Those 'All Electric' Fire Trucks are a Sad Joke

Putin: How About a Cease-Fire in Place, With Keepsies?

A farmer in Canada has found an enormous piece of space junk in a field that is believed to have fallen from a SpaceX mission. The piece is 2 meters (6 feet) wide and weighs 40 kilograms (90 pounds). It landed on the farm of Barry Sawchuk in Saskatchewan province, northeast of the city of Regina.The fragment was found in late April. Sawchuck describes it as a burned-up piece of carbon fiber a honeycomb aluminum lattice in between. Attached to it there was what appears to be a hydraulic cylinder.        IFLScience is not responsible for content shared from external sites.“Not every day you go out in your field and find space junk,” Sawchuk told Global News. “We knew it came from the sky, because it couldn’t get there by itself.”"It's really just luck. If that had hit in the middle of Regina or, yeah, New York City, it very easily could have killed someone," University of Regina astronomy professor Samantha Lawler told CBC."Here in Ituna, Saskatchewan, we're in the process of building a [hockey] rink. I think, if I can, I'm going to sell it. Some of the proceeds will go to the rink," Sawchuk told CBC. "That's where I was born and raised, so why not?"Astronomer Jonathan McDowell, from the Harvard & Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics shared on Twitter that there was a recent mission that passed over Saskatchewan. The Dragon Trunk section of the Axiom 3 mission reentered over there on February 26. Asked if it is normal for such a big piece to survive the burn-up in the atmosphere, he had a pithy reply.“We are discovering that the composite materials the trunk is made from survive reentry surprisingly well,” McDowell said.       This is not the first time that bits of SpaceX's debris have fallen on Earth. Pieces from the SpaceX Crew-1 mission fell in Australia in 2022. Recently, a piece from an ISS junk drop fell onto a Florida house. The number of objects in orbit has skyrocketed recently due to megaconstellations such as SpaceX's Starlink, so space junk is more likely to be up there. And if it doesn’t truly burn up, chances are that it lands down here.

The number of people who use cannabis on a daily basis now exceeds the number of daily alcohol drinkers in the US, new research reveals. Overall, more people continue to consume booze than weed across the country, yet the proportion of high-frequency stoners has skyrocketed, overtaking regular alcohol use for the first time.Study author Jonathan P. Caulkins from Carnegie Mellon University looked at data from the National Household Survey on Drug Abuse as well as the National Survey on Drug Use and Health in order to determine how usage rates changed between 1979 and 2022. This period saw a number of major shifts in US drug policy, and results indicate that fluctuations in cannabis consumption closely mirror these legal and political developments.Caulkins focused on four milestone years that represented key junctures in the country’s official relationship with cannabis. The first of these was 1979, which is the earliest year for which data is available and marked the end of a period of liberalization during which 11 states decriminalized or reduced penalties for cannabis use.The next year under consideration was 1992, the end point of the highly punitive stance on cannabis adopted by both the Reagan and Bush Sr. administrations. Next, Caulkins looked at data from 2008, which saw the beginning of a new era of federal non-interference with state policy and facilitated the legalization of cannabis in Washington and Colorado in 2012.Finally, the researcher looked at 2022, which is the most recent year for which data exists and is representative of the ongoing wave of state-level legalization and decriminalization across the US. Overall, Caulkins examined 27 surveys from these four years, including a total of 1.6 million respondents.Results indicate that reported cannabis use plunged to an all-time low in 1992 before rebounding as the political landscape became increasingly pot-friendly. In the early 90s, daily or near-daily drinkers outnumbered daily cannabis users by 8.9 million to 0.9 million. Three decades later, however, the number of regular pot users had increased 15-fold to 17.7 million, while daily drinkers numbered just 14.7 million. Looking closer at the data from 2022, the author found that the US still contains many more boozers than stoners, but while the average alcohol drinker partakes on just four or five days per month, those who use cannabis do so on 15 to 16 days each month.“These trends mirror changes in policy, with declines during periods of greater restriction and growth during periods of policy liberalization,” said Caulkins in a statement. “It is striking that high-frequency cannabis use is now more commonly reported than is high-frequency drinking,” he adds.As a caveat, it’s important to consider that the data comes from voluntary self-reports, and may therefore be heavily influenced by political dangers. For instance, many cannabis users are unlikely to have admitted to using the drug back in 1992, when penalties for doing so were extremely harsh.It’s therefore unclear if these numbers represent an actual increase in use or simply reflect a diminishing reluctance to openly report such behavior as the legal risks for doing so disappear. “Willingness to self-report may have increased as cannabis became normalized, so changes in actual use may be less pronounced than changes in reported use,” writes Caulkins.“Nonetheless, the enormous changes in rates of self-reported cannabis use, particularly of [daily or near-daily] use, suggest that changes in actual use have been considerable,” he concludes.The study is published in the journal Addiction.

Dozens of rivers and streams in the far reaches of Alaska have turned from crystal clear to a rusty color, some looking “like a milky orange juice.” According to a new study, the culprit is likely to be warming temperatures causing permafrost to thaw and leak metals into the waterways. Needless to say, the researchers believe the rusty waters could have “considerable implications” on the local wildlife, as well as drinking water quality in rural Alaska.Scientists at the US National Park Service, the US Geological Survey, and the University of California Davis recently ventured to northern Alaska’s Brooks Range and found at least 75 streams that had turned orange in the past 10 years. “The more we flew around, we started noticing more and more orange rivers and streams. There are certain sites that look almost like a milky orange juice,” Jon O’Donnell, lead study author and an ecologist for the National Park Service's Arctic Inventory and Monitoring Network, said in a statement. “The stained rivers are so big we can see them from space. These have to be stained a lot to pick them up from space,” continued Brett Poulin, principal investigator in the research and an assistant professor of environmental toxicology at UC Davis.Another aerial view of the orange waters at the Kutuk River in Alaska's Gates of the Arctic National Park.Image credit: Ken Hill / National Park ServiceSamples of the tainted streams showed the chemistry of the water had undergone a radical change in the past decade. The impaired waters contained high or elevated levels of iron, zinc, nickel, copper, and cadmium.Some of the water in the Agashashok River basin was also incredibly acidic, with a pH of just 2.6 – that’s not far from the acidity of lemon juice or white vinegar. Downstream from the highly acidic stream, the researchers noted the vegetation was “blackened and dead.”Iron is the prime reason these rivers appear a funky color. While iron itself is typically a metallic gray color, it often appears orange due to the formation of iron oxides. When iron is exposed to oxygen and moisture, it undergoes a chemical reaction that produces rust, scientifically known as iron(III) oxide, which has a reddish-orangey coloration. The preliminary data from the study suggests that metal mobilization in Alaska’s rivers could heighten the risk of population decline in key subsistence fish species, including Dolly Varden, chum salmon (Oncorhynchus keta), and whitefish (Coregonus).The problem is becoming more noticeable in northern Alaska, but the researchers warn that climate change is set to ensure it becomes increasingly common in other parts of the world where permafrost exists. “There’s a lot of implications,” O’Donnell said. “As the climate continues to warm, we would expect permafrost to continue to thaw and so wherever there are these types of minerals, there’s potential for streams to be turning orange and becoming degraded in terms of water quality.”The study was published in the Nature journal Communications: Earth & Environment.

Johnston County Animal Services is currently investigating a distressing case of animal cruelty involving a dog and her five puppies. The investigation began after a shocking discovery was made outside a fire station in Cleveland. This case highlights the severe consequences of abandoning pets and the importance of seeking help from animal services when in... The post Firemen find abandoned suitcase outside station filled with puppies and mama dog inside appeared first on Animal Channel.

David Fine, a 63-year-old Massachusetts man, is on a heartfelt mission to find a new home for his beloved dog, Babs. This mission is driven by his terminal illness, a stark reality he faces with a blend of courage and love. Babs, a Shar-Pei Boxer mix, has been David’s faithful companion for nearly a decade,... The post Desperate terminally ill man’s final wish is to find a home for his beloved dog appeared first on Animal Channel.

On Wednesday, CNN’s Laura Coates referred to the “Appeal to Heaven” flag flown outside the home of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito as controversial and questioned his legitimacy in overseeing important election cases. Despite the fact that the “Appeal to Heaven” flag symbolized the unyielding pursuit of liberty and justice, Coates asks former FBI attorney Andrew Weissmann if Alito should be involved in cases such as Trump’s presidential immunity claim or other January 6th cases. According to a New York Times report, Justice Alito was seen flying the “Appeal to Heaven” flag outside his home last year which Coates described as a “controversial” flag. The flag dated back to before the American Revolution and symbolized the growing anger of the colonists who were not willing to give their freedom away to the oppressive English Monarch. The flag today symbolizes that the American people’s journey should be towards a more perfect union. Although this flag stands for many American values, Coates rather associated this flag with rioters.  She downplayed the history of the flag she states “But it has been carried by rioters who stormed the Capitol on January 6th.” The Appeal to Heaven flag was carried in the protest that occurred but was among other flags such as the American flag. The American flag, flown by many Americans including Alito, should also be associated with the January 6 protest.     When Coates asked Weissmann if Alito should be overseeing important cases, Weissmann answered: The idea that he sat on the decision to decide whether the president should be disqualified because he was an insurrectionist, should he be disqualified from being on the ballot again, that is a decision that you would think he might have to recuse himself on. In May of this year, the decision to include former President Trump on the ballot was unanimous by all of the Supreme Court Justices. Excluding Alito from being involved in this case would not have changed the outcome of Trump being on the presidential ballot. He completely ignored the history of the flag and asserted that flying it was only about January 6: And if you think back to what those flags mean at the time, as you reported, this is about flying that flag just shortly after the January 6th insurrection. We all can remember our reaction to what was going on, particularly if you were in Washington, D.C. But I think for the nation, it was shocking and horrifying. And not only was he flying a flag that was a symbol used during that insurrection, but his sort of claim that it was something that was okay to do because it was retaliation for a sign that was sort of against Trump that his neighbor was flying. Weissmann stated that a justice flying this flag had an “appearance of impropriety” and decried that there was “no system to hold him to account so that he isn't sitting on cases where there's an appearance of impropriety.” The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: CNN Laura Coates 5/23/2024 11:20:59-11:24:25 [ON SCREEN HEADLINE: Second Provocative Flag Spotted Outside Alito Property] LAURA COATESCOATES: So tonight, another controversial flag spotted outside of a Supreme Court justice's property. Again, Samuel Alito. The New York Times for a second time uncovering the photos. But this time, it was the "Appeal to Heaven" flag that was flying outside his vacation home in Jersey. Now, that flag has a long history dating back to the Revolutionary War. But it has been carried by rioters who stormed the Capitol on January 6th. Now, Alito, he previously pointed fingers at his wife for raising the upside-down U.S. flag, a "Stop the Steal" symbol, at his Virginia home during a clash with a neighbor, notably just three days before Biden's inauguration. Now, one might wonder who was responsible this time. Well, joining us now, senior prosecutor to Robert Mueller Special Counsel Investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and also the co-author of The Trump Indictments, Andrew Weissmann. Andrew, so good to have you on. Thanks for stopping by today. You know, when you hear about the Supreme Court justices and yet another controversial issue like this, does it raise questions for you about the fact that he is sitting and overseeing important cases like, I don't know, Trump's presidential immunity claim or other January 6th cases? ANDREW WEISSMANN (FORMER FBI ATTORNEY): Absolutely. The idea that he sat on the decision to decide whether the president should be disqualified because he was an insurrectionist, should he be disqualified from being on the ballot again, that is a decision that you would think he might have to recuse himself on. But even more important is the point that you're making, which is that he has just heard in his sitting on a case deciding the issue of presidential immunity. And if you think back to what those flags mean at the time, as you reported, this is about flying that flag just shortly after the January 6th insurrection. We all can remember our reaction to what was going on, particularly if you were in Washington, D.C. But I think for the nation, it was shocking and horrifying. And not only was he flying a flag that was a symbol used during that insurrection, but his sort of claim that it was something that was okay to do because it was retaliation for a sign that was sort of against Trump that his neighbor was flying. So, his neighbor has a First Amendment right to fly that, and so a sitting Supreme Court justice has on his lawn. And I don't buy that sort of like "my wife did it" defense when it's on his own front lawn. To me, the issue is it's an appearance of impropriety. And there really is, unfortunately, right now, there is no system to hold him to account so that he isn't sitting on cases where there's an appearance of impropriety. COATES: I mean, he does have life tenure, much like federal court judges do, the other Article III judges. But there is a difference in the way in which one has this code of ethics and guidelines that do require a certain behavior compared to really, it's good to be the king when it comes to the Supreme Court. (…)

Technology has, in the words of sex columnist Dan Savage, “put a porn studio in everyone’s pockets.” That’s not to say that other, more traditional forms of pornography have been eradicated and replaced by amateur productions. There are, of course, still porn studios, still women who, either voluntarily or through coercion, act in more produced pornographic films. But the consumption and production of porn have radically changed. While pornography has always existed, we are living in an unprecedented era. Far gone are the days of debating obscenity laws. Amateur porn is now considered by some an integral piece in the seduction process between romantic partners, as would-be lovers send one another "nudes," often before first meeting. The current conversation around porn is primarily anchored in voluntary consumption and production. To the consumers, we speak often of removing the stigma that surrounds sex and allowing people their sexual outlets. This ranges from everything from the garden variety to more “hard-core” expressions of pornography, with conversations around “kink-shaming” being a recognizable part of public discourse. Now, if that’s how they react to people throwing softballs, think about what happens when harder questions like, 'What do we do with trafficked or coerced women?' pop up. On the production end, the mainstream lens has moved away from women who may have been coerced (either through their economic conditions or by another party) into porn to "voluntary sex workers." Even the language we use to describe porn production has collapsed, where cam girls and other kinds of amateur "content creators" are discussed in the same breath as professional pornographers, exotic dancers, and prostitutes. They all exist under the umbrella of "sex work," and the assumption is that all participation is voluntary and enthusiastic. Here, stigma comes under attack again, seen as the sole reason sex workers suffer. I recall a debate I got into with a sex-positive feminist sometime last year, where she vociferously claimed that the “real problem” that prostitutes who work primarily at truck stops face is that people shame them. She claimed that there is no reason why anyone would feel humiliated by knocking on cab doors and selling sex other than society-imposed policing of sexuality. It’s well-trodden ground that for any of these arguments to be coherent, you must accept that sex is morally neutral. It exists somewhere between “consumer product,” “just labor,” and “just another bodily function,” like using the restroom or eating. In fact, the latter is another analogy that often gets evoked. Even though many of us eat at fast-food restaurants like McDonald’s regularly, that will never take away how special it is to cook a meal at home for yourself or for someone you love. Or, put another way, some people love to cook for themselves; other people don’t mind cooking for strangers. A third commonly referenced analogy deals more specifically with labor. It goes something like this: Any job you work causes you problems — emotional, physical, and psychic — so why does sex work get extra scrutiny? No matter how sex is described, advocates aggressively deny that there is a possible world where sexual intercourse could have any intrinsic meaning or value. To them, the idea that sex could be sacred in and of itself is considered a preposterous idea. Curiously, though, a contradiction emerges. The very same people who assert that sex is morally neutral will also shout that rape is among the worst crimes you can commit. In a worldview that promotes rehabilitation for criminals, sex crimes are both nebulously defined and seem to constitute being banished from society permanently. But why this special focus if sex is morally neutral? The answer, according to them, is because it violates the person's consent. But ostensibly, any crime is a violation of consent, so why the special focus on sex? One has to wonder if it's an incoherent argument or if continued probing would reveal that sex is considered a type of property that can be bartered with, sold, or offered for free, but never stolen. But even that would at least suggest it's a valuable type of property. This perspective ultimately collapses onto itself. Another curious piece missing in the pro-pornography arguments around production — how empowering it is — is the very real ramifications of the labor. “Sex work is work” until you get into the nitty-gritty of what that means. Even morally neutral arguments evaporate in public conversation, often minimized under the "that’s just stigma" banner. Let’s accept their narrative terms here: There is nothing morally wrong with producing pornography. Not only is there nothing morally wrong with producing pornography, one can voluntarily engage in it and enjoy it. But what of the conversations around the potential emotional and psychological impacts of people analyzing your body with the precision one might with any other purchased consumer product? Just as we carefully examine our new cars and mobile phones, consumers of sex work of any variety, including but not limited to porn, do the same to women’s bodies. A rogue pimple or stretch mark suddenly comes under a critic’s eye. Is the solution here never to read reviews of your work? What if it starts impacting your income? What are the psychological ramifications of knowing that your appearance is “worth” $2.50 a month, whereas other women are “worth” thousands? Any line of questioning is framed as “anti-sex-work” and quickly silenced. People will argue that questions are a slippery slope that will open the door to people who don’t want sex work to exist or, at a bare minimum, people who don’t want it to exist to this extent. But if your position can be so easily weakened by questions that accept your premise, then how strong is your position in the first place? How empowering can something be if any whiff of negativity removed from the narrative that porn producers are a victimized class is shut down immediately? Now, if that’s how they react to people throwing softballs, think about what happens when harder questions like, “What do we do with trafficked or coerced women?” pop up. It’s a system that works only if all flaws are obfuscated.

Thousands of Americans turned out in the South Bronx Thursday night to support former President Donald Trump and hear how he plans to reverse the perilous trends that have begun or worsened under the Biden administration. Despite leading with the headline, "Trump bombs the Bronx," Axios acknowledged that the "sight of Trump speaking to several thousand people in a predominantly Hispanic neighborhood in deep blue New York is a sign of the realignment happening between the two parties." "Trump's GOP is becoming more working class and a little more multiracial," the publication noted. "Democrats are gaining with more well-educated voters in the suburbs." Just weeks after suggesting black children in the Bronx "don't even know what the word 'computer' is," and calling a New York Supreme Court justice an "extremist" for following the law, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul concluded on CNN's "The Lead" Thursday that the constituents of this diverse crowd of working-class Americans were "clowns." Host Jake Tapper led into Hochul's seeming "basket of deplorables" moment by noting, "Donald Trump, former President Trump, he's holding an event shortly in the Bronx in an effort to attract voters of color, Latinos and African Americans — historically a loyal voting block for Democrats, especially African Americans." "The truth is this is, this is a sport, this is politics of margins. What more do Democrats need to do to solidify and mobilize their base?" asked Tapper. "Well, I'll tell you what won't make a difference at all Jake and that is for Donald Trump to be the ringleader and invite all his clowns to a place like the Bronx," said Hochul. "New York will never, ever support Donald Trump for president. We know him better than anyone and that means we understand what he's all about is just for himself. So this state will go solidly behind Joe Biden for president as it has in the past." 'Biden only leads Trump — whose negative favorability rating is not much worse than Biden's — by a 'narrow' nine points.' Trump only nabbed 16% of the vote in the borough and 37.8% of the vote in the state in 2020 — a state that has not thrown its support behind a Republican presidential candidate since Ronald Reagan — yet he assured the enthusiastic crowd, "We're going to win New York," and implored them to vote in numbers "too big to rig." A Wednesday Siena Poll indicated that the delta is no longer insurmountable: Biden only leads Trump in New York 47-38%. “In a state that hasn't voted for the GOP candidate for president since Ronald Reagan 40 years ago, and where Democrats hold a 26-point enrollment advantage over Republicans, Biden only leads Trump — whose negative favorability rating is not much worse than Biden's — by a 'narrow' nine points," said Siena College pollster Steven Greenberg. "While 18% of Democrats support Trump, only 9% of Republicans support Biden, and independents are evenly divided, 37-37%," continued Greenberg. "There is only a small gender gap as Biden leads with men by five points and with women by 12 points." In other words, the so-called ringleader's tent is more populous than Hochul may like to think. Hochul told Tapper, "So, if he wants to spend his time doing these made-up fake rallies and pretending there is support here, be my guest because while you're doing that, Donald Trump, Joe Biden's out there on the other side, making sure he is delivering for Americans. And so go ahead, spend all the time you want in New York because we'll be with Joe Biden, and Joe Biden is out there winning over the rest of the battleground states." Biden is currently failing to win over the rest of the battleground states. 'Right now, this election is about President Biden's economic record and America's economic future.' A Cook Political Report survey released Thursday indicated that in a horse race including third-party candidates, Trump is leading Biden in Arizona by 4 points, in Georgia by 4 points, in Michigan by 3 points, in Nevada by 8 points, in North Carolina by 8 points, and in Biden's home state of Pennsylvania by 3 points. The two are presently tied in Wisconsin. In terms of a head-to-head, Trump is leading Biden by 1 point in Arizona, 3 points in Georgia, 2 points in Michigan, 9 points in Nevada, 7 points in North Carolina, and 3 points in Pennsylvania. Again, in a head-to-head they are dead even in Wisconsin. "Right now, this election is about President Biden's economic record and America's economic future," said GS Strategy Group president Greg Strimple. "When it comes to who voters trust to move the economy forward, Trump is in the driver's seat." While abortion remains an animating issue for Democrats, the pollsters indicated Biden's advantage on the issue isn't enough to "offset Trump's overall strength on bringing down the cost of living." Watch the full rally here: Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!