Slashdot Mirror

Example 4: Dihydrogen Monoxide
OK, this one is stupid, but it shows how easy it is to misattribute symptoms for the cause.

Dihydrogen Monoxide can kill you.

Won't anyone please think about the children?

That stuff is dangerous and should be destroyed on sight: see here:- http://www.dhmo.org/

NO! Don't listen to parent poster, and whatever you do, don't drink Dihydrogen Monoxide!

That stuff is deadly!

"Completely safe"!?! You've got to be kidding. That stuff is dangerous.

Dihydrogen monoxide is one of the most dangerous substances known to science!

Then surely you're not talking about Dihydrogen Monoxide!

ANYTHING that tastes good, makes us feel good, makes us stronger, gives us a better memory or helps us concentrate or otherwise gives us any kind of advantage over someone not ingesting said drug is dangerous and must have hidden side effects. Some nutjobs might argue that a drug that might improve our memories dramatically and thus advance the productivity and technology of our civilization would be beneficical. However, any drug that does this is bound to be toxic, addictive, and otherwise damaging and even if it kills 1 person out of a million. Even if that one person who dies took thirty times the recommended dosage we must ban it because the only acceptable use of ingestible non-food substances should be to cure disease.

That being said, there is a horrible drug plaguing our streets known as 1,3,7-trimethylxanthine. It is lethal in doses as small as 3.2 grams. It is consumed compulsivley by a growing number of American addicts. It can cause psychomoter agitation, rambling flow of though and speech, tachycardia or cardiac arrhythmia. Large evil megacorps are trying to poison our childrens lives with them by getting them addicted to it early and it is even being distributed in schools by their dealers! Some people even say it helps them concentrate and lets them stay up longer but these benefits pale in comparison to the evils of this psychotropic drug. The Deaths piling up because of this drug should lead us to ban it immediately! We should also ban a substance often taken in conjunction with this awful drug known as DHMO.

They managed to convince me of their credibility, at least.

Did they?

To me they sound very much like these guys, except that they're taking themselves seriously.

-jcr

I don't care what it is. Have you read this? We gotta ban this stuff, and fast!

I've heard terrorists also use an evil substance called Dihydrogen Monoxide. More facts on this substance is available.
All is not lost however, I've heard about a promising new development, apparantly they can grow microbes that eat the vile stuff!

I fully expect it to be illegal to posses or discuss wet water any day now.

As well it should be. You'll just have to settle for the anhydrous variety.

"How many charge cycles before the nasty insides of those batteries end up inside a landfill"

The insides are lithium based rather than heavy metal based for a start and if you had bothered to follow the link and read the article before bothering to reply you would have known before bothering to reply that there is a one percent degradation per one thousand full cycle discharges. Battery electric cars have been capable of 300+ miles per charge for several years now. We are talking hundreds of thousands of miles, more probably millions of miles of life out of the battery.

"Lithium is considered a pollutant, as is sulfur"

Hydrogen is highly explosive and oxygen makes things burn very quickly, the combination of the two must be horribly dangerous, I wouldn't like to have any dihydrogen monoxide anywhere near me, would you... Do you have any idea what you're talking about?

Well, there's an inductive effect with the standard metal knob that interferes with the high-frequency responses in stage 1 amplification. Also, less expensive wooden knobs don't have correct fits to the post, causing (inaudible, microscopic) vibration effects that can introduce jitter.

I thought it was because the factory knob was contaminated with dihydrogen monoxide.

Crazy man. Your bird wasn't killed by Teflon, it was killed by Dihydrogen Monoxide. Clearly, that stuff should be banned!

Whoa, /.'s peanut gallery must be losing it's edge when it can mention DHMO without remembering to link to this site...

Well, maybe not a front page story, but there is a website on the dangers of this insidious, deadly chemical. http://www.dhmo.org/

Be careful! Dihydrogen Monoxide can be a dangerous thing! Spread the word.

... but they don't mention the terrible risks.

Bull! BULL I say! I know you're trying to pull a fast one...

H2O2 is clearly related to Dihydrogen Monoxide, which means it must be related.

It's even got the same symbols and stuff!

Hydrogen is toxic... we all saw what happened to the Hindinberg!!!! HYDROGEN bombs!

Here is the DiHydrogen Monoxide FAQ ... but I could not find one for DiHydrogen Dioxide which (as previousely noted) might be what they are calling "Super-oxygenated water" ...

Those aren't dangerous. Pah! The first one sounds like it's practically edible! You want to see a really dangerous substance?

Isn't that the same as Dihydrogen Monoxide?

Sigh, from the "you guys" comment, it's obvious that you didn't take the time to actually read my post. I could tell you that I've run McKitrick and McIntyre's algortithm, I could tell you that I have a hundred results with everything from red noise to sine waves as the input and that Mann's equation continually produces "hockey sticks" on all of them. I could publish code and graphs and raw data, but you would choose not to read them or pay attention, just as you failed to read my previous message.

I could tell you how I have reverse engineered the http://climateprediction.net/ source code to see how their model worked and found it woefully inadequate for even the simplest of models.

I could tell you all these things, but you wouldn't read them, just as you failed to read my previous post. For you, the conclusion is already there and messy facts must be ignored to support the conclusion. Like most Anthropogenic Global Warming advocates, you have made your cause a religion, rather than a Science. Mann is your gospel and no amount of proofs will change your mind.

Feel free to save the world from Dihydrogen Monoxide while you're at it.

• 1 in 6 carrot eaters are pirates.
• Nearly 100% of pirates have been exposed to the dangerous chemical DiHydrogen Monoxide at some point in their lives, and most still have traces of it in their urine.
• Almost 100% of all pirates were born after 1900 AD.
• 1 in 5 people who own a TV set are pirates.
• 1 in 5 people who have ridden in public transportation are pirates.
• 1 in 5 people who wear two shoes are pirates.

Yeah, this is news-worthy. An idiot can infect his PC if he lets untrusted code run on his computer. Wow, that's QUITE a story! This up next: Dihydrogen Monoxide kills! Stay tuned!

A better link is http://www.dhmo.org/

"- install ... those kits that limit the amount of water per toilet flush."

You mean, ... a brick?!? Don't bother purchasing some expensive kit. Walk outside, find some suitable heavy object, like a rock, and gently install it in the tank of the toilet. Or, if your allergic to sunlight, get an empty mountain dew bottle, fill it with dihydrogen monoxide, and gently install it in the tank of the toilet. If you need some DHMO, shoot me an email and I will sell you some for the low price of $19.95/ gallon plus shipping and handling.

The toilets reservoir is full when a float reaches a predetermined height and shuts off the flow of water into the reservoir. Next time you take a shit, take the lid off of the tank and see.

As for the brown lawns, either replace them with cacti and succulents (depending on location) or spray paint it green. A green lawn started off as status symbol, because they are incredibly expensive in time and other resources to maintain. Admittedly spray painting the lawn is not the most environmentally friendly thing to do, but it will be green and you will save water.

(that's very scary stuff, I've seen what goes into most cookies and crackers... most of the ingredients are also found in windex...)

That'd be dihydrogen monoxide (also found in most industrial waste) and color?

BTW. The sail emits carbon monoxide to get its speed boost. You know, the stuff the kills humans almost as fast as dihydrogen monoxide.

You really want to be behind that thing for a whole month?

You know, it's really sad that no one gets this parody anymore. Here's the link. Oh yes, DHMO is dangerous! /sarcasm

Anyways, for those who still don't get it, think about the chemical symbol for DHMO (Hint: it isn't DHMO!)

Learn ... and FEAR!

:D

You might want to look up dihydrogen monoxide before commenting next time

Obviously you stopped reading after about two sentences. My whole point was that the scientists noted a trend, the public over-reacted. Now we see the same thing, and you claim I didn't read the whole page. I read it. If the scientists "didn't believe in global cooling" why were there over 900 published papers on it during the 1970's? By that argument, scientists don't believe in global warming today...

Amazing. You claim much better climate models today. This is on the same topic where (on a separate thread) a global warming advocate is telling me I can't understand climate models, because no one understands them. If we understand the climate model so much better, explain how temperatures dropped in the 1950-1970 period while CO2 emissions were continuing linearly upward.

You claim "universal consensus" among scientists. Proof please? The article you will undoubtedly site hand-picked 900 articles out of 4800 climate articles published over three years. Among those, there was still disagreement. Amnong the full 4800 there is outright "fisticuff-style" debate.

Several climatologists who disagree with global warming have also been ostracised from the group. They have banded together to write articles that tell how the "Peer Review" system has become "Friend Review", and anyone that upsets the gravy train of funding is suddenly found out in the cold.

Go to John Daly's web site to see a good example of what happens when someone says, "Wait a minute, that's bad science." Learn how he was refused the right to even *be* reviewed. This from a guy who spent years proving that "The Rising Oceans", the doomsday of the late 1980's, was a fraud. How? Well, he did something that all these modern scientists seem to lack the ability to do. Field Research.

If you're worried about something, why not look into the frightening overuse of dihydrogen-monoxide and work towards banning that? dhmo.org It seems like that'd be right up your alley.

Amzing. Let me take these words out of my mouth that you've shoved in there. Ones like "foregone conclusion." My whole point is that the global warming crowd are the ones making foregone conclusions. Is your best defense trying to say, "you don't agree with me, so I'll accuse you of the same thing I'm doing."

No, I'm not an exoclimatologist by trade, but every process I listed is a part of climatology. You state right here that no climatologist understands climate while trying to argue that those same climatologists can predict the climate 100 years into the future. Yes, I have a solid idea that those effects exist. Why? Because a hundred years of empirical study proove they exist. Adiabatic heating and cooling can be demonstrated by driving ten minutes from where I am now and climbing Pike's Peak. Guess what, it's colder at the top then at the bottom. An air-mass moving up 7000 feet *must* shed temperature to do so. As the temperature drops, dew point is reached and water condenses out of the air. Water caries a large percentage of the specific heat of the atmosphere. Thus precipitation removes a large amount of energy from an airmass. Find me *ONE* climatologist who disagrees with that. ONE, I dare you.

I could continue and back up every single one of those items. But never mind. Here, look what your climatologists believed a mere three decades ago and consider what "listening to those experts" would have caused then. Global Cooling

I find it interesting that the country that has supplied more science to identify climate change, and to address climate change, is the one everyone seems to think is the "bad guy" in the scenario. I'll tell you what. Demonstrate to me that a bucket with 330ppm of CO2 will stop heat from radiating out vs a bucket with 212ppm CO2, and you might convince me of something. In fact, those experiments produce results that fall within the error margins of the measurement devices. Venus is sighted as a "runaway greenhouse", yet there's good evidence it radiates more energy than Earth. On the other hand, it receives more than twice the energy input from the sun. But you've already established that a million mile wide, barely contained, continuous, violently active, nuclear explosion has no effect on global temperatures.

And I'm the one with hobgoblins.

I'll tell you what, here's another cause to take up. www.dhmo.org Later, you can tell me to choke on that too.

I demand that children be taught the dangers of dihyrogen monoxide! Its effects can be catastrophic! Go here and read for yourself! Spread the word! Only you can help us break the barriers and help inform the populace of this terrible threat....

"Hydrogen is a Boondoggle. The energy density is so low, that we might as well use batteries if we're going to power vehicles with it." -StCredZero

Hydrogen is an integral component of dihydrogen monoxide

Do you mean DHMO? That shit is *NASTY*.....

Most of the stuff that makes the press is by "scientists" with dubious credentials http://www.consumerfreedom.com/news_detail.cfm/hea dline/1742 who sell their services to groups with an axe to grind http://www.pcrm.org/

With the right buzzwords, you can dupe most of the public into believing anything http://www.dhmo.org/

Are you not aware there are respected and citable sources of information on the Internet which are significantly better than a 9th grade essay?

If this is released into the environment, then we're dealing with another greenhouse gas (water vapor).

It is far worse than one would imagine. You can read more about the dangers here about the byproduct of hydrogen combustion. Truly sobering....were they to put these in automobiles, they would generate a key component of acid rain.

My largest concern is the waste product known as DHMO. Highly toxic and linked to cancer!

That's almost as scary as this hydrogen dioxide problem!

HO2??

Or do you mean dihydrogen monoxyde?

Government regulation is there to protect the industry from harm

No. Government regulation is there to protect the people from harm.

Suppose you buy a house from a construction firm. For an average person, it is impossible to know if that house will collapse on him a month from purchase. Even an architecht cannot know this without tearing open walls and other structures to see the hidden supports. Similarly, it is impossible to know if the food you just bought will give you food poisoning or not, or your hairdryer will electrocute you, or whatever. Add in the fact that bad houses, bad food, and bad hairdryers are cheaper to manufacture than good ones, and there is a problem.

This is why there's regulations for making houses, food and hairdryers. They exist to make sure that when you buy something, it is unlikely to kill you unless you do something very stupid (like leave the food on table overnight before eating, remove a supporting wall, or blow your hair while sitting in a bath), allowing some basic level of trust between consumers and industry. Obviously, this also helps the industry by making people more likely to buy something they aren't familiar with, but that is just a side effect.

However, this requires that the regulating body knows how to build a safe device. In the case of houses, food and haredryers it does; in the case of spaceships, it doesn't, as proven by all the crashed, exploded or otherwise failed spacecraft.

My fear is that, once government starts passing regulations on civilian space travel, they keep on piling more. Because space travel is still in its infancy, and government thus knows very little about space travel, those regulations are as likely to be inane and make trouble than not.

Of course regulations like "you may not launch a nuclear salt water rocket from downtown New York" would be good, but I'm pretty sure anyone who can design a space ship possesses enough intelligence to obey such common-sense rules anyway, and governments have a nasty habit of piling ever more regulations on things they know absolutely nothing about (like the city council that almost banned Dihydrogen Monoxide, also known as water :).

Er, go ahead with the flaming about the evil terrorists who will destroy the reactor or take over the worlds energy sources now.

I'm waiting to see the social activists out protesting with placards reading "Ban Hydrogen Now!"

(It's a key component of DHMO!)

It's not just the explosion hazard - it's used in atom bombs - but it can form many dangerous compounds. too.

Dihydrogen Monoxide is found to be a pervasive, corrosive chemical found in every facet of our culture. It plays a key part in nuclear power, gaseous dihydrogen monoxide has been seen to cause burns, the chemical industry makes extensive use of it and dumps it straight into the water supply. Corporations are ignoring the DHMO threat. Third world countries suffer widespread disease due to dihydrogen monoxide contamination.

I think it's high time that the WWF, Sierra Club and Earth Liberation Front tackle this issue and get DHMO banned. It would be in keeping with their record of sound science and reasonable policy.

Wow, killer helium that finishes you off if you inhale or digest it. Almost as bad as Dihydrogen Monoxide.

This important site will make this issue clear for you. If we would stop worrying about substances of proven minimal danger like caffeine, and deal with a vastly more dangerous substance, like dihydrogen monoxide, we'd all be healthier.

True, here is a web site dedicated to raise awarness to the dangers of Dihydrogen Monoxide