This has been a thing forever and its really frustrating that its still happening, but absolutely not just you. Unfortunately very little that can be done really. Got some python that can grab follow lists for later comparison, but unless you never follow or unfollow its not been much use for me :(

A lot of people probably do streaming playlists but ew spotify. I think bandcamp recently added playlist functionality, though don't know how it works. I usually just do USB or upload a zip of the mixtape to filesharing of somekind. Or go for bonus points and edit all the songs into one file.

I found this recipe a few years ago and I've never looked again for a carrot cake recipe, its perfect. Usually do 1.5 on the icing but the recipe is generous and with that amount its enough for the icing layers to be thick enough it starts having structural issues. Can't recommend enough.

I've just finished mine and it would never occur to me to try and show it off unprompted or unrequested, that's so strange.

A (long) summary of others’ investigations into the well-funded international Islamophobia networks & Australian links, reflections.

Palestinians are slaughtered because power elites have accepted the indoctrination.

& Palestinians forbidden to mourn 😡

open.substack.com/pub/lucyham2...

#auspol

It's so good!

Maybe its in good faith, maybe its just ignorance, maybe there's nothing like that happening, but when you're reporting on this stuff in an authoritative voice you *really* need to be careful. This is how these lobbies operate, and it undermines all good faith attempts at science communication.

99% sure that this "journalist" got contacted by Kuhlman, with a nice clickbait framing ready to go, a bunch of cherry picked literature, with token pushback about "on the safe side", and just published with zero thought or critical faculties engaged at any point. Insanely dangerous thing to do...

Maybe taking a single paper from a research group, and construing it as supporting this "lack of evidence" without mentioning the other work the group has done, that finds overwhelming evidence in favour of the concern about microplastics, that's really fucking bad.

Maybe when you describe a paper, the criticism, and the response to criticism, and you selectively highlight the less important criticism, and not the stuff the authors responded to, because the critics are all employed by plastics manufacturers, that means you're aware what yours doing is fucked.

Maybe if one of the big criticisms is funded by a chemical manufacturers lobbying organisation and you don't make the audience aware you're getting close to malpractice.

Like maybe the "bombshell" framing, which is repeated from a quote by Kuhlman, whose letter is linked, is bad, when the guy framing it that way is a former research chemist for Union Carbide and Dow with obvious vested interests in undermining this.