I think that’s just more examples of it being misused. BMI may be useful to compare populations in certain instances. It has value in being easily calculated based off data that is often easy to obtain. But, there are many situations where it would be inappropriate to use BMI for statistical comparison. That doesn’t mean it’s entirely useless.
If I had a friend I knew for decades that was convicted of some awful shit like this, I’d find it pretty easy to just not write a letter about their good character. Maybe I never saw even a hint of the monster that was convicted, but it’d be pretty messed up for me to just ignore the reality of the present and talk about how good they were to me in the past. Attesting to someone’s character has a limit. They could have very easily just kept their mouths shut on this topic not supported a convicted rapist. My hypothetical friend can go deal with the consequences of their own actions themselves while I try to internally come to terms with the fact that my friend betrayed me by lying to my face for so long.
Please don’t give their statement any credibility without adding the important context. Based in some truth may be technically accurate, but when compared to all the other possible causes of bird death it’s basically inconsequential.
https://www.fws.gov/library/collections/threats-birds
If there’s a solution, such as painting one blade a different color, then great. We can leave it up to the turbine engineers and wildlife agencies to address it, it doesn’t need to be part of any news cycle. Giving their outlandish claim any air at all lends it far too much weight.
Thanks, appreciate it.
Do you have a source for that? I only know the news about his opposition to Putin and haven’t gotten too far into his character.
That’s a gross over-simplification. I’d wager that you’re correct that the majority are scammy in nature since it’s so simple to create a nonprofit. But, there are thousands of important nonprofits out there doing good work. In my experience, the people that choose to mostly work with nonprofits are working with important organizations doing good work. That’s anecdotal, but it just seems pointlessly dismissive to lump nonprofits together as bad simply because they’re nonprofits.
Why not assume that this person’s job does some very basic due diligence to confirm they’re working with an authentic organization that’s doing good, rather than trying to “bust ur dream”.
The criticism of this news is needlessly toxic. Maybe Hamas won’t accept the offer, but that doesn’t mean it’s not a genuine attempt to save some children’s lives.