Bio-brain_2035 (@2035Bio) header
Bio-brain_2035 (@2035Bio) profile picture

biotech freestyler “there are no contradictions - check your premises" No Bad Religion song can make your life complete

Joined October 2019
Photo by Bio-brain_2035 (@2035Bio)Photo by Bio-brain_2035 (@2035Bio)Photo by Bio-brain_2035 (@2035Bio)Photo by Bio-brain_2035 (@2035Bio)Photo by Bio-brain_2035 (@2035Bio)Photo by Bio-brain_2035 (@2035Bio)Photo by Bio-brain_2035 (@2035Bio)Photo by Bio-brain_2035 (@2035Bio)Photo by Bio-brain_2035 (@2035Bio)Photo by Bio-brain_2035 (@2035Bio)
Bio-brain_2035 retweeted
still thinking about how La Rochefoucauld wrote (in 1665!) that we underestimate our abilities not because we are humble, but because we don't want the burden of actualizing our potential. Better to think "that's beyond me" instead of "I betrayed my gifts." Ouch
1
19
1
189
4,631
Bio-brain_2035 retweeted
So, let me flag a few things, traitor. 1. "European security architecture" is a phrase the Kremlin uses. We already have one: it's called NATO. 2. You conflate (as you always do) the victim of this war with the aggressor. The aggressor is Russia. 3. "Root causes" is Russian for "do it our way" and you know it. 4. Nothing a word about Russian withdrawal, the occupied territories, POWs or deported children. Weird. 5. Lavrov wrote this for you. 6. Fuck Putin, fuck Russia, and fuck you.
President Trump today advanced an important discussion with several European leaders about the need for a broader European security architecture that can help establish the conditions for lasting peace. Building on his leadership and the substantive work undertaken this week in Brussels with Ukraine, NATO, and our European partners, @SEPeaceMissions and I wanted to share some of the objectives guiding our ongoing discussions. For more than 30 years, Europe and Russia have struggled to establish a sustainable security framework. Decades of mistrust, competing security concerns, and the devastating consequences of this war make this an extraordinarily difficult challenge, but one that is essential to lasting peace. Our objective is to develop practical arrangements that address the security concerns of all sides, reduce the risk of future conflict, and create a more stable and predictable security environment. We are exploring five principal goals: permanent security consultations, reliable crisis communications, greater military transparency, reciprocal measures to reduce escalation risks, and an enduring framework for long-term European security and stability. Any arrangements must fully respect the sovereignty, territorial integrity, and independent decision-making of every nation. Each country will retain authority over its own security and alliances, and no country would have a veto over another’s sovereign choices. NATO will remain central to European collective defense, and this initiative would build upon existing institutions and commitments. We will continue consultations through the Shell Bay format with Ukraine, NATO, the EU, and our European partners, expanding engagement to ensure that all relevant perspectives and ideas are considered. We will also engage Russia as part of the peace negotiations. Next week in Abu Dhabi, the United States will convene the first trilateral peace discussions with Ukraine and Russia since February. All parties remain intensely engaged in preparing for substantive and productive negotiations. We will consult closely with our European partners on the sidelines and, if progress is made, aim to move toward a broader multilateral format with their direct participation. These ideas continue to evolve, and we welcome thoughtful input. Creating the right structure will be critical to ending this war and transitioning from conflict toward conditions that make possible a durable peace. This is difficult, detailed work. There are no easy solutions. But the opportunity to help end this devastating war and build a foundation for a more peaceful, secure, and prosperous Europe for generations to come makes it a challenge well worth undertaking. We will see how these discussions develop and continue working intensively with all parties toward President Trump’s objective of a comprehensive and lasting peace.
574
7,483
286
26,179
467,309
Robert de Niro
230
3,378
150
21,180
257,048
Bio-brain_2035 retweeted
L'aereo con mezzo establishment serbo tenta di fuggire a Mosca ma il pilota riceve l'ordine di tornare indietro quando era già sulla Lituania: a bordo fra gli altri c'erano il ministro della Difesa, Vulin, il segretario del partito popolare serbo e il direttore di Serbiagaz.
56
788
38
2,700
44,447
Bio-brain_2035 retweeted
Replying to @welt
Apropos schieflaufen: Wenn du erfährst, dass du die Reifeprüfung leider nicht geschafft hast ... und wohl auch nie schaffen wirst. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ (Symbolbild)
1
3
53
Bio-brain_2035 retweeted
Elon Musk deleted this video from X. It shows Republicans telling the truth about Trump before they teamed up with him. In the end, they sold out the whole world for money.
449
8,600
379
14,157
189,083
He Warned Us in 2009. The Experiment Never Stopped. By Dan | Restore Britain In 2009, Christopher Hitchens sat in a quiet meeting room, beside a fireplace and in front of a crowd, and told them exactly what was coming. Hitchens was a lifelong man of the left and one of the sharpest minds of his generation, and no one could ever call him a Little Englander. "Resist it while you still can," he said, "before the right to complain is taken away from you, which will be the next thing. You will be told you can't complain because you're Islamophobic." He warned that the word was being slipped into the culture "as if it was an accusation of race hatred, or bigotry, whereas it's only the objection to the preachings of a very extreme and absolutist religion." Then he gave the line that should hang over the door of every council chamber in the land: "The barbarians never take a city till someone holds the gates open for them." He said it would be our own preachers and our own "multicultural authorities" who held them open. Seventeen years on, look around you. He didn't just predict it. He described it. A country run as an experiment Somewhere along the way, Britain stopped being a nation and became a laboratory. Ordinary people became the test subjects, and nobody asked our permission. We saw it most clearly during COVID: rules made overnight, neighbours encouraged to report neighbours, questions treated as crimes, and a political class that partied while families said goodbye to dying parents through care-home windows. We were told to trust the experts and stop asking awkward questions. But that experiment didn't end when the masks came off. It simply moved into every other part of our lives. In the classroom It moved into the schools, where the most basic fact of human life has become something you're not supposed to say out loud. Children have been taught that whether you're a boy or a girl is a matter of feeling rather than biology. Girls have been told to share toilets and changing rooms with boys and keep quiet if they feel uncomfortable. And parents who simply noticed, who asked what their children were being taught, were treated as the problem. Some were labelled bigots for stating what every generation before them took for granted. It took the Cass Review in 2024 to stop puberty blockers being handed out to children on the NHS, after years of anyone who questioned it being called hateful. It took a Supreme Court ruling in 2025 to confirm that, in law, a woman means a biological woman. Those ought to be the easiest questions in the world. Instead, they had to be fought for through the courts. Hitchens warned that the right to complain would be the next thing to go. In our schools, it nearly went first. On the lampposts The experiment moved into the town halls too. When ordinary people across England put up the St George's Cross and the Union Jack on lampposts and roundabouts, many councils rushed to tear them down, calling them divisive, unauthorised, even intimidating. The same councils had happily flown other flags from their own buildings for causes they approved of. So the flag of this nation is a problem, and almost any other banner is "culture" or "inclusion". In what other country on earth would its own flag be treated as a threat on its own streets? In the hotels It moved into the hotels. Across the country, hotels have been block-booked to house asylum seekers, the large majority of them young, single men, many from countries that have collapsed into war, dictatorship or chaos. The cost to the taxpayer has run into billions of pounds. At the same time, veterans who served this country sleep rough or wait years for help, and young British couples who work full time can't find a flat they can afford, never mind buy a home. A generation is told to be patient, while hotel rooms are paid for, three meals a day, for people who arrived illegally on a dinghy. This isn't compassion. It's a government that has lost the ability to put its own people first. In the courts And it moved into the courts. More and more people feel there's one law for them and a softer, more "sensitive" one for others. We saw how grooming gangs were allowed to operate for years because officials were frightened of being called racist. In Rotherham alone, an independent inquiry found around 1,400 children were exploited between 1997 and 2013. Baroness Casey's audit in 2025 found the same fear and the same looking away. Meanwhile, Tommy Robinson spent years being called a liar for raising the alarm about grooming gangs, until the inquiries proved the scandal was real. And today, Danny Tommo sits in HMP Winchester, held since September. He's charged with criminal damage to a dinghy in the Channel and denies it, yet he won't face trial until March 2027. As Rupert Lowe put it: "It remains absolutely astonishing that Danny Tommo is in prison BEFORE his trial, for MONTHS. I won't forget it, and nor should you." English law should mean one law, the same for everyone. No exceptions for "community sensitivity". No quiet pressure from religious tribunals working alongside it. One country, one law. The word that ends arguments Through all of it, there's one weapon used again and again to shut the conversation down, and it's exactly the one Hitchens named. In 2025 the government set up a working group to write an official definition of "anti-Muslim hatred". Free speech campaigners warned it could be used to chill legitimate criticism of a religion and its practices. Let's be clear. Hating people for who they are is wrong. But criticising an idea, a doctrine or a practice is not hatred. It's free speech, the very thing this country gave to the world. When a government starts drawing lines around which beliefs may be questioned, you're no longer living in a free country. You're living in a managed one. The high street we don't recognise You can see the change with your own eyes. Walk down almost any high street and you'll find rows of barbershops, vape shops and mini-marts, many of them cash businesses. Trading Standards and the National Crime Agency have repeatedly linked some of them to money laundering, illegal workers and illicit goods. Most people working there are just working, but nobody in power seems interested in finding out which ones aren't. Britain now has one of the highest rates of cocaine use in Europe, fed by organised international gangs, while our border has never looked weaker. Over 200,000 people have arrived on small boats since 2018. The little things that aren't little Hitchens finished with two small examples. A cricket team, the Middlesex Crusaders, changed its name. Stories about little pigs were reportedly dropped in some schools for fear of offence. They sound trivial. They aren't. That's how surrender happens: not in one great defeat, but in a thousand small retreats, each one too minor to fight over. A flag taken down here. A word banned there. A parent silenced. A child confused. A veteran forgotten. Until one day you look up and the country you grew up in has gone, and you can't even say so. Resist it while you can Hitchens ended with five words: "Resist it while you can." He's gone now, but his warning is more urgent than ever. Resisting doesn't mean hatred and it doesn't mean violence. It means refusing to be silent. It means flying your flag, protecting your children, speaking plainly about what you can see, and backing the people who'll put it right. Restore Britain is saying out loud what millions of us think: control the borders, deport foreign criminals, put British people first in housing, one law for everyone, and stop apologising for being British. The gates were held open. It's time to close them. He warned us in 2009. Don't let anyone tell you, seventeen years later, that you're not allowed to notice. Dan | Restore Britain I'm a member, not affiliated with Restore Britain, and I get no money from them.
1
30
3
80
7,199
111
478
94
5,500
725,301
Bio-brain_2035 retweeted
Pentagon tells Europeans to cool their rhetoric on Russia. Fuck Russia and fuck Hegseth. The US is not even funding the war anymore so they should sit this one out.
142
789
36
4,465
31,816
Bio-brain_2035 retweeted
Barack Obama decided to hit Pete Hegseth with the elbow from the top rope. Absolutely brutal takedown.
600
6,732
587
51,065
3,587,187
Bio-brain_2035 retweeted
Hoover Senior Fellow @NFergus rejects the reading that Europe's riots are migrants running amok, "the sack of Rome all over again." Ferguson argues that Europe's youth are angry about the wrong thing, and that the real grievance is a welfare system that moves resources from the young to the old. Watch GoodFellows on Hoover+: plus.hoover.org/plus/researc…
Georgetown University computer scientist Cal Newport joins Hoover Senior Fellows @NFergus, @LTGHRMcMaster, and @JohnHCochrane, as well as moderator @BillWhalenCA, on GoodFellows to lay out what Congress should be asking AI leaders. After that, the fellows unpack what's fueling the fiery riots across Western Europe and what compelled President Trump to threaten Ukraine with blocked access to Starlink. In the "Lightning Round," they discuss their Hoover colleague Robert E. Hall receiving a Nobel Prize, America's midterm elections, and whether they will be buying Elon Musk's "flying" roadster. Watch on Hoover+: hoover.org/plus/research/boo…
10
24
3
96
18,427
Two icons of freedom and free speech. Two survivors of Islamist terrorism. Two nightmares for the ayatollahs. Two heroes. @AlinejadMasih @SalmanRushdie
142
1,129
27
5,864
104,430
Bio-brain_2035 retweeted
“Let’s ally with Russia” is a sure vote-getter.
.@EconUS/@YouGovAmerica: In the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, who do you sympathize with more? Registered voters 🇺🇦 66% 🇷🇺 3% Dem 🇺🇦 82% 🇷🇺 1% GOP 🇺🇦 52% 🇷🇺 4% Ind 🇺🇦 64% 🇷🇺 4% Lib 🇺🇦 88% 🇷🇺 1% Mod 🇺🇦 65% 🇷🇺 2% Con 🇺🇦 52% 🇷🇺 6% MAGA 🇺🇦 50% 🇷🇺 5% Oct. 19-20, 2026
7
52
2
305
10,303
Bio-brain_2035 retweeted
Kommunisten sind zu blöd, zwischen Umsatz (eingenommene Mieten) und Ertrag (nur daraus kann Dividende bezahlt werden) zu unterscheiden. Damit fängt das Elend an.
37 Cent je eingenommenen Euro Miete werden bei Vonovia an Aktionäre ausgeschüttet. Diese Ausschüttung treibt die Mieten bei #Vonovia unnötig in die Höhe und es fehlt bei der Instandhaltung. Just saying kritischeaktionaere.de/vonov…
Readers added context they thought people might want to know
Erstens stimmt der Prozentsatz nicht (report.vonovia.com/2025/q4/de/ges…) und zweitens ist er nicht überraschend. Wenn die Mieten pro Jahr im Bereich von 5% der Investition in Wohnraum liegen, dann MUSS ein relevanter Teil der Miete ausgeschüttet werden, um die Investition für einen Anleger sinnvoll zu machen.
16
21
385
3,417
Bio-brain_2035 retweeted
🤮
Witkoff to Putin: “You talk so much about my president, President Trump, being a humanitarian -- you are a humanitarian also, sir, and I salute that.”
1,628
1,671
76
25,006
1,305,138
Das Problem sind nicht die Schulen, sondern die Einwanderungspolitik, die komplett gescheitert ist. In einem Bericht hatte der Schulinspektor Jean-Jacques Obin bereits 2004 auf die katastrophale Situation in den Schulen der Banlieus hingewiesen. Die islamischen Schüler lehnten Unterrichtsthemen ab, die sie als Gegensatz zu einer mittelalterlichen Scharia empfanden, darunter Naturwissenschaften und Geschichte, sie bestanden auf einer rigorosen Geschlechtertrennung und zeigten eine antisemitische Grundeinstellung. Diese Probleme lassen sich auch mit einer besseren Finanzierung der Schulen nicht beheben. #Frankreich, #Gewalt, #Islamismus, #Einwanderung faz.net/aktuell/politik/ausl…
56
619
40
2,214
26,995
Bio-brain_2035 retweeted
Things go from bad to worse. Trump 🇺🇸 seems to regret that 🇷🇺 didn’t conquer 🇺🇦 immediately, and blame the failure on some incompetent 🇷🇺 general. Who feeds him this strange stuff? Or does he just invent it because he wishes it was so?
Readers added context they thought people might want to know
Russian tanks did use highways to Kyiv in 2022 and took heavy losses. The main reason the 40-mile convoy failed was it lacked fuel and food. Ukraine blew bridges, flooded the Irpin, and ambushed columns. nbcpalmsprings.com/2025/08/15/fac… rusi.org/explore-our-re… npr.org/2022/03/01/108… mwi.westpoint.edu/urban-warfare-… euronews.com/my-europe/2025…
332
851
86
4,689
285,455
Bio-brain_2035 retweeted
Science magazine’s account is riddled with inaccurate and misleading reporting. Start with the verdict. The jury awarded David $500,000 for defamation, $3.2M for interference with contractual relationships in a category explicitly naming MIT et al., and $2.3M for interference with prospective professional relationships. It rejected Knouse’s claims of sexual harassment, hostile workplace and educational environments, and retaliation. These are findings in a court of law, not competing opinions to balance against the losing side’s disappointment. Of the $6M awarded, $5.5M concerned interference with David’s professional relationships. Science obscures the connection to MIT et al. and the administrators whose actions inflicted those losses. Causation was central to what David had to prove. In “but for” legalistic terminology, the losses would not have occurred without the conduct at issue. If David would have suffered the same losses anyway because of a culture survey, an investigation, or anything else independent of Knouse’s conduct, those losses could not be attributed to her interference or her words. Science never examines that implication. MIT et al.’s actions on based Knouse's behavior were how allegations became lost employment, a lost laboratory, and a lost career. Yet Science tells readers the verdict “has no direct impact on the conclusions of Whitehead’s probe.” That framing ignores the causal connection established by the interference and defamation findings and treats the institutional investigation as insulated from the verdict. Science also returns to allegations of a sexualized or “toxic” environment as something David merely denies. Knouse sued him over those allegations. The verdict form explicitly asks whether she proved a sexually hostile workplace or educational environment. The jury answered no to both. Recycling those allegations while giving the losing attorney space to attack the jury’s competence protects the institutional narrative from scrutiny. Allegations retain their authority. The verdict becomes an inconvenient opinion. MIT et al. exercised the power that destroyed David’s career. Science should scrutinize their actions with the same aggression it directed at him. Institutional prestige is not evidence, and “independent investigation” is not a magic phrase that makes the verdict disappear.
A Massachusetts jury has awarded biologist David Sabatini $6 million—plus interest—in damages in his defamation case against Kristin Knouse, a former colleague at the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research. The physician-scientist’s claims led one research institution to fire Sabatini and precipitated his resignations from Whitehead and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, where he was a tenured faculty member. Read more: scim.ag/4jxig3b
18
73
6
676
57,046
Bio-brain_2035 retweeted
Mal schauen, was über sie in den AfD-Leaks zu finden ist ...
8
14
2
233
9,657
Bio-brain_2035 retweeted
"Buy American" increasingly means "Pay us now so we can decide later if you can depend on us at all."
If we cannot be 100% certain that a technology will be available when we need it most, we cannot trust it at all. That’s how trust works. Either it’s absolute, or it doesn’t exist.
14
345
6
1,907
34,630