frezik
The two are interrelated. Charles Taze Russel (founder of what is now called the Jehovah’s Witnesses) was associated with the Millerites. Lots of their doctrine was copied from the 7th Day Adventists, including the numerology of the timeline that gets them to 1914 as “the” year. That one was supposed to be just a step along the way, but after WWI happened, it was a lot of pointing and saying “see, we predicted something big would happen”.
They’re also building 95% of the world’s new coal plants: https://www.carbonbrief.org/china-responsible-for-95-of-new-coal-power-construction-in-2023-report-says/
New coal construction has basically stopped everywhere else, including the US.
“Per capita” is also doing some heavy lifting. Nature doesn’t care about per capita. It cares about overall output, and China’s is enormous. They’d need to produce over four times less co2 on a per capita basis to be equivalent to US output. They’re closer to two times.
I have a bit of schadenfreude around this. For years, people said Europe was fine, and didn’t need to invest more in their military. “No, you silly American, we are just fine with the military we have because we don’t go invading other countries.”
Now here we are. Thing is, I wasn’t even talking from the perspective of Europe becoming warmongers like us. I wanted Europe to be armed well enough to handle what the US has been doing, and the US can draw down its military. Then we could put that money into healthcare and schools and shit, but Europe would have to pick up the slack (and also Japan, S. Korea, Taiwan, and Australia). This is still a good idea.
Almost like they’re looking for an excuse to hang NATO out to dry.
That’s always fun. Some people will swear it can’t possibly work like that, but they have plenty of experience riding bikes. You wouldn’t be able to turn properly at speed unless you’re counter-steering, so they clearly have done this. The idea seems to be so incredibly intuitive that people don’t even realize they’re doing it, which is very interesting.
The idea behind clips is that you can pull up on the rising pedal instead of just following momentum from the other foot pushing down. It does work, but isn’t really necessary for commuter biking.
I got a used bike that had a hybrid pedal with a clip on one side and flats on the other. While the clip (heavy) side usually landed down, it didn’t always and it was weird to pedal with it. I just ride around on my bike, so I replaced them with cheap flat pedals and it’s fine. I also converted it to an e-bike, and I don’t need the extra pedal power.
It’s pretty common to bring up gyroscopes for this when people know a little bit about physics. It’s all over motorcycle forums, for instance.
As you say, it doesn’t work. Experiments have been done where they attach a counter rotating wheel to cancel out the gyroscopic effect, and while it’s a little wonky to ride, it works fine.
IIRC, we’re not 100% sure how bikes work just yet. Every time somebody comes up with a model that seems to be good, someone finds a counterexample that throws it in the bin. Even your explanation of bike trail isn’t all the way there; Razer-type scooters still work without trail on the front wheel.
It works on its own. If you push your bike along with a good run and then let go, it’ll stay upright until it slows down too much.
Learning to ride a bike is mostly about being confident enough to let the bike work itself out. It gets more stable as it goes faster, but it’s natural to be afraid to go faster when it already feels unstable at low speed. Then there’s a little bit to learn about countersteering, but most people figure that out without being told it’s even a thing.
