Sea level at geological time scale is wild. Hundreds of metres.

I find it fascinating since we live during such a short period on the geological time scale.

Driven mostly by glaciation effects, but thermal expansion of sea water is also significant. These effects can be partially offset in places by isostatic rebound (plates are floating, so reducing ice mass on continents allows them to rebound or rise, lowering apparent sea level, relative to the land).

There’s a lot less ice left, since the sea level has already risen >110m since the last glacial maximum (~20000 years ago), and has been quite stable for the past ~6500 years. This stability has been influential in the placement of human settlements along coastlines and river deltas.

Its fun that ice shelf melt doesn’t change sea level, the same way the melting ice cube in a glass of water doesn’t, but ice on land does. This is why the focus is generally on Antarctic and Greenland.

Together, the Antarctic & Greenland ice sheet could cause almost 68m of sea level rise, converting this unsinkable aircraft carrier to more of a stationary submarine?

Carney put forward a thesis about the state of the world in his speech, then Trump stepped up and proved Carney’s point…

This is indeed a good speech. I often see of critique from both sides of our political discourse about some of his actions (security, climate change, neoliberalism, etc.), but I’m proud to have a smart, thoughtful, and well respected leader representing our country on the world stage. This is a tricky needle to thread, but hopefully one that can lead to continued peace & restored prosperity for all of us.

We didn’t ask for this, but we need to make the best of the current situation.

And to be clear, as a Canadian, I still view our southern neighbours as friends (excluding a few notable individuals), who are going through a difficult time. One that many of us saw coming from 1.609km away, but sometimes you can’t tell a friend their love interest is a psychopathic narsicist, because they’re too infatuated to listen or see it. They have to learn for themselves…

Unfortunately, in this case, we’re all being dragged along for the ride.

It’s fascinating to me that a group of individuals in another country read some history novels and think they understand Canada and Canadians today - to the point they suggest actively interfering in the domestic politics and elections through intelligence operations and the like.

They have cause and effect backward.

Canadians generally view Americans as friends, long time allies, and we generally respect (and appreciate the differences between our countries (things like maternity leave, gun laws / safety, and public healthcare)… But, we don’t generally hold hard feelings against the Americans, especially the average individual - at least until they make overt threats against us, like in this article. It’s the Americans like the authors of this post causing the problem.

Can we quit the aggressive stupidity, and move forward in a respectful way to build a prosperous future for all of us?

I understand the frustration, but this is a major gamble. “Different” can easily be worse, with potentially irreversible consequences. Voting alone isn’t enough, especially given the options, but neither is rolling the dice. Citizens aren’t powerless when they get involved, organize, and actively push for better solutions together.

Even if this was an economically sound proposal, the next X45 magnitude solar flare might be a nasty surprise for reliability metrics…

Edit: at some point, this would also likely contribute to Kessler Syndrome, but at least we’d have chat bots.

This led me down a rabbit hole where I found some invisible pink unicorns.

“Invisible Pink Unicorns are beings of great spiritual power. We know this because they are capable of being invisible and pink at the same time. Like all religions, the Faith of the Invisible Pink Unicorns is based upon both logic and faith. We have faith that they are pink; we logically know that they are invisible because we can’t see them.” 🤣

Feels like this is probably aimed at climate agreements, but it’s similar to the ‘sovereignty act’, intended to grant broad powers without saying exactly what the law would change.

This kind of law only creates more legal uncertainty (bad for business as well!) and wastes money on court fights, when we could be doing something constructive. Like paying teachers to educate our children.

Yeah definitely a difference there. Rural is also often further travel distances - so that’s a thing as well.

Snow clearing is pretty good in the city (generally), and the studs work well on the ice. Hardest biking days are usually 12-24h after a snowfall when its not fresh, but just a mess to ride through.

I started winter bike commuting last year, and it was great. Studded winter tires, bar mitts, and warm shoes; helmet / goggles are great. Very little “traffic” on my ~40min commute.

I start getting cold toes below -22C or so, so maybe I need some better boots, but honestly, the people who say you can’t bike in the winter have probably either never tried it, or are dressed inappropriately. Summer is definitely more forgiving if you get a flat tire though.

It’s not for everyone, because there’s some fitness requirement, and equipment isn’t cheap (but neither are cars), but I’m stoked to get ~70-80 minutes of exercise daily on my way to/from work.

Turns out, photo radar is only “annoying” if you’re exceeding the legal posted speed limit…

Its bizarre to me that the government (who is responsible for creating laws), is taking the stance that enforcing them should be optional.

Imagine if Alberta could fund fall immunization programs instead of reducing speeding fines for people speeding!

So you’re saying we could get 178k people and hold a referendum on whether the Albertans agree to have Family Day become a monthly paid statutory holiday - on the third Friday of every month?

Longest referendum ballot challenge?

This sounds like a fun can of worms! Can’t wait for the debate in the newly renamed “Ledgy McLedgeface”!

That’s very useful context that I wasn’t aware of - thanks for sharing!

For others interested: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1995_Quebec_referendum#Opinion_polling

Yep agree. I like having the numbers with these headlines, to avoid people getting the wrong impression.

E.g. “70-75% of Albertans oppose separatism, comparable to Quebec”

Provides similar information - but doesn’t give the impression that everyone wants to separate. Its a threat, but let’s not give it any extra credibility than it deserves?

There’s polling from Angus Reid on this; it’s not particularly popular - not enough to come close to winning a referendum, but it’s still an uncomfortably high number of people who don’t value Canada.

https://angusreid.org/smith-shapiro-sovereignty/

Me as well. I don’t remember where / how I got the CD. Linux as a desktop has come so far since then!

This brought back some memories: https://www.mandrakelinux.org/

I’m in an Alberta riding which is very likely to go CPC, but exercising my right to vote is also my civic duty.

So while it might not affect the outcome this time, my vote contributes to popular vote metrics, turnout, and in the case where there’s lots people who happen to surprise (it is within the margin of error), my vote might in fact be the deciding vote that sways a riding.

It’s a shame when people value democracy so little they can’t be bothered to vote.

I highly recommend taking a look through pages like this: https://www.policyalternatives.ca/news-research/platform-crunch-3-every-party-is-promising-tax-cuts-and-cash-transfers/

Its really interesting to see how the proposed changes actually benefit different income brackets. TLDR: Proposed income tax changes from the Conservatives and Liberals predominantly benefit the richest tax bracket(s). If you happen to be in those tax brackets, I can see how conservative policies might ‘appeal’ to that demographic.

In general, when parties propose tax cuts (unless very thoughtfully targeted), they benefit the rich - who already have ample financial resources to pay for things they might need (like healthcare, private education for their children, etc.), while those who get net benefit from taxation through services are net losers from tax cuts… Because cutting taxes necessitates some reductions in service funding to balance the books. (I’m always fascinated when low income voters vote conservative as opposed to NDP.)

That would sum it up nicely; however, It’d be unfair to not mention the 77 million Americans that voted for this clown, the 90 million people who neglected their right & responsibility to vote, and the 75 million americans who voted against him.

Voting matters…until it doesn’t.

I’m also a subscriber - and that was my initial reaction as well - but perhaps if they can get more Canadians (to whom that ad appeals) reading the Globe instead of Postmedia, we end up in a better place?

I still think it’s a bad look if they just ran partisan ads supporting a specific party - I wonder how many stories they ran as promotional / paid content? Hopefully a blend of stories?