All right. I tweeted around an idea that the UN is kicking around for floating cities. So apparently there's an architect and there's some serious people who have figured out how to make these hexagonal floating little islands that you can connect together in lots of combinations to create a floating city. And apparently they know how to harden them so that they're safe from hurricanes and everything else. Now I'm not sure it's sailing because I believe that these are intended to be permanent locations. So they're not, I don't think they're intended to float around. I think they're intended to be anchored with some technology they have.

And this is yet again one of those situations where you see the Adams law of slow-moving disasters. When we have a lot of time to figure out how to get out of the way of disasters, we're really good at it. Really, really good at it. We have not yet solved this floating city challenge. But doesn't it feel to you like really solvable? Wouldn't you say that as problems go this probably is in the category of hard but very solvable if you had enough resources and attention? And climate change might be that attention. It could be that climate change is what makes floating cities work.

I understand that 50% of the population of the world is near the coast. They live near the coast. So there's a thought that they might need to relocate. Now whether or not they do, I think floating cities make sense for a lot of different reasons. Now here's the question I asked myself. How would you power a floating city? You know where this is going. You know how would you power a floating city? Would you power it with solar and batteries? No, we haven't figured out how to do that. Would you run a long electrical cable under the ocean? Possibly. I don't know. I'm no expert on that stuff. But maybe. Maybe you could, depends where it is. Yeah, generation four nuclear is the answer.

So these small floating cities would be essentially nuclear submarines. So we already know how to put a nuclear power plant on a floating small floating thing. It's called an aircraft carrier. It's called a submarine. So in all likelihood these floating cities also depend on generation four nuclear.

Now I tweeted around late last night, so it's in my Twitter feed. Why am I having a brain? Tim, who is at Timcast. Why am I having a, I know his name and I'm just blanking out here. Tim, Tim, Tim, Tim. Sorry I'm forgetting your name. I actually remember his Twitter. Tim Pool at Timcast. So his Twitter name is Timcast. And he did a long segment on the New York Times article about generation four. And it was fun to watch him move from apparently some older and outdated thoughts about nuclear, yeah thank you Tim Pool, some out-of-date thoughts about nuclear that he admits he had to the newer stuff. The newer information about generation four.

And I didn't realize this but apparently Tim had been in Greenpeace at one point. And he's an independent journalist so he doesn't identify, I believe he doesn't identify either right or left. But he's now up to speed on this and he's got a lot of credibility. I know he has a lot of credibility among the people watching here in part because he's not a member of a party. He's not a partisan. But he also was a member of Greenpeace who just said in the strongest possible terms that nuclear looks like the only solution for saving the world if climate change is what the experts say. And he mentioned that he talked to Patrick Moore I think.

So you're seeing now, correct me if I'm wrong, correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you seeing generation four nuclear just sort of become a thing now? It's entering, it has entered the zeitgeist and it looks like it's penetrated both sides. But for some reason the major news organizations, except for the New York Times who did that article, they're not really focusing on it. And I don't know why. For example, I don't know why Fox News isn't talking about generation four nuclear every day. I don't know how to explain that. I don't know why CNN, I guess I do understand why CNN isn't talking about it. It's because it would give credit to the administration.

So apparently the Congress, as Tim Pool was pointing out in his YouTube presentation there, he pointed out that Congress is actually, both sides like the new nuclear stuff. So both Democrats and Republicans by a solid majority are pro-nuclear. Did you know that? Did you know that Congress is pro-nuclear, both sides? Now when I say pro-nuclear, I'm talking about generation four, the new stuff, not the old stuff that's a little riskier.

So why are we hearing about this? Or let me put it in more stark terms. The biggest problem in the world according to the press that leans left is climate change. And it's been solved. That's not a story. That the biggest problem in the world is solved. Nothing. Not a headline. Nothing as far as I can tell. The left-leaning press wants the issue more than they want the solution. Of course they want the solution because they don't want the world to end. But they certainly would rather go into 2020 saying that the Trump administration isn't doing anything for climate change when in fact they solved it.

Now when I say they solved it, I mean they've put in motion. The government has passed some legislation recently. Department of Energy is doing some things where they're promoting the rapid development of this technology. So the government is actually doing stuff. They're making test beds for testing and they're taking fairly aggressive steps in that direction. And it is the solution to what half the country believes is the biggest problem we've ever had. Climate change completely solved, or at least it's on the path to completely solved. And it's just not a story.