David vun Kannon

@WarintheFuture Didn't we do all this before with Fukuyama?

4/ This special essay written by Dr Frank Hoffman just for Futura Doctrina examines the analytical failure behind the 'end of war' thesis and argues that prudent foresight, not optimistic extrapolation, is what security policy demands. War has a future. The question is whether we prepare for it seriously. mickryan.substack.com/p/our-darker-a…

@Clint_Davey1 Just a little of the victor writing the history going on there.

Christ explicitly says to Pilate "it is he who handed me over to you who has the greater sin". Plus there are numerous hints that the Romans aren't really the main enemy. The Roman centurion has greater faith than all Israel (hence we use his words in the Mass - "only say the word and my soul shall be healed..."). John the Baptist doesn't tell Roman soldiers to lay down their weapons, he just tells them to be content with their wages. In fact, Jesus says almost nothing negative about Romans at all. And Daniel 9 says the people of the Messiah will destroy the Temple, hence the Romans will become the people of the Messiah. And Rome remains the centre of the Church.

@MatthewWielicki The issue is how fast the change happens. Even humans can't move farms, towns, or whole cities, as climate, weather patterns, and sea level change rapidly. All other species, even less.

Yosemite Valley was once buried beneath massive glaciers. Today it’s granite cliffs, waterfalls, forests, and one of the most iconic landscapes on Earth. Glaciers are not eternal. Coastlines change. Temperatures change. Wet periods and mega droughts come and go. Nature has always been dynamic. That’s not ‘climate denial.’ It’s geology. It’s Earth history. It’s reality. The planet has never been static and pretending every environmental change is unprecedented ignores the evidence carved directly into the landscape itself.

@SandyofCthulhu One side of the family wanted a Viking Ship Burial, the other side wanted a Barrow, so they compromised.

The Dungeon Ship In the 1970s, I was going through a friend's dungeon (this is all original D&D) and on the second floor, he had a long gallery - an extra wide hall. In the middle of the gallery was the mostly-burnt husk of a ship. No way could it have fit down the 10 foot side stairway. We asked the dungeon master and he seemed diffident. "Don't worry about it." Well of course we had to check out the ship. Did it have traps? Loot? Lurking enemies? The dungeon master told us flat-out "It has NO loot." But we couldn't move on. How did a ship make it to this place? Why was it scorched? Finally, the dungeon master realized we weren't going ANYWHERE till he told us the story. True to his code, he let us find a small metal scroll in the hull that told the story. Please note that when you SEE the story you'll also realize there wouldn't have been a metal scroll with this tale engraved. It was just the dungeon master's way of giving us the information so we'd move on. Because he wasn't "there" in the dungeon with us to tell us. 1/2

@TonyClimate So what, you're bringing back trilobites? The real question is how fast is it changing today and whether species can adapt that fast? Hint: they can't.

The greatest expansion of life on earth occurred 540 million years ago, with atmospheric CO2 levels were 10-20X higher than now,

@NikolovScience Sea ice loss has a greater effect on albedo than decreasing clouds. Rising temps cause lower humidity aka fewer clouds, not the other way 'round. You've got correlation (not causation) backwards.

EU continues to live in the darkness of 19th-Century delusions, when it comes to understanding climate change. They still discuss insanities such as CO2 emissions and how to tax them without realizing that CO2 has NOTHING to do with climate change. Warming since 1980 was the result of a decreasing cloud albedo, not increasing human carbon emissions! Wake up to the real science...😎

@paulogia0 Makes sense if they stayed in Judea and got wiped out in the First Jewish Revolt.

There is no surviving 1st- or 2nd-century attestation that any of Andrew, Bartholomew, James the Great, James son of Alphaeus, Jude, Matthew, Matthias, Simon the Zealot, or Thomas founded churches.

@AndrewCFollett Apples and oranges if "Defense" is only Federal, but Education is Federal, State, and Local. But I am very happy that Defense is much smaller than Social Welfare. Keep the economy growing!

Defense is 8% of US government spending. Welfare is 47%!

@PatrickC1995 Why confuse workers and owners? Owners get paid more when the company makes a profit, and less on a loss. If a worker wants to be an owner, let them buy shares.

If workers expect to be paid more when their company makes a profit, are they willing to be paid less when the company takes a loss?

@DineshDSouza Also unreported - the stances of the parties flipped in the mid-20th century. Nothing said about Republicans in 1865 maps to GOP positions today. But it is very inconvenient for you to mention that.

Of 4 million slaves in America in 1860, fewer than 10—not 10%, the number 10—were owned by Republicans. More than 90% of the slaves were owned by Democrats. This crushing fact is left out of the textbooks, unreported by NPR, PBS & the History Channel. Yet it’s undeniably true.

@Clint_Davey1 I'd say Princess Mononoke was more conservative and showed the dichotomy better. Also, just a better movie. But the samurai were fighting for a vanished world where Japan was closed. There was no going back.

To make this clear. If you are preserving an existing or past societal order based on hierarchy and tradition - you are on the right. If you are trying to destroy or transform an existing social order in the name of an abstract principle or ideology - you are on the left. I can concede that both sides in Last Samurai are right-wing by modern standards. I also concede that the movie is not fully historically accurate. But in the movie the samurai are very much a right-wing force.

@peterrhague There is an argument that development will irrevocably change the way the Moon looks for everyone on Earth. The "scenic viewshed" of the Near Side should be protected, in this argument.

An opinion piece in the Guardian against lunar industrialisation spells out, in plain language, what the actual motivation is: "They are the opening moves in a long-term transformation of another world. And yet the decisions behind them – about what the moon is for, how it should be used and what risks are acceptable – have been made with remarkably little public deliberation... This matters because it shapes how we allocate attention, resources and political will. Every hour of effort directed toward building infrastructure off Earth is an hour not spent addressing the crises that threaten the only habitable world we know we have." Many intellectuals continue to believe, after a century of catastrophe, that they have the right and the wisdom to direct human efforts. This is the goal of the "debate" they wish to have prior to allowing other people to act. Fortunately, the people with the capability to act aren't listening. theguardian.com/commentisfree/…

@sarahsalviander The six days of Creation (and the other Creation story in Ch. 2) are not trying to be scientific. If they were scientific, you could make falsifiable predictions based on them.

People keep saying this, but what in Genesis 1 contradicts scientific research: - that the universe began to exist a finite time ago - that the Earth was formed a finite time ago - that oceans appeared, then land - that plant life emerged first - that animal life began in the oceans - that land-based and flying animals came later - that humans appeared later - that human consciousness was the last big development? Genesis says first the universe was created, then the stars, then it zeroes in on Earth and describes the development of its surface from unformed and chaotic to brimming with life, starting with less complex and progressing to more complex lifeforms. How is this scientifically wrong? This is incredible knowledge for uneducated, backwards, Bronze Age goatherds to possess. Why did it take thousands of years and the rise of modern science for us to rediscover what Genesis 1 says? We only discovered that the universe is finite in age about 100 years ago. But the author of Genesis knew it thousands of years ago. What non-believers typically do is point out a couple of seeming out-of-order events, like the Sun and Moon being made after the Earth or the appearance and description of plant life on day three, and say Genesis is completely unscientific. Even if those events were truly mistakes, it's still incredible that the author of Genesis mostly got it right. But Genesis didn't mostly get it right, the author got it entirely right. The Sun and Moon weren't made after the Earth, but before the Earth on day 2. Genesis says they appear from the surface of the Earth on day 4. Scientifically, we now know it took time for the atmosphere to become sufficiently oxygenated to become transparent. Prior to this, a hypothetical observer on the surface of the Earth would not be able to see any of the great lights in the sky. As for plants on day 3, since the Sun was made on day 2, sunlight filtered through an opaque atmosphere would've reached the surface of the Earth. The description plant life seems a little out of place, since Genesis immediately talks about flowering and seed-bearing plants. But medieval biblical commentators already understood how to resolve this. As Gerald Schroeder explains in 'The Science of God': "When the Bible is relating a topic of immediate but not continuing interest, it condenses the chronology of that topic and presents the entire account in one place rather than break into the narrative at a later point." We clearly see another example of this narrative device in Genesis 11. The point of Genesis 1 is to get from the creation of the universe to humankind to the line of Abraham, so the author keeps things moving. The problem with modern readers and Genesis is that they're looking back on Genesis from the perspective of, "Duh, we already know this stuff scientifically." But look at it from a perspective that's contemporary with Genesis. Compare it with the Babylonian account of creation to see what a stark contrast there is. I've linked it below. The Enuma Elish is a political myth focused on wars and personal clashes, like a super-violent soap opera about gods and monsters, from which human emergence is almost beside the point. Genesis 1 is utterly unique in its austerity and matter-of-fact description of a stepwise development of the universe, Earth, and life on Earth that culminates with the deliberate creation of the most complex form of life on Earth - human beings. The criticism leveled against Genesis 1 as contra-science isn't supported by the evidence. worldhistory.org/article/225/en…

@TrentTelenko 4 yrs old

If these are recent videos, it marks the collapse of Russian ground based air defenses in occupied Ukraine.

@historyinmemes Successful government program, so of course DOGE wanted to kill it.

The United States regularly releases millions of flies over Panama’s Darién Gap each week. The practice is part of a long-running pest control effort targeting the New World screwworm, a parasitic fly whose larvae infest open wounds in animals. In the 1950s, scientists developed the sterile insect technique, in which male flies are sterilized with radiation and released in large numbers so that wild females produce no offspring. By 1959, this approach had eliminated screwworm from the United States. Over the following decades, the program expanded through Mexico and Central America. Today, the focus is prevention—stopping the pest from moving north out of South America. To maintain that barrier, Panama and the United States still release millions of sterile flies each week over the Darién Gap.

@MorlockP Energy efficiency went way up after the oil shocks of the 1970s. Prior to that it was an afterthought (in the US).

I don't believe this claim; in fact, I think the opposite is true. Almost everything (cars, light bulbs, airplanes, etc) is much more energy efficient now than then.

@Nickisbackbaby And then the parties switched positions in the mid-20th century. You assume your audience knows less history than you do.

Sadly in America most African Americans don't realize it was the Republican party that campaigned to end slavery. The Democrat party fought tooth and nail to keep it!

@BradRTorgersen The problem is suicide by gun in rural America.

If you take the blue (D) urban zones out of the math the gun violence numbers plummet. The problem is never the firearms. The problem is the blue (D) urban zones.

@truetomharley That just pushes the question to "was he unable to stop human environmental abuse?" But it isn't all environmental, some is genetic. None of it is the child's fault.

Is it really “designed” to include pediatric bone cancer or is is merely vulnerable to the environmental abuse humans have wrought that give rise to it?

@GrahamLKeegan That is really cherry-picking one number off this chart, as if the trend is not obvious. A real test would pick two random points over and over and see if the warmer one was after the cooler one. Go ahead, try it.

The planet is now into its 3rd year of cooling. 1998 had temperatures hotter than April 2026. How can this be if CO2 emissions cause global warming? Perhaps CO2 isn’t the climate control knob.