We did spend a while making sure that individual countries could do what they wanted without engaging the responsibility of a unified NATO response, because we were terrified Putin might use it as an excuse for his NATO aggression rhetoric.

She's the villain of this movie, she's definitely not Thanos or Kang level villain. And there are suspicion that even in this movie she's a fake out and there will be another villain replacing her. Either it's Doom and this movie starts him up like Avengers 1 did Thanos, or it's someone else and it won't be a Thanos level villain either.

A bomb that could destroy Earth's core would be an admittedly impressive technical feat!

Does France do graduated brackets like the US?

Is there any place that does taxes without brackets, just flat "pass this number and suddenly lose half of everything"? Does that even exist outside the imagination of Americans who have never understood or looked at taxes? Brackets should be the definition of income taxes, is it not? It's not an economic tariff applied regardless the volume of merchandise passing a frontier.

This is our Fortran guy. We just call him Fortran. He calls himself Fortran too. So do his parents.

That's how good he is!

I don't keep up with youtube alternatives but this one doesn't require login https://invidious.fdn.fr/watch?v=DaJWEjimeDM the video isn't loading easily but it seems to work after a bit

https://youtu.be/DaJWEjimeDM?si=rwX4eZZQvGV22iiR first half is citing two guys who think the Sphinx is older than we think (including your guy); third guy and after show that the erosion and the faults didn't come from rain from outside, but water infiltration from below, from before the Sphinx was carved into the rock, and that yes, we do see it in other places in the same rock layer. Other buildings above it don't have that erosion from below. So the erosion is indeed old, but it didn't happen from rain falling after the Sphinx was carved out, so you can't use it to determine when the Sphinx was carved out of the ground.

I’m only suggesting that theories which are not supported by direct anthropological evidence are worth considering

You can consider an idea and build a theory around it, but once your basic idea is disproven, your whole theory disappears. And the idea that the Sphinx erosion doesn't match the agreed upon age has already been proven wrong - as in, it has been explained that the observed erosion is perfectly compatible with what rock types are there and with the data that we know since the actual period it was built in, the mid third millenium BCE. So you don't have your premise that the erosion doesn't match the official age, and that means there is nothing left to consider here until you actually have something new, anything else is fanfiction.

Considering new idea is perfectly fine, no one disagrees with that, but you are not considering new ideas, you are considering old ideas that were proven wrong and not listening when someone tells you why it's wrong. Get new material.

The link quotes him calling the Kiev regime a putsch, but that was back in 2014, and that was in fact a revolution. It's not about Zelensky, but he does give all the current talking points (neonazis in Kiev, NATO provocations, Russia can't have NATO at their doorstep...). BTW no one did anything about Russia stealing Crimea, either, everyone was still trying to justify not doing anything.

That was 10 years ago and he has been (very) slowly toning it down: when making the left alliance a few weeks ago, he finally relented on allowing weapons to be sent to Ukraine because the rest of the left made him, there's still hope he'll give up the anti-NATO talk... eventually. If he makes it to the government, when someone asks him about Russia bombing children's hospitals, at some point he'll have nowhere to run because he doesn't actually support that. He shouts and curses quite violently at journalists who help out the far right, but on serious subjects in serious interviews, he actually has to be reasonable (and he is). On the last presidential elections, when he showed up to the round 1 left parties debates, he was all proper and serious and making his points properly and sensibly - and then he lost on round 1 and the next day in the street, he screamed his head off at the first journalist who put a microphone in his face.

Oh, and over this side of the world, no one claims Russia is socialist. But leftists do get mad at the EU and NATO for crushing the farmer class and playing the capitalist hand, that's what that is about.

Mythology is not a monolith. We're talking 3000+ years of cultural evolution across multiple cities that united and separated multiple times, each having their own local cult that rose to prominence or got supplanted by a different one.

When some of them got together and overlapped, they might have taken different facets of "death": Osiris is not strictly a god of death itself but a judge of your soul, and grants eternal life in death, while Anubis was a god of funerary rites and graves, so the physical aspect of handling dead bodies.

When a city took prevalence over another, either because the pharaoh set up shop there or because a temple in that city became more famous and gained influence, that city's major cult could overshadow other gods worshiped in other cities and take over their duties.

Then there were bigger gods that got cults that split into different aspects, like how Hathor and Sekhmet come from the same goddess but Sekhmet specialized in bloody war and the sun burning in the desert (an aspect she took from her father, a more general sun god) while Hathor specialized in motherhood.

Other aspects are passed around in the same way, starting with the role of sun, there are countless aspects of the sun that were embodied in different gods. Even the scarab is an aspect of the sun - because it emerges fully matured from the dungball of its parent the same way the sun comes out from the underworld in the morning, so there was a god for that. Death is a major aspect that remained a big constant in Egyptian religion, that's why those two are seen the most often.

If you look at which city becomes the center of Egypt's rule as time goes on through the different kingdoms and intermediate periods, and check which major temple is in that city, you see which cult takes over more duties.

That's what natural selection is. We focus on those that survived because they developed resistance to something, but it has always meant that everybody else died and the species as a whole has moved forward.