super granny game Should we have more children? It’s a heavy question for a Sunday morning, but one that we must ask, in our current times. In 2009, climate scientist Johan Rockstrom, along with 28 renowned scientists, introduced the idea of Planetary Boundaries, which serves as a kind of master health check for Earth. They defined boundaries as “safe limits for human pressure on the nine critical processes which together maintain a stable and resilient Earth”. In 2009, we exceeded the recommended limits on at least two of these boundaries. By 2023, we had crossed these limits on six, including climate change, novel entities (microplastics, endocrine disruptors and their ilk), land-use change (think deforestation), freshwater change, biochemical flows (phosphorous and nitrogen) and biosphere integrity (we are in the midst of a sixth mass extinction; the last one being when the dinosaurs disappeared). How much of this situation is attributable to the fact that there are “too many” of us? According to History Database of the Global Environment (HYDE), a population land-use model, there were an estimated 19 million people on Earth 7,000 years ago, with 2.5 million living on the land that is currently India. The database’s creator, Kees Klein Goldewijk of Utrecht University in the Netherlands, tells me this was estimated by hindcasting from later population estimates, using available literature. It was a broad stroke, not meant to be accurate at a regional level, but capable of helping us understand how land use, population and climate trade-offs might play out. Comparing the database’s estimated carbon-dioxide concentrations at that time with CO2 concentration data from ice cores shows, if anything, that HYDE’s estimates are conservative. This was a time when the strong Indian monsoon let rivers run full, making floodplain agriculture more productive. This likely helped India support larger populations: over the next 3,000 years, population would rise by nearly eight times, to reach 20 million. Indeed, between 4000 and 2000 BCE, India quite possibly had the fastest growing population in the world, thanks, in part, to the agricultural marvels of the Harappan Civilisation. These farmers mastered their local water, not by trying to control it but by shaping their cities and their diets to what the local land and climate supported. Technology, after all, is but the handmaiden of philosophy. When the philosophy was “Adapt”, water management and diets did. And so, when water was plentiful, the people gorged on wheat, but in a dry spell, they made do with foxtail millets, as archaeobotanical evidence shows. Today, we are dazzled by shiny tech, ignoring the “winner-take-all” or “ignore-negative-externalities” philosophies operating behind many of them, and forgetting that philosophy, like climate, always comes home to roost. *** About 4,000 years ago, a study of snail shells from a lake in a Harappan-era settlement showed that the monsoon, our monsoon, weakened not for one or two years, but for two centuries. Together with other factors, this is believed to have led to the decline, or deurbanisation, of the civilisation that once flourished here. Two millennia later, a climate shift may have played a hand in the fall of the Roman Empire. Closer to home, an interplay of climate and population appear to have shaped the many cities of Delhi, acting like a pendulum, pushing it from river to ridge and back again. For example, Iltutmish established his city far from the Yamuna, in the defensible Lal Kot. But as the population grew, the people needed water, and so he built a tank called Hauz-i-Shamsi, in 1231. When that proved insufficient, the city began inching closer to the river. As the Mamluks ceded to the Khiljis, a spell of weaker monsoons pushed the city closer to the river, prompting Alauddin Khilji to build another tank, Hauz Khas, to harness the rains. Even that was not enough. As the Khiljis ceded to the Tughlaqs, the drought intensified, with famines killing thousands. “Rumours of cannibalism were current,” the historian Irfan Habib writes, in his 2001 book Economic History of Medieval India, 1200-1500. A geological blink later, India was colonised. Between 1600 and 1700, forests turned to fields at a galloping rate. To the colonisers, driven by a philosophy of maximising revenue, this was free land. The bill for that “free” gift came due much later, as we shall see. *** In 18th-century England, the economist Thomas Malthus wrote that “the power of population is infinitely greater than the power in the earth to produce subsistence for man”. Later in life, he taught young men headed to India as part of the East India Company that famine was a consequence of fast-growing populations. Did that particular instruction make colonial leaders less concerned with their role in famine amelioration? The 19th century saw famines claim millions of lives. Deforestation, a fixed, cash tax, and the forest and market policies of the Raj made a dry stream flow less reliable, and pushed farmers to grow inedible or climate-unsuited crops. Did all this, paired with the export of grain while the masses starved, cause the death toll, or was it the Malthusian ogre of a growing population? The next century saw India gain independence, after which the crude death rate (the number of deaths per 1,000 in a given year) began to plummet. It fell from 27 in 1941 to 15 in 1971, to 10 in 1991, and 7 in 2011. India, worried about its population, launched its National Family Planning Programme in 1952, the first country in the world to do so. And yet, while India’s birth rate fell, the population continued to boom. Last year, ours became the world’s most populous country. That is not a bad thing, per se. Indeed, there are advantages to a large population: one Bengaluru is bigger than an Israel; one Delhi much larger than a Singapore. These tiny nations have spun wealth out of their vulnerabilities and so can we, if we play our cards, especially education and local policy, right. However, per United Nations data, our numbers seem likely to swell by another 100 million by 2030 — just as the climate is changing again, asking us to make land use greener, leaving us less room to grow more crops or build on. Where will these 100 million be housed, when our cities and towns are running out of green spaces and water bodies? Where will the land come from, to graze the animals and raise the crops they will need? Where will the cotton for their throwaway onesies be grown? Population and climate both limit the strategic options we can take. With a smaller population and a friendlier climate, we could have taken our water for granted. Doing so now is tantamount to ritual suicide. Being blasé about food waste is a luxury we no longer have. We may never (and I pray we never) experience famine again, but so many mouths to feed means that the smallest supply disruptions (a heatwave here or a flood there) will send prices soaring. This is especially true since we have doubled down on crops that don’t suit their local climate, pumping out so much groundwater to support rice and sugarcane and the myriad others that we have altered the tilt of Earth’s axis. *** It’s more than food: we churn out cement, steel, cobalt, plastic, cotton and chemicals to give solidity to our ephemeral desires. The average Indian consumes only 1/10th the energy and the meat an American consumes, but the average Indian is consuming more, of late. If that trend continues, then Houston, or rather Sriharikota, we have a problem. It’s the defining trade-off for this generation: progeny or philosophy, somethings gotta give. A decade ago, Samuel L Jackson, playing the eccentric villain Valentine in a Kingsman film, said: “When you get a virus, you get a fever. That’s the human body raising its core temperature to kill the virus. Planet Earth works the same way. Global warming is the fever, mankind is the virus. We’re making our planet sick. A cull is our only hope. If we don’t reduce our population ourselves, there’s only one of two ways this can go: The host kills the virus, or the virus kills the host.” I don’t agree. There is a way for both host and “virus” to survive: we learn to co-exist. We evolve to become less lethal (as the variants of Covid-19 did), and use our resources more thoughtfully, in a philosophy that acknowledges that the environment matters. Seeing the smog all around us, though, I wonder if that will happen fast enough. (Mridula Ramesh is a climate-tech investor and author of The Climate Solution and Watershed. She can be reached on tradeoffs@climaction.net)SAN ANTONIO (AP) — Colorado secured what it said was record insurance coverage for quarterback Shedeur Sanders and Heisman Trophy winner Travis Hunter as the star duo opted to complete their college careers in the Alamo Bowl rather than sit out and prepare for the NFL draft. Colorado would not disclose the amount of insurance coverage each received, citing privacy laws. Coach Deion Sanders and athletic director Rick George both said it was the largest in college football history. “We happen to have two players that are probably going to be the first two picks of the NFL draft,” Sanders said Monday. “We all know who those two are and they have received, I think, the highest number of coverage that has ever been covered in college football. It far exceeds anyone that has ever played this game of college football.” While college programs maintain insurance policies for their athletes in case of injury, Colorado increased disability coverage for its entire roster in the Alamo Bowl. Sanders, the coach of the No. 20 Buffaloes, ensured his QB son and two-way star Hunter received larger policies since both are expected to be among the top 10 selections in the upcoming NFL draft. “It was his idea we should get disability insurance for our athletes for this game to ensure that they played and if there was some kind of injury that they would be well taken care of,” George said. “So, we worked together on that. We’re excited about it. We think it’s great that all our players are playing in the game. That’s what all bowl games should be like.” RELATED COVERAGE Boise State’s legacy includes winning coaches and championship moments Hajj-Malik Williams throws 2 TDs passes to help No. 24 UNLV beat Cal 24-13 in the LA Bowl Mike Shula is back in the SEC at South Carolina after nearly two decades since Alabama fired him Colorado (9-3, No. 23 CFP) will face the 17th-ranked BYU Cougars (10-2, No. 17 CFP) in the Alamo Bowl on Saturday. While most teams are scrambling with starters opting out of bowl games this year to enter the transfer portal or NFL draft, the Buffaloes did not lose any player on their two-deep roster. “It’s more than what I got (when he played at Kansas State),” Colorado linebackers coach Andre’ Hart said. “They gave us a helmet and said pop this on your leg and get out there and play. For them to get that (increased insurance coverage), I just think it’s beneficial. To talk about where the game is, where it’s going and how leadership is taking care of the players, I thought that’s excellent.” Shedeur Sanders completed 337 of 454 passes for 3,926 yards and 35 touchdowns this season. Many scouting services have Sanders rated as the top quarterback in this year’s draft. Hunter received the Heisman Trophy as a two-way standout at cornerback and wide receiver. He had 92 receptions for 1,152 yards and 14 touchdowns and as a cornerback had four interceptions, broke up 11 passes and limited the opposition to 22 receptions on 688 defensive snaps. “They’ve taken care of us, everybody,” Colorado running back Micah Welch said. “It really means a lot to have every teammate up here. That’s a big thing. What I like about Coach Prime, they’re taking care of us.” ___ Get poll alerts and updates on the AP Top 25 throughout the season. Sign up here . AP college football: https://apnews.com/hub/ap-top-25-college-football-poll and https://apnews.com/hub/college-football

East Carolina 71, Stetson 64HMC wins prestigious award for Best Wellbeing ProgrammeShares of Netflix, Inc. ( NASDAQ:NFLX – Get Free Report ) shot up 0.5% during trading on Thursday . The stock traded as high as $880.95 and last traded at $877.34. 2,575,914 shares changed hands during mid-day trading, a decline of 30% from the average session volume of 3,668,794 shares. The stock had previously closed at $872.60. Analysts Set New Price Targets NFLX has been the topic of a number of recent analyst reports. Wedbush reissued an “outperform” rating and set a $950.00 price target (up previously from $800.00) on shares of Netflix in a research note on Monday, November 18th. StockNews.com upgraded Netflix from a “hold” rating to a “buy” rating in a research report on Tuesday, September 24th. Morgan Stanley lifted their price target on Netflix from $820.00 to $830.00 and gave the company an “overweight” rating in a report on Friday, October 18th. Pivotal Research increased their price objective on shares of Netflix from $925.00 to $1,100.00 and gave the stock a “buy” rating in a report on Wednesday, November 20th. Finally, Guggenheim boosted their target price on shares of Netflix from $810.00 to $825.00 and gave the company a “buy” rating in a report on Tuesday, October 29th. Two investment analysts have rated the stock with a sell rating, nine have issued a hold rating and twenty-five have assigned a buy rating to the stock. According to data from MarketBeat, the company presently has an average rating of “Moderate Buy” and a consensus price target of $764.82. Check Out Our Latest Stock Report on NFLX Netflix Stock Performance Netflix ( NASDAQ:NFLX – Get Free Report ) last posted its quarterly earnings results on Thursday, October 17th. The Internet television network reported $5.40 earnings per share (EPS) for the quarter, beating the consensus estimate of $5.09 by $0.31. The firm had revenue of $9.82 billion for the quarter, compared to analysts’ expectations of $9.77 billion. Netflix had a net margin of 20.70% and a return on equity of 35.86%. On average, analysts anticipate that Netflix, Inc. will post 19.78 earnings per share for the current year. Insider Buying and Selling In related news, Director Timothy M. Haley sold 647 shares of the firm’s stock in a transaction on Monday, November 11th. The stock was sold at an average price of $800.19, for a total transaction of $517,722.93. The sale was disclosed in a legal filing with the SEC, which can be accessed through the SEC website . Also, Director Anne M. Sweeney sold 589 shares of the business’s stock in a transaction on Wednesday, November 20th. The shares were sold at an average price of $880.00, for a total transaction of $518,320.00. The disclosure for this sale can be found here . Over the last three months, insiders sold 185,866 shares of company stock worth $133,393,921. Corporate insiders own 1.76% of the company’s stock. Institutional Inflows and Outflows Large investors have recently modified their holdings of the business. American Trust bought a new position in Netflix in the third quarter worth about $323,000. Old North State Trust LLC raised its position in shares of Netflix by 3.2% during the 3rd quarter. Old North State Trust LLC now owns 699 shares of the Internet television network’s stock worth $496,000 after purchasing an additional 22 shares during the period. Franklin Resources Inc. boosted its position in Netflix by 11.5% during the 3rd quarter. Franklin Resources Inc. now owns 1,236,539 shares of the Internet television network’s stock valued at $881,652,000 after purchasing an additional 127,541 shares during the period. Synovus Financial Corp boosted its position in Netflix by 43.9% during the 3rd quarter. Synovus Financial Corp now owns 12,667 shares of the Internet television network’s stock valued at $8,984,000 after purchasing an additional 3,864 shares during the period. Finally, Destination Wealth Management grew its stake in Netflix by 7.5% during the 3rd quarter. Destination Wealth Management now owns 1,083 shares of the Internet television network’s stock worth $768,000 after buying an additional 76 shares during the last quarter. 80.93% of the stock is currently owned by institutional investors. Netflix Company Profile ( Get Free Report ) Netflix, Inc provides entertainment services. It offers TV series, documentaries, feature films, and games across various genres and languages. The company also provides members the ability to receive streaming content through a host of internet-connected devices, including TVs, digital video players, TV set-top boxes, and mobile devices. Recommended Stories Receive News & Ratings for Netflix Daily - Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts' ratings for Netflix and related companies with MarketBeat.com's FREE daily email newsletter .

NASH.VILLE, Tenn (AP) — Nico Iamaleava threw for 257 yards and four touchdowns rallying No. 7 Tennessee from a 14-point deficit within the first five minutes to rout in-state rival Vanderbilt 36-23 Saturday. The Volunteers (10-2, 6-2 Southeastern Conference; No. 8 CFP) needed a big victory to impress the College Football Playoff committee enough to earn a home playoff game in December. They beat Vanderbilt (6-6, 3-5) for a sixth straight season. Better yet, they rebounded from a nightmare start giving up the first 14 points by scoring 29 straight points. They led 24-17 at halftime on Iamaleava's first three TD passes. Junior Sherrill returned the opening kickoff 100 yards for a touchdown for Vanderbilt to stun a mostly orange crowd. Dylan Sampson fumbled on the Vols’ second play from scrimmage, and Sedrick Alexanader's 4-yard TD run on a 26-yard drive put Vandy up 14-0 quickly. Then Iamaleava got Tennessee going with a 28-yard TD pass to Dont’e Thornton Jr. Tennessee got a break when Max Gilbert's 50-yard field goal bounced off the crossbar and over. Iamaleava found Thornton again on an 86-yard catch-and-run TD, then he tossed an 18-yard TD pass to Miles Kitselman just before halftime. Iamaleava capped the opening drive of the third quarter hitting Mike Matthews with a 14-yard TD pass for a 31-17 lead. The Vols added a safety by Tyre West and another Gilbert field goal. Diego Pavia threw a 31-yard TD pass to Richie Hoskins late with Vandy's 2-point conversion failing for the final margin. Tennessee didn't make a good early impression with yet another slow start. The Vols need to hope for some help to have a chance at moving up a spot or two . The big question is whether the Vols get to host a playoff game in December at Neyland Stadium where they went undefeated this season. Tennessee put together TD drives of 91 and 96 yards in the first half alone. The Vols then beat Vandy at its own game of keepaway after not even managing 10 minutes of possession in the first half. They finished with the edge in that stat outgaining Vandy 538-212. Vanderbilt had some of the best offensive success against Tennessee of any opponent this season. The Commodores had 114 yards rushing and 17 points by halftime against a defense that came in ranked sixth nationally allowing just 98.8 yards a game. The Vols had been fourth in the country giving up just 13.1 points a game having held 10 of 11 opponents under 20 points this season. The Tennessee running back, who set the program record with 22 rushing TDs this season, didn't reach the end zone for the first time this season. Sampson finished with 178 yards rushing to reach 1,485 yards for the season, topping the school mark of 1,464 set by Travis Stephens in 2001. Tennessee waits to hear its spot in the CFP field, while Vanderbilt learns its bowl destination Dec. 8. Get poll alerts and updates on the AP Top 25 throughout the season. Sign up here . AP college football: https://apnews.com/hub/ap-top-25-college-football-poll and https://apnews.com/hub/college-football.

RCC’s students help other people hold food drive during holidaysShort Interest in Eos Energy Enterprises, Inc. (NASDAQ:EOSEW) Increases By 3,260.0%

Colorado adds record insurance coverage for Sanders and Hunter with both playing in Alamo BowlNone

ASML Lead Plaintiff Deadline Approaching – Contact Robbins LLP for Information About the Class ...New Delhi: The BJP on Saturday, November 30, hit back at the Congress for questioning the electoral process, including EVM’s integrity, saying its chief ministers and other elected representatives like Rahul Gandhi should first resign and announce that they will contest only after ballot papers are brought back. Such a stand will underscore their trust in the issues being raised by them, BJP spokesperson Gaurav Bhatia told reporters, adding that their allegations will otherwise be nothing but empty words. The Congress should move the courts over the issue too, he said, while stressing that the Supreme Court has quite a few times endorsed the transparency of the electoral process and the integrity of Electoral Voting Machines. Congress chief ministers, Rahul Gandhi and Priyanka Gandhi Vadra should resign as they were elected through the same electoral process the opposition party is questioning, Bhatia said. It was ironic that Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge questioned EVMs on a day Priyanka Gandhi Vadra took oath as a Lok Sabha MP, he said. The Congress will soon be confined to the pages of history books, he said. Speaking on the incidents targeting Hindu minorities in Bangladesh, the BJP spokesperson noted the stand of the Indian government and expressed confidence that India’s strong voice cannot be ignored. As the biggest democracy in the world, it is India’s duty to raise its voice when minorities are facing harassment anywhere, Bhatia claimed. He also accused Samajwadi Party leader and former Uttar Pradesh chief minister Akhilesh Yadav of acting as a shield for rioters and alleged that the party’s members, including MPs, are involved in instigating violence rather than showing commitment to the restoration of peace. Targeting the SP, he alleged that riots frequently broke out when it ruled the state and that the opposition party has no faith in the police. The BJP’s reaction came after Yadav accused the BJP of orchestrating violence in Sambhal in Uttar Pradesh where protesters who were opposing a court-ordered survey of a mosque clashed with police last Sunday.

Elon Musk jests about potentially purchasing MSNBC