Activists in the Baby Boomer and Generation X demographic promote a narrative that guns are a big worry for youth, and climate change will kill them unless everyone gets solar, but it is only resonating with people in their tribe.

Gen Z has been raised in an information age, they know that outside suicide and criminal activity, gun deaths are so rare that it's only slightly more concerning than dying due to a tornado. And they like their phones too much to endure the persistent black- and brown-outs that countries which relied too heavily on solar endure now.

Next week is the oddly named National Health Education Week. Like calling a law that will dump poison into rivers the National Clean Rivers Act, the Health Education name is odd because the year it was created, 1995, by the Clinton administration's appointees in the National Institutes of Health, was the year after he exempted supplements and alternatives to medicine from FDA oversight. The $35 billion industry populated by grifters who get away with lying as long as they put “This statement has not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease" in small print and don't adulterate their placebos with real medicine.

We now know that during the last election, a worldwide pandemic was also manipulated culturally for political gain. Just like in 2008, Democrats were early adopters with new tactics, viral internet campaigns, reneging on a promise to obey McCain-Feingold campaign finance rules so they could outspend Republicans 2:1, etc. 

When you get in that expensive electric car, you are exposing your age, gender, social security number, religious beliefs, marital status, your race, if you are a citizen, even if you have a disability. Tesla says they don't sell your information to outside companies but they were also busted for sharing videos of customers internally, including kids, including nudity, so it's not secure.

I am not just picking on electric cars, though they are a nationally-subsidized grift so they should at least be stealing from us less after the sale. Virtually any car made since 2006 uses its sensors, microphones, cameras, bluetooth, and vehicle telematics to spy on you and harvest everything it is allowed.

And it is allowed a lot. Because you said they could. 

When it comes to denying science, California leads America, and sometimes the world. In early 2020, for example, when the President of the US said to cut travel from China due to SARS-CoV-2, Governor Newsom said he was xenophobic and racist and that since the World Health Organisation denied it was a pandemic, he was opposed to science also.

Prior to that it was a state where we had to hammer the legislature for 10 straight years to eliminate arbitrary exemptions from vaccines, because California schools on the coast had more unvaccinated kids than the rest of the US combined. Prior to that, they tried to ban modern agriculture, along with Happy Meals and Golf.

Polish Grandmaster Jan-Krzysztof Duda won the 2023 Armageddon Championship Series in convincing fashion but the intriguing science story is his biology while doing so.

Armageddon Chess is often used as a tie-breaker, and in it, black plays second but is the winner if the game is a draw - and has a shorter clock. The Armageddon Championship Series compresses time and uses a double-elimination format once the regional finalists are obtained.

Epidemiologists correlate eating more fish to better health and while skepticism is warranted - we're talking about what people claim on food surveys and taking it as scientific truth - there is no question its economic impact is real.

Yet food activists then piled out to an environmental strain problem by claiming that farmed salmon is somehow worse. It resonated without any skepticism because many weealthy elites want to go to restaurants and know blue collar workers risked their lives for expensive fish. 

I have often felt that "The Economist" is one of the best-edited publications around. Since it primarily involves economics, and there is no scientific basis to it beyond supply and demand, it is easy to appreciate writing and editing, the same way I could be impressed if the world had a great magazine devoted to astrology.

Sometimes "The Economist" forgets its wheelhouse and ends up looking more ridiculous than Javier Baez swinging at something so far off the plate the catcher was lucky to grab it.

Last century, $3 billion in environmental groups opposed 19th century technology - oil. To win their war on extinction they promoted an unscientific concept that caught on with journalists and allied academics - "fossil fuels" - and insisted alternatives were better. Alternatives like hydroelectric and geothermal and natural gas.(1) 

Today, they oppose all of those. They want to tear down all of the dams they told government to build, they claim natural gas will cause earthquakes, and that geothermal will cause earth to deflate.