What the hell map projection is that?

And of course there will be zero consequences for either the Prosecutor or the jail officials that let this happen.

And the main issue is that the murder had filed a order with the jail that he was declining any outside contact without his lawyer presence. The jail ignored that for this interview, and it's at best questionable that the interview was shown under those circumstances.

This MIGHT be intended for commercial scale. Though even then, it's literally the exact same popping method commercial poppers use, just using an IR heat source rather than a resistive heating element.

Also for home use, you can use a pan or metal bowl over your stove.

We need to switch to high efficiency cold pockets.

Paper bag of kernels with one of these would do the job:
https://www.lowes.com/pd/PULL-START-FIRE-Pull-Start-Fire-Firestarter-3-pack/1003177642?cm_mmc=shp-_-c-_-prd-_-sol-_-ggl-_-PLA_SOL_237_Seasonal-Heat-Coolers-_-1003177642-_-online-_-0-_-0&ds_rl=1286981&gclid=CjwKCAiA76-dBhByEiwAA0_s9XpV4Djzuqj4-4bROla41iYdIuHs1ICMj9dJ_4X7ECJMHuCffpfUJRoC11cQAvD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds

Ok, reading the paper, aren't they precisely describing how a commercial popcorn popper works? You have a vessel that is heated, you stir the kernels until they pop. I think they usually use an electric element in the vessel to heat it but not universally and that really isn't a major change.

I'm assuming they are talking about the microwaveable packets. Which is hardly the only way of making popcorn.

90% of academia would talk forever about their field(s) of expertise if they lost track of time. Don't repeat the mistake and nobody will give it a second thought.

Actually, no. "Stealing" is to take something without permission intending on permantly depriving the owner of it. Joyriding, for example, is a separate crime than grand theft auto. He's still looking at some serious crimes, but "theft" is not likely one of them.

Minimal damage to the car, but scrapped up the parking lot (and presumably the bucket), and broke a fence (though that was intentional).

>With cars, they made them safer and smarter. We have to find a better system to dispose of the worst. That is the argument we should have.

We have that, it's called "don't execute them". Which incidentally is cheaper and has all the deterrent value.

You can put an air quality monitor on a building that is not a US Embassy. You can even put them away from any building at all.

The data is out there, it's just not mentioned at all in the article.

On the one hand, a win is a win. Cleaner air is great.

On the other, is there any data that shows the was a greater improvement in cities with monitors than those without? Of course if it is just a broader trend that everyone's air is getting better, that is even more reason to celebrate. It just means this particular relationship is pure coincidence.