CBDC currency: Creating shortages with full shelves

Globalist “Guru” Claims Trump’s Re-Election Will Mean ‘The Death Of Global Order’

The Ascendance of Sociopaths in U.S. Governance

Dems Go Full Throttle On Kamala After Biden Drops Out Of 2024 Race

BIRD FLU: They Fooled Us Once. Looks Like They’ll Try to Fool Us Again.

Trump Demands Reparations Over Biden Dropping Out

After years of debate, botanists have now voted to change the scientific names of over 200 species of plant, fungi, and algae that make references to a racial slur, the first time such a move has been made.The decision took place at the International Botanical Congress (IBC) in Madrid, where 351 out of the 556 people who attended voted in favor of changing names containing, or with roots in the word caffra, a slur that’s been used against Black people, particularly in South Africa.Set to take effect at the end of July, the offensive term will be replaced with affra and various derivatives, as a way of making reference to the species’ African origins.It’s a change that was first proposed by botanists Gideon F. Smith and Estrela Figueiredo of Nelson Mandela University back in 2021, calling for the shift to be made “permanently and retroactively”.Speaking on the recent decision, Smith told Science: “[We] express our gratitude to our colleagues from around the globe who supported our efforts to rid botanical nomenclature of a despicable, racial slur.”Though it was ultimately amended such that only new species names would be ruled on, there had also been a proposal to create a new committee that would vote on changing any offensive species name retroactively.“It is time for the nomenclature of algae, fungi, and plants to get to grips with what has been perceived, at least by some, as its colonial past and deliberately, completely and irreversibly eliminate the use of such offending epithets from scientific plant names,” argued Smith and Figueiredo in their 2021 proposal.Not everyone in the world of taxonomy takes the same stance. Last year, for example, the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature stated its position was to keep the scientific names of animals the same, citing that to do otherwise would be “difficult to implement and unlikely to be recognized by the whole biological community.”“The stability of scientific names is essential for all activities under the umbrella of biological science,” they wrote in a journal article stating their position.That argument may well be undercut by the practical problems created when researchers find themselves in circumstances where they need to use a species' scientific name, but it contains an offensive term."[I]t is very difficult to talk about such plants [in Africa], as it is a word that is even banned in some regions, creating a real communication problem,” explained botanist Sonia Molino, who had attended the IBC meeting, in a post to social media platform X.The American Ornithological Society took a middle ground of sorts last November – while scientific names remained the same, it was decided to change the English names of birds named directly after people, with many birds having common names linked to people with ties to slavery, racism, and misogyny.The debate over whether or not scientific and common names should be changed is one that is likely to rage on even in light of the recent vote – and that goes for disciplines outside of biology too.

Scientists have described how human activity contributed to the extinction of a large number of animals. Humans have had a significant impact on the extinction of wildlife species, and many animals have suffered from this impact. Exact numbers on how many animal species have gone extinct vary, making it difficult for scientists to give a definitive answer. However, there are some estimates and studies that help approximate the scale of the problem. Since the beginning of the modern period, about 777 animal species have become extinct since 1500, according to the IUCN Red List. While some disappearances may have been natural, human influence likely played a key role. Historical data on extinctions before this time is scarce, but it is known that human influence on nature began long before 1500. The IUCN estimates that only about 5% of known species are extinct, meaning there are many extinctions that have not yet been recorded. According to a study by Robert Cowie of the University of Hawaii, published in the journal Biological Reviews, between 150,000 and 260,000 known species may have disappeared on Earth over the past 500 years. The study found that animal extinction rates ranged from 150 to 260 extinctions per million species per year (E/MSY), with an average of about 100 E/MSY. This means that of the approximately 2 million known species, about 100,000 have gone extinct in the last 500 years, not including unknown species. Scientists estimate that over the past 500 years there have been more than 380,000 human-related extinctions, although this figure is only an estimate. John Elroy of Macquarie University in Australia noted that it is extremely difficult to accurately calculate extinction rates in the modern era. According to the scientist, to accurately understand the overall rate of extinction, researchers need to know the number of existing species. Much wildlife, especially in understudied regions such as the tropics, remains unknown to science, making assessment difficult. Elroy believes that despite current estimates, humans are helping to accelerate extinction, and the actual number of extinct species is significantly higher than the 777 recorded by the IUCN. The post Scientists release data on animal species driven to extinction by humans appeared first on Anomalien.com.

Pro Political Tip For Mika Brzezinski: When praising Joe Biden, DO NOT, under any circumstances, talk about his "touch." And yet, on today's Morning Joe, Mika Brzezinski violated that rule. Expressing her sadness at Biden leaving the race, Mika thrice extolled Biden's "touch." Mika, Mika, Mika! You say "touch," and for millions of Americans it brings to mind unsettling images. Biden's "touch" with the daughter of Dem Sen. Chris Coons, seen here, is just one of many such examples.  MIKA: He had authenticity and touch. Whether you saw it or not, but everything about him, even sometimes the stutter and the bumbling was part of the touch, part of the sort of empathic, very loving, very clear, clear-eyed touch that he had, that allowed him and enabled him to be an effective president. A bit earlier, trying to explain why Biden dug in his heels before eventually relenting and quitting the race, Joe Scarborough spoke of the Democratic establishment having repeatedly "s---" on Biden.  Scarborough suggested that Biden and his family and top advisers wanted to prove that, like Rocky, there was one more fight in him. In that same paean to Biden, Mika made two absurd accusations against the Republicans. First, she claimed that Republicans had already begun a "hate campaign" against Kamala Harris. Mika, it's not a "hate campaign" -- it's a campaign. Exposing Kamala's word salads and "deep thoughts" on things like "the passage of time" is an entirely valid venture into informing Americans about her. Mika also accused Republicans of deliberately mispronouncing Harris' first name as Ka-MA-la. There are countless examples of politicians of all stripes making the same mistake, including—yup!—Biden himself [see 48 seconds in]! Finally, Mika warned her fellow Dems that Trump would be hard to beat, telling them not to make the same mistake they made in 2016, when they laughed at Trump's chances. Was that a shot at Mika's fellow MSNBC host, Joy Reid, who famously laughed at Ann Coulter when, in 2015 on Bill Maher's show, Ann said that Trump was the Republican with the best chance of winning the general election? Notes Scarborough, egomaniac that he is, was so eager to bloviate on Biden's departure that he rudely cut off Willie Geist, who had opened the show by describing the Dem rules for nominating Biden's replacement. Scarborough sarcastically asked executive producer Alex Corson for two more hours on Dem logistics. Scarborough also went out of his way to credit former Morning Joe regular Mark Halperin for breaking the news on Friday that Biden would quit on Sunday. Video here. Halperin hosts a once-or-twice-daily 2Way Zoom/YouTube, bringing on top strategists and pollsters from all sides, but also allowing time for non-professionals to express opinions and ask questions. Here's the transcript. MSNBC Morning Joe 7/22/24 6:02 am EDT WILLIE GEIST: Since Biden left the race, his delegates are free to support whoever they choose. The president does not have to release his delegates. So, let's pause there, Joe. JOE SCARBOROUGH: Yeah. GEIST: The delegates are part of this. SCARBOROUGH: I think, I think it was good at the top of the show. I think we should read all the subsections of the Democratic National Committee's charter, and Alex, could we go a couple more hours on that? Because I don't think anybody wants reactions to anybody here. GEIST: I saw where that was headed. Executive decision, you cut it off. SCARBOROUGH: Thank you, thank you. . . . JOE SCARBOROUGH:  By the way, just to be really clear here.  And Jonathan, I'll let you finish up on this. To be really clear, Ricchetti and Donilon loved Biden. They heard Biden counted out time and time and time again. The family heard the Democratic establishment just absolutely [pauses] shit on Joe Biden time and time and time again.  And what did he do? He always exceeded expectations. He became President of the United States, as we all remember in 2020, with the entire Democratic establishment mocking him, saying he wasn't good enough, he wasn't up to it. So, as a background, you can understand why Ricchetti and Donilon said, hey, let's do it again, Rocky. Come on, one more fight, you can do it. . . .  MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Well, obviously, on many levels, I'm really sad. Joe Biden is a patriot. I love him, I love his family, and I love what he's done for the country.  He had authenticity and touch. Whether you saw it or not, but everything about him, even sometimes the stutter and the bumbling was part of the touch, part of the sort of empathic, very loving, very clear, clear-eyed touch that he had, that allowed him and enabled him to be an effective president. But all that turned against him after the debate for all the reasons that we discussed. And he would say, no time to complain about it. Let's move on. It's go time. And Democrats really have a moment of momentum here, and my hope is that they grab it and run with it. Get unified. Get organized. Get coordinated. No more infighting. Donald Trump is not easy to beat. He is not easy to beat, and anyone who thinks he is is back at 2016 when they're laughing at the concept. And you can see how quickly they tried to steal the unity narrative. And I've heard from inside Republican circles and right-wing media that the hate campaign against Kamala Harris has begun.  You'll notice they purposefully pronounce her name wrong. They say Ka-MA-la. They do it all the time. It is on purpose. But the talk is to start that hate campaign and get it going and start it churning.