You really don’t think LGBTQ affirming Christians exist? That’s just ignorance on your part. Just search LGBTQ affirming churches and you’ll find thousands around the world.

I don’t understand where you get this feeling of silent acceptance. If there is something Christians are known for it’s inter-christian conflict. Conservative christians absolutely despise liberal Christians and vice versa. If you spend some time in online christian spaces you will quickly see how conservative christians spend almost as much time bashing liberal Christians as they spend on ethnic or sexual minorities, if not more so depending on the space.

I wish more people understood that there are good Christians out there. I’m not christian myself but one of my best friends is. And not one of those who just say they are but don’t follow any of it. He goes to church every week, waited until marriage and spent one year after high school studying theology full time. And he is one of the nicest people I know. One of his best friends is a trans woman who lives in a polycule and he has no problem with it.

The worst Christians are the ones who don’t listen to their own scripture. It litteraly says right in the new testament, dozens of times, that you shouldn’t judge. Judgment is a sin.

Skin cancer is the most easily treatable cancer with long term survival rates between 90-95%. Most deaths that do occur are those cases that were either ignored or undetected for a long time so if your skin cancer is detected early your chance of survival will be much higher than that. If you protect yourself with sun screen or otherwise make sure you’re not getting extreme amounts of UV the benefits of sun exposure far outweigh the detriments in my opinion. Let a loved one check your body for melanoma from time to time.

I don’t think a dish has to be 100% original from the domestication of the species of the ingredients all the way to the invention of the dish. I would say it’s valid to claim a variation of a dish with just one tiny tweak. Norwegians can’t claim the entirety of sushi but they are totally valid in claiming specifically salmon sushi. The French can’t claim to have invented neither wheat, flour, bread, the baking of bread in ovens or any of the other steps it took in-between, but they can claim the baguette specifically as a French bread.

With that logic any Mexican dish that contains cumin, cilantro, wheat or any dairy product including cheese is not real Mexican.

Soy fixes nitrogen and doesn’t affect the rest of the nutrients. Without soy in the crop rotation you have to simply buy more nitrogen fertilizer for the subsequent crop, which will make it more expensive to grow. Soy is good but it’s not a looming disaster without it. The EU barely grows soy and is doing fine. And regarding dust bowl. Those areas of the US have already switched from plowing to no-till decades ago. Another dust bowl is unlikely even with drought because of it.

Dependence on food imports? The US is a large net food exporter. And will remain so for a long time. Especially in wheat, corn and soy beans. Harvesting grains is incredibly labour efficient. The labour crisis is mostly in fruits and vegetables which are very labor intensive. Even if soy and grain yields would be unexpectedly badly impacted by climate change it will first impact the exports and lastly animal feed and agro ethanol. The yields would have to be unrealistically devastated for it to lead to shortages in human food like bread. So at worst we are looking at a shortage of meat, fruits and vegetables but we are extremely far away from any situation involving starvation. This also includes Canada, the EU and Australia. And it’s not all vegetables either. Potatoes, carrots, peas and onions are machine harvested and won’t get affected by a farm labour crisis and will continue to be available. No one is gonna starve for having to substitute broccoli and asparagus with carrots and peas. No one is going to starve when fruits gets expensive either, they are healthy but you can live without them.

It’s the part of the third world which currently relies on western food exports that will have food insecurity in a worsening climate crisis. The west is at worst facing a more boring and monotone diet.

In the case of my own country Sweden and the Vikings I think it’s clear that Norse paganism not only allowed the plundering and rape in foreign nations, it even encouraged it with the concept of Valhalla and the mortality system it had which saw war and dying in war as a positive thing. Now I absolutely know Christians have committed horrible acts in other cases. But in this specific case Christianity was a huge force for good because after christening the plundering stopped, the holding of slaves stopped, the public sacrifice of human beings stopped and society became better and more moral in several ways.

But that’s far away from my point. My point is that monotheism isn’t always bad and paganism isn’t always good. It’s more nuanced than that.

If you wanna take up thousand year old history I can as well.

The pagan Roman Empire brutally suppressed Christians for 250 years before they converted.

The pagan vikings regularly went to Christian Europe to rape and abduct women, pillage villages and burn down monastries.

The pagan mongols conquered and raped half the world leading to 30-60 million deaths, consequences include the collapse of the Islamic golden age that they haven’t been able to recover from even to this day.

The shinto-buddhist japanese crucified and killed most of their native japanese Christians in the 1600s.

That’s just some I remember on top of my head. However two wrongs don’t make one right. In today’s world we should tolerate each other no matter pagan, monotheist or atheist. That’s at least my belief. By the way. I suggest you look up the Christian concept of territorial spirits. I find it’s a good explanation to explain the parts of the Bible that seem to be henotheistic.

Monotheism is their actual religious belief though. If one says “I believe there is only one god and we call him god” that’s their religious belief. If we are all to be tolerant of each other’s religious beliefs a simple statement of one’s belief shouldn’t be offensive. You should then be able to reply with your own beliefs and both can be like “cool” and move on.

Have you really become so hateful against religion that simply the mention of god in a joke triggers you? I understand that you have become absolutely sick of the American brand of evangelical Christianity but remember religious people are approximately 84% of the entire world population. You can’t lump them all together. The immigrants that evangelical christians want to stop are also majority religious. By hating religious people I think you are hating a larger share of the population than the religious people you hate for hating people.

I think a lot has to do with the microflora one has. The microflora can absolutely be influenced by diet but part is simply unique to the specific person. The specific bacteria one is exposed to at birth has a huge impact for the rest of your life as your immune system tends to attack bacteria that you didn’t have in your first weeks of life. Taking antibiotics can also permanently alter the micro flora. I know more than one family where one specific member has horrific farts but the others don’t despite basically identical diet. So it really can just be bad luck. Not everyone drinking protein shakes gets horrific farts but some do.

Those new popular female gym shorts that look like they vacuum sealed their ass with a seam going deep into the buttcrack. I really do think that’s a bit much. “Just let women wear what they want” yes I agree. That’s why I built a home gym instead.

Do things really need a justification to exist?

I currently have a tiny ant hill outside my house. They are thankfully of the kind that don’t attack the house or cause any kind of damage. They are chill and I don’t mind them. Maybe they do some small good to the ecosystem but if that specific anthill disappeared no one would really notice. It wasn’t there last year and everything in my life was the same. Does that ant hill need a justification to exist? No. And I mean that no matter if it was a good ant or a bad ant. Those ants are just there. Let’s say they were the kind of ant that does eat up the house. Then I would want to exterminate them. But that has nothing to do with their justification for existing. I would then remove them because they destroy my house, not because they haven’t earned the right to exist.

I don’t believe we have to earn a right to exist. We just exist. Existence is very neutral. A rock on Mars also exists and that’s nothing extraordinary. If that rock suddenly breaks no one is gonna care. However some things have value because of other traits than simply existing. If we suddenly learned that there was a human on Mars that no one knows or previously cared about, but we now know about him and he is in danger. Then he would be very valuable and I would even say invaluable and we should try to save him! It’s the human part that adds value.

So first off no one has to earn the right to exist. People just happen to exist and that’s a neutral thing. But I also happen to believe human life is invaluable. I think that’s even in the UN declaration of human rights somewhere. Now how useful you are does not mean you are more valuable. Human life is already invaluably high. Same with if you are a detriment to others. I don’t believe in the death penalty. If your value was how useful you were then we would kill everyone who was a net drag on society but I think very few people believe that. Even a serial killer I wouldn’t kill. However I would lock him up for the sake of others.

So you don’t have to show that you are worthy of existing. I don’t believe in that. I also don’t believe you have to prove that you are valuable. As I believe all human life is invaluable. You could however have to show that you are a net benefit to society. But that’s a whole other point and I really don’t believe everyone has to have a net benefit. Some can contribute a lot, some can’t contribute at all. And that’s ok. Contributing a lot to society is admirable and should be heavily encouraged. But it shouldn’t be necessary to be valued as a human being. The Nazis used to think that your value was tied strongly to your societal contribution and exterminated disabled people. I think that’s an unfathomable crime no matter how much of a drag those people were on society. If you exist AND you are a homo sapiens. You are invaluable no matter what.

Sorry for rambling. I’ll get to bed now.

Introduced from where? That’s my whole question. Apparently you don’t know but phosphorus is a finite resource which will run out in the next 100-300 years. It’s just as fossil as fossil fuel. Any solution that uses mined phosphorus is not sustainable.

I missed that azolla could fix nitrogen, knew that about duckweed but azolla is not my strength to be honest. However the question still remains, where would you get the potassium and phosphorus required to grow the azolla? All 3 of your examples involve continually harvesting azolla and not getting the nutrients back in. You could add chemical fertilizer to grow azolla into organic fertilizer but that would be kinda dumb wouldn’t it? Not to say that hasn’t been done multiple times before, looking at you alfalfa fertilizer pellets.

In a way wood is a great way to produce biochar because nearly all the nutrients in the tree are in the leaves and the branches. When harvesting wood we only take the trunk. This means we can grow wood generation after generation and we don’t have to use fertilizer. The same is not true for something like azolla. A good setup to make it cyclical would be to put the azolla right next to the animal farm whose animals are fed the azolla. And use the manure to grow azolla. However then I wonder if the hygienic quality is acceptable.

You can feed the azolla waste water from a fish farm for sure. But then what do you feed the fish? The nutrients always have to come from somewhere and they have to end up somewhere. If you’re simply dumping azolla in a mine somewhere as carbon storage that then turns into a huge waste of nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium. It’s a very nutrient dense plant.

What would you use the azolla for? Animal feed? Which source of nutrients would you feed it with? Intensive harvesting of azolla would quickly deplete the nutrients in the water.

That’s absolutely true. But aging society is gonna make communities like this more common. Soon enough most or all communities may be like this, urban and rural alike.