crapwittyname

Yes. You need to use radiation, via radiators. It's a shame I'm getting downvoted on this, because I really do know what I'm talking about on this one. Ammonia in heat pipes wicks the heat away from the thing you want to be cold, towards the radiator, which is usually just a dumb coil, but could be enhanced with a bimetallic thermally decoupled louver if you want to keep it cool in sunlight. Or bury it, since we're on the moon. From an engineering perspective it's not that difficult to do, as the variables which affect it are well known and don't change that much. It is for sure slower than combined conductive/convective cooling, but it's a known quantity, so you can plan quite effectively.

Heat pipes running to radiators in vacuum is how you do it in space. It's efficient and scaleable, though it hasn't ever been done on an industrial scale. Definitely doable though. Considering the temperature on the moon is a balmy -270°C

Wow.

It makes perfect sense if you learn it that way! It's hardly asinine in any case. I don't think it's ever caused a problem, except for Americans in Europe getting confused by it or vice versa.

It would be if you did it in the US, where everybody knows the ground floor is the first floor. Here in Europe, it's just taught that way from birth, so everybody knows that the first floor is above ground and there's no confusion.

There is no place in a modern culture for harm-based ideologies like conservatism.

Louder for the people in the back

There are infinite possible ways to implement wealth tax. If you want to avoid your scenario, tax corporations on their profits, reducing the dividend payout to shareholders. For example.
These people have ALL THE MONEY and it needs to be stopped, like yesterday. Find a way.

From your source:

From the river to the sea is an aspirational call for freedom, human rights, and peaceful coexistence, not death, destruction, or hate

conflating anti-Israel sentiment with antisemitism “silence(s) diverse voices speaking up for human rights.

It's certainly not as clear-cut as your first sentence, and I'll remind you that the only agent currently committing genocide in this conflict is the IDF/Likud (who incidentally have used the same wording, in their 1977 manifesto: "Judea and Samaria will not be handed to any foreign administration; between the Sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty.")

So no, I won't be editing my comment, because I do not acknowledge your falsehood.

Caribbean? I 'ardly know Ian!

Maybe if you had used it constructively instead, by, say, making any coherent point whatsoever? Then we wouldn't be here would we.

I haven't once argued in bad faith. You, on the other hand have essentially forbidden any criticism of Israel whatsoever, made no arguments except those where you attack me (hint: this is called an ad hominem fallacy) and continuously hand-waved without actually stooping so low as to tell me where I'm wrong; you just claim that I am but you can't be bothered to say why/how.
Bonus points for your "I know you are but what am I" on the subject of open-mindedness.
If this is you at your coolest, I guess if you were to actually lose your temper we'd just get an incoherent string of characters as repeatedly you smash your keyboard into your face to make a point.

Is this a joke account?

want to live in peace

Genocides their neighbours