I think the "abundance agenda" is vague enough that some people could read it that way, but my read is that we need to build a lot of solar/batteries/transmission (to keep fossil fuels in the ground!), and a lot of old-school environmentalists are opposed to that because it involves building stuff.

Re the CRs: the age might buy you a factor of 2 relative to the solar system, but there may be a larger effect (in the same direction!) - 3I's orbit sends it further above the galactic midplane -> less B field -> more CRs

(adapted from an argument made in this paper: arxiv.org/abs/2509.04165).

It is wild how many outdoor cats there are in NZ. Everyone loves the native birds, but the outdoor cat culture is really ingrained.

Obviously peer reviewed vs. not can be an issue, but in this particular case the data in the paper seems to have been completely fabricated. I think it's fair to say that peer review generally operates on assumptions of good faith, so fake data will often make it through.

They don't seem to sell many ads on these calculator-style searches, so perhaps costing google money is the most ethical choice 🤷 (if it worked lol).

But seriously, not a bad point!

Yeah, could be. Google has worked well for the past decade, so it feels like the end of an era.

If this holds up it will be the 3rd interstellar object (comet or asteroid from another star system). Not every day we get to increase the sample by 50%!

168 hr arc = observed over a period of 1 week so far, and e~9 meaning convincingly interstellar (anything >~1 is not bound to the Sun).

Bad stats (and not a convincing biosignature in the first place) bsky.app/profile/dist...