Damour

Co-Creator for Games on the Block , Okko and other web 3.0 content.
Nostr address npub1y2uylktpzrmtqh0eavr6hqc0fyup4dvlrz6jjt97ewlqxcwxl6as4hgvd4

[Damour @Damour08]

@0_3_BTC Why only then ? Sounds to me like you are not convinced and looking for excuses

[Daniel Batten @DSBatten]

The most important thing happening in Bitcoin this week is not the ATH...

[BTChick @bt_chick]

Bitcoin fixes money. Fiat breaks it.

[The ₿itcoin⚡️Libertarian @TheBitcoin__]

Decades of banking, and she still chose #Bitcoin

[Farmer,Till, I die or get Disappeared @Farmer31548981]

Life Lessons...
Get Strong.

[The Vigilant Fox 🦊 @VigilantFox]

🚨Patrick Bet-David asks Tucker Carlson, “in what world” are we not allowed to ask about vaccines and autism?

“They’re forcing your kids to take this stuff.”

World-renowned cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough recently reported that “five studies now show” that “children who take no vaccines” are “healthier than the kids who take the vaccines.”

He says unvaccinated kids have lower rates of:

• Food allergies
• Peanut allergies
• Asthma
• Allergic dermatitis
• Need for tympanostomy tubes
• Attention deficit disorder
• Asperger’s disease
• Autism spectrum disorder
• Etc.

“Massive, excessive vaccination is likely harming our children today.”

[Simply Bitcoin @SimplyBitcoin]

LYN ALDEN: "If people don't have financial freedom, they don't really have any freedom." 👏

[BTC Isla 🌴⚡️ @BTCisla]

If you would like to help and be part of the BTC Isla journey:
https://t.co/QvRJeWZh1l

[Maya Parbhoe @MayaPar25]

For some reason all of our projects are offline.

What’s going on @steliosrammos @metamick14 @geyserfund

https://t.co/rBQxhqq7zm
https://t.co/o8faumALBI
https://t.co/LPN7qRKul3

[Damour @Damour08]

@Softy_1231 GL in the competition.

[Softy 🐷🌸 Emote Artist @Softy_1231]

🎁 Chibi for you! 🐷✨

🌷 To join:
Follow me
RT this tweet
Tag someone 🫶

You have time until April 17th ⏳
Thanks for being here! ˗ˏˋ ♡ ˎˊ˗
#artgiveaway #chibiart #vtuberartist #commissions

[Jimmy Corsetti @BrightInsight6]

Popular Mechanics published an article yesterday on GOBEKLI TEPE

They cite a Scientific Study which suggests Gobekli Tepe is the world’s OLDEST calendar 🤯

Many have suggested that this site is a time-capsule, which was purposefully buried 11,600yrs ago to warn Humanity of the next cataclysm

Whatever this site was is debatable. However, we’ll never know until we dig further.
Delaying a full excavation for “future generations”, with a 150 Year timeframe is the most unscientific, pseudo-archaeological decision imaginable

No true Archaeologist, Historian, Anthropologist, or enthusiast for ancient history alike could be content on living the rest of their lives not knowing what’s buried under that dirt, waiting to be discovered. This is insanity.

[Jimmy Corsetti @BrightInsight6]

Not one single Archaeologist on site at
GOBEKLI TEPE

90% remains buried. An estimated 128 T-Pillars await excavation

They say it will be another 150 YEARS before that happens 🤯 - This is entirely unacceptable

[River @River]

Our cold wallet migration is now complete.

https://t.co/mq640OyEyK

[Max DeMarco @itsmaxdemarco]

$13 trillion on war over the past two decades:
Funded by inflation, hidden taxes and silent theft.

This is how fiat money became a weapon.

In this episode with @LynAldenContact
- How money fuels endless wars
- Why the system was built to control you
- The path to opt out

(Link Below)

[Jimmy Corsetti @BrightInsight6]

Well, it’s all starting to make sense

Dr. Flint Dibble @FlintDibble is a Lecturer at Cardiff University

Cardiff has received USAID Funding

Cardiff is now laying off Hundreds of faculty

Flint Dibble has made a living off a Taxpayer funded Salary, while defaming I, and others as “Nazis, racists, and white supremacists”

Is Flint a shill? 🤔

[Daniel Batten @DSBatten]

An open letter to @slate

I just read your recent article on Bitcoin by Nitish Pahwa.

https://t.co/vSnv8dty52

TLDR: the article is hyperbolic, divisive, sensationalist, ignorant of the scientific consensus and laden with long-debunked myths about Bitcoin that are no longer used by your peers in the media.

Espousing such an article in 2025 reflects poorly on your efforts you make to ensure that you are not misleading your readers.

Below I outline the evidence for why such a synopsis is fully justified.

1. Sensationalist Tone Undermines Credibility
The article uses hyperbolic language (e.g., “cook the planet,” “really, really, really bad for the environment”) to evoke fear rather than engage with nuanced data. Such rhetoric dismisses peer-reviewed research demonstrating Bitcoin’s potential environmental benefits, including grid stabilization, methane mitigation, and renewable energy integration (Bruno et al., Lai et al., Rhodes et al.). By framing Bitcoin as an existential threat, the author overlooks documented cases where Bitcoin mining has accelerated decarbonization efforts, such as monetizing stranded renewable energy or replacing gas peaker plants.

For context, Bitcoin's emissions, which like eVs arise from the use of electricity, have been shown by the Digital Assets Research Institute not to have risen for the last four years (see chart below). This fact by itself should strip away any basis for the title and claims that Bitcoin somehow is going to make our future uninhabitable.

Secondly, Bitcoin is not a technology that exists in a vacuum.  Like eVs, it obviates more carbon-intensive technological predecessors. In the case of Bitcoin, it obviates the more emission intensive fiat banking system as a method of transacting, and the far more emission intensive gold (mining) industry as a store of value.

2. Reliance on Debunked or Outdated Sources
The article ignores 16 peer reviewed studies showing that Bitcoin has well established climate benefits and instead selectively uses two studies that have been widely debunked, the first of which was not even a full peer reviewed publication. Would the Slate endorse an article by an author that ignores the scientific consensus and instead focuses on two widely debunked outliers of low academic standard? If not, then why does the Slate selectively use this same technique when it comes to it's coverage on Bitcoin?

The two widely refuted articles in question are

1. Alex de Vries’ water and energy consumption estimates, which uses a “per transaction” metric for evaluating Bitcoin resource use. The metric is both flawed and rejected by academic research (Sai and Vranken, 2024; Cambridge Judge Business School, 2018). For instance:

Water Use Claims: De Vries’ assertion that a single Bitcoin transaction “fills a swimming pool” ignores the fact that Bitcoin’s energy consumption is unrelated to transaction volume. The network’s energy use secures the blockchain, regardless of transaction count, just as driving a car uses energy irrespective of how many songs you play on the radio, making “per transaction” comparisons as misleading as blaming car emissions on the act of playing the radio while driving.

Energy Mix: The article claims Bitcoin mining is “fossil fuel–powered,” but Bloomberg Intelligence and Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance now estimate Bitcoin’s sustainable energy use at 56.5% as of July 2024, up from 39% in 2020.

2. The Slate piece relies on a UN University Study that was heavily critiqued by Climate Scientist and Bitcoin mining expert Margot Paez for using and outdated data set (e.g., 2020–2021) as well as other methodological flaws

3. Conflation of Bitcoin with “Crypto”
The article conflates Bitcoin with altcoins, memecoins and NFTs. This betrays a lack of understanding of Bitcoin’s unique Proof of Work (PoW) mechanism, which provides critical grid services and environmental benefits absent in PoS systems such as Ethereum. For example:

Grid Flexibility: Bitcoin miners act as “controllable load resources,” absorbing excess renewable energy and reducing curtailment (Lai et al., Duke University). ERCOT’s former CEO confirmed Bitcoin mining helps stabilize Texas’ grid and lower electricity costs.

Methane Mitigation: Bitcoin mining converts vented methane from landfills and oil fields into CO₂ (84x less potent as a greenhouse gas), a practice endorsed by the White House OSTP (2022).

By lumping Bitcoin with speculative altcoins, the article overlooks its distinct role in climate solutions, which is documented at length here.

https://t.co/RsxUrFcDBO

4. Ignoring Evidence of Bitcoin’s Climate Benefits
The Slate piece dismisses Bitcoin’s environmental potential without engaging with peer-reviewed studies or real-world examples including Renewable Overbuild: Bitcoin mining incentivizes renewable infrastructure by monetizing stranded energy (e.g., hydro in Africa, wind in Texas). Meanwhile Gridless Compute has funded microgrids in rural Kenya, Malawi and Zambia. MARA is supplying 1.4% of Finland's district heating through using recycled heat energy

5. Politicization Over Solutions
The article frames Bitcoin as a partisan tool tied to figures like Trump and Musk, ignoring its bipartisan appeal and global humanitarian applications. For example, long before the Republican Party embraced Bitcoin, human rights leaders did. Evidence for this is found in an open letter about Bitcoin as a critical tool of financial equity and inclusion by a consortium of human rights activists to Congress in 2021.

Further, Bitcoin’s support spans the political spectrum: a survey of 3,538 holders found “very liberal” (21.9%) as the largest cohort, followed by moderates and conservatives.

This aligns with Bitcoin’s apolitical utility—decentralized money transcending ideological divides. For instance, Bitcoin empowers unbanked populations in Africa and women unable to access banking in Afghanistan due to their gender, benefiting communities regardless of politics. Even adversarial leaders like Vladimir Putin acknowledge Bitcoin’s inevitability, while the U.S. Treasury labels it “digital gold.”

By fixating on polarizing figures, the article overlooks Bitcoin’s role in fostering financial inclusion and energy access—priorities shared across ideologies.

6. Counterproductivity to Climate Goals
Articles like this, which rely on alarmism and outdated claims, harm the climate movement by discouraging innovation. Bitcoin mining is already:

Mitigating Methane: Partnering with landfill operators to convert waste gas into power.

Accelerating Renewables: Providing demand for solar/wind projects that would otherwise be unprofitable.

Reducing Reliance on Fossil Peaker Plants: Flexible mining loads replace inefficient gas plants

Dismissing these advancements undermines efforts to leverage Bitcoin as a tool for achieving net-zero targets.

Do better. This sort of article is a good example of why that trust in journalism is fading.

[Documenting ₿itcoin 📄 @DocumentingBTC]

Popular financial educator with 1.6 million followers on TikTok, Dean has changed his opinion about Bitcoin

[RŌNIN @ronin21btc]

You were born to be a slave

[River @River]

What they believe:
Study hard > get a job > buy a house > retire at 65

But the rules have changed:
- Degrees cost more and don't guarantee jobs
- Houses are unaffordable for most
- Retirement is uncertain
- Inflation is guaranteed

Politicians won't fix this

But Bitcoin might