CMR is the leading provider of funding and management support for small to medium-sized businesses and entrepreneurs 

Salt-loving microbes kept for months in a lab version of the Martian underground did more than hang on. They grew, according to a study from University of Florida researchers published in the journal Applied and Environmental Microbiology, in what lead author Adam Robinson says adds to "the growing body of evidence suggesting that we should consider the possibility of life on Mars today."

The microbe is Haloferax volcanii, a salt-loving archaeon found in places like the Dead Sea and Utah's Great Salt Lake, and a standard stand-in for life that could survive on other planets. According to the Daily Mail, Robinson's team held it for 180 days in a solution seven times saltier than seawater, with almost no oxygen, a carbon dioxide atmosphere at a small fraction of Earth's pressure, and either nitrates or perchlorates, chemicals found on Mars that can stand in for oxygen. Cultures given either chemical fed and reproduced; cultures given neither showed no noticeable growth.

Each hazard has been tested alone before, and some studies have shown microbes can cling on for months under several at once. Robinson said "far fewer have been able to combine these conditions together and show that microorganisms can actively grow." A preprint on what appears to be the same experiment, posted on bioRxiv and summarized by Astrobiology.com, describes 160 days at no more than 24 millibars, a 99.9% CO2 atmosphere and 21 degrees Celsius. It reports growth in every low-pressure treatment, shown by rising optical density and by the microbes breaking down nitrate and perchlorate, and calls it the first demonstration of a halophilic archaeon growing under that combination.

The microbes also appear to have protected their water. They formed biofilms, clumps encased in a slimy protective layer, and lost very little water over the months-long run; the preprint puts water loss below 4%. Growth was far slower than in Earth-like conditions, but the colonies kept growing.

Robinson was careful about what it does not show.

 "I would not say this study suggests there is definitely life on Mars today," he said.

"However, this work adds to a growing body of evidence suggesting that the shallow subsurface of Mars may still retain environmental conditions conducive to active metabolism and extant life." 

The lab also did not perfectly recreate every danger Martian life would face, and surviving on Mars is hard because cold, salt, radiation and thin air all hit at once.

Robinson told the Daily Mail that if Mars once hosted life, some organisms may have evolved to tolerate increasingly hostile conditions as the planet changed.

 "If life from Earth can grow under hostile conditions it has never naturally encountered, what might potential life on Mars look like after billions of years of evolution under those conditions?" he asked.

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity,

The British state is openly preparing the public for multi-day blackouts while lining up the BBC to broadcast pre-scripted government messages once the lights, water, and internet fail.

A so called "Black Sky" contingency now sits on the books: roughly 100 BBC staff would man a hardened radio studio stocked with its own fuel, food, and water for at least three days, pumping out official instructions over FM if the grid collapses.

This arrives weeks after the government launched an official "Be Ready" campaign ordering every household to stockpile three days of bottled water (three liters per person per day for drinking alone), non-perishable food, cash, a torch, and a wind-up or battery FM radio.

What happens if the internet goes down? BlackSky - the UK's emergency backup plans https://t.co/FE5XUUsCbT

— BBC News (UK) (@BBCNews) November 7, 2026

Prime Minister Andy Burnham told the public that unexpected events "seem to becoming more common" and that people should keep "those supplies in the house to get you through those moments."

Defence Secretary Wes Streeting has gone further, stating that "we do live in a more dangerous and turbulent world" and warning that adversaries could be ready to attack by 2030, giving Britain "a little over 1,000 days to complete our mission: to be ready with our allies to fight and win."

?? Britain is preparing for a potential nationwide blackout that could leave millions without electricity, running water, mobile networks or access to basic services for 72 HOURS. Known as a "Black Sky" event, such a crisis could result from extreme weather, a major cyberattack or sabotage targeting the national electricity grid. The preparations follow the massive April 2025 blackout across Spain and Portugal, alongside growing concerns about Russian cyberattacks and sabotage against European infrastructure. Prime Minister Andy Burnham recently urged British households to keep emergency supplies, including THREE DAYS' WORTH of food, water and basic necessities, as part of the government's new "Be Ready" campaign. Meanwhile, around 100 BBC staff are reportedly designated to operate an emergency radio service, equipped with independent communications and enough supplies to function for at least three days. The government is also investing £70 MILLION in high-altitude aircraft designed to restore emergency mobile and internet connectivity. Authorities insist there is no specific threat to Britain's electricity grid, which has never experienced a complete nationwide outage in its 75-year history. But with tensions between Russia and NATO continuing to raise fears of attacks on critical infrastructure, Britain is preparing for the possibility that a future confrontation could leave the country without power for days. Source: BBC, Sky News / Writer: Mhedi

— Mario Nawfal (@MarioNawfal) November 7, 2026

The BBC's own reporting on the Black Sky plan confirms the studio would operate on secure, non-internet communications and broadcast "pre-arranged government messaging."

Those scripts already exist online and cover basics such as how much people should drink each day and how to dispose of toilet waste without flushing.

? NEW: The Government's "Black Sky" contingency plans for a national water or power blackout - Around 100 BBC staff would be deployed to run an emergency RM radio studio stocked with enough food, water and fuel to keep it running for 3 days - The BBC would broadcast pre-written Government scripts through the studio, including how to ration water, what to do if toilets stop working and which food to eat first (see scripts below) - Radio masts would switch to diesel generators to keep broadcasts going for up to 72 hours without electricity - BBC teams would use satellite phones to stay in contact, with agreed meeting points and backup arrangements if those phones stop working - They would also report from emergency centres across the UK using satellite-equipped BBC vehicles to help keep information flowing to the public - Emergency services would have alternative ways to communicate if mobile phone networks stopped working - The Government is putting £70m towards aircraft that could restore mobile phone and internet coverage across the UK for over a week

— Politics UK (@PolitlcsUK) November 7, 2026

Transmission towers isolated from the internet hold diesel tanks of between 5,000 and 40,000 liters to keep generators running for three days.

One BBC insider noted that planners originally looked at five to seven days of capacity before the National Energy System Operator indicated power might return in two to three days.

Cabinet Office officials insist "there has never been a complete outage in the grid's 75-year history," yet the machinery for a nationwide communications fallback is being detailed in public.

Lord Harris, chair of the National Preparedness Commission, has spelled out the cascading failures: a power cut is "likely to stop the water supply because unless you happen to be located neatly downstream of a reservoir, that requires electricity."

Sewage systems, he added, can solidify without flowing water, causing blockages and backups. These are the practical consequences the government now wants households to absorb themselves rather than rely on rapid state restoration.

The timing tracks with earlier signals. In July the government announced mass stockpile guidance and the largest home-defence wargames in decades (Operation Albiston Shadow in 2027), while updating the old War Book for the first time in years.

Army chief General Sir Roly Walker has already told troops that the public will be asked to make sacrifices and that political leaders will soon discuss the risks of war with citizens.

The pattern is consistent: condition the population for disruption, then keep the official narrative channel open when normal media infrastructure fails.

Spain and Portugal's April 2025 blackout supplies a recent European reference point. Millions lost power for days, traffic lights failed, trains stopped, and mobile networks collapsed across both countries and into southern France. Authorities did not rule out a cyberattack.

That event is now cited in UK discussions of grid vulnerability.

At the same time, climate-driven blackout proposals continue to surface in left-governed cities. In New York, a Manhattan assemblywoman advanced legislation for mandatory nightly blackouts from 11 p.m. to 5 a.m. under a "Dark Skies Protection Act," framed around energy conservation, bird migration, and reduced light pollution.

Critics noted the security implications in a high-crime environment and the WEF-adjacent logic of rationing energy while basic order frays.

The preferred messenger for any Black Sky emergency is the same State funded organization the government has already sought to amplify on social media platforms. Officials have pushed plans to force YouTube and other giants to boost BBC content in feeds and recommendations, ostensibly to combat "disinformation."

Parallel proposals would compel platforms to prioritize state-backed output.

The BBC has been extensively documented pushing regime narratives including extreme open-borders material to schoolchildren via Bitesize resources used by 1.7 million pupils weekly: games that scored points for open borders and amnesty while docking points for deportation or training locals first, alongside Net Zero advocacy. Sections were pulled after exposure, but the institutional tilt is documented.

When the internet and mobile networks fail, the fallback is an FM radio studio staffed by the same broadcaster that has treated mass migration, Net Zero, and institutional loyalty as settled consensus.

Pre-written government scripts would reach the public through that channel alone. Households are being told to prepare for 72 hours of disruption while the state ensures its preferred voice remains on air.

The gap between "alert not alarmed" messaging and the concrete hardware, stockpile orders, wargames, and war-readiness timelines is now narrow. People will draw their own conclusions about what the preparations are actually for.

Authored by Larry C. Johnson via Sonar21

Vladimir Putin does not give three hours of his time to people who have nothing to say. On Thursday, he gave three hours to Mohsen Rezaei, the secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council. Two days later, Israel's president handed the job of forming the next government to Gadi Eisenkot instead of Benjamin Netanyahu.

Washington spent the week arguing about the midterms. Moscow, Tehran and Jerusalem spent it rearranging the board.

What the Kremlin said, and what it didn’t

The Kremlin’s account of the meeting was a masterpiece of saying nothing. Putin received Rezaei on November 5. The two discussed “the current state of bilateral relations” under the Comprehensive Strategic Partnership Treaty, and “the situation in the Gulf region and the Middle East as a whole.” A message from Iran’s Supreme Leader was delivered. Its contents were not disclosed. That was it.

The Kremlin is never chatty, but the brevity is itself a message. When Moscow wants the world to know it has promised something, it says so. When it wants room to bargain with Washington, it publishes three sentences.

The photograph said more than the text. Sitting on the Russian side of the table were Yuri Ushakov, Putin’s senior foreign policy adviser, and Igor Kostyukov, the head of the GRU, Russia’s military intelligence service. You do not bring your top diplomat and your top military intelligence officer to a courtesy call. That is a working group for war and peace.

The Iranian side has been far more talkative. According to Kazem Jalali, Iran’s ambassador in Moscow, the meeting ran about three hours. Rezaei’s message from Mojtaba Khamenei covered the American and Israeli attacks on Iran, Tehran’s seven conditions for reopening the Strait of Hormuz, and nuclear cooperation. Jalali also described an agreement on gas. In the short term, Russian gas would be swapped through Azerbaijan. Over two to three years, a pipeline would be built with 110 billion cubic meters a year of capacity, starting at 55 billion.

Putin made no public promise of military help, and the 2025 treaty contains no mutual defense clause. But he did not need to say anything. Iran sent its top security official to walk Putin through its terms for ending the war, in person. Moscow brought its spy chief to hear them. That is how you prepare for a negotiation, not a photo op.

Bibi gets the pink slip, sort of

On Saturday, President Isaac Herzog asked Gadi Eisenkot to form Israel’s next government. It was not close. Sixty-seven members of the Knesset recommended Eisenkot, including the Arab-led parties. Only 46 recommended Netanyahu.

Now comes the hard part. Eisenkot’s bloc won 48 seats on October 27, and he has ruled out governing in coalition with the Arab-led parties that just helped him. That leaves him two roads. He can bring in the ultra-Orthodox parties, Shas and United Torah Judaism, to reach exactly 61. Or he can run a minority government that the Arab parties support from outside. He has 28 days, plus a possible 14-day extension. If he fails, Israel heads for another election, and Netanyahu stays on as caretaker.

Netanyahu, true to form, is not going quietly. He warned that a government “dependent on Islamists” would “dismantle the state of Israel from within.” He has also demanded an investigation into supposed foreign interference in the election. It is the political equivalent of declaring the referee biased after losing 67 to 46.

What changes if Bibi goes

Eisenkot is no dove. He is a former chief of staff of the Israel Defense Forces, and he lost a son and a nephew in the Gaza war. He still supports economic pressure on Iran and limited military action. But his approach differs from Netanyahu’s in three ways that matter.

• Iran. Netanyahu has spent this year campaigning for regime change in Tehran and lobbying Washington for more strikes. Eisenkot campaigned on “more diplomacy alongside any military steps” and told the Wall Street Journal he would back military action only against “direct and immediate threats to Israel.” Years ago, he called the US withdrawal from the 2015 nuclear deal a “strategic mistake.”
• Washington. Netanyahu tied Israel’s fortunes to the Republican Party and to Trump personally. Eisenkot calls the relationship “a partnership between peoples, built over generations” and promises to rebuild its bipartisan base. He also says he wants to work “closely and constructively” with the Trump administration. That is a man who wants Israel back on good terms with both parties, not one who wants to drag a lame-duck Congress into another war.
• Leverage. For eight months, the loudest voice urging Trump to “finish the job” in Iran has come from the Israeli prime minister’s office. Take that voice away, and the war party in Washington loses its most important foreign ally just as Republicans absorb a midterm verdict on the war.

Now put Moscow and Jerusalem side by side. Iran is laying out its terms to Putin, with Russia’s military intelligence chief in the room. Qatar and Pakistan are mediating to keep Washington and Tehran from going back to open war. And Israel is about to swap a prime minister who wanted the war widened for one who talks about diplomacy and alliance repair. For the first time since February, the people pushing for a settlement have more momentum than the people pushing for more bombs.

There is one dangerous window. Until Eisenkot forms a government, Netanyahu remains prime minister, and he has every incentive to create facts before he leaves. A caretaker with nothing to lose and a fondness for surprise strikes is not a comforting combination. If there is a moment of maximum risk in the next six weeks, it is now.

The odd man out

So here is the week in review. Iran sends its security chief to Moscow for three hours. Putin brings his spy chief and says almost nothing in public, which is how you keep your options open. Israel’s president hands Netanyahu’s job to a general who prefers diplomacy alongside force. American voters fire the Republican Congress over the war.

Everyone seems to have read the room except the man in the Oval Office. Donald Trump can treat these as separate stories, or he can see what the rest of the world already sees. The coalition for war is shrinking, the coalition for a deal is growing, and the window for a face-saving exit will not stay open forever. Three hours in the Kremlin and a 67-to-46 vote in Jerusalem are not the end of the war. But they may be the beginning of the end of the reasons to keep fighting it.

President Trump told "60 Minutes" that his deportation policy "might be too tough" and that he would "love to do something on immigration" with the Democrats about to take over Congress, in an interview taped Friday, his first since the midterms. An hour after the conversation, he replaced chief of staff Susie Wiles with Stephen Miller, the architect of that policy.

60 MINUTES REPORT: Ross Douthat interviews President Trump in his first sit-down interview since the 2026 midterm elections.

The wide-ranging conversation covered immigration and corruption, Iran and artificial intelligence, his potential successors and his own mortality. The... pic.twitter.com/rVNbgRlQhS

— 60 Minutes (@60Minutes) November 9, 2026

Asked by CBS correspondent Ross Douthat whether the crackdown hurt Republicans in the midterms, Trump answered: "I think it both helped and hurt. I think I got an A+ for closing up the border. I get very high marks for getting the bad ones out." "But I get hurt because we also took people that had good jobs that created one violation for breaking of the law. And that was that they came into the country illegally."

Douthat then asked: "So you think your deportation policy went too far?" "It was too tough," Trump said. "I think it might be too tough. Yeah."

He said the deal he has in mind with Democrats is "something that's actually doable": "some kind of legal status for the landscapers," and for people like a hotel maid or waitress who are suddenly "taken out of the country." "It's tough," he said. "It's a tough thing."

Trump said a group "on the sort of pretty far right" would like everybody removed, and when Douthat asked whether any of them work in his administration, he answered: "Well, there are a lot of those people." Others, he said, are "more modified on that": "get the killers out, get all the rough ones out, get the drug dealers out. But let the people that are here, and in some cases here for 10 and 15 years, work a deal for them."

Does he expect Democrats to deal? "I think so, yeah. People have already called me," Trump said, naming Texas Democrat James Talarico, whom he described as the state's new senator and said he saw on Fox News saying immigration was something he wanted to work on.

Douthat noted Trump had called him "Tallafrico" during the campaign and asked: "If it took six months of not insulting the Democrats to get a deal done, do you think you could do it?" "Very easily," Trump said.

In an interview airing Sunday on 60 Minutes, correspondent Ross Douthat asks President Trump: If it took six months of not insulting the Democrats to get an immigration deal done, do you think you could do it? pic.twitter.com/0npaHDQTdX

— 60 Minutes (@60Minutes) November 7, 2026

Asked whether he would fire anyone after the midterms, Trump said he would be "doing maybe a few changes." The first change came an hour after that conversation. Wiles was replaced by deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller, "the architect of the president's mass deportation policy," 60 Minutes said in its report, "a move that seems to conflict with the president's professed desire to work with Democrats on immigration." As we reported, Trump named Miller the new chief of staff on Friday.

Douthat also asked whether Democrats, who will gain subpoena power, might impeach him again. "I can't imagine it," Trump said.

Oh... 

Regardless of what people might think happened during the midterm elections (there's some real weird post-election numbers coming out of certain states right now), wokeness is not an effective selling point for the political left.  James Talarico had to renounce his insane woke statements from the Biden era to get any kind of traction in Texas.  Abdul El-Sayed had to begrudgingly claim that he no longer supports the Muslim Brotherhood.  Clearly, someone sent out a memo to turn down the volume on the Cultural Marxism.  

The reason is obvious - Get Woke, Go Broke.  And nowhere is this rule more apparent than the online media industry.  In the case of left-wing web media, the result has been a well deserved bloodbath.   

Ultra left-wing news outlet Salon launched in San Francisco in 1995 in the early days of the internet, proving yet again that nothing good has come out of the Bay Area for at least a century.  Their stated ideological mission was to provide an "unapologetically progressive" and liberal "counterweight" to mainstream, corporate media.  A hilarious notion given that the media was already brutally left-wing in the 1990s, but hey, Salon wanted to push that line even harder.   

From its inception, the publication intentionally rejected the traditional journalistic ideal of "objective neutrality," which the founders believed resulted in bland and market-tested commentary.  In other words, they wanted the news to also be entertainment, and they were willing to sacrifice things like facts and balance in order to make that happen.  

It shows.  Salon became infamous rather than famous for their grotesque headlines, which included stories like:

My Abortion Made Me Happy: The Story That Started The #shoutyourabortion Movement

White Guys Are Killing Us: Toxic, Cowardly Masculinity, Our Unhealable National Illness  

Let’s Hope The Boston Marathon Bomber Is A White American    

Human-On Dolphin Sex Is Not Really That Weird    

I’m A Pedophile, Not A Monster (a story Salon eventually erased) 

Salon was also well known for crafting fraudulent hatchet job articles against conservative politicians.  In 2022, the outlet finally corrected a year-old headline after falsely accusing Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis of signing a bill that forced Florida students and professors to register their political views with the state.  The article misrepresented an anonymous and voluntary state survey.  

The company was one of the pioneers of militant woke activism posing as "journalism."  However, this lack of integrity has finally caught up with them.  Salon announced this week that they are shutting down after 31 years in operation.  The announcement was posted to X, and then Salon promptly shut off replies.

Today, after 31 years, we are saddened to announce that Salon is ceasing publication. It has been an extraordinary privilege. https://t.co/a103i0aEKi https://t.co/GTFbVqAzvz

— Salon (@Salon) November 5, 2026

"It's difficult to find the right words for the end of something that has meant so much to so many people," a letter titled "Goodbye From Salon" reads. "Salon was never just a website. It was an idea about what journalism could be, born at a moment when the internet was still a largely unexplored frontier."

"...The business realities of independent digital journalism have changed profoundly over the years. After careful consideration, we have reached the difficult decision that our publishing model is no longer sustainable. We know this news will be deeply disappointing to many of you, and we share that sadness."

Many critics previously considered Salon a cockroach that would never die.  If the pro-pedo articles didn't kill them, what possibly could?  Theories abound on what finally did them in.  Some suggest that the defunding of USAID is the key to the downfall of numerous progressive operations, and that Salon is one of them.  The idea that the company was able to self-sustain for this long without government funding is hard to believe. 

There was also the decline of venture capital and ESG lending in the early 2020s, which crushed a number of left-wing media sites.  Proving that woke companies cannot survive on legitimate profits, they must have outside help to stay afloat.  It's possible Salon was one of the final holdouts from the ESG bonanza.

In any case, good riddance to bad rubbish.