Every year being the hottest year on record has been the norm for awhile now…

TBH, the most astonishing reveal from the study for me was that Hybrid owners weren’t charging their vehicles. Unfortunately, the why isn’t covered in the study since it seems to just be hard math and statistical analysis.

Are they just not plugging in at night?

Too frustrated with the battery draining too quickly?

Driving too far for the battery to meaningfully contribute between charges?

Is the extra hardware mass making the ICE that much less efficient?

Laziness from having to fill both the battery and the gas tank?

To be fair, I’m really just judging the EC’s article writer. Not the trustworthiness of EC or the study itself.

1. Armadillo Looks like rejection Doesn’t want (???)

Squid Couldn’t find lips. No response. Until (???) study (???)

I question how much of this is a logistics issue, vs how much of this is because half the population is convinced that basic medical care causes Down syndrome .

The researchers discovered that Chernobyl wolves are exposed to upwards of 11.28 millirem of radiation every day for their entire lives - which is more than six times the legal safety limit for a human.

Ms Love found the wolves have altered immune systems similar to cancer patients undergoing radiation treatment, but more significantly she also identified specific parts of the animals' genetic information that seemed resilient to increased cancer risk.

Why is this advertising considered news?

But even with those historic gains, they don't bring workers back to where they were before 2007, when wages and benefits were slashed amid tough economic times.

Headline makes the strikers sound greedy, but this context puts things into perspective.

What would prevent them from arguing that was improper, and thus invalid?

I’d be upset… except I don’t see any value to those services so I’m not subscribed in the first place.

I miss when web searches gave us personal websites of people passionate about a topic.

"In the absence of that sorely-needed action, the Office of Gun Violence Prevention along with the rest of my Administration will continue to do everything it can…”

Isn’t that basically admitting that this new department can’t do anything and just posturing?

Or am I missing something?

Edit: In retrospect, the biggest value this department might have is having it be under Republican leadership down the line. An entire department explicitly against gun violence may cause some in-fighting about reasonable measures… as opposed to the current status quo.

That is of course assuming the entire department doesn’t just get tossed and establishes itself as having some teeth.