Dear Daily Disaster Diary, Mar. 21 2025

 

Happiness is not a reward - it is a consequence. 

Suffering is not a punishment - it is a result.

- Robert Green Ingersoll

Winona LaDuke: DAPL Pipeline Lawsuit Against Greenpeace Aims to Silence Indigenous Protests, Too

Greenpeace, The Sioux, and the World Happiness Sham: Where Would Native Americans Rank?

Once again, the World Happiness Report has declared Finland the happiest nation on Earth. Congratulations to the Finns—your lakes are clean, your social services are top-notch, and your people trust each other enough to leave their wallets on café tables without fear. 

Meanwhile, in the United States, the Sioux of Standing Rock are still fighting the same battle they lost in 2017 when the Dakota Access Pipeline cut through their ancestral land. 

And Greenpeace? 

Well, they're on the brink of bankruptcy, sued for their support in those very protests. But let's ask an uncomfortable question: If the Standing Rock Sioux were their own country, where would they rank on this so-called Happiness Report?

Not 1st, that's for sure. Not even 81st, where Greece sits, lamenting its economic woes. 

No, the Sioux—and Native Americans as a whole—would be battling Afghanistan for last place. And why? 

Because when the West talks about "happiness," it conveniently ignores the foundations of its prosperity: land stolen, treaties broken, and indigenous cultures bulldozed for pipelines and profits.

The Price of Protest: Greenpeace’s Financial Death Sentence

Greenpeace, ever the rebel of the environmental movement, now faces financial ruin after a North Dakota jury ordered it to pay $660 million in damages to Energy Transfer, the corporation behind the Dakota Access Pipeline. Their crime? 

Supporting the Sioux and daring to challenge the oil juggernaut.

It’s a textbook example of corporate retaliation. Energy Transfer, armed with legal teams and political connections, claims Greenpeace orchestrated the protests, spread false information, and caused $340 million in losses. 

A compliant jury in a state reliant on fossil fuel revenues agreed. 

Never mind that Greenpeace was just one of many voices in the resistance. 

Never mind that the Sioux themselves were the ones whose land and water were at stake. 

The real message here is clear: challenge Big Oil, and you’ll be crushed—legally, financially, and systematically.

The Real Happiness Report: A Rigged System of Metrics

While Greenpeace fights for survival, Western nations are busy patting themselves on the back for being "the happiest." 

The World Happiness Report, released every year, ranks countries based on metrics like GDP per capita, social support, life expectancy, and perceived freedom. And surprise, surprise—the top spots are always filled with Scandinavian nations, the very same ones that have built strong democracies, invested in high-quality education, implemented progressive taxation, and developed world-class healthcare systems.

Meanwhile, indigenous peoples don’t even appear as a footnote in this report. 

The Sioux, the Navajo, the Cree—where do they rank? 

What about the entire indigenous population of the United States, many of whom still live in conditions resembling third-world poverty, their water poisoned, their lands fracked, their youth in crisis? 

What good is "freedom" when your sovereignty is trampled every time oil money enters the conversation?

What Happiness Looks Like When Your Land is Stolen

Let’s imagine an honest Happiness Report—one that includes not just prosperous nations but also those whose happiness was stolen to fuel the wealth of others. 

Where would the Sioux rank? 

Where would the Palestinians rank? 

Where would any displaced, exploited, or colonized people sit on this list?

Would the indigenous of North America score high on "freedom" when their lands are taken at will? 

Would they score high on "trust in government" when every treaty signed with them has been violated? 

Would they score high on "social support" when they are often left to fend for themselves, their crises ignored by mainstream media until an oil pipeline threatens their water?

The Final Question: Who Really Deserves to be Called "Happy"?

Happiness is a privilege. And like all privileges, it is unequally distributed. The West celebrates its high-ranking nations while ignoring the systemic oppression that allowed them to achieve such prosperity in the first place.

Meanwhile, the Sioux are still fighting a battle that should have been won centuries ago. 

Greenpeace, despite all its missteps and controversies, is paying the ultimate price for daring to stand beside them. And the World Happiness Report? 

It will continue to churn out its rankings, blissfully ignorant of the blood and tears that never make it into its statistics.

If there is any justice, happiness should be measured not just by how much a country has, but by how much it has taken. 

Until then, the Sioux and all indigenous peoples will remain at the bottom of a list that was never meant to include them in the first place.

Sincerely,

Adaptation-Guide

ADAPT OR DIE!

WE ARE READY! ARE YOU?

WHERE IS OUR GREEN BILLIONAIRE HERO??

Dear Daily Disaster Diary, Mar.20 2025

"I woke up in a cold sweat, haunted by a vision where artificial intelligence was shaped and sustained by the forces of conservatism and the far right. A nightmare where reality itself was rewritten. Is adaptation even possible?"

- ADAPTATION-GUIDE

As Trump exits the Paris Accords, what’s at stake for the climate? | 

The Take

The Inconvenient Truth: How U.S. Politics Kills Every Climate Goal Before It Even Begins

The world’s climate ambitions are dead on arrival, and the corpse isn’t even cold yet. 

The idea that we’ll be carbon-neutral by 2050 is a delusional fantasy, and the only thing more absurd than the goal itself is the notion that policy alone can make it happen. Why? 

Because it all comes down to one thing: who sits in the Oval Office. One election in the United States is enough to erase decades of progress, making global climate efforts a pointless exercise in wishful thinking.

The Brutal Reality: Fossil Fuels Rule, No Matter What

The truth is simple: global energy demand is skyrocketing, and despite all the green talk, fossil fuels still power the world. 

Switzerland, for instance, still gets 59% of its energy from fossil fuels, while the global figure is a staggering 77%. 

And let’s be honest—India, Africa, and developing nations have every right to demand cheap, reliable energy, which means coal, oil, and gas aren’t going anywhere anytime soon.

Meanwhile, the U.S. swings between climate action and reckless rollback depending on whether a Democrat or a Republican occupies the White House. 

Biden rejoined the Paris Agreement; 

Trump pulled out. 

Obama pushed for clean energy; 

Bush and Trump favored fossil fuels. 

A single regime change and the entire global climate trajectory is derailed.

America: The Climate Destroyer-in-Chief

Let's be clear: without the U.S. on board, every global climate goal is a joke. 

The U.S. is one of the largest carbon emitters in the world, yet its policies flip-flop every four years.

Biden can throw billions at solar and wind projects, but if Trump (or any fossil-fuel-backed Republican) gets elected in 2024 or 2028, everything is off the table. 

The U.S. will gut regulations, ramp up drilling, and laugh in the face of international climate agreements.

The whole world is essentially held hostage by American politics, and pretending otherwise is naïve. 

No matter what Switzerland, Germany, or even the EU does, if the U.S. government decides that oil is king again, the global effort to reduce emissions is nothing more than a farce.

The Pipe Dream of Renewable Energy

Renewables? Sure, they sound great—until you actually do the math. 

Even if Switzerland installs 36 gigawatts of solar power, it will still face massive winter energy shortages. 

The same is true for every country trying to replace fossil fuels with wind and solar alone. Energy storage? 

The numbers don’t add up. Hydrogen? 

Good luck storing 750 million high-pressure gas bottles just to cover seasonal shortages. Nuclear? 

That’s the only viable option left, but green activists have spent decades demonizing it.

And what happens when a climate-friendly U.S. president is replaced by one who doesn't give a damn? 

Just like that, coal plants roar back to life, oil drilling expands, and climate targets become worthless overnight.

The Ugly Truth: There Is No "Pain-Free" Transition

People want a green future but refuse to sacrifice comfort. 

The reality is that moving away from fossil fuels requires massive economic restructuring, reduced consumption, and—brace yourself—higher costs for everything. 

But in a democracy where politicians must win votes, no leader has the guts to tell the public that their quality of life will take a hit.

Instead, we get magical thinking: infinite clean energy, no economic downturns, and a seamless transition. The problem? 

As soon as voters feel the pain—rising energy bills, economic slowdowns, restrictions on cars and air travel—they revolt. 

And in the U.S., that means electing the next fossil-fuel-friendly president who promises cheap gas and “energy independence.”

Conclusion: The World’s Climate Plan is a Joke

If we’re serious about tackling climate change, we need to stop pretending that policies built on shaky political systems will ever work. 

The real solution? 

Either a complete overhaul of how global decisions are made—meaning no more four-year flip-flops in the U.S.—or we accept that fossil fuels will dominate for the foreseeable future.

As it stands now, the world’s climate future is being decided not by science, not by sustainability, but by the electoral map of the United States. 

And that’s the most inconvenient truth of them all.

Sincerely,

Adaptation-Guide

ADAPT OR DIE!

WE ARE READY! ARE YOU?

Dear Daily Disaster Diary, Mar.19 2025

 Science is simply common sense at its best - that is, rigidly accurate in observation, and merciless to fallacy in logic.

- Thomas Huxley

Why the world is not prepared for the next pandemic after Covid | 

The Take

Five Years After COVID-19: Are We Any Better Prepared for the Next Disaster?

The global response to COVID-19 will be remembered as a case study in institutional failure, political cowardice, and scientific suppression. 

Five years later, with millions of lives lost, economies shattered, and public trust in science and government at historic lows, one question looms larger than ever: 

are we ready for the next pandemic—or will we repeat the same mistakes?

The Lab Leak Debate: Science or Censorship?

At the heart of this catastrophe lies an inconvenient truth: we still don’t know where SARS-CoV-2 came from. 

Was it a zoonotic spillover from a wet market in Wuhan? 

Or was it an escaped lab-modified virus from the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV)? 

The answer remains elusive, not because the evidence doesn’t exist, but because the pursuit of truth was stifled from the very beginning.

Early in the pandemic, an elite group of scientists and public health officials, including prominent figures like virologist Christian Drosten and researcher Peter Daszak, aggressively pushed the natural-origin narrative. 

Their statements, published in influential journals such as The Lancet and Nature Medicine, dismissed alternative theories as "conspiracy theories," silencing legitimate scientific inquiry. Why? 

Some sought to protect the reputation of China, others feared jeopardizing global scientific collaboration, and still others—like Daszak—had direct conflicts of interest due to their involvement in "gain-of-function" research at the WIV.

This wasn't science. This was dogma. And when dogma replaces debate, the consequences are disastrous. The result? 

Years of missed opportunities to uncover the origins of COVID-19 and mitigate the risk of future lab-driven outbreaks.

Governments Knew, But Chose Silence

If scientific censorship wasn’t bad enough, political leadership across democratic nations also played a role in suppressing debate. 

Investigative reports from Die Zeit and the Süddeutsche Zeitung reveal that, behind closed doors, the German government seriously considered the lab-leak hypothesis while publicly endorsing the zoonotic origin. 

This pattern repeated across multiple Western nations: private skepticism, public conformity.

Why? 

Because acknowledging the possibility of a lab accident would have required world leaders to demand accountability from China—a politically and economically dangerous move. 

It would have also sparked scrutiny of virology research practices worldwide, forcing a reckoning with the reckless scientific ambition that led us here in the first place.

The WHO’s Role in Covering Tracks

Enter the World Health Organization (WHO), an institution supposedly dedicated to transparency and global health. 

Instead, the WHO participated in shaping a predetermined narrative. Its first "investigation" into the virus’s origins, conducted with minimal access to Wuhan laboratories and guided by individuals like Daszak, unsurprisingly concluded that a zoonotic origin was the most likely scenario. 

This was not an impartial inquiry; it was a diplomatic charade.

Despite mounting evidence that the pandemic’s origins may have been far more complex, it took years for the lab-leak theory to be considered a legitimate hypothesis. 

By then, the damage was done. 

Trust in scientific institutions had eroded, skepticism toward public health authorities skyrocketed, and misinformation flourished in the void left by a censored debate.

Five Years Later: Are We Ready for the Next Disaster?

If another pandemic were to emerge tomorrow, would we be better equipped to handle it? 

The answer, disturbingly, is no.

1. Scientific Integrity Remains Compromised – Research funding is still controlled by the same institutions that buried inconvenient truths about COVID-19. If a new virus were to emerge from a lab today, would scientists feel safe speaking out? Or would they fear professional exile?

2. Political Leaders Still Prioritize Diplomacy Over Public Safety – Governments remain reluctant to confront China or any powerful nation involved in high-risk research. The same political calculations that kept COVID-19’s origins in the dark will likely play out again.

3. Regulation of Dangerous Research Is Inadequate – Gain-of-function experiments continue with limited oversight. The US and other nations have restarted funding for such work, despite the glaring risks. Have we learned nothing?

4. Global Health Organizations Lack Accountability – The WHO has yet to undergo the reforms necessary to make it a truly independent body capable of investigating future pandemics without geopolitical interference.

The Path Forward: Demand Truth, Not Narratives

Op-ed: How to Prepare for the Next Pandemic | Mike Bloomberg

The next pandemic is not a question of "if" but "when." 

We cannot afford another round of suppression, half-truths, and politically motivated science. We need:

• Full transparency in virology research – Every high-risk experiment should be subject to global oversight, with real consequences for non-compliance.

• Unbiased scientific inquiry – No theory should be off-limits. If a new outbreak emerges, all possible origins must be investigated with equal rigor.

• Independent global health leadership – The WHO needs fundamental restructuring to prevent political influence from corrupting its mission.

• Public accountability – The scientists and officials who misled the world in the early days of COVID-19 must be held responsible for their role in obstructing the truth.

Had we conducted an open, unfiltered inquiry into SARS-CoV-2’s origins from the start, we might not have definitive answers—but we would have trust. 

And trust, in the next pandemic, could be the difference between life and death.

Sincerely,

Adaptation-Guide

ADAPT OR DIE!

WE ARE READY! ARE YOU?

Dear Daily Disaster Diary, Mar.18 2025

 

The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.

- Karl Marx

          More NOAA cuts, 1,000 layoffs expected, sources say

Playing with Fire or Terrorism? The Systematic Dismantling of Public Safety and Environmental Monitoring

We are witnessing an unprecedented assault on the very infrastructure that protects the American people. 

The Trump administration’s reckless slashing of critical environmental and safety programs—under the guise of cost-cutting—is nothing short of sabotage. 

When you dismantle the mechanisms that track hurricanes, air pollution, droughts, and wildfires, the result is clear: increased chaos, suffering, and death. 

So, is this merely reckless governance, or does it cross the line into deliberate terrorism against the American people?

The Systematic Blindfolding of a Nation

Federal agencies responsible for tracking and mitigating environmental hazards are being gutted. Layoffs at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) have decimated the workforce monitoring weather patterns, air quality, and disaster risks. 

Essential tools—weather balloons, radar stations, tsunami warning centers, and air pollution monitors—are being defunded, abandoned, or outright shut down. 

The administration’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) is canceling leases for facilities that serve as the backbone of climate data collection.

The most staggering cuts include NOAA’s National Weather Service, whose forecasting models are used by farmers, emergency responders, and insurers. 

It is no coincidence that these cuts come as climate disasters intensify. The very satellites and sensors that track climate shifts and storm patterns are under attack, leaving citizens defenseless against natural catastrophes.

A Calculated Assault on Public Safety

The question must be asked: Who benefits from this devastation? 

The deliberate gutting of public environmental monitoring opens the door to private weather services, ready to sell access to life-saving information that was once public. 

Trump’s attempt to install Barry Lee Myers in 2017—a man with direct financial ties to AccuWeather—as the head of NOAA made the motive crystal clear. 

A privatized weather service would force Americans to pay for basic forecasting, making vital information accessible only to those who can afford it.

At the same time, the administration’s actions conveniently allow the fossil fuel industry to continue polluting without accountability. 

Without public access to air and water quality data, communities cannot prove that they are being poisoned. 

Lawsuits against polluters will be nearly impossible to win, and the Supreme Court—packed with a GOP majority—will ensure that corporations are shielded from legal consequences.

Dismantling Science to Deny Reality

The elimination of government weather and environmental services serves another purpose: erasing evidence of climate change. 

The increasing frequency of wildfires, hurricanes, and extreme weather events is undeniable, but without the scientific data to prove their causes and trends, climate denialism can thrive. 

This is not just about ignorance—it is a strategic move to suppress reality itself. By severing access to information, the administration makes it easier to push its fossil fuel agenda while diverting public attention to manufactured crises like border security and foreign conflicts.

The Path to Disaster: A Dystopian Future

The implications of this strategy are dire. Without NOAA, USGS, and other agencies, Americans will face greater threats from hurricanes, tornadoes, droughts, and wildfires with little to no warning. 

Insurance premiums will skyrocket as risk assessment becomes more difficult. Air pollution will worsen, leading to higher rates of respiratory diseases. Public health will suffer as environmental monitoring disappears.

More alarmingly, this sets the stage for a tiered system where only the wealthy can afford to protect themselves. 

If private companies control weather forecasting and disaster warnings, those who cannot pay will be left in the dark—literally. 

Emergency services, once a public good, could soon be available only to those with the means to purchase them. 

This is not just an attack on science; it is an attack on the fundamental principle that public safety should be accessible to all.

Is This Negligence or Deliberate Harm?

At what point does reckless governance become something more sinister? 

If a foreign adversary were to systematically dismantle a nation’s ability to predict and respond to natural disasters, it would be labeled an act of war. 

Yet, when this destruction comes from within, it is dismissed as policy. 

The administration’s actions align disturbingly well with the interests of authoritarian regimes like Russia and China, both of which benefit from a weaker, more chaotic United States. 

Trump’s deference to Putin and Xi raises serious questions about where his allegiances truly lie.

The Choice Before Us

The destruction of America’s environmental monitoring systems is not just bad policy; it is an existential threat. 

It is an engineered disaster, a slow-moving catastrophe that will disproportionately harm the most vulnerable while enriching the powerful. 

We are being led into an era where knowledge is controlled by private corporations and survival is a privilege, not a right.

The choice before us is stark: Do we allow this reckless dismantling to continue, or do we recognize it for what it is—an act of deliberate harm against the American people? 

This is not just playing with fire; it is an act of war against truth, science, and public safety. 

The time to act is now, before the flames consume us all.

Dear Daily Disaster Diary, Mar. 17 2025

 

We must make the best of those ills which cannot be avoided.

- Alexander Hamilton

US Secretary for Energy: It's time for reality in our Energy Policy | Chris Wright at ARC 2025

Puffins vs. Politics: How Climate Change and Corporate Greed Are Cooking Our Tuxedoed Friends

Move over, polar bears—there’s a new canary in the climate coal mine, and it’s wearing a tiny tuxedo.

On Machias Seal Island, puffins—those charming, fish-juggling, clown-beaked icons of the North Atlantic—are undergoing disturbing changes. 

They’re shrinking, their beaks are mutating, and their reproductive rates are in free fall. 

Scientists, ever the cautious bunch, are still piecing together why. But let’s be real: climate change, driven by relentless fossil fuel consumption, is serving up a steaming plate of environmental catastrophe, and the puffins are on the menu.

For the past three decades, researchers have tracked the puffins’ health, noting that today’s fledglings are noticeably smaller than their predecessors. What does this mean? 

Maybe they’re adapting to a hotter world by shedding mass like a businessman ditching his tie in a heatwave. Or maybe they’re just too malnourished to reach their full size. Either way, the outlook isn’t great.

A key culprit? 

The warming Gulf of Maine, where water temperatures have spiked by 1.6°C since the 1980s, ushering in marine heat waves that have scrambled entire ecosystems. 

Puffins rely on high-fat Atlantic herring to feed their chicks. But lately, their diet has been downgraded to sad, less nutritious alternatives like sand eels and squid. 

It’s the avian equivalent of swapping out steak for celery sticks and wondering why you’re still hungry.

And what is the grand response from the U.S. government? 

A full-throttle embrace of fossil fuels. Enter Chris Wright, the newly anointed Energy Secretary and former fracking executive, who waltzed onto the stage at the annual CERAWeek oil and gas conference like a villain in a Bond film. 

With all the charm of a man gleefully tossing a lit match into a dry forest, he promised a “180-degree pivot” from policies that even vaguely resembled an attempt to curb climate change.

“The previous administration’s policy was focused myopically on climate change, with people as simply collateral damage,” he declared, drawing enthusiastic applause from a room full of executives who probably consider rising sea levels a fun opportunity to invest in luxury waterfront property.

Translation: We’re burning it all down, baby. And if the puffins can’t hack it, tough luck.

Wright, the fossil fuel industry’s human embodiment of ‘let them eat coal,’ has little patience for renewable energy, dismissing wind and solar as expensive and inefficient. 

He’s also got a fascinating take on fossil fuels, calling their contribution to global warming a mere “side effect” of progress—like an inconvenient gas leak in an otherwise lovely house. 

Sure, we’ve jacked up the planet’s CO2 levels by 50%, but hey, at least we’ve got modern medicine! (Spoiler: Rising global temperatures are also super great for spreading diseases, but let’s not let facts get in the way of a good oil industry-funded monologue.)

Meanwhile, puffins, blissfully unaware of the political circus, are just trying to survive. Their beaks are mysteriously growing larger, potentially as a way to dissipate heat—because nothing says ‘thriving’ like evolving a biological radiator.

The biggest kicker? Even their ability to breed is now rolling the dice. Scientists are seeing wild fluctuations in chick survival rates, with “really, really good years” followed by “really, really bad years.” 

One year, puffin chicks flourish. The next, they’re barely making it out to sea. If this erratic pattern continues, the population could crash.

And yet, in Houston, amid the cigar smoke and corporate back-patting, Wright and his cronies pitched oil and gas as the saviors of humanity. Their argument? 

That fossil fuels are a moral necessity to lift people out of poverty. Because nothing says ‘helping the world’ like melting glaciers, supercharged hurricanes, and a few billion displaced climate refugees.

So, where does that leave the puffins? 

Clinging to a boiling rock, while oil execs toast to their next quarter’s profits. It’s a tragicomic farce of cosmic proportions—one where tuxedoed seabirds pay the ultimate price for human arrogance.

But hey, at least the beaks are getting bigger. 

Maybe someday, they’ll be large enough to peck some sense into the people running the show.

Maine’s puffins are “doing ok," but climate change is threatening their food supply

Sincerely,

Adaptation-Guide

ADAPT OR DIE

WE ARE READY! ARE YOU?

Dear Daily Disaster Diary, Mar.16 2025

 

Security is the priceless product of freedom. Only the strong can be secure, and only in freedom can men produce those material resources which can secure them from want at home and against aggression from abroad.

- B.E. Hutchinson

US stops Cyber-Operations against Russia: Free Pass for Putin?

THE UNITED STATES SURRENDERS TO RUSSIAN HACKERS
АМЕРИКА СДАЕТСЯ РУССКИМ ХАКЕРАМ

The United States, once the global leader in cybersecurity, has just committed an act of self-sabotage so staggering that it defies logic. 

In a move that reeks of appeasement, the Trump administration has effectively neutered its own cybersecurity agencies, ordering them to ease off Russian cyber threats. 

This isn’t just a strategic shift—it’s a full-blown surrender.

For years, Russian cyber operatives have launched relentless attacks against American infrastructure, businesses, and even our democracy itself. 

They’ve hacked elections, infiltrated power grids, and brought essential supply chains to their knees. 

And now? The U.S. government is telling its top cyber defenders to stand down.

A GIFT TO PUTIN—COURTESY OF WASHINGTON
ПОДАРОК ПУТИНУ ОТ ВАШИНГТОНА

This decision is nothing short of a geopolitical love letter to Vladimir Putin. 

Coming hot on the heels of a phone call between Trump and the Russian dictator, it signals to the world that America is no longer serious about defending itself in the digital age. 

The fact that the White House has stopped publicly naming Russia as a top cyber threat is alarming enough, but ordering agencies like CISA to stop tracking Russian hackers? 

That’s an act of sheer recklessness.

The implications of this are catastrophic. The “Five Eyes” intelligence alliance—our strongest cyber defense network—relies on the U.S. for crucial intelligence sharing. 

By muzzling its own experts, Washington is weakening not just itself but also its closest allies. Britain, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand are now left wondering if America can be trusted to have their backs.

THE ERA OF AMERICAN WEAKNESS
ЭПОХА АМЕРИКАНСКОЙ СЛАБОСТИ

This isn’t just about cybersecurity. 

It’s about global power. 

America’s retreat from the cyber battlefield is a neon-lit sign of weakness that will be noticed in Moscow, Beijing, Tehran, and beyond. 

This is the same nation that, just last year, labeled Russia a “permanent cyber threat.” What changed? 

Have Russian hackers suddenly abandoned their efforts to cripple U.S. infrastructure? 

Hardly.

This move also hamstrings America’s ability to retaliate. Cyberwarfare isn’t just about defense—it’s about deterrence. 

The ability to launch counterstrikes and impose real consequences on adversaries has been an essential tool in modern conflict. 

But with this shift, the U.S. is essentially disarming itself in cyberspace. If the Colonial Pipeline attack of 2021 taught us anything, it’s that cyberattacks aren’t just nuisances—they can paralyze entire sectors of the economy.

AMERICA IS NOW A SITTING DUCK
АМЕРИКА ТЕПЕРЬ ЛЁГКАЯ ДОБЫЧА

The most infuriating part? This isn’t a strategic recalibration. 

It’s a surrender masquerading as diplomacy. The American people are being gaslit into believing that this is some kind of diplomatic masterstroke when in reality, it’s a display of profound cowardice. 

The Trump administration would rather cozy up to Russia than protect its own citizens from cyber warfare.

And make no mistake—Russia will exploit this. Every cybercriminal syndicate and Kremlin-backed hacker group just got a free pass. 

The next major cyberattack on U.S. infrastructure is no longer a question of if, but when. And when it happens, Washington will have only itself to blame.

America is at war in cyberspace. 

The problem is, only one side is still fighting.

Sincerely,

Adaptation-Guide

ADAPT OR DIE!

WE ARE READY! ARE YOU?

Trends in CO2 - NOAA Global Monitoring Laboratory March 14th - 427.77 ppm

Dear Daily Disaster Diary, Mar.15 2025

 

A wise old owl sat on an oak,

The more he saw the less he spoke;

The less he spoke the more he heard;

Why aren`t we like that wise old bird?

- Edward H. Richards

15 Minute Super Deep Meditation Music: Relax Mind Body, Inner Peace, Relaxing Music, ☯2563B

SURVIVING THE NOISE: A GUIDE TO NAVIGATING THE MODERN INFORMATION WARFARE

Eyes on the Horizon!

---

1. SHOCK AS A STRATEGY: HOW TO KEEP YOUR SANITY IN A STORM OF CHAOS

Donald Trump is not the reason attention has become the world’s most valuable currency—but he has mastered its exploitation like no other. 

"Flood the zone with shit"—this is the strategy, as articulated by Steve Bannon, his former advisor. The goal? 

A relentless barrage of headlines, scandals, and executive actions—so rapid that nobody has time to react, let alone reflect. 

And Trump executes it with terrifying precision: "Bang, bang, bang. We’ve got to start with muzzle velocity."

So how do you not lose your mind? 

Sociologist Jennifer Walter provides a solution: 

resisting overload is an act of defiance. 

She suggests a 48-hour rule: before losing your head over every new proclamation, wait. 

Let the dust settle. 

Time sorts the significant from the sensational. Trump’s trade tariffs? Announced with fanfare, then quietly rescinded. 

The key is to zoom out.

Martin Sandbu of the Financial Times advises focusing on the broader geopolitical strategy. Extend your time horizon—recall the Cold War. 

Many crises seemed existential, yet history moved on. Perspective is the antidote to manufactured hysteria. 

Keep your eyes on the horizon. 

If it helps against seasickness, it helps against the madness of Trump's media storm.

---

2. LIES AND HALF-TRUTHS: HOW TO SEE THROUGH THE BULLSHIT

Information today is like food. As historian Yuval Noah Harari points out, humanity no longer suffers from famine—we suffer from obesity. 

"Information is now like junk food. 

More is not better." And just like junk food, the worst information is engineered to exploit our cravings: outrage, fear, tribalism. The truth is complicated. 

Complexity is the enemy of attention.

And just like with junk food, you can't analyze every ingredient in real time. What we need is a 

nutrition pyramid for news. 

The rule? The less processed, the better. When an issue is framed in extreme emotion, ask yourself: 

Who benefits from my outrage?

Trust needs a foundation. Psychiatrist Jürg Acklin argues that we need reliable analysts—not those who pander to our fears, but those who stand on the same reality as we do. 

That might be reputable media, or individual journalists with a proven track record. 

Exposure to different viewpoints is healthy—but without a clear standard of truth, 

you’ll drown in the chaos.

---

3. THE FEAR OF COLLAPSE: WILL RUSSIA INVADE EUROPE?

No, it’s not time to flee to New Zealand and dig a bunker. Putin’s threats of nuclear war are a psychological weapon. The reality? 

He can’t even conquer Ukraine. 

Perspective matters. 

The Cold War saw far greater threats—remember 1979? 

NATO’s response to Soviet missile deployments caused mass panic. Yet, the world didn’t end.

Consider the numbers: Russia has 144 million people; the EU has 450 million. The true crisis? 

Europe’s dependence on American protection is ending, and it is not ready for self-defense. 

But the solution isn’t doomscrolling—

this isn’t control, it’s addiction. 

Harvard’s Aditi Nerurkar recommends 

acceptance, not paralysis. 

Fear only weakens when acknowledged and processed. Acklin puts it bluntly: 

It’s time for Europe to grow up.

One hopeful sign? This week, the EU finally woke up: 800 billion euros committed to defense.

---

4. THE POLITICAL CESSPOOL: HOW TO KEEP FAITH IN DEMOCRACY

Democracy is fragile—even in the U.S., the self-proclaimed oldest democracy. Political brutality is not new. 

Senator Joseph McCarthy’s communist witch hunts were just as authoritarian. Lies, manipulation, and power games are baked into the system. But when they cross a threshold, 

cynicism becomes a weapon.

"Politics has always been dirty, and politicians have always been egotistical. The difference? Today, they seem clinically narcissistic," Acklin observes. 

If we give in to the idea that politics is irredeemable, the populists win.

The answer? 

Be alarmed, but don’t surrender. 

New Yorker editor David Remnick argues for pragmatic engagement. Acklin suggests recognizing your own agency. 

Democratic participation doesn’t require joining a party. 

It can be as simple as 

creating spaces for real discussion—

reading groups, political meetups, online forums. Hannah Arendt warned that 

isolation breeds authoritarianism. 

If you feel alone, you lose belief in your own impact. 

And that’s how democracy dies.

---

5. OUTRAGE FATIGUE: HOW TO SURVIVE FOUR YEARS OF THIS

Even if Trump’s worst week is behind him, don’t expect the chaos to slow down. His second term has begun with the speed of a gunshot—but the reality? 

It’s a marathon.

Don’t burn out. Acklin advises setting strict limits on news consumption. 

Take breaks. 

Protect the mundane normality of life—

take the kids to soccer practice, get annoyed at your neighbor’s dog, goof around with friends. 

Even something as simple as a phone call with American friends can be grounding. 

They’re living through the same storm, but their lives go on.

And remember: 

Trump’s greatest strength might be his own downfall. 

Ezra Klein suggests that Trump’s strategy—constant scandal, perpetual outrage—

is unsustainable. 

Eventually, he will either provoke a constitutional crisis or reveal his own limits. 

The key is endurance.

---

Final Word: The One Who Controls Your Attention, Controls Your Mind

Trump, Putin, social media—they all understand the game: 

attention is power. 

If you let them dictate your focus, you’ve already lost. The way forward? 

Be deliberate. Be strategic. Choose where to direct your gaze. 

The world has always been chaotic. The only way to navigate it is to 

keep your eyes on the horizon.

Sincerely,

Adaptation-Guide

ADAPT OR DIE!

WE ARE READY! ARE YOU?

credits: Neue Zürcher Zeitung

Dear Daily Disaster Diary, Mar.14 2025

 

I would live to study, and not study to live.

- Francis Bacon

Why is 2025 a key year for climate change? - What You Need to Know

Climate Change: The Global Catastrophe We Refuse to Stop

The world is on fire—literally. And yet, we continue to act as if the flames aren’t licking at our heels. The climate crisis isn’t just an impending disaster; it is happening now, accelerating with every ton of carbon we pump into the atmosphere. 

But rather than taking decisive action, our leaders play political chess, delaying the inevitable at the cost of billions of lives and trillions in economic damage.

A recent study by the Boston Consulting Group, the Cambridge Judge Business School, and the Climate Traces Lab at the University of Cambridge lays out a stark reality: if global temperatures rise by 3°C by 2100—a scenario that seems increasingly likely—up to 34% of the world’s total economic output could be wiped out. Let that sink in. 

A third of the global economy erased. The cost of inaction will dwarf any investments we could make today to curb emissions.

And yet, here we are, still debating whether it’s worth transitioning to renewable energy, still coddling fossil fuel giants, still allowing climate-denying politicians to dictate policy. 

If humanity continues to drag its feet, the annual global GDP growth rate will shrink by 0.56%, setting the stage for economic devastation that will make the Great Depression look like a minor setback.

The Cost of Ignorance: A Self-Inflicted Collapse

The numbers are staggering. To stay below 2°C warming—our last chance to avoid total collapse—the world must invest at least 1-2% of global GDP annually into climate mitigation and adaptation. 

This means a ninefold increase in climate protection spending and a thirteenfold increase in adaptation investments. 

That’s $10.5 trillion per year for green energy, electrification, and reforestation. Sounds like a lot? 

Consider this: without it, the climate crisis will cause losses of up to $34 trillion.

This isn’t just about money. It’s about survival. 

Rising sea levels have already climbed 25 centimeters since 1880. 

Deadly heat waves now occur three times more often than in the 19th century. 

By 2050, 1.6 million people could die each year from extreme heat alone. 

Droughts, wildfires, supercharged hurricanes—these are no longer anomalies. They are the new normal, and they will only get worse.

The Brutal Reality of a 3°C World

Let’s be clear: a 3°C world is a world of chaos. In the United States, GDP losses could hit 10% by 2050. 

Europe? 9%. 

China and Latin America? 14%. 

Africa? 16%. 

The Middle East? A staggering 19%. 

By mid-century, the U.S. will endure an average of 22 days per year with temperatures over 35°C. 

Italy will see sea levels rise by up to 1.39 meters. 

In Indonesia, heat-related deaths could increase sevenfold, while productivity could drop by 20%—crippling entire industries.

And yet, the people in power hesitate. They are more concerned with election cycles than with planetary survival. 

The study makes it clear: 60% of climate investments must be made by 2050 to avoid catastrophe. 

But politicians, driven by short-term economic gains, refuse to act. They underestimate the long-term economic devastation of inaction and ignore the reality that delaying climate action means condemning future generations to a dystopian nightmare.

The Greatest Investment in Human History

Here’s the hard truth: saving the planet isn’t just an environmental necessity—it’s an economic imperative. 

Climate mitigation isn’t a cost; it’s an investment with returns of up to 14 times the initial input. 

The money we could save by preventing climate disaster could fund every defense budget on Earth, eradicate extreme poverty, revolutionize global infrastructure, and triple worldwide healthcare spending. 

But only if we act now.

The political cowardice and corporate greed preventing real climate action will be remembered as the greatest betrayal in human history. 

Future generations will curse our complacency. 

They will ask why we let short-term profits outweigh long-term survival.

The Time for Patience is Over

If we fail to act, we are choosing to watch civilization burn. 

We must force governments and corporations to take radical, immediate steps: phase out fossil fuels, implement carbon pricing, invest massively in renewables, and create strict climate laws that are not subject to the whims of political convenience.

We no longer have the luxury of ignorance. 

We no longer have time for half-measures. 

The planet will not wait for our leaders to grow a spine. 

The time to act is now, or we might as well start writing Earth’s obituary.

Sincerely,

Adaptation-Guide

ADAPT OR DIE!

WE ARE READY! ARE YOU?

Dear Daily Disaster Diary, Mar.13 2025

 

A nation, like a person, has a mind - a mind that must be kept informed and alert, that must know itself, that understands the hopes and needs of its neighbors - all the other nations that live within the narrowing circle of the world.

- Franklin Delano Roosevelt

Isolation, uncertainty and fear – How the Covid-19 pandemic fractured American society

The COVID-19 Lab Leak Theory: Are Intelligence Agencies Closing in on the Truth?

The origins of the COVID-19 pandemic remain a contentious issue, with theories ranging from a natural spillover to a possible laboratory accident. 

Recent reports from intelligence agencies, including the CIA and Germany’s Federal Intelligence Service (BND), suggest that the lab leak hypothesis is gaining credibility. 

Although definitive proof is still lacking, mounting circumstantial evidence points to the possibility that the virus could have escaped from a lab in Wuhan, China.

The Chinese government has consistently rejected such claims, calling them baseless conspiracies. 

However, Beijing’s persistent lack of transparency only fuels suspicion. The refusal to grant independent investigators unrestricted access to crucial data raises an important question: What does China have to hide?

Intelligence reports indicate that several Wuhan Institute of Virology researchers fell ill with COVID-like symptoms in late 2019—before the official outbreak. 

Additionally, concerns over inadequate safety measures at the institute were raised years before the pandemic. 

While none of this constitutes irrefutable proof, the pattern of secrecy and circumstantial evidence cannot be ignored.

The scientific community remains divided. 

Many virologists still argue that the virus likely originated from a natural spillover, as similar pandemics in the past have followed this pattern. 

But the absence of a confirmed animal host for SARS-CoV-2 after years of extensive searching is unusual. In previous outbreaks, such as SARS and MERS, the intermediary animals were identified relatively quickly.

If the lab leak theory turns out to be true, it would have profound consequences. It would not only damage China’s credibility but also call into question global biosafety practices and oversight at high-risk research facilities. 

More importantly, it would highlight the dangers of gain-of-function research, which involves modifying viruses to study their potential risks. Such research, if improperly managed, could pose catastrophic threats to humanity.

Yet, the likelihood of uncovering the absolute truth seems increasingly slim. Without full access to the relevant data, intelligence agencies can only work with indirect evidence. 

Political interests further complicate the investigation, as governments fear the geopolitical ramifications of openly accusing China.

In the end, the debate over COVID-19’s origins is not just about scientific curiosity—it’s about accountability and global preparedness for future pandemics. 

If we fail to uncover the truth now, we risk repeating the same mistakes in the future. 

The world deserves answers, and the pressure on China to cooperate should not subside. 

Until then, skepticism remains warranted, and the search for definitive proof must continue.

Addendum:

It has been half a decade since the world was turned upside down. Five years since the pandemic that swept across the globe, leaving devastation in its wake. 

Five years since we were promised change, accountability, and a commitment to never let this happen again. 

And yet, here we stand—bruised, battered, and forced to ask a simple, enraging question: Is this really all we get?

Over 25 million (A.G.estimate) lives were lost worldwide. Parents, children, friends, and colleagues—gone. 

Not just numbers, but stories, memories, and futures erased. Hospitals overflowed, economies crumbled, and entire communities were fractured beyond repair. 

Governments swore they would learn from their mistakes, yet here we are, watching history repeat itself in slow motion.

Where is the justice for the families who were torn apart? 

Where are the policies that ensure our leaders will never again ignore science, suppress vital information, or prioritize profit over human life? 

Where is the investment in healthcare, the strengthened global response systems, the real, meaningful change that was promised?

Instead, we are fed hollow apologies, meaningless platitudes, and bureaucratic reports that go nowhere. 

We are told to move on, to accept this tragedy as an unfortunate chapter in history—one that conveniently absolves those in power of responsibility.

But we won’t forget. 

And we certainly won’t accept this as the best we can do. 

If this is all we get after five years and 25 million dead (A.G. estimate), then we have failed—not just those we lost, but those who remain.

Enough is enough. 

We demand action, accountability, and real change—before history repeats itself once more.

Sincerely,

Adaptation-Guide

ADAPT OR DIE!

WE ARE READY! ARE YOU?