We don’t need industrial farming to feed the world. We need industrial farming to provide excess amounts of meat and dairy products and sustain an abhorrent food waste.

In western countries half to two thirds of farmland are used for animal feed. by reducing our meat overconsumption by half, which would still far exceed what is considered a healthy diet, we could make 25% of farmland available for feeding humans. 30-40% of food in the US is wasted. About 10% of food in the EU is wasted. So if the US would reduce its food waste to European standards that would make another 20-30% of farmland available.

So simply by cutting down overconsumption and food waste, we could increase the available farmland by 50% and accept 2/3s of current yields per hectar in the US w.o. any reduction in available food. When looking at farmers who switched from industrial to more sustainable farming, they achieve the same and sometimes increasing yields, as the crucial natural ability is restored with a healthier soil and more biodiversity, protecting against all sorts of pests and allowing for pollination.

Industrial farming is a death sentence to the world, as it destroys the very foundation of farming. An intact soil and an intact ecosystem to allow the plants to grow.

Both are possible.

I disagree with that. In Western countries typically half to two thirds of agricultural land are used for meat and dairy production. We have plenty of food available to sustain the current or even growing populations without depending on mineral fertilizers. Farming techniques have significantly evolved over the past two hundred years and the crop yield of an intelligently managed field without mineral fertilizers is not signficantly lower than what is achieved by conventional farming. With the added difference that conventional farming is actively destroying the soil and killing the insects that are vital to maintaining agriculture.

And where did the Dinos get the poo from? From eating plants. Plants that either used bioavailable nitrogen or captured nitrogen from the air.

The nitrogen cycle has been interconnected between soil, air and biomass nitrogen since forever. There simply is no fundamental need to use mineral fertilizers, as was claimed in a comment earlier.

And what about the ~700 million years before cows existed?

So how did these plants exists before mineral fertilizers?

Legumes like lentils capture air nitrogen.

Anlage also means attachement i.e. a file attached to an E-Mail

Like many people with the reddit exodus.

But i also got quite annoyed with the main German communities shifting more and more to the right and the moderators of the largest german subreddit to tolerate and enable transphobic and racist discussions, e.g. when there was some tabloid “news” on either topic shared.

I dont know how much of it was because the communities were more and more targeted by organized far right propaganda and how much was the moderators of the /r/de subreddit sharing such viewpoints.

Those trends already happened for some years, getting particularly worse with covid.

You develop your own database application or use a professional file system with customizeable attributes.

Then you end up cursing yourself because half the time you didn’t fill in any of the entries that would actually help you find it again and you named it “funny comic cheetos”

You can only push so much nitrogen and phosphor into the biological cycle w.o. having grave side effects. Acidification, erosion of soil microbiomes, eutrophication of water bodies…

The current amount of fertilizers used are killing the environment and through this reducing crop yields.

The difference being that this is about protecting sensitive data like trade secrets, in a complex ecosystem that is impossible to fully oversee. Many western governments have banned Huawei from 5g network components for the same reason and that is solid reasoning.

But with TikTok it is a very different story. Nobody needs to use it. People are using it voluntarily. In regards to steering people to bad content through its algorithm, it is no different from Facebook or Instagram. The argument @[email protected] made is valid.

It is not about preventing foreign or private influence that his harmful to the citizens. It is about controling that influence.

Well, Columbus, Galilei, Kepler & co. challenged what was considered “established fact” about the shape and place of the earth in their times.

It is not wrong to challenge what is considered “established facts”. Problem is when you discard results that are going against your preoposition. I wouldn’t consider flat earthers to be particular religious as a crowd though. At least in my country they mostl come from the esoteric scene, where you get a mixed bowl of esoteric nonsene, conspiracy theories, and fascist ideology.

The issue with our impact on the nitrogen cycle is that it is exceeding the planetary boundaries significantly. Same for Phosphor https://www.stockholmresilience.org/research/planetary-boundaries.html

However if we look at the countries with the highest use of chemical fertilizers per Capita it is also countries with industrialized agriculture that focus on meat production or cash crops.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/fertilizer-per-capita

We use about half of global agricultural lands for animal feed. So the nitrogen fertilizers are not needed to sustain nutrition. They are needed to sustain the meat overconsumption in wealthy countries.

We can make nitrogen fertilizers just fine with the Haber Bosch process and Hydrogen electrolysis. All you need for that is water, air and electricity.

Also crop yields are perfectly suitable to feed all of the global population without using fertilizers. It just requires farmin techniques, that are not suitable for industrial farming for profit maximising companies. On the contrary the current way of industrial farming destroys the yields as it erodes soils physically, chemically and biologically. If we continue farming like this for another century or two we will face severe global starvation.

It is all the more reason to switch both in the use of fossil fuels and the way of current agriculture sooner rather than later.

This is obviously absurd. If choosing from the legal options in an election is being part of a “conspiracy” then the whole system is already failed and you yourself are a conspirator for not doing anything about it.

And no, voting one of the same two parties that have brought all this mess in the first place is not doing something. The Reps and Dems are equally responsible for the desolate state of the US democracy. So by your definition of “conspirator” you have conspirated to bring about the conditions in which Trump not only was elected, but has a chance to be reelected.

You fill a barrel full of Ammonium-Nitrate fertilizer and put a 30-120 seconds delay fuze depending on expected depth. You start the fuze and drop it into the water. Voila Depth-Charge.

For non military or explorative purposes there is absolutely no reason to go that deep. The “submarine experience” at 50m is the same as at 250m. And it smells terribly, because recycling sweaty air only goes that far.

Which Israel repeatedly bombed when Egypt let trucks enter.

How did you calculate 8200 m/s?

the gravitaitonal constant is only constant at one specific height in the gravitaitonal field. But the gravitaitonal force is reducing, the further away from earth you get. So what you actually have to do is calculate U1 = -GMm/r1 for the LEO and U2 = -GMm/r2 for surface level. leaving out the objects mass already you get as difference

(U1-U2)/m = 6.67e-11 x 5.97e24 x (1/6,73e6-1/8,73e6) = 13,555 Now that is your specific energy from the starting velocity = 1/2 v² from the kinetic energy. So at ground level you actually need 5,206 m/s ignoring air friction.

Also your length of the railgun exceeds the atmosphere, so not only for the friction, but also for the distance to earth you will need much less speed at the end of that railgun. Furthermore g will get less as it gets higher, so you can accelerate faster towards the end of it.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/gpot.html

I’m not claiming the concept is viable by default, but your calculation is not including crucial aspects of how gravitaitonal force changes in a gravitaitonal field.