When confronted with any questions that make people evaluate their dissonance people will often fall back on "I don't know" and refuse to engage information that contradicts their beliefs. If they do engage at all it may come in the form of circular logic, "Things are this way because they just are".
It can basically become a parent getting exasperated trying to explain why the sky is blue to a kid when they don't really know themselves.
The disconnect is often that their worldview is they are "right" and they just know that they are, and trying to prove otherwise kinda circles back on the sky argument. Saying that they are wrong is like telling them the sky is neon yellow, they know you're wrong in their mind.
So yeah I'm not sure how to get through to that other than people being social and usually abandoning ideas if they conflict with everyone around them and offer no options for people to engage with them, but that can be undone fast with an echo chamber of false information or really anything that reinforces their beliefs.
Go to your attorney general's website and fill out a form for a complaint. Check the box says you don't mind getting the news involved and detail everything you've done so far that hasn't worked.
The one in Panama actually makes sense because it is near the rainforest and acting as a buffer against them. These facilities only work if they are near the flies, you can't use sterilized flies unless there is a population of flies to use them on.
When you put that together this almost looks like they are signaling plans to abandon support for the Panama facility and allow them to spread through all of South America up into Mexico.
The backend on YouTube is pretty much designed to encourage skub (ragebait/"engagement"). Having comments that are incendiary is good for the video's performance.
Does that make it the perfect breeding ground for astroturfing and pushing misinformation? Probably. Bad actors can basically use it as a cheap form of advertising and pushing ideas that benefit them. Even the creator of the video if it was a video that has a completely opposite viewpoint of those comments still stands to benefit from having them because that increases engagement and their revenue.
So I guess my point is is that YouTube has a lot of problems and there is a multitude of reasons why comments like that have a home there and motives for them.
I have selected premium several times and then the tank stopped filling 30¢ early and my receipt said regular despite selecting premium when filling up my moped. I think the machines try to account for the gas type difference sometimes or maybe the pumps I was using were a bit dodgy.
I always thought it was a major fuck you to veterans that the big state funded fireworks display where I live is launched like 10 feet from the veterans hospital where they have people living there and being treated for PTSD.
Also I worked second shift so driving home through low visibility "fog" a few hours after everyone stops shooting them off feels eerie when you live in a city that doesn't get fog. That's probably not good for breathing, but I don't really know about just kind of being anecdotal
It's still deflective. Saying someone else called these events a war crime is distancing their news agency from calling it that even as they spell out details of an event that's a war crime
Also people aren't necessarily able to monetize their interest in science. Maybe if there were no barriers like people needing to pay for education, food, shelter, transportation, medical care, and the air they breathe then maybe a larger portion of those people would be the mage they want to be or at least closer to it. As it stands you are right, but things can be different than they are right now
They aren't concerned primarily with employing people or crop yields, agribusiness is a business.
Your sentiment holds entirely if agriculture was entirely dependant on staple crops.
The plateau didn't come out of nowhere. Staple crops are being pushed aside in favor of high margin crops for biofuel and luxury goods. Large agriculture still focuses on short term gains.
Profit per acre is going up. Businesses don't care about increasing yield past a certain extent. If the business is set to profit and is currently profitable then all of these issues are non issues to the business.
I think you might be missing something. If food yields were soaring that would decrease the market value of food. The current agriculture system is designed with profit as the goal and feeding people as a secondary result.
Is a supply chain inefficient? In the current system that's alright, it lets a company charge more to make up for losses and gives them something tangible to justify price hikes.
There's also massive surplus waste and other problems that are prevalent in the current system. Growing to feed local populations rather than growing for export would drastically shift the situation alone and is currently entirely possible, but not nearly as profitable.
Can we get enough food for everyone? Yes. Can we do it while maintaining record high margins? Probably not
Looking at my electrical bill is depressing. It's always power used x and then taxes that are the same as x plus fees. So using $100 in electricity means I pay $220 with over half being taxes and extra fees
When confronted with any questions that make people evaluate their dissonance people will often fall back on "I don't know" and refuse to engage information that contradicts their beliefs. If they do engage at all it may come in the form of circular logic, "Things are this way because they just are".
It can basically become a parent getting exasperated trying to explain why the sky is blue to a kid when they don't really know themselves.
The disconnect is often that their worldview is they are "right" and they just know that they are, and trying to prove otherwise kinda circles back on the sky argument. Saying that they are wrong is like telling them the sky is neon yellow, they know you're wrong in their mind.
So yeah I'm not sure how to get through to that other than people being social and usually abandoning ideas if they conflict with everyone around them and offer no options for people to engage with them, but that can be undone fast with an echo chamber of false information or really anything that reinforces their beliefs.