I believe the first step to stop the weather from changing is to build massive domes to shove our cities into. Also, chemtrails.

The biggest problem in the world today is that the weather just keeps changing.

I’ve experienced this myself, in fact.

Sometimes, it’s cold. Sometimes, it’s too hot. Sometimes, it rains, or snows, or it’s too windy…

The weather is really all over the place. It really gets in the way of my plans to BBQ some steaks, you know?

Is it too much to ask to be able to grill meat outside 365 days a year?

Luckily, the Amazon man Jeff Bezos is getting on this problem, so we can all feel safe in the knowledge that the weather will soon stop changing.

Presumably, the weather will now be exactly perfect for shopping online and receiving packages, every day of the year.

BBC:

Amazon boss Jeff Bezos has pledged $10bn (£7.7bn) to help fight climate change.

The world’s richest man said the money would finance work by scientists, activists and other groups.

He said: “I want to work alongside others both to amplify known ways and to explore new ways of fighting the devastating impact of climate change.”

Writing on his Instagram account, Mr Bezos said the fund would begin distributing money this summer.

Mr Bezos has an estimated net worth of more than $130bn, so the pledge represents almost 8% of his fortune.

Some Amazon employees have urged him to do more to fight climate change. There have been walkouts and some staff have spoken publicly. Also, Mr Bezos is financing the Blue Origin space programme.

Actually, space exploration might be the ultimate and perfect solution to preventing the weather from changing. After all, in space, the weather is pretty stable, no?

Just make sure to wear sunscreen and shades if you’re going in the sunny spots. It gets a bit balmy. You might want to pack a coat for the shady spots, too.

Maybe Bezos should just funnel all that money into his space program instead.

Compared to some multi-billionaires, Mr Bezos had done only limited philanthropy. His biggest donation before Monday’s pledge is thought to have been $2bn in September 2018 to help homeless families and fund schools.

He has also been criticised for not signing the Giving Pledge, under which the super-rich promise to give away half of their wealth during their lifetimes.

The Seattle-based company is a neighbour of Microsoft, which in January unveiled a plan to become carbon negative by 2030.

Mr Bezos’s full Instagram post read: “Today, I’m thrilled to announce I am launching the Bezos Earth Fund.⁣⁣⁣

⁣⁣⁣”Climate change is the biggest threat to our planet. I want to work alongside others both to amplify known ways and to explore new ways of fighting the devastating impact of climate change on this planet we all share. This global initiative will fund scientists, activists, NGOs – any effort that offers a real possibility to help preserve and protect the natural world.

“We can save Earth. It’s going to take collective action from big companies, small companies, nation states, global organisations, and individuals. ⁣⁣

Bezos has already saved the earth, in his own way:

• He’s saved us from long shipping times when ordering knickknacks online.
• He’s saved us from wrongthink by having everyone install internet-connected microphones in their homes.
• He’s saved his employees from having to go to the bathroom by having them pee in bottles.

Bezos is a savior and a visionary.

So now he’ll save us from the changing weather. The question isn’t whether he’ll succeed or not. The question is, can you handle how advanced Bezos’ vision for the future is?

We’re talking Amazon killbot drones roaming the streets, helping people safely consume. We’re talking Alexa AI servers directly connected to everyone’s nervous systems, ready to order any product whenever the thought (or subconscious desire) emerges. We’re talking bottles permanently attached to everyone’s peehole, improving productivity nationwide.

Listen, I’ve ordered packages online, only to have them arrive late because of “adverse weather conditions.”

It’s time we, as a society, took a step forward and got this stupid climate under control in order to finally get those Amazon delivery dates stabilized for good.

Sorry goyim, we’re gonna have to shut all your videos and comments down. Can’t be having all this hate in these tubes.

The best thing about being a social science research professor is that you can pretty much just make up anything you want and support it with any random shoddy methodology and no one is likely to ever call you out on it – as long as your results support the status quo.

In the harder sciences, like physics and chemistry, if researchers start making things up, then no matter how much institutional support they might have, it’ll be quite obvious that something is wrong when people see that the math doesn’t add up and the predictions don’t match physical phenomena.

But in the hands of a sociology or psychology professor, things like numbers or statistics become akin to molding clay, things they can shape to their heart’s content.

For example, they can examine YouTube’s censorship history and conclude that the website isn’t biased in any way against the right-wing.

Ars Technica:

In August 2018, President Donald Trump claimed that social media was “totally discriminating against Republican/Conservative voices.” Not much was new about this: for years, conservatives have accused tech companies of political bias. Just last July, Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) asked the FTC to investigate the content moderation policies of tech companies like Google. A day after Google’s vice president insisted that YouTube was apolitical, Cruz claimed that political bias on YouTube was “massive.”

But the data doesn’t back Cruz up—and it’s been available for a while. While the actual policies and procedures for moderating content are often opaque, it is possible to look at the outcomes of moderation and determine if there’s indication of bias there. And, last year, computer scientists decided to do exactly that.

Is that so?

Allow me to doubt that in the strongest possible way.

Motivated by the long-running argument in Washington DC, computer scientists at Northeastern University decided to investigate political bias in YouTube’s comment moderation. The team analyzed 84,068 comments on 258 YouTube videos. At first glance, the team found that comments on right-leaning videos seemed more heavily moderated than those on left-leaning ones. But when the researchers also accounted for factors such as the prevalence of hate speech and misinformation, they found no differences between comment moderation on right- and left-leaning videos.

In other words, YouTube is definitely censoring right-wing comments in a completely obvious way, but it doesn’t actually count as censorship because those comments are hateful and wrong.

Naturally, the comments are hateful and wrong according to the left.

“There is no political censorship,” said Christo Wilson, one of the co-authors and associate professor at Northeastern University. “In fact, YouTube appears to just be enforcing their policies against hate speech, which is what they say they’re doing.” Wilson’s collaborators on the paper were graduate students Shan Jiang and Ronald Robertson.

To check for political bias in the way comments were moderated, the team had to know whether a video was right- or left-leaning, whether it contained misinformation or hate speech, and which of its comments were moderated over time.

From fact-checking websites Snopes and PolitiFact, the scientists were able to get a set of YouTube videos that had been labelled true or false. Then, by scanning the comments on those videos twice, six months apart, they could tell which ones had been taken down. They also used natural language processing to identify hate speech in the comments.

Snopes is run by liberal cat-ladies and pot-smoking prostitutes.

This is Snopes.

This is also Snopes.

Politifact is just some mainstream media creature, founded and maintained by various newspapers and news organizations. It’s a mouthpiece of the left-wing media.

To summarize the “methodology” used to claim that YouTube isn’t biased against the right-wing:

1. Look at a bunch of censored comments. Comments on right-wing videos are overwhelmingly over-represented.
2. Run those comments by the cat ladies and weed-smoking whores at Snopes. If they disapprove of the comments, dismiss them.
3. Run those comments by the mainstream journalists at PolitiFact. If they disapprove of the comments, dismiss them.
4. If the comments are “hateful” based on some arbitrary feeling, dismiss them.
5. Wow! Now the right wing comments aren’t over-represented any more! I guess YouTube isn’t biased after all.

This is some high level bullshit right there.

Obviously, “hate” is a completely left-wing concept used to shut down all right-wing ideas. It’s “hateful” to want to shut down immigration. It’s “hateful” to want traditional values instead of homosexualism and trannies. It’s “hateful” to point out the fact that Jews have disproportionate power and influence, and use that power to erode America and the White race.

As such, any comment that is “false” (according to borderline commies) or “hateful” (i.e., right-wing) can be deleted from YouTube without this being “censorship,” since the authors of the study also believe those comments should be removed.

Anyone who even briefly looks at this “study” with an objective mind will immediately know that it’s complete bullshit.

But that doesn’t matter at all.

What matters is that now, the mainstream media can just dismiss all claims that YouTube is biased by saying “oh, a study disproved that claim.”

In other words, the study is just a vulgar propaganda tool.

Communism is the last remaining shield against degeneracy.

If you’re living in the West, you might be worried that leaving your children in public schools will see them brainwashed with insane tranny acceptance gibberish as well as “gay rights” nonsense.

Well, apparently, there’s a simple solution if you want your kids to get a healthy education: just move to Vietnam.

The Guardian:

Young people in Vietnam continue to be taught at home and at school that same-sex attraction is a “disease” and a “mental illness” that can be cured and treated, despite legislation designed to support and protect LGBTQ+ rights.

Stigma and discrimination about sexual orientation and gender identity contribute to the verbal harassment and bullying of LGBTQ+ young people, which in some cases leads to physical violence, according to a report published on Thursday by Human Rights Watch (HRW).

Activists have called on the Vietnamese government to fulfil its pledges to protect LGBTQ+ rights.

“Largely thanks to a vibrant civil society-led LGBT rights movement, social awareness and acceptance of sexual orientation and gender identity has increased greatly in recent years in Vietnam. The government’s actions, however, have so far not officially reflected these changes,” said Graeme Reid of HRW.

In other words, a bunch of “private” organizations are pushing for faggotry in Vietnam, while the government is resisting these “changes.”

Practically every time you see these private organizations agitating the people against their own traditions and government policies, foreign (i.e., Jewish) powers are behind them, looking to destabilize the country.

With the ultimate goal of overthrowing the government and replacing it with a more Jew-friendly one.

Faggotry in general, and “gay rights” in particular, are literally a weapon used by Jews to destroy countries they don’t like.

“One result of the sluggish policy change is that social perceptions in many cases remain mired in outdated and incorrect frameworks – such as the widespread belief that same-sex attraction is a diagnosable mental health condition.”

Verbal harassment of LGBTQ+ students is common in public and private schools, both rural and urban, the report claims. Students and teachers commonly use derogatory words, with teachers frequently referring to homosexuality as “mental illness”, and parents threatening violence, expulsion, or medical treatment if children are gay, according to in-depth interviews with 52 LGBTQ youth, teachers and other school staff in Vietnam.

Quân, a gay 18-year-old, told interviewers that his high school biology teacher described “being LGBT [a]s a disease”, while Tuyết, also 18, said: “During a class to educate us about family and marriage, the teacher said: ‘Homosexuality is an illness and it’s very bad.’”

“There’s a lot of pressure on kids to be straight,” one school counsellor told HRW. “It’s constantly referenced that being attracted to someone of the same sex is something that can, and should be, changed and fixed.”

n 2015 Vietnam made international headlines when it voted to allow individuals who have undergone gender reassignment surgery to register under their new gender. Although the nation was heralded as one of the most progressive in south-east Asian , Vietnam has still not passed the bill required to enforce that law, which means discrimination against LGBTQ+ people largely goes unchecked, activists claim.

All this sounds extremely reasonable.

In fact, this is definitely something that we should emulate in order to reduce the prevalence of all these insane perverts.

Maybe if Bernie somehow wins, he can put in place a new regime of brutal communism, and we’ll finally be able to shove all these bourgeois degenerates in a gulag. More importantly, we can get some commie summer camps for children, which look sweet as hell.

Tfw you’ll never prance around in a Soviet uniform while playing communist music. My childhood will never be complete 😔.

Presumably, once China takes over all of Asia, all of these countries will be shielded from the Western (i.e., Jewish) pressure to tolerate homo behavior. You can be sure that once that pressure is let off, all of these Asians will crack down on degeneracy in a heartbeat.

After all, Confucius once said: “Penis goes in vagina, poopoo comes out of butthole. Not other way around. That is the way of wisdom.” Wait, or was that Buddha? Whatever.

That color scheme would go really well with, erm, dirty plaid pants? A used up potato sack?

The powers that be (i.e., Jews) apparently have decided that the next “big thing” that they’re trying to push is veganism.

Well, veganism and trannies.

I guess they’re offering veganism as an option for the large crowd of liberals who are trying to be “hip,” yet are feeling hopelessly left behind by the sheer insanity of the tranny and social justice movement.

Veganism is “safe” hipsterism, which allows bugmen to feel like they’re part of the progressive crowd simply by engaging in a certain type of consumerist behavior. After all, simply buying expensive crap that says “vegan” on the box is a lot more comfortable than hanging out with actual trannies and other mentally ill degenerates.

As such, the demand for “vegan” products is skyrocketing, as a result of the liberal desire for consumerist escapism from the current social insanity.

“Vegan sneakers” are just one example of big business taking advantage of this new craze.

Live Kindly:

Nike’s new “Space Hippie” line of sneakers are vegan and made from recycled trash.

The American sportswear company created four futuristic designs for the Space Hippie with environmental sustainability in mind. According to Nike, the vegan sneakers have the lowest carbon footprint scores of any shoe created by the brand so far.

“Space Hippie product presents itself as an artifact from the future.It’s avant garde; it’s rebelliously optimistic,” says John Hoke, Nike’s Chief Design Officer. “Space Hippie is also an idea. It is about figuring out how to make the most with the least material, the least energy, and the least carbon.”

The Space Hippie’s flyknit-based uppers use at least 85 percent rPoly—primarily recycled plastic water bottles, t-shirts, and yarn scraps. The sole uses 15 percent Nike Grind Rubber, combined with 100 percent recycled foam materials.

On one level, I’d like to investigate if these sneakers are truly more “sustainable” than regular Nike shoes, if you include the energy costs of the collection of waste, the recycling process, the production of the chemicals used in recycling, and so on and so forth.

But that’d be largely a waste of time, because it’s perfectly obvious that Nike doesn’t care at all about “sustainability” and the environment.

If they did, they’d put their efforts into making a shoe that’s as durable and easy to repair as possible.

These shoes can last for many years, and can easily be repaired by a skilled cobbler when damaged.

By contrast, all Nike product (just like other sneaker brands) produce fragile shoes that are basically impossible to repair, since all of their parts are made out of various molded plastics held together by glue.

Making “disposable” products out of “eco-friendly” materials is obviously a scam to part braindead hipsters from their money.

And those “Space Hippie” sneakers look like they wouldn’t last through 3-4 months of daily wear.

“I’d say Space Hippie attacks the villain of trash,” adds Hoke. “It’s changed the way we look at materials, it’s changed the way that we look at the aesthetics of our product. It’s changed how we approach putting product together.”

Nike’s “Move to Zero” initiative details the company’s goal of both zero carbon and zero waste. Many other sneakers, including Nike Air, now use recycled materials and renewable energy. And according to the company, the Space Hippie line represents a new benchmark in responsible shoe design.

“We believe the future for product will be circular,” says Seana Hannah, Vice President of Sustainable Innovation. “We must think about the entire process: how we design it, how we make it, how we use it, how we reuse it and how we cut out waste at every step.”

Nike is not alone in striving for more sustainable footwear. Adidas and marine advocacy group Parley teamed up in 2016 to create a line of training wear. The products use at least 75 percent upcycled marine plastic. Adidas has also released the Futurecraft.LOOP, a vegan and fully recyclable trainer.

Mainstream brands including New Look, Marks & Spencer, Topshop, and even supermarket chain Aldi, are all exploring vegan footwear.

Veganism is a fad.

And it’s not even a popular fad.

We’re talking about less than 2% of America, here – a number similar to the “paleo diet,” for example.

But Nike aren’t releasing paleo footwear made of nothing but mammoth bones and fur, nor is Burger King coming out with the paleo burger, where the bun is replaced with two additional meat patties.

Woah, that actually sounds pretty good… Someone needs to get on that.

In any case, as soon as this fad is forgotten (which is as soon as big business realizes that people aren’t going to be eating bugs anytime soon), all these stupid vegan products are going to be quietly dropped in the dustbin of history.

In the same way, “corporate environmentalism” is generally a scam as well. These companies never really fundamentally change the way they’re doing business to address real environmental concerns (like the destruction of the rainforest or the over-fishing of various marine ecosystems), but rather just change a few materials or ingredients here and there and call it a day.

“Real” environmentalism would necessarily entail not doing business with countries like China and India, who are doing most of the polluting. However, doing such a thing would cost companies a lot more than just making their shoes out of recycled water bottles, so they won’t do it.

Why are these creatures allowed to come play basketball in our schools? Why are schools allowed to play basketball instead of White sports – like CS:GO?

Whenever you see a brown person doing anything (except packing their bags to leave America), there’s only one question you need to be asking:

“Where’s your passport?”

That’s the key question that no brown person wants to answer. Especially not Puerto Ricans.

The Puerto Rican is immunized against all dangers: one may call him a scoundrel, parasite, swindler, profiteer, it all runs off him like water off a raincoat. But ask him for his passport and you will be astonished at how he recoils, how injured he is, how he suddenly shrinks back: “I’ve been found out.”

Even high school students are getting hip to this fact.

The Hill:

A competitive high school basketball game in California hit a low point when a group of one team’s fans began chanting “Where’s your passport?” at the rival team, which has a roster that includes a player from France and three from Puerto Rico. (Residents of Puerto Rico are US citizens, so passports are just as unnecessary as they would be for residents of any state.)

Puerto Ricans don’t have their own passports? What’s this then?

But more importantly, if they don’t have passports, then why are they allowed in? Because they’re “technically” a US territory? Pretty weak argument, honestly.

The two Santa Maria high schools, St. Joseph, a private school, and Righetti, a public school, played each other on Tuesday evening at St. Joseph’s campus. It was a home victory, with St. Joseph ultimately winning 74-57, according to the Santa Maria Times.

No wonder these Puerto Ricans won the game – they have plenty of practice running around, avoiding immigration agents trying to deport them to their own country: Puerto Rico.

They certainly didn’t win because of any biological advantage.

Yes, the average height for Puerto Rican males is below 5 feet 5 inches – in other words, they’re all manlets.

No wonder they’re trying to hide their passports – they don’t want anyone seeing that pesky “height” line.

As players and coaches walked parallel to high-five each other, the Righetti student section in the gym erupted in a crowd chant of “where’s your passport?” at the top of their lungs.

St. Joseph Head Coach Tom Mott has reportedly recruited players from all over the world to play at the private school. This falls outside of California Interscholastic Federation (CIF) bylaws, which St. Joseph, a member school, must abide by.

With that context, the chant was quickly seen as derogatory, nationalistic and racist.

The principal of St. Joseph, Erinn Dougherty, rushed toward the Righetti students once the chanting began and confronted Righetti’s Assistant Principal Ted Lyon before being led away by a friend.

Mott told the Santa Maria Times on Wednesday that he did not think the chant was meant to be racist, although he understands how it can be interpreted as such.

“I honestly think they were unaware they said a racist thing,” Mott told reporters. “They did not intend for it to be racist.”

That’s where you’re wrong, retard – these high school students clearly knew exactly what they were doing: expressing their hatred for the color of the skin.

More importantly, they were protesting against “the man” importing cheap labor from Puerto Rico to steal all our jobs sports team positions.

How much are these Puerto Rican manlets even getting paid per game, huh? Probably less than minimum salary, I’d bet.

Bernie wouldn’t allow these basketball scabs to drive down the wages of our high school student athletes for the benefit of big business. Or, uh, “big education.”

High schoolers know what’s up with these Puerto Rican invaders.

He further clarified that he and the Righetti coach, Kevin Barbarick, remain on good terms and that upon reviewing the video, Mott sensed that “Barbarick did try to stop the students from chanting as he was coaching the final seconds of the game.”

The Archdiocese of Los Angeles, the governing body over St. Joseph, stated that they are “disappointed” at what occurred on Tuesday night and the school has a zero-tolerance policy toward “inappropriate statements made at any students.”

These Catholic priests need to pay less attention to policing what high school kids are saying, and more attention to the demonic invasion of America.

The upcoming release of DOOM: Eternal can only do so much to stem the demonic tide of degeneracy.

It seems that these days, the Catholic Church finds a way of being on the wrong side of every issue. I’ll bet they’ll be the first ones to welcome the incoming demon tide with open arms.

“Demons are also God’s children, and we should welcome them, lol.” -Pope Francis.

But yeah, I guess Catholic private schools importing brown children to compete in basketball games is a thing now.

Honestly, there are few worse and more annoying things you can sic on people you hate than a gaggle of angry feminists.

“Conservatism,” by which I mean “mainstream Republicanism,” has always been about whining about the crazy stuff liberals are doing now, while completely accepting all the crazy stuff liberals did just yesterday.

So these Republicans are totally fine with:

• Feminism
• Mass immigration from brown countries
• Abolishing Christianity from all public places
• Homos
• Trannies everywhere
• Abortion on demand
• etc.

But apparently, they’re putting their foot down at children getting chemically (and surgically) castrated in the name of tranny acceptance. No, for realz, this time. They won’t just suddenly accept this in 2-3 years when the next, even crazier crap starts hitting the propaganda circuit.

They’re even bringing in the feminists to show their liberal credentials.

Washington Post:

She introduced herself to a room full of conservative lawmakers as a bisexual woman, a longtime political progressive and the leader of a radical feminist organization.

Listening to Natasha Chart through a Skype call were more than a dozen South Dakota state representatives, most of them Republican, considering a bill to criminalize medical treatments for transgender children.

“Doctors shouldn’t help kids take out their sadness and anger on the only bodies we can ever have,” she said in her testimony to South Dakota’s House State Affairs Committee on Jan. 22. “Please vote yes to forbid the sterilization of these young people.”

The Women’s Liberation Front is part of a long-running strain of feminism that rejects the existence of transgender identity. These fringe activists argue that advancements in transgender rights will come at the expense of women’s rights and threaten the safety and sanctity of women-only spaces. They say women are defined not by their gender identity, but by their biology and by having “survived girlhood.”

Mainstream progressives have long shunned the organization, calling it a discriminatory, right-wing group disguised as feminist. But the Women’s Liberation Front, also known as WoLF, has found an increasingly influential platform by teaming up with conservatives who disagree with their support of abortion rights and the “reproductive sovereignty” of women.

“Bisexual.”

“Progressive.”

“Radical feminist.”

“A woman.”

Even hardcore communists would condemn this woman as a bourgeois degenerate.

Yet now supposedly conservative people are cozying up to women like this just to give themselves permission to condemn abject moral degeneracy.

The essence of feminism is about discrimination – discrimination against men to benefit women. If a feminist group isn’t discriminatory, then it isn’t really feminist.

How could women with a deep, seething hatred of men and a hardcore obsession for giving women as much status and power as possible tolerate the glaring loophole which is trannyism? After all, if the tranny lobby has its way, then any man will be able to claim all the privileges that feminists have worked hard to get for women just by pretending to “feel like a woman” deep inside.

Dressing up like a freak isn’t even necessary according to the “gender theorists.”

These two random powerlifters could probably get affirmative action jobs just by claiming to have “feminine souls” or whatever.

So any feminist who supports trannyism must necessarily be some kind of shill – or more likely, extremely stupid (i.e., a woman).

WoLF’s leaders have become frequent guests on “Tucker Carlson Tonight” and at Heritage Foundation events. The group received a $15,000 grant from the Alliance Defending Freedom to help fund a legal fight against the Obama administration over transgender bathroom policies. It also filed an amicus brief in one of the most consequential Supreme Court cases of the year, arguing that sex-based discrimination protections in the workplace should not apply to transgender people.

Now, WoLF is even helping shape legislation in places like South Dakota, which last month became the first state to advance a wave of state bills nationwide banning medical interventions for transgender youth. Kara Dansky, a WoLF board member from the District, plans to travel to South Dakota on Monday to testify in favor of the bill in a Senate committee hearing.

Emboldened by the Trump administration and a conservative majority on the Supreme Court, Republican politicians across the country have made transgender issues, particularly those affecting transgender children, a key target for 2020. And Chart and other radical feminists are helping to bolster their message, creating the perception of bipartisan support in a polarizing social debate.

Sure, I’ll believe it when I see it.

Even if they block tranny surgeries for kids now, they’ll probably fold in a few years under the unrelenting pressure of the Jewish media and the new wave of brainwashed college kids.

I mean, society is basically getting sold “anime trannyism” these days in order to erode all opposition.

Trannies in anime.

Trannies in real life (note: this is also in an anime).

In other words, they’re doing the same thing they did with the homos.

Homos were portrayed as these saintly, innocent young men who are very clean and have a killer fashion sense. The whole “inserting each other’s penises in each other’s buttholes” was fully glossed over.

Basically, all proponents of trannyism gloss over the central fact of all this nonsense, which is that the whole tranny movement is about men cutting off their own penises and turning themselves into disgusting, sterile freaks.

What all parents wish for their children.

How long will these Republicans hold out?

I don’t know. But I do know it won’t be long enough to outlive all the degenerates who will keep pushing for trannyism.

So I hope your grandchildren will be prepared for state-enforced-trannyism.

Okay, but how’s the WiFi speed in there? Do I get free miniature bars of soap and sachets of shampoo?

Okay so because we’re spending all our money on brown people, we’re probably going to have to scrap all that “space exploration” and “colonizing Mars” business.

BUT.

That doesn’t mean closing down the whole space program. There’s still much that NASA has yet to accomplish, and can still do, in spite of a limited budget.

For example, opening a space hotel. For extremely rich people (i.e., Jews).

And also, aliens.

Wait – I have reason to believe that might actually be a really good idea.

Either way, it’s happening.

Futurism:

NASA announced last week that it’s moving forward with a plan to commercialize the International Space Station (ISS) — and that the private company Axiom Space will develop a “space hotel” to tack onto the orbital space station.

Now, Axios has obtained more details about the plan, which will see a shift from NASA providing orbital services itself to depending more heavily on private companies take the helm.

It’s a marked shift in priorities for a space agency that’s spent over 20 years helping run the ISS.

It’s indeed a large change in priorities.

However, I prefer to think of it as a change in genre.

Originally, NASA was more into “hard” scifi, in the style of 2001: A Space Odyssey.

That’s cool, but to be honest, this genre of scifi is a little outdated by now. It’s probably a good thing that NASA is trying to branch out.

NASA is transitioning into “cartoon” scifi, or the comedy space opera genre – which I’m quite fond of.

That means we can expect, beyond the space hotel, to be graced with a space burger joint.

Fans of Space Quest rejoice.

And, heaven permit, a space Hooters.

What alien life form could possibly resist visiting NASA’s local Boobies joint?

Basically, we should all expect less space colonization, and more wacky hijinks – in space.

Any Axiom-run space hotel is still several years away, Axios reports. The company’s plan is to launch its first module by the end of 2024, followed by two more modules — one for habitation and one for manufacturing — over the course of the next year.

But even before that, Axiom crews will become a regular sight on the ISS. Company cofounder Michael Suffredini told Axios that it already booked tickets to the ISS on rockets that will launch starting next year.

“We’re beginning these flights early in order to set the cadence and the rhythm,” Suffredini said.

The ISS is expected to be retired at some point in the future — past reports suggest some time between 2024 and 2028.

When that happens, Axios reports that the Axiom Space modules will detach, and the private company will continue to operate its own space station for the foreseeable future.

So in the future, when aliens (which don’t actually exist) visit earth, there won’t be any kind of research facilities in space, but there’ll be some killer accommodations.

The decor is a little questionable, but it looks fairly comfy – by space standards.

So I guess this is how Western civilization dies out, huh? Not with a bang, but with a whimper. Supposedly, we sent a bunch of guys on the moon in the 1960s, when the combined computing power of all of NASA was a fraction of that of your cellphone – but today, with our vastly superior technology, we can’t even maintain a space station in low earth orbit without turning it into a Best Western hotel chain or whatever.

Well, I won’t complain. I’ll just save up my space bucks for when the first Boobies opens up.

This is a future I can come to terms with.

This is a thing? Was this always a thing?

A few days ago, I saw some article announcing that breast cancer was no longer the most common type of cancer (at least, in England), and had been overtaken by prostate cancer. In other words, a woman-only type of cancer is now second in importance to a man-only type of cancer.

I didn’t really pay it any mind at the time.

BBC:

Prostate cancer is now the most commonly diagnosed cancer in England, overtaking breast cancer for the first time, latest figures show.

In 2018 there were nearly 50,000 registered cases – around 8,000 more than in 2017.

Public Health England says it is because more men are getting tested.

And that is thanks to celebrities, like Stephen Fry and Bill Turnbull, raising awareness by speaking out about their own experiences.

In 2018, there were 316,680 cancers of any kind diagnosed, the equivalent of 868 cases a day.

Prostate was the most common type – 49,029 cases – followed by breast – 47,476 cases.

Lung and bowel cancers were the next most commonly diagnosed.

As a side note, the notion that prostate cancer is overtaking breast cancer because “more men are getting tested” sounds kind of ridiculous. I mean, even if you don’t get tested, I’m pretty sure you’ll notice at some point when a cancerous tumor is growing on your own prostate.

Ouch.

In any case, what’s making me do a double take here is that the news is now flooded with stories about “Go Red.”

There are hundreds of these articles right now.

I didn’t even know what “Go Red” was, so I had to look it up.

It’s apparently some kind of “awareness campaign” for women’s heart disease.

Go Red:

What is the goal of Go Red For Women?

Go Red For Women encourages awareness of the issue of women and heart disease, and also action to save more lives. The movement harnesses the energy, passion and power women have to band together and collectively wipe out heart disease. It challenges them to know their risk for heart disease and take action to reduce their personal risk. It also gives them the tools they need to lead a heart healthy life.

In 2010, the AHA set a strategic goal of reducing death and disability from cardiovascular disease and strokes by 20 percent while improving the cardiovascular health of all Americans by 20 percent by the year 2020.

So I was like… Huh…

“Women’s heart disease” is a thing? A thing distinct from men’s heart disease?

And everyone needs to be reminded of this and wear red just to be politically correct, huh?

Fox 17:

Heart disease is the top health threat for women everywhere, and today everyone is urged to wear red to help spread awareness.

Go Red for Women asks Americans on the first Friday every February to wear wear red and donate to the American Heart Association.

I guess so.

We also need to be wearing one of those pink bracelets to remind ourselves about titty cancer – even though it’s now only the second most common cancer (in England).

For a whole month, too.

Oh, and there’s also HIV awareness to remind us about the fags and their anal engagements.

Wait, they get three separate days?

So basically, everyone needs to be aware of diseases that affect women (and fags).

Never mind that anyone can get cancer – we need a month to raise awareness for the only type of cancer that only women can get.

Never mind that men are more likely to die of heart disease – we all need to dress up in red to raise awareness for the minority of women who might suffer.

Never mind that homos are only getting AIDS because they can’t control their urge to do all sorts of sickening things nonstop or that women are getting breast cancer from birth control pills – they’re victims and we need to devote all of society’s collective medical research fund to prolonging their pitiful, disgusting lives.

When was the last time a major national illness awareness campaign was started about something that straight White males are likely to suffer from?

When are we going to all dress in blue to spread awareness of all the blue collar workers dying of workplace accidents?

When are we going to start wearing neon-green bracelets to spread awareness about men’s heart disease?

When are we going to designate a national awareness month for all those mad lads dying of popcorn lungs from blowing sick clouds or blowing themselves up with defective vaping mods?

We all need to be more aware of this.

The answer, of course, is never. So long as Jews and women are in charge of society, at least.

All this “awareness” bullshit is largely meaningless from a medical standpoint, and is mainly just another opportunity to reinforce the notion that only women and minorities matter and deserve to be pitied, while White men dying isn’t something that is worthy of mention.

I, for one, only care about diseases affecting millennial men like me as well as 2D anime girls.

Pitbulls are the niggers of dogs – but they’re also the medieval marksmen of dogs.

No man knows how he’ll die.

That being said, I have a suspicion that my own death will be the result of either:

1. Getting mauled by a pitbull.
2. Getting shot by a crossbow.
3. Having my cheap Filipino vaping death tube blow up in my face because the battery overheated.

This is why I’m always nervous around pitbulls and crossbows. Also, I haven’t looked this up recently, but aren’t those the most common causes of death in America? Or was that cancer and heart disease? I forget.

Either way, some poor chap just bit the dust in probably the most metal way imaginable – he got shot by a crossbow while getting mauled by a pitbull.

I can only applaud the man.

CBS News:

A man was shot and killed in his apartment by a crossbow bolt that a neighbor had fired at dogs who were attacking the man, authorities in Massachusetts said. The death Wednesday afternoon in Adams appears to be accidental, according to Berkshire District Attorney Andrea Harrington.

The neighbor heard a commotion and the victim, who was a friend, shouting for help just after noon, authorities said. The victim was identified as Joshua Jadusingh, 27, the Berkshire district attorney’s office said in a statement.

The neighbor made his way into the apartment, then returned to his own unit to get the crossbow, which he was licensed to own and used for hunting, Harrington said at a news conference Thursday.

He stood at the bottom of a stairwell and fired up at a dog on the landing, she said. The bolt struck the dog with a glancing blow, went through the door and hit the man in the room where he was trying to barricade himself, Harrington said. A young girl in another room was unharmed.

One of the dogs belonged to the man who died, she said. The other belonged to his girlfriend, who also lived in the home.

This is a very strange situation.

This man was called “Joshua Jadusingh” and owned a pitbull, which would seem to indicate that he was a colored gentleman.

His “friend” and neighbor owned a crossbow – legally – as well as a hunting license, which would seem to indicate that he was a White guy. Black guys don’t go hunting – and they certainly don’t go around getting licenses for things.

There was a “young girl” in the apartment, and yet the pitbull didn’t try to eat her and went for the grown man instead.

That doesn’t fit with the typical pitbull modus operandi.

None of this makes any sense. Since when do White guy hunters become friends with pitbull-owning niggers?

Since when do pitbulls ignore delicious young children and instead try to devour crusty old Black guys?

The adult male pit bulls were known to fight and were usually kept in separate cages, Harrington said. They had a history of being aggressive, and one had previously attacked a person who required medical attention.

The neighbor who fired the arrow is a “good Samaritan” who is cooperating with the investigation, the district attorney’s office said. Harrington does not anticipate criminal charges.

“The neighbor was reacting in a very stressful circumstance” and is “very distraught,” she said.

The dogs showed aggression toward responding police officers, who shot and killed both. Officers fired five rounds at the dogs, an investigation found.

On the other hand, this part of the story makes perfect sense.

Some Black guy was living with his “girlfriend” and a “small child,” which indicates that the child probably isn’t his, and was probably born out of wedlock.

These Blacks were keeping violent, bloodthirsty pitbulls in the same apartment as their small child.

The first thing the pitbull did when let out of its cage was to try and devour its owner, resist arrest and then got shot by the police – as expected of the niggers of dogs.

This is exactly within the range of expected pitbull behavior.

None of these things surprise me, nor should they surprise other rational minded people.

Actually, it’s quite amusing that all the things that I find baffling, and the things I find completely normal, are exactly reversed from what a liberal would find baffling and would expect. After all, liberals don’t believe that either Blacks or pitbulls have any particular behavior patterns, and so would just find this whole story to be a strange and inexplicable tragedy that could perhaps have been avoided if only there was “mo’ money for dem’ programs” and better dog-rearing techniques.

If only all pitbull were raised by the dog whisperer, no children would have to get eaten.

In short, what I’ve learned from this story is that pitbull skin deflects crossbow bolts, and so if I’m ever sent back to the middle ages for whatever fantasy reason, I’ll make sure to sew myself some pitbull leather armor.

If anti-personnel mines are good enough to protect your bedroom, why wouldn’t they be good enough to protect our country?

America needs to protect its southern border from Mexicans and other assorted brown people pouring in at an alarming rate to sell our kids drugs and steal our jobs.

And no, a wall isn’t good enough. A wall can be jumped over.

Yes… Just like that.

A wall can be dug under.

If an anime schoolgirl can dig a hole, so can Mexicans.

A wall can be teleported through – provided your space-time magic is above level 6.

Since it’s theoretically possible to bypass a wall, that makes walls completely worthless.

What America really needs is to take the minepill. We need to replace walls with minefields. That’s the next step in human evolution – replacing tangible, visible barriers with the abstract threat of getting blown to bits.

Mines are both cheaper and more effective than walls. After all, even a single small gap in a wall means people can get through. But who would be willing to risk getting his legs blown off just to go through even a low density minefield? Even if there’s only 1% chance of blowing up, I’d bet 99% of people would think twice.

So the protection per dollar is way higher.

The only thing getting in the way of this superior border protection strategy is the whining of hippies and Europoor commies.

However, that time may come to an end soon – it seems the Trump administration has recently taken the minepill.

BBC:

US President Donald Trump has lifted restrictions on the deployment of anti-personnel landmines by American forces.

The decision reverses a 2014 Obama administration ban on the use of such weapons, which applied everywhere in the world except for in the defence of South Korea.

The Trump administration said Mr Obama’s policy could put US troops “at a severe disadvantage”.

Thousands of people are injured and killed by landmines every year.

That’s only because they haven’t been using Africa’s latest anti-mine technology: pet rats.

Another example of African ingenuity. It might bring you sadness, but it sure works. A gopher or whatever that is perfectly simulates a human walking pattern. 

I don’t know what this method involves, but I like to think that Africans just walk around with pet rats on leashes walking in front of them, hoping the rats will blow up instead of them.

US forces will now be free to use the weapons across the world “in exceptional circumstances”, the White House said.

The US is not a signatory to the 1997 Mine Ban Treaty, which restricts the development or use of anti-personnel land mines.

The Obama-era ban applied to the US military everywhere but on the Korean Peninsula. That exception was made under pressure from military planners, to protect US troops based across the de-militarized zone from the North Korean military.

Mr Obama also ordered the destruction of landmine stockpiles not made to defend South Korea. But the Trump administration has now scrapped that policy, stating that the president was “rebuilding” the US military.

“The Department of Defense has determined that restrictions imposed on American forces by the Obama administration’s policy could place them at a severe disadvantage during a conflict against our adversaries,” a White House statement said, adding: “The president is unwilling to accept this risk to our troops.”

Mr Trump has given the all-clear for the use of “non-persistent” landmines that can be switched off remotely rather than remaining buried beneath the ground.

US Defence Secretary Mark Esper said landmines were vital to its military.

“Landmines are an important tool that our forces need to have available to them in order to ensure mission success and in order to reduce risk to forces,” he told a press conference.

“That said, in everything we do we also want to make sure that these instruments, in this case landmines, also take into account both the safety of employment and the safety to civilians and others after a conflict.”

Okay, so they’re repealing the policy which banned the use of landmines.

In other words, they’ll now start using landmines again.

The important question is: will they be using them in America, against our real enemies – Mexicans? Why should we waste our precious, and presumably expensive, landmines on foreign countries? How does it benefit Americans to lay down minefields in brown countries? We should be laying down these minefields right here in America, where it’ll do the most good.

Of course, the southern border is a great candidate. But the border between California and the rest of the country is also a logical choice.

The point is, landmines are a crucial tool that can be used to improve Americans’ lives – if only they’re used locally.

Now landmines will be more widely available to US commanders, the argument being that their absence leaves them at a disadvantage in relation to likely adversaries – perhaps a reference to the fact that neither Russia or China have banned or placed any restrictions on such weapons.

The use of antipersonnel landmines by US forces will only be in exceptional circumstances, says the Pentagon, and only “non-persistent types” – ie. versions that disarm themselves after a period, will be used. But campaigners will see this as striking at the international norm outlawing these weapons, and will argue that for all the technical wizardry many mines may still fail, remaining live and risking injury to innocent civilians.

Ugh. Right. “Russia” and “China.”

Trump isn’t thinking of America at all with this new landmine policy.

These new mines are all gonna get hogged by foreigners. Sigh.

Well, in any case, the fact that mines are going to get used again at least puts them out there in the public imagination. Perhaps, someday, America will be ready to employ this revolutionary means of border control.

A man can dream.