New modeling has shown that low-temperature hydrothermal vents could exist at the bottom of the underground oceans on Jupiter’s moon Europa and Saturn’s moon Enceladus for a very long time. They could warm the oceans and give rise to alien life. On Earth, hydrothermal vents are both a source of energy and heat and one of the possible places for the origin of life. The study was published in the journal Geophysical Research: Planets, reports Space. Although there are both high-temperature and low-temperature hydrothermal vents in the Earth’s oceans, a much larger volume of water passes through the latter. High-temperature hydrothermal vents rely on volcanic activity. Saturn’s moon Enceladus And they can pump energy and heat from the Earth’s hot core. But the icy moons of Jupiter and Saturn do not have hot cores. So scientists created simulations to find out how common low-temperature vents are on Europa and Enceladus. Given the lack of data on the oceans on these satellites, which lie beneath the icy surface, the scientists based their modeling on the water circulation system in the northwest Pacific Ocean. There, cool seawater sinks and flows into the rock at the bottom through extinct volcanic cavities called seamounts. The water passes through the rock, heats up, and rises through another seamount. According to scientists, the water comes out at a higher temperature and has a completely different chemical composition. Jupiter’s moon Europa By applying this water circulation model to Europa and Enceladus, scientists modified properties such as gravity, temperature, seafloor composition, and water circulation depth to better match the potential conditions in the oceans of these moons. Modeling has shown that low-temperature hydrothermal vents can exist at the bottom of underground oceans under a wide range of conditions. At the same time, lower gravity ensures greater heating of the water coming out of the sources. Scientists believe that conditions on the satellites allow these sources to exist for billions of years. And this is enough for alien life to arise there. Therefore, theoretically, life could exist in hydrothermal vents on Europa and Enceladus. Now all that remains is to explore their oceans and discover it, if it really is there. The post It turned out where alien life is hiding on the satellites of Jupiter and Saturn appeared first on Anomalien.com.

The authors of a new study published in The Astrophysical Journal Letters believe that the galaxy neighboring the Milky Way consists of a hypothetical form of dark matter, the particles of which can interact with each other. But this contradicts the basic cosmological model that explains the nature of the Universe. Orbiting the Milky Way about 380,000 light-years away is its fourth-largest satellite galaxy, Crater 2. It is approximately 6,500 light-years in diameter and consists of several billion old stars. In recent years, astronomers have been trying to figure out exactly what properties this dwarf galaxy has that allows it to maintain its structure and relatively large size. It is known that the evolution of the Crater 2 galaxy over thousands of years is influenced by the gravity of the Milky Way. It also influences the dark matter halo surrounding the galaxy and its stars. According to scientists, the gravitational influence of our galaxy can remove both dark matter and stars from its neighbor, which will reduce the mass of the galaxy over time. The study authors found that the gravitational influence of the Milky Way is too weak to explain the density of dark matter in Crater 2 if it consists of cold dark matter particles, reports Space. Dark matter is the invisible part of the Universe and makes up more than 80% of its mass. It is believed that thanks to dark matter, all galaxies can be held together as a single whole. But no one has yet seen dark matter directly. Dark matter is the invisible part of the Universe and makes up more than 80% of its mass. It is believed that thanks to dark matter, all galaxies can be held together as a single whole. But no one has yet seen dark matter directly. The main cosmological model called the Lambda-CDM Model, which explains the nature of the Universe, tells us about the existence of cold dark matter, the particles of which cannot interact with each other. At the same time, there is a theory that suggests that dark matter may consist of self-interacting particles. These particles interact with each other using an as-yet unknown force that goes beyond gravity. Scientists believe that exactly this kind of dark matter exists in the Crater 2 galaxy, because, among other things, the gravity of the Milky Way should have reduced its mass much more strongly, which is not observed. The simulations show a surprisingly large agreement between the theory of self-interacting dark matter and observations of the Crater 2 galaxy. According to scientists, in this dwarf galaxy, despite the predictions of the Lambda-CDM Model, there is no bulge of dense dark matter that is directed from the halo closer to the center of the galaxy. This can again be explained by the fact that dark energy particles transfer energy between themselves during collisions and this means that the dark matter halo is aligned around the galaxy. According to the self-interacting dark matter theory, the galaxy is likely to grow inside a dark matter halo and this explains the size of Crater 2 better than the Lambda-CDM Model. Scientists have concluded that the properties of the Crater 2 galaxy challenge the main cosmological model and it may indeed consist of dark matter particles that collide with each other, although this contradicts modern ideas about the mysterious substance. Now the authors of the study want to find other galaxies similar to Crater 2, where the same properties can be observed. The post Impossible Matter Found in Nearby Galaxy appeared first on Anomalien.com.

On Friday, CNN’s Newsroom with Jim Acosta hosted an interview with Bryan Lanza, who was the deputy communications director for Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign. The discussion quickly got heated as the two disagreed on how the recent presidential debate went. Acosta unsurprisingly started the segment by sharing a CNN analysis regarding Trump: “at least one lie for every three minutes.” He added that supposedly “Donald Trump made more than 30 false claims during last night's 90-minute debate.” Also, according to CNN, President Joe Biden only made “nine false or misleading claims.”     He then made an outrageous claim that Biden actually “let Trump off the hook with a shaky performance” because Trump “was lying over and over again.” Lanza responded “Listen, I wouldn't say Joe Biden let Donald Trump off the hook at all last night. I think what we saw last night was the mental deterioration of Joe Biden.” He continued to state that “what the American public saw was a president who just doesn't have the cognitive fitness to be president.” Lanza also hinted that the 25th Amendment may be exercised next month if the “Democratic Party tries to find a new candidate.” In response to Acosta claiming Trump lied about Democrats’ abortion beliefs, Lanza then countered how Trump “was proud of nominating Supreme Court justices who did overturn Roe v. Wade.” He reminded Acosta that “CNN can sort of cover, or MSNBC and Atlas can try to sort of focus on the lies,” but Acosta quickly interjected before he could finish his point, ““Don't go -- don't talk about the press. Come on. He's lying over and over again. No, Bryan, he said that January 6th defendants are, quote, ‘so innocent.’” The subtle discussion quickly turned into a competition of both men trying to talk over the other. Acosta decided to not give up as he continued to interrupt Lanza and prohibit him from speaking his thoughts. Acosta declared “We're focusing on what Donald Trump said last night because he lied repeatedly over and over again.” Focusing back on the voters’ view of the debate, Lanza stated: “So, all voters at this particular point made a decision that January 6th is not relevant to their lives. They're saying inflation is relevant to their lives. They're saying immigration is relevant to their lives. I get it that the media wants to give cover to Joe Biden and focus about the past, but the future is going.” Acosta concluded the interview by asking Lanza what he thought about Democrats replacing Biden on the ticket. Lanza responded, “The next candidate, if Joe Biden were to drop out, is going to be Kamala Harris. And the voters have made the decision that they trust President Trump far more than Kamala Harris.” Click "Expand" to view the transcript: CNN Newsroom with Jim Acosta 6/28/2024 10:23:06 AM EDT JIM ACOSTA: We should note CNN has calculated nine false or misleading claims for President Biden, obviously outweighed by the former president. Let's discuss with Bryan Lanza. He was deputy communications director for Trump's 2016 campaign. And, Bryan, I mean, the president sort of let Donald Trump off the hook last night with a shaky performance because Trump, over and over again, he was lying, he was pushing these widely debunked conspiracy theories. Why does he keep doing that? BRYAN LANZA (FORMER SENIOR TRUMP CAMPAIGN AIDE): Listen, I wouldn't say Joe Biden let Donald Trump off the hook at all last night. I think what we saw last night was the mental deterioration of Joe Biden. And we can talk about, you know, Donald Trump said this, we can talk about, you know, Joe Biden's lie here. But what the American public saw was a president who just doesn't have the cognitive fitness to be president. And we'll have a conversation in next month, you know, whether the 25th Amendment is exercised, where the Democratic Party tries to find a new candidate. I think Joe Biden should be on the ballot through November. I don't think they shouldn't be allowed to switch candidates at this point. They voted. They want him there. We're running. We spent resources. It feels cheating to try to change it at this point. ACOSTA: Well, you don't want that to happen because you want your candidate to win, obviously. But, I mean, let me ask you about -- LANZA: I want the American public to be in a better position tomorrow than they are today. ACOSTA: But let me ask you about some of these -- let me ask you, why does Trump keep saying that Democrats want to execute babies after birth? That's a lie. It's not true. LANZA: Sure, I think what you have to do is you have to sort of have the conversation with the campaign to see where they lie. I think the most important thing that I walked away from the abortion conversation last night was that President Trump was proud of nominating Supreme Court justices who did overturn Roe v. Wade and returned it to the states, which is where the American public has wanted it for a significant amount of time. Now, sure, CNN can sort of cover, or MSNBC and Atlas can try to sort of focus on the lies. ACOSTA: Don't go after-- don't talk about the press. Come on. He's lying over and over again. LANZA: You have to talk about the press. ACOSTA: No, Bryan, he said that January 6th defendants are, quote, "so innocent." LANZA: Correct. ACOSTA: These are people who are criminals.   LANZA: And what did voters decide on that? And what did voters decide on that? ACOSTA: They stormed the Capitol. LANZA: Yes. ACOSTA: They broke the law. That would have never happened had Donald Trump just accepted the results of the 2020 election, and you know that. LANZA: Sure. But what have voters decided on that? The voters decided that is not their priority when they're voting this election. They're deciding – ACOSTA: Republican voters decided it. LANZA: Sure. And he's winning independent voters and he's winning the general election in these swing states. So, all voters at this particular-- at this point made a decision that January 6th is not relevant to their lives. They're saying inflation is relevant to their lives. They're saying immigration is relevant to their lives. They're saying two wars are relevant to their lives with a third one about to start. I get it that the media wants to give cover to Joe Biden and focus about the past, but the future is green. ACOSTA: The media wants to give cover to Joe Biden? Everybody is reporting, we just went through all the headlines and all the major newspapers, all the networks are all saying that the president had a shaky debate performance last night. LANZA: And you want to focus on January 6th. The voters aren't focusing on January 6th. ACOSTA: We're focusing on what Donald Trump said last night-- LANZA: Let me tell you-- ACOSTA: -- because he lied repeatedly over and over again. And the president went after Trump at one point on his character. Let's listen to that because I think that's an important part of this too. (...) ACOSTA: Does anybody believe that? LANZA: Listen, what everybody believes is that the economy today, inflation is ruining their lives. And so sort of focusing -- I think that's the problem that Joe Biden and his campaign have, is they can't focus on their accomplishments of the past that address immigration, that address inflation, that address the wars. They have to focus on these other things. And so going forward, Jim, you tell me what's better for the country? Having a conversation about January 6th or having a conversation about immigration and inflation? The voters are making that choice. ACOSTA: Well, I mean, accepting election results is awfully important. LANZA: Listen, I encourage Joe Biden to keep talking -- ACOSTA: I mean, and the former president last night did not accept the election results. [CROSSTALK] LANZA: -- under a second President Trump term, and we both know it today. ACOSTA: But let me ask you this, if Joe Biden is somehow not on the ticket, the Trump campaign is worried. LANZA: Joe Biden. ACOSTA: They're worried if there's another candidate that rises up and becomes the Democratic nominee? LANZA: No. Listen, if Joe Biden were to step down, it's clearly going to be Kamala Harris. We're not worried about Kamala Harris. In fact, that's what the voters need to understand. This performance last -- ACOSTA: Can Trump beat Gavin Newsom? Gavin Newsom's not the candidate. He's in a -- it's not about Gavin. The next candidate, if Joe Biden were to drop out, is going to be Kamala Harris. And the voters have made the decision that they trust President Trump far more than Kamala Harris. ACOSTA: All right. Bryan Lanza, thanks for coming in. I appreciate it.

After Joe Biden's mentally feeble performance in the CNN debate, it's obvious that no one in the pro-Biden media more aggressively defended Biden as mentally sharp than MSNBC's Joe Scarborough. Maybe his friends need to tell him he needs to quit. The show's embarrassing.  Scarborough is the very last person in the American media who should be appearing on television today like he has not been severely discredited. Joe Scarborough has repeatedly rushed to the front of the Mental Acuity Wars, proclaiming this year's Biden is the sharpest Biden ever -- "intellectually, analytically." When Biden's cognitive decline went  on display, Scarborough quickly folded and said Biden should get out of the race. As Scott Jennings proclaimed on CNN, every Democrat and every Democrat journalist who insisted Biden was mentally sharp lied to the American people. Morning Joe regular Katty Kay tweeted after the debate: "Wondering what Dean Philips is thinking today. He complained that he couldn't get traction in the press or in the primaries because the race wasn't truly open. The incumbent had a lock on the system." Congressman Philips ran against Biden to make the argument that he wasn't mentally fit enough to defeat Trump. But the Democrats and their media enablers never gave him a chance, and never suggested it was plausible that Biden would have to engage in primary debates. It's only fair to admit that the CNN moderator team of Tapper and Bash showed remarkable restraint, which we did not expect. I boasted to the AP reporter that we were going to be counting anchor interruptions of the candidates. Nick Fondacaro counted one for each candidate. It was more common that they had to tell the candidates they still had time.  Nick counted the ideological tilt of questions, and it was 11 from the left, 8 neutral, and 3 from the right. And that’s being generous. The opening question stating the realities on the economy counts as a Republican question, even if it’s a factual question. The best question from the right was Bash asking Biden if he favored ANY restrictions on abortion. He didn't name any, but he claimed he's not in favor of late-term abortions. This is a Pants on Fire lie.. Just look at the 2020 Democrat platform. No restrictions.  Enjoy the podcast below, or wherever you listen to podcasts.   

HBO’s Bill Maher and former MSNBC host Chris Matthews were greatly displeased on Friday night’s Real Time that Democrats won’t replace President Joe Biden with California Gov. Gavin Newsom after his disastrous debate performance the night before. Maher was unconvinced of former Democratic Rep. Tulsi Gabbard’s claim that the reason why Biden is struggling in the polls is because of his policy record, “Are you kidding? Yes, we have problems like every country has problems, but a different candidate would make a huge difference, I think.”     He then accused Democrats of being blind partisans who are unable to see the disaster that is staring directly at them, “From last night, the flash poll afterward, Trump, they said won 67-33, 33, that number rings in my mind because you know what that number is? That's the number you always see, very close — 33, 34, 32 — of the people who are just always with their party. I mean, that's Mrs. Goebbels in the bunker number.” After the laughter from the audience subsided, Maher continued, “You see it on the right, they used to call them Birchers, birthers, Tea Party, whatever you, MAGA Nation, whatever, they never move, and now that's a third of the Democrats who like—they're going to stick with this guy and they are going to regret it. He is going to lose. I said nine months ago, and I’m saying it again tonight, and now it seems like it's so apparent.” Matthews agreed, “In the real world outside of the Biden world, it is clear to me that another candidate like Newsom, the governor of California, could have the dynamic to move from June, right now, to November, and build up support to match Trump's and maybe overtake him. He could change the whole situation.” While Maher decried blind loyalty, Matthews claimed Democrats have an additional problem. Even if Biden were to step aside, Democrats would choose to replace him with Vice President Kamala Harris instead of Newsom, “The problem is, and this is the Democratic Party, and the way it is. It's a party of center-left and left. If he does that, Kamala Harris people will go, ‘Wait a minute, I'm next’ and he’ll say, ‘You’re right, you are next,’ because that's what he is saying right now, and that's the problem.’” Maher was not persuaded that Matthews’s fears were warranted, “I’m not sure that’s even that big a problem for the Democrats. People, at the end of the day, want to win.” Gavin Newsom may be capable of sounding alive at a debate, but voters will probably not respond well to his infamous COVID hypocrisy and Panera Bread scandals. Here is a transcript for the June 28 show: HBO Real Time with Bill Maher 6/28/2024 10:18 PM ET BILL MAHER: Are you kidding? Yes, we have problems like every country has problems, but a different candidate would make a huge difference, I think. From last night, the flash poll afterward, Trump, they said won 67-33, 33, that number rings in my mind because you know what that number is? That's the number you always see, very close — 33, 34, 32 — of the people who are just always with their party. TULSI GABBARD: Right. MAHER:  I mean, that's Mrs. Goebbels in the bunker number. I mean, you see— CHRIS MATTHEWS: They're the woman that kills all our kids. Right. MAHER: Rather live in a world without national socialism, exactly. MATTHEWS: You got it right. MAHER: You see it on the right, they used to call them Birchers, birthers, Tea Party, whatever you, MAGA Nation, whatever, they never move, and now that's a third of the Democrats who like—they're going to stick with this guy and they are going to regret it. He is going to lose. I said nine months ago, and I’m saying it again tonight, and now it seems like it's so apparent.” MATTHEWS: In the real world outside of the Biden world, it is clear to me that another candidate like Newsom, the governor of California, could have the dynamic to move from June, right now, to November, and build up support to match Trump's and maybe overtake him. He could change the whole situation. MAHER: Absolutely. MATTHEWS: The problem is, and this is the Democratic Party, and the way it is. It's a party of center-left and left. If he does that, Kamala Harris people will go, “Wait a minute, I'm next” and he’ll say, “You’re right, you are next,” because that's what he is saying right now and that's the problem. MAHER: No, but here's the great thing about Gavin Newsom as the candidate, she can't be his vice president. You can’t be from, you can't be from— MATTHEWS: No, she’s next for president. MAHER: Oh. MATTHEWS: That’s the problem. The problem is the—of the team. MAHER: I’m not sure that’s even that big a problem for the Democrats. People, at the end of the day, want to win.

The New York Times surprised its audience on Friday morning with no front-page story on the debate. They just told readers to go to NYTimes.com. If Trump was the candidate who had a terrible debate, would they do that? Online, they admitted in an online headline that “Biden Campaign Plunged Into Crisis After Halting Debate Performance” after Thursday evening’s embarrassment. But political reporter Michael Gold still played defense for the paper's preferred candidate. If the biased headline didn’t give the game away (“Trump’s Debate Performance: Relentless Attacks and Falsehoods” ), then complaining about Trump both “seizing” and having “pounced” in a single sentence makes Gold’s pro-Biden slant clear. For most of Thursday night’s debate, former President Donald J. Trump verbally pummeled President Biden, painting his political opponent as an ineffective leader with a torrent of attacks that were frequently false, lacked context or were vague enough to be misleading. .... He tried to accuse Mr. Biden of corruption, dubbing the president as a “Manchurian candidate” who was “paid by China,” a nod to frequent accusations of undue influence for which there is no evidence. He directly blamed Mr. Biden for a wave of immigrants “coming in and killing our citizens at a level we’ve never” seen, a hyperbolic claim that is not backed up by available statistics. After weeks of reporters relishing MAGA complaints about a debate format supposedly tilted against Trump, Gold whined that those rules kept Biden from challenging Trump. He even whined that the CNN moderators failed to fact-check Trump, as if they were supposed to interfere in the flow of the debate on Democrat Biden’s behalf. But the barrage of attacks during the debate was particularly striking given that Mr. Biden was standing mere feet away from him, unable to interrupt or effectively challenge Mr. Trump because of debate rules that kept his microphone muted. And as the debate’s moderators, the CNN anchors Jake Tapper and Dana Bash, focused on keeping the peace, they did not even try to fact-check Mr. Trump’s assertions, allowing them to stand unchallenged. Mr. Biden got in a few licks, including some of the debate’s more memorable moments. He said Mr. Trump had the “morals of an alley cat” and accused him of having sex with a porn star while his wife was pregnant. But by and large, Mr. Biden was on the defensive from the get-go in the face of a steady stream of insults, false characterizations and attacks from Mr. Trump. Then came a classic sentence, with the reporter fitting in not one but two classic terms used by liberal reporters to denigrate effective Republican talking points: Seizing on Mr. Biden’s halting speech early in the debate, Mr. Trump pounced at one moment when Mr. Biden trailed off, saying: “I really don’t know what he said at the end of that sentence. I don’t think he knows what he said, either.” Gold even defended Biden’s indefensible immigration policies, via unlabeled liberal "experts." Mr. Trump accused his successor of “ridiculous, insane and very stupid policies” that fostered a crime wave, pointing to high-profile killings that involved immigrants. He vaguely accused Mr. Biden of killing “so many at our border” by not curbing the surge of migrants, an assertion that he did not back up with statistics. Experts have said that those heavily publicized cases do not represent a broader trend. Studies have concluded that immigration does not push up crime rates.

When you see 'Biden Is Toast' in a Politico headline, you know things are really, really bad for Joe Biden. That line was part of a title of a story in that periodical about Biden's disastrous debate performance on Thursday which was originally published fifteen minutes before that event was even completed: "Dems freak out over Biden’s debate performance: ‘Biden is toast’." Lisa Kashinsky, Adam Cancryn, and Eugene Daniels, acting more like coroners providing a Biden campaign autopsy than as Politico reporters, had the sad task of laying out the brutal facts for the bereaved Democrats and their media allies. ...he stammered. He stumbled. And, with fewer than five months to November, he played straight into Democrats’ worst fears — that he’s fumbling away this election to Donald Trump. The alarm bells for Democrats started ringing the second Biden started speaking in a haltingly hoarse voice. Minutes into the debate, he struggled to mount an effective defense of the economy on his watch and flubbed the description of key health initiatives he’s made central to his reelection bid, saying “we finally beat Medicare” and incorrectly stating how much his administration lowered the price of insulin. He talked himself into a corner on Afghanistan, bringing up his administration’s botched withdrawal unprompted. He repeatedly mixed up “billion” and “million,” and found himself stuck for long stretches of the 90-minute debate playing defense. And when he wasn’t speaking, he stood frozen behind his podium, mouth agape, his eyes wide and unblinking for long stretches of time. Reading this you could almost hear Howard Cosell yelling "DOWN GOES FRAZIER! DOWN GOES FRAZIER! DOWN GOES FRAZIER!" except substitute "Biden" for "Frazier." And now the Politico serving of toast followed by a heaping pile of sheer Democrat panic: “Biden is toast — calling it now,” said Jay Surdukowski, an attorney and Democratic activist from New Hampshire who co-chaired former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley’s 2016 presidential campaign in the state. In text messages with POLITICO, Democrats expressed confusion and concern as they watched the first minutes of the event. One former Biden White House and campaign aide called it “terrible,” adding that they have had to ask themselves over and over: “What did he just say? This is crazy.” It seemed to be so bad for Biden that the Politico coroners/reporters even appeared to pronounce his campaign to be DOA: Already, some Democrats were openly saying that Biden should end his campaign. One major Democratic donor and Biden supporter said simply: “Biden needs to drop out. No question about it.” ...Fergus Cullen, a former New Hampshire GOP chair and “Never Trumper” who is considering voting for Biden, had warned that Democrats would need to reconsider their ticket if the president delivered a poor performance on Thursday. After the debate, Cullen said: “Anyone who has watched a parent grow old, frail, and foggy recognizes what they are seeing and knows it only gets worse, at an accelerating rate, from here.” One beneficial side effect of this Politico panic attack over Biden's presidential campaign future is that perhaps the media will finally drop its absurd "cheapfake" shtick to debunk videos of Biden acting as incoherent as he did during Thursday's debate.

The New York Times editorial board declared that President Joe Biden should drop his re-election bid. "To Serve His Country, President Biden Should Leave the Race," the headline of the piece asserts.The editorial board's suggestion that Biden should abandon his run for another term came on the heels of the president's abysmal performance in a debate against former President Donald Trump.'That is how much of a danger Mr. Trump poses.'"The president appeared on Thursday night as the shadow of a great public servant. He struggled to explain what he would accomplish in a second term. He struggled to respond to Mr. Trump's provocations. He struggled to hold Mr. Trump accountable for his lies, his failures and his chilling plans. More than once, he struggled to make it to the end of a sentence," the editorial board wrote.But the New York Times editorial board still said that it would back Biden over Trump in a contest between the two men."If the race comes down to a choice between Mr. Trump and Mr. Biden, the sitting president would be this board's unequivocal pick. That is how much of a danger Mr. Trump poses. But given that very danger, the stakes for the country and the uneven abilities of Mr. Biden, the United States needs a stronger opponent to the presumptive Republican nominee. To make a call for a new Democratic nominee this late in a campaign is a decision not taken lightly, but it reflects the scale and seriousness of Mr. Trump's challenge to the values and institutions of this country and the inadequacy of Mr. Biden to confront him," the piece states."The clearest path for Democrats to defeat a candidate defined by his lies is to deal truthfully with the American public: acknowledge that Mr. Biden can't continue his race, and create a process to select someone more capable to stand in his place to defeat Mr. Trump in November," the editorial board wrote. "It is the best chance to protect the soul of the nation — the cause that drew Mr. Biden to run for the presidency in 2019 — from the malign warping of Mr. Trump. And it is the best service that Mr. Biden can provide to a country that he has nobly served for so long."Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

California Gov. Gavin Newsom praised a split decision by the Supreme Court to allow cities to prohibit homeless people from sleeping and camping in public spaces. The 6-3 decision overturns a lower court order that called such prohibitions unconstitutional violations of the Eighth Amendment. 'Sleep is a biological necessity, not a crime.' Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote the majority opinion that included the conservative justices on the court. “Homelessness is complex. Its causes are many. So may be the public policy responses required to address it,” he wrote. “A handful of federal judges cannot begin to ‘match’ the collective wisdom the American people possess in deciding ‘how best to handle’ a pressing social question like homelessness.” Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote the minority dissent opinion. “Sleep is a biological necessity, not a crime,” she wrote. “For some people, sleeping outside is their only option.”She went on to call some city actions against the homeless "unconscionable and unconstitutional.”The National Homeless Law Center condemned the ruling and said it would make the homeless crisis worse. "In a profoundly disappointing ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court today decided that the US Constitution does not protect homeless people against cruel and unusual punishment, even when they have no choice to sleep in public using things like blankets or pillows," read its statement in part. "Arresting or fining people for trying to survive is expensive, counterproductive, and cruel," it continued. "While we are disappointed, we are not surprised that this Supreme Court ruled against the interests of our poorest neighbors."'The definitive authority to implement and enforce policies to clear unsafe homeless encampments.' While homeless advocates were aghast at the decision, Newsom said it would allow cities to better govern their public spaces. "Today’s Supreme Court ruling in Grants Pass provides state and local officials the definitive authority to implement and enforce policies to clear unsafe homeless encampments and helps us deliver common-sense measures to protect the safety and well-being of our communities," he wrote on social media. Other California Democrats agreed. San Francisco Mayor London Breed said in a media briefing that the order would allow the city to be more aggressive in taking action against homeless encampments. On the other hand, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, also a Democrat, criticized the ruling and scolded cities who were trying to “arrest their way out of this problem or hide the homelessness crisis in neighboring cities or in jail.”Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Parents and lawmakers across the country are trying to find a solution to protect young Americans from the dangers of social media and smartphone use, according to Fox News Digital. One prevalent solution is for parents to wait to give their child a smartphone until the end of eighth grade. However, social media expert Melanie Hempe claimed that "there could not possibly be a worse time for social media exposure in a child's life."'We are giving our kids one of the highest dopaminergic devices during the most vulnerable stages of development when their guard is the lowest and the most harm can be done.'"We cannot afford to keep getting this wrong. This is not cute. It is not to be taken so lightly. It is serious, and we should not rely on a rhyme to parent our kids," she said.The Wait Until 8th movement is a growing one across the U.S., where parents have pledged to refrain from handing their children a smartphone at an early age. According to the project's website, it is meant to "empower parents to rally together to delay giving children a smartphone until at least the end of 8th grade. Let's protect the elementary and middle school years from the distractions and the dangers of a smartphone.""Banding together helps decrease the pressure to have a phone at an early age," the statement continued. "Ten years old is the average age children get their first smartphone. You can change this!"Hempe noted that the Wait Until 8th movement is running parallel to the "greatest adolescent mental health crisis" in the country. Hempe, who is also a registered nurse, claimed that eighth grade is not a good time to introduce smartphones and social media, per the report.She emphasized that there is an incongruency in brain development for students in the eighth grade that could make the introduction of social media more harmful in the long run."The accelerator is working before the brakes," she said. "And what this means is they are taking higher risk before the frontal cortex, the judgment center of their brain, is developed. So their emotion center is developing before the frontal cortex or the reasoning center.""By eighth grade they are searching for content that is more provocative," she continued. "They're searching for content like anxiety and depression and mental health diagnoses because all their friends have one, so they're trying to figure out what theirs is. And then the algorithms kick in and they get exposed to the worst content at the most vulnerable stage and impressionable stage of their development."The CDC recently published a research paper that stated suicide is among the most common causes of death in high school students. Consequently, suicide and suicidal behavior is considered a public health concern."Among high school-age youths aged 14–18 years, 1,952 suicides occurred in 2021, making suicide the third leading cause of death for this age group (2021 rate = 9.0 per 100,000 population). Suicide accounted for approximately one fifth of deaths (18.6%) among this age group," according to the paper.Hempe also called attention to the prevalence of addictive behaviors forming in adolescent children, saying: "Suicide interest in attempts are peaking, addictions are peaking and forming, the brain becomes what it does.""So the teenage brain is the most susceptible to addiction. We know that 90% of all adult addictions start in adolescence. Just because your child is intelligent doesn't mean they're mature enough to handle or wise enough to handle a smartphone.""We are giving our kids one of the highest dopaminergic devices during the most vulnerable stages of development when their guard is the lowest and the most harm can be done."Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!