I'm not American. I don't know much about the history of the body, who runs it or whether leadership changes under different administrations. I also do not know the scientists and whether they are completely state funded or there is industry funding anywhere (on this, or on previous or future research papers). I'm asking questions. I looked at the paper and usually it has a section on conflicts of interest, even to state that none exist. I couldn't see that section on this paper.
So first cutting airline emissions increases global warming and now cutting ship emissions does it?
It's like someone is trying to get a message out that cutting emissions is bad for the planet. Are we being gaslighted? Is this industry FUD?
What are you stating cannot be turned off?
This sounds baseless without any evidence.
And it can be turned off.
This is the bargaining stage of the five stages of grief.
Maybe it's Stockholm Syndrome.
Firefox works for nearly everything. The only stuff that doesn't work for me is Xitter embeds, and this is a gift that keeps on giving.
So for a little bit until people stop caring.
Firefox is the correct play here.
Yes, but until we have them, Firefox is the best option.
For now. They could default to yahoo and make money. Maybe not as much, but they could sustain browser development.
Firefox is still far superior to chromium.
I prefer flawed but trying guys to guys with zero morals that farm every ounce of data they can.
Of course not. It's an internet browser. What point are you trying to make?