Slashdot Mirror
China's Yangtze River Turns Red
redletterdave writes "The Yangtze River, the third longest river in the world traditionally known as the 'golden watercourse,' mysteriously blushed for the first time on Sept. 6. Residents in the surrounding area near the city of Chongqing, where the Yangtze connects to the Jialin River, literally stopped in their tracks when they noticed their once golden river had turned a shocking shade of red. Residents have carefully crept down to the riverbanks for the past few days to save some of the red, tomato juice-like river water in bottles. Early predictions from scientists say the red water was likely a result of pollution, but investigators are still investigating the unknown cause."
Soon Moh She will lead the workers out of their factories and part the Yellow Sea.
Obvious propaganda from the chinese communist party.
Sig? Heil
They've unleashed gods wrath on us with their patent wars....
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
Maybe my eyes need to be checked, but it looks brown to me.
Trying to figure out the scientific explanation behind this isn't nerdy enough?
Red river? BFD.
Cleveland's rivers fucking BURN.
I was looking at some of the photos linked in that article, and I noticed that some of them are pretty obviously photoshopped. I'm sure the river was red, but I'm not so sure it was such a dramatic shade of red. You can see where the editing was sloppy and bled over into the arm and thumb of the person holding the bottle, and the arm of the guy behind, as well as some sections that are probably the actual shade of red that the river turned.
No.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Blood from sacrifices at Foxconn factory?
Here is a picture that I remember from way back - this is a red river in the city of Zaporizhia in Ukraine, this city has (or had) a number of factories, smelters, motor factories, I think most of them were just dumping the waste right into Dnepr (the main river in Ukraine) and then all that water flows into the Black sea.
You can't handle the truth.
I'm from Cleveland. Call me when the Yangste is on fire.
I am officially gone from
Aluminium plants produce a huge quantity of "red mud" which is red from iron oxide. A spill could well color the whole river red.
See e.g. here where the mud spilled through a broken dam in Hungary: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/gallery/2010/10/05/GA2010100502818.html
There are chemicals that can cause it but the other option is all the fertilizer resulted in a red tide, a type of algae. For wildlife it's as bad or worse than a chemical spill. The blooms can come on suddenly and should fade once the food source gets used up.
When Android was in China's land ... let my cell phones go! .. let my cell phones go!
Just trolled so hard they could not stand
Go down, Samsung, way down in China's land,
tell ol' Jintao to let my cell phones go!
(Nah, it just doesn't quite have the same ring to it)
I am officially gone from
Only Glorious Red Rivers for Glorious Red Chinese Communist Republic! Soon all waters and newborn babies everywhere will shine triumphantly with Glorious Red Hue!
"Molest me not with this pocket calculator stuff."
- Deep Thought
I blame Obama. Who's with me?
Just let the Jews go. It only gets worse from here.
- Pharaoh
Some of the religious nuts will probably claim this is bibilical, but more likely, somebody dumped some industrial waste.
Something like that happened in San Jose, CA about twenty years ago. Someone dumped several big industrial plating baths into the sewers all at once. This killed most of the bacteria that digest waste in the sewerage treatment plant. So for about three days, raw sewerage was dumped into the San Francisco Bay. Big mess, especially since there isn't much water flow in the south end of San Francisco Bay to dilute that stuff. It could be both seen and smelled. EPA fined San Jose millions for that. San Jose found and fined the plating company.
Had the same issue in Norway a while ago: http://www.aftenposten.no/nyheter/iriks/Utslipp-fra-politiker-farget-sjoen-rod-6953762.html
It was an iron oxide spill, as OP mentioned.
Call me when it catches on fire. That's how you know an industrial revolution is complete.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
the next iPhone will be red!
And then they get "sync'd"?
Now imagine that with 14 million women and poor sanitation.
...that river was called golden for a reason -- it always carries suspended particles of clay, so the color of the river depends on the composition of clay around it.
Red clay is nothing unusual, so most likely the river eroded some part of a bank with a different clay composition. If this is the case, any sane geologist should be able to find the place along the river where color changes, take water samples, and determine the source.
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
Here's another one for Photoshop Disasters. Look at that psychedelic halo around that tree in the lower left!
Also, is it me, or is there something wrong with the general color balance of the picture?
The 'shop certainly makes it look more insane, but in the spots where you can see the original colors it's still discolored. It's more of a ruddy brown, but it's still reddish.
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
And those photos are a lot closer in color to the un-enhanced spots on the Daily Mail shots. No doubt it was orange, but not the bright pumpkin orange from the daily mail shots (not that the DM necessarily touched them up, they obviously belong to a Chinese outfit).
a bloom caused by excess nutrients, i.e. pollution, in the water ?
maybe a kind of algae ?
that would be my guess.
Absolute statements are never true
Based on a quick study of the poorly Photoshopped image (you can clearly see the mask lines, and the bits they forgot to alter) it looks like someone simply doubled the saturation on the water.
I've made an attempt to restore the image to something approaching reality.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
I have mod points, where is the option +1 Fucking gross comment.
When it rains a little all our rivers in europe look like this...
You've got to like the last sentence of the dailymail piece:
According to chapter 16, verse 4 of the Bible's book of Revelations, one of the signs that Armageddon is near will be an angel pouring a bowl into the rivers, turning them into blood.
There most likely is no god
Why are you trying to turn this into a religious argument? There most certainly is a god, and I've got a Wikipedia article that proves it.
It wouldn't be the first time dye turned a chinese river red
They said it's not the normal red-tide algae because that algae grows in salt water, but this is a freshwater river.
I see why the Baiji dolphins of that river went extinct. At least they didn't have to suffer through this red mess.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baiji
Different drainage basin... you're thinking of the Tsangpo or Huang.
You reminded me of the film The Sand Peebles, whose Spanish title was "El Yang-Tsé en llamas" ("The Yangtse on fire").
__
Men with no respect for life must never be allowed to control the ultimate instruments of death.
GW Bu
You've seen the movie. Don't make me go through all the stuff again.
Just ask the Pharaoh...Oops! My bad!
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Great, another dumb FSM heretic. You can run but you can't hide, She will punish you for your beliefs and you'll never see her coming!
Is there a reason Roman is getting trounced?
Probably his reputation. To some people mod points are a weapon to use on their "foes", I don't agree with roman_mir 99.9% of the time he opens his mouth about politics, but there is always a lot more to a person than their political opinions. Down modding his interesting and on-topic post above is just petty vindictiveness from someone he has offended in the past. Slashdot really isn't that much different to a village in the dark ages, some people get noticed more because of what they regularly talk about. If you're one of these people, (as roman is), and your opinions are unpopular with the wrong people, they will try and hound you out of "their" village. Meta-moderation is intended to smooth this out but it usually doesn't happen until after the post has gone cold.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
ya, except it isn't.
Theism is the belief in a god. The A, means no or not. I don't believe, I'm not making a statement for or against.
A philatelist is a stamp collector. I am an 'Aphilatelist'. Am I making any type of assertion of a negative?
Of course there is a difference, I can actually see stamps. Kinda helps with the credibility. That and no one is killing anyone else over invisible stamps.
... for the river.
Obviously someone blew up the local true blood factory.. time to get the garlic out.
...her "golden river" turns red every four weeks!
Computer simulation made easy -- LibGeoDecomp
Atheism is indeed the most daring of all dogmas . . . for it is the assertion of a universal negative. -- G. K. Chesterton
No, it is not an assertion of a universal negative. Atheism is the lack of belief, not the active practice of non-belief. They are not the same thing.
I don't believe in Aliens from another planet. But I don't discount the possibility of Aliens, either. Given proof, I would be willing to accept Aliens as real, but as long as there is no proof, I do not believe them to exist.
Red mud is dangerous because of two reasons: first, it contains sodium hydroxide which is a chemicale base and caustic so that the pH is somewhere betwee 10 and 13. However, I would suppose that the pH drops quickly in the river after a few kilometers and only fish at the location where the mud entered the river would be severely affected.
Second, it contains heavy metals but not in a concentration that would have an immediate toxic effect -- problem with that is that it will accumulate in organisms.
The biggest portion of material in red mud is iron oxide in a very fine suspension and this can color a river red even when the mud is diluted with lots of river water already. I would suspect that with the traditional yellow mud coloring of the Yangtse, the final color of the mixture would indeed be more orange-ish.
I seem to recall that the cuyahaga(sp?) river caught on fire 10+ times before they did much about it, around the early 70s. Pretty sick, really.
So many tons of toxic shit dumped into the rivers and great lakes...
Sent from my PDP-11
It appears you don't even understand your position. As an a-theist, it isn't that you don't believe in god, you believe there is no god, otherwise you would be an agnostic. Atheism takes a position, one which cannot be based on knowledge*, which renders it belief.
That and no one is killing anyone else over invisible stamps.
You flatter yourself based on mistaken belief.
League of Militant Atheists
Documentary on Militant Atheism in the Soviet Union
Militant Atheism in the USSR
Tortured for Christ in Atheist Romania - Richard Wurmbrand
* ~ 10^11 galaxies in the universe . . . no God anywhere? Really? You know this?
What you are describing is agnosticism :)
Atheism does indeed imply a strong belief in the non existence of a deity exactly as the opposite view of theism
It's just a definition, though, not that it matters that much in this conversation
He's got a habit of calling his opinions "facts" (eg. his opinion that the rise of capitalism spontaneously caused the cessation of child labour with no government involvement), which gets him modded down for pushing misleading flamebait IMHO (even though I'm guessing at the motive since I've been too lazy to mod in a long time). I don't see that as a sign of a broken moderation system.
Nope.
Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
You're another idiot in the long list of those who conflate two non-exclusive terms. Atheism vs antitheism.
Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities.
(second sentence of the article)
here is the companion article that also agrees with what I said (which is just what I have been teached at some point anyway, it could be 'wrong')
The last one was a pair of illegal dye factories. They got shut down and their equipment dismantled. Now all depends on whether this is an illegal operation or in the Party's good books.
Trying to become famous by taking photos. Visit my homepage please.
You are confusing me with your "nope" linking to a wikipedia which says exactly what I was saying
have been teached
That's because, apart from basic kindergarten grammar skills, you also lack reading comprehension:
Most inclusively, atheism is simply the absence of belief that any deities exist.
There. Now for antitheism:
Antitheism (sometimes anti-theism) is active opposition to theism.
Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
Appart from this, the article is quite clear:
specifically the position that there are no deities.
The term atheism originated from the Greek (atheos), meaning "without god(s)"
the burden of proof lies not on the atheist to disprove the existence of God, but on the theist to provide a rationale for theism
This is from your linked article which I clearly misunderstand because of my sub-kindergarten reading comprehension
Looking at the companion link I provided you you get this quite unambiguous precision, which I understand I am totally not comprehending either:
In some senses, agnosticism is a stance about the difference between belief and knowledge, rather than about any specific claim or belief. In the popular sense, an agnostic is someone who neither believes nor disbelieves in the existence of a deity or deities, whereas a theist and an atheist believe and disbelieve, respectively.In the strict sense
Anyway, it's not really important, it's just 'names' so to speak, and I was just trying to give a nice hint at my parent poster as to which term is better suited for what he was talking about (as far as I understood him) :)
Now, you bolded *exactly* just as you bolded *teached* (thank's again). Could you be nice and tell me what is gramatically wrong with it ? I honestly don't know but would apreciate being taught about it
Have a nice day...
English (always capitalized) is not my mother tongue either, but guess what, I don't see it as a viable excuse for my errors.
Every word is "just a word" and their meanings are important for unambiguous communication.
The relevant parts of the definiotion are "narrower" and "broader" as well as the phrase "most inclusively," and collectively they make your claim of being "exactly" what you've written earlier untrue. Absence of belief does not equal belief in absence. That's where antitheism fits.
Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
Hmm that wasn't an excuse for my errors, that was an excuse for asking humbly to be explained what was the grammatical error with "exactly". ;)
Thanks to your explanation in which you manage to throw some basic kindergarten level spelling errors (yeah I can tell a typo when I see one, I'm just kidding you and giving you a glance of how effective your harsh attitude can be) it is now effectively clear that one of us has very bad reading comprehension skills
Also, that wasn't a grammatical error, not only was it not an error, but you must not understand well what grammar actually is, but that's OK, English is not your first language either so that must explain everything
I agree with you by the way, absence of belief is not belief of absence
But guess what ? sometimes it takes several sentences to convey a message and explain something, in this case the definition of a term (atheism, agnosticism)
For some reason you are sticking to one of them, the one that is ambiguous by the way, then you make your interpretation of the term thanks to this and completely disregard the rest of the definition where the ambiguity is addressed and removed. (??)
The two linked articles make several specific clarifications which I just quoted for you where they specifically make the distinction of 'belief of no existence' vs 'doubt' (or maybe 'non belief of existence')
antitheism is a word I have never heard of, but I agree it is quite unambiguous when you read it, if it was more widespread, that would probably be the term I would use when referring to what I currently qualify as atheism
At least that would distract them from poaching endangered species to sell as snake oil instead.
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
... behold, I will smite all thy borders with frogs and the river shall bring forth frogs abundantly...
Hmm that wasn't an excuse for my errors, that was an excuse for asking humbly to be explained what was the grammatical error with "exactly".
Where exactly did I claim "exactly" was a grammatical error? How exactly my previous post enforces that idea, when it clarifies it is incorrect by being untrue? Pray tell.
Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
Hmm, you are right, this isn't what you said exactly, you just put together the two 'errors' and I assumed you put them in the same category to later make your point
I apologize for "putting words in your mouth", so to speak, but this is because I just didn't imagine that the 'exactly' error you were pointing at was (apart from being *your* error as a matter of fact) just some irrelevant pedantry
So indeed, since my post wasn't a complete copy-paste of the article that *you* referred to, then, it isn't 'exactly' what I was saying
But, the article does make the effort to clarify and make the distinction that I was making myself, so it was in this sense, exactly what I was saying
Did you even read the article ? did you read the parts I quoted for you ?
I really don't think you did, I (but I can be wrong of course and I am certainly don't mean to be rude or anything like that)
I imagine that you have somehow the preconceived 'feeling' of what the word atheism means, that you are certain this is what you think it is, and that when you looked it up just to correct me on wikipedia, you didn't read it past the first sentence
At least this is what it looks like, or, indeed, you would have terrible reading comprehension skills, but I don't think this is it
Now, care to read the whole article, or at least the first 3 or 4 sentences, or just read the parts I quoted for you and explain to me again how this is not exactly what I was saying at the beginning ?
Now, care to read the whole article
I've read it, several times. But since you insist on not reading or otherwise disregarding what I've written to you before (or you wouldn't make such idiotic claims), thus indirectly telling me to go fuck myself, here's a resounding "you too."
Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
Ok, well, no I didn't tell you to go fuck yourself, I don't even see where in my post you could extract this kind of meaning, but that must be using the same reading comprehension skills you applied before when reading (several times :D (this is such an piece of delight, I'm sure you must be reading it several times a day (seriously, WTF ?))) :D were you eating popcorn ? did you invite some friends ? :D) and you clearly don't understand what it says, or pretend not to, well... I don't know, I checked your posting history to see if you were a troll
Anyway, I was giving you a chance of not making a complete fool of yourself and you just blew it
So well, since you admit having read said article (several times
You clearly are always very harsh (though correct in most of the few examples I saw) so I guess yeah, you must be an overall unsuccessful troll and today was your lucky day, congratulations and have a nice day
The relevant parts of the definition are "narrower" and "broader" as well as the phrase "most inclusively,"
It's interesting that you've noticed the typo (now removed) but ignored the quoted words which appear in the first three sentences of the article in question. You had no reason to suppose I've not read them. And you dare call me a troll. Fuck you.
Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
It looks to me like you might be challenged by the word "militant". Maybe you shouldn't be throwing around "conflate" until you get that figured out.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
I see you've made a little mistake. You might also want to learn about the word "misnomer." Good luck!
Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
I'm amused that you would try to disprove documented historical fact with a hand waving article from a self-labeled "activist" in a psychology magazine. Sorry, but the body count is simply too large for that to work.
I assume we can both agree that "misnomer" isn't the way to formally address an unmarried female of a race of mythical short people? Salud!
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
What part of "Most inclusively, atheism is simply the absence of belief that any deities exist." Is still unclear?
If you think this is bad, that 1 major river in India was so polluted it actually lit on fire multiple times lol.
You're another idiot in the long list of those who conflate two non-exclusive terms. Atheism vs antitheism.
Well, to be fair, it looks like the antitheists started it.
Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
If you are fond of what roman_mir says and want more of it
Please don't insert words into my mouth, it belittles us both. I've verbally wrestled with roman and his socks about politics many times, and the posts you describe have a valid reason to be modded OT/troll. My point is that there is no valid reason to down mod the post in question, it's on topic and interesting. However given it's roman (and his reputation), the invalid down mod is almost certainly intended as a personal attack on him, not his post. I'm not sticking up for roman, I'm sticking up for the ideal that everyone (including roman) deserves a "fair go".
Unfortunately, with roman_mir, that statement is incorrect.
I reserve the word evil for very special people in history, other than that all men are afflicted with the same humanity, even Hitler loved his nieces and nephews. If you want a bit of insight into why he thinks the way he does, just ask him to describe where (and when) he grew up. He's actually unaware that he is doing exactly what he has spent his life trying to avoid - being a propaganda tool for the upper class.
I cannot help feeling a little sorry for someone who believes what feels good rather than what is true, for a start they must be in a constant state of confusion. I don't want roman to go away just because he's annoying, I want him to think about Pravda vs Fox, wake up to what's going on, and get angry at the people who are using him. I don't imagine it will happen any day soon, he's an old fart like me, telling him he's been "doing it wrong" all his life isn't going to work, he has to decide to direct that "passion" toward self-skepticisim, and figure it out himself. Being a "feels good" kind of decision maker that is very unlikely. I'm not a fan of lost causes so consequently I rarely reply to his posts these days, when I have mod points I know I can save a point by letting others knock him down to -1. This particular post caught my attention because I believe the moderation is vindictive rather than indicative, it grossly offended one of the very few principles I have, "the golden rule".
Anyway his sane post is now at +5 interesting and his insane ones are still in the toilet, maybe he will catch on with appropriate reward and punishment, who knows?
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
If it was just his I could agree with you, but take a closer look at the arm of the person behind him.
Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
I find myself wondering, what the hell does this have to do with the Yangtze turning red?
But that has nothing to do with his post. Just because you disagree with someone doesn't make all his statements incorrect.
It probably also depends on his blood type.
yes, I said it.
I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
Not nearly as amused as I! Next thing you know, you'll be telling me there was communism in USSR, that the USA is democratic, that free market is viable or that Caspian Sea isn't a lake! I ain't gonna fall for that! No siree, Bob!
Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
So do I, and I plaid guilty for this absurd deviation
No, it has everything to do with the post I replied to instead.
It was a post about the moderation system and how people get modded down when they use a paticular style and had nothing at all to do with whether I agree with an opinion or not.
I will bet you anything that roman_mir will not catch on. - Why do you think I put him in the "lost cause" basket?
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.