The thing is that both GMO and vaccines are just tools and science doesn't say much besides that as tools they work. GMO can just as easily be used to design a deadly organism as a beneficial one and vaccines can be taken to the extreme where a vaccine for the common cold has a 10% chance of preventing a cold and 10% chance of killing the recipient. The problem is in trusting those who are using the tools and those who are double checking the use and the fact that people, especially in committee (corporations, government), can be dishonest or just willfully blind when there are large rewards or even ideology on the line.
That would be 40 times the allowable for a new car. Cars a few years older are allowed higher NOx etc and commercial vehicles aren't usually tested. How much NOx does the average old semi-truck that's being used for 12-24 hours a day put out over a year? I know when I failed the smog test on a '97 Ford PU for NOx and it wasn't worth spending the money for new cats, I just bumped up the GVW and drove it until I found another truck I could afford. A '96 F150 which passed the smog test with way higher readings on NOx. When I had a '84 Nissan diesel PU, all they tested for was opacity.
The energy released is simple math, how the energy reacts with the Earth is an educated guess and there are a lot of variables Too lazy to check as it's bedtime here, but if I remember correctly, oxygen levels were much higher in the age of dinosaurs, which would make a firestorm more likely. Also IIRC, the dinosaurs were on the way out at the time and the asteroid finished them off. What is more likely is a small rock hitting. A 500m rock hitting in the middle of Europe would cause a lot of damage and likely screw up the worlds economy. Lots of similar scenarios. And a small rock is much more likely to hit and it is more likely we could do something about it. And of course while looking for small rocks, we'd likely spot a large one.
A 10 km rock hitting Earth tomorrow would not wipe out the human race. Assuming iron meteorite hitting at a 90 degree angle at 17 km a second in deep ocean is 1.45 x 108 MegaTons TNT. On the other side of the world the initial impact excepting the tsunami is hardly noticeable and even tsunami is only about 350 feet high. Things would be bad with the majority of the human race dead but we're pretty resilient. The odds of any 10 km object hitting over the next year is about 200 million to one (actually less as there aren't as many around as there used to be). Consider a big comet, 100 kms across made of ice, hitting at 90 degrees and 50 km/s, odds are one hasn't hit the Earth since initial formation. Energy is 1.63 x 1011 MegaTons TNT. You'd feel it on the other side of the world (in less then an hour), might even break windows. The shock wave (arriving about 12 hours later at 350 mph) will collapse most everything. There will be survivors, especially anyone in bomb shelters. Half an hour later the 1700 ft tsunami will arrive and wipe out everything remotely close to the coast. At this point there are still survivors and a chance that some will survive the following wild weather. It takes a pretty good sized asteroid/comet hitting just right to wipe out humanity. Numbers taken from the Earth impact calculator at http://impact.ese.ic.ac.uk/Imp...
There seems to be a lot of people on here who equate expanding into space with colonizing the new world and seem to think that in the near future we'll have a self-sustaining colony on Mars, the Moon and/or on the asteroids. Seems pretty nutty to me. Now the idea that we should explore and learn isn't a bad idea
When I speak about GMO, I speak only about the science and nothing else.
The science is pretty simple. GMO is a tool, nothing else. Like most tools it can be used for good, eg making a tomato that has more vitamins and flavour, or for making a tomato that ships better with no flavour or nutrition. It's impossible to generalize that a tool is always going to be used in the best manner or the worst manner. Each use has to be evaluated separately. Throw in the motivations of the for profit agribusinesses such as Monsato and the odds of some uses of GMO not being for the benefit of the average person goes way up.
A breathable atmosphere is a lifting gas on Venus and the temperature is good at the height where the Venus atmosphere is 1 bar. The big problem is the amount of corrosive acid in the atmosphere. I believe there are pretty good winds at that altitude as well.
Even though it does seem that the cat has much more free will then a human, even a cat can be conditioned to take a bunch of actions for an imaginary (actually remembered) reward, it's just harder then with a human or dog. The difference is that a human can be conditioned over years to take very complex series of actions as you show in your post. I do like how you reference Pavlov by using a bell/alarm to trigger your complex set of conditioned actions.
We're talking minimum wage workers, people without an internet connection or computer and probably no credit card, little well enough disposable income to buy stuff on ebay. Just like the poor often can't grocery shop at the cheap stores as they're often in the wrong location, they often can't shop online.
On the other hand, in an age of lowering wages (inflation means that $7.25hr has less buying power every year) and basics like food, transportation and shelter increasing in costs faster then inflation, who is going to have spare money for luxuries like McDonalds. Used to be 3 McDonalds where I live. Population has gone up (almost doubled) along with the cost of housing and now there is only one. Hasn't really been other restaurants opening up either. We do have a Walmart now though.
I guess you're implying that *you* have a brain and obviously you can explain this:
"Almost nobody has any real savings and so borrowing savings at a normal interest rate is impossible"
How do you borrow savings? I can't wait to hear this.
It's how banks used to work. People put their savings into the bank, the bank paid them interest on the savings. The bank lent out the savings at a higher interest rate and made money that way.
There were 2 lunar orbit missions, one mission that swung around the Moon due to an oxygen tank explosion changing the mission as well as 6 missions that landed on the Moon.
Dust storms on Mars? You're reading too much into The Martian [go.com].
Don't remember Mariner 9? It had to wait for months before the planet wide dust storm settled down enough to image anything besides the tops of some volcanoes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... More recently there were issues with the rovers solar panels getting covered with dust which were solved by dust devils clearing them. Martian dust is mostly iron oxide and very small so would likely play havoc with electronics as well as potentially blocking the Sun for months making solar energy hard to acquire. And the Martian atmosphere is too thin for aerobraking so it has to be rockets all the way down with only minimal help from parachutes and due to the higher gravity, the rockets need to be bigger to land any substantial mass on Mars. Things can only be made so light.
Probably a flat area to land will be a requirement, especially if supplies are launched first. Lava tubes are often on volcanoes, not the easiest thing to land on. Of course that raises the question of just how they're going to land. Rockets are about the only option, which means packing a lot of fuel.
How would a 100 mega-watt reactor work in space? You need to turn that heat (and a 100 mega-watts of heat is quite a bit of heat) into electricity, usually done with a fancy steam engine, and you're not going to have a handy river, ocean or even evaporation towers with you to cool down that steam for another cycle. I guess with big enough radiators you could do it but I hate to think how big the radiators would be as they would only work by radiating the heat away.
How would a multi-megawatt reactor function in space? Need coolant and generally a reactor boils water or such which is used to drive a turbine+generator and then the steam is cooled down to start the cycle over. The part I'm not sure about is the cooling down of the steam, especially the amount to generate multi-megawatts. Then there is the shielding etc that would be needed to have the reactor running on a space ship. Even on Mars it'll be a bitch to generate much power using fission for the same reasons.
Most of it was not digitized and I've heard at least one fisheries scientist, researching something as harmless as where Cod breed, that papers that he had referenced were no more. The anti-science and need to control goes deep with this government
Different type of library. These are science libraries, things like all the fisheries research that us taxpayers have paid for over the last 125 years. They claim that citizens aren't using the libraries, which is true as they are targeted at fellow scientists and shut them down including dumping and burning all the years of research. The idea is to do away with the fisheries, which bring in $100s of millions of dollars as well as food in favour of selling raw bitumen. If there are no records of the salmon, it can't be argued that the bitumen spill hurt the salmon. The local libraries are not a Federal responsibility.
While the left has a pretty bad record, they have managed to have the odd anti-authoritarian leader whereas the right has yet to produce one successful anti-authoritarian leader.
Slashdot Mirror
The thing is that both GMO and vaccines are just tools and science doesn't say much besides that as tools they work.
GMO can just as easily be used to design a deadly organism as a beneficial one and vaccines can be taken to the extreme where a vaccine for the common cold has a 10% chance of preventing a cold and 10% chance of killing the recipient.
The problem is in trusting those who are using the tools and those who are double checking the use and the fact that people, especially in committee (corporations, government), can be dishonest or just willfully blind when there are large rewards or even ideology on the line.
That would be 40 times the allowable for a new car. Cars a few years older are allowed higher NOx etc and commercial vehicles aren't usually tested. How much NOx does the average old semi-truck that's being used for 12-24 hours a day put out over a year?
I know when I failed the smog test on a '97 Ford PU for NOx and it wasn't worth spending the money for new cats, I just bumped up the GVW and drove it until I found another truck I could afford. A '96 F150 which passed the smog test with way higher readings on NOx.
When I had a '84 Nissan diesel PU, all they tested for was opacity.
The energy released is simple math, how the energy reacts with the Earth is an educated guess and there are a lot of variables
Too lazy to check as it's bedtime here, but if I remember correctly, oxygen levels were much higher in the age of dinosaurs, which would make a firestorm more likely. Also IIRC, the dinosaurs were on the way out at the time and the asteroid finished them off.
What is more likely is a small rock hitting. A 500m rock hitting in the middle of Europe would cause a lot of damage and likely screw up the worlds economy. Lots of similar scenarios. And a small rock is much more likely to hit and it is more likely we could do something about it. And of course while looking for small rocks, we'd likely spot a large one.
The dinosaurs made the same decision and look what happened to them.
Survived for a couple of hundred of million years?
A 10 km rock hitting Earth tomorrow would not wipe out the human race. Assuming iron meteorite hitting at a 90 degree angle at 17 km a second in deep ocean is 1.45 x 108 MegaTons TNT. On the other side of the world the initial impact excepting the tsunami is hardly noticeable and even tsunami is only about 350 feet high.
Things would be bad with the majority of the human race dead but we're pretty resilient. The odds of any 10 km object hitting over the next year is about 200 million to one (actually less as there aren't as many around as there used to be).
Consider a big comet, 100 kms across made of ice, hitting at 90 degrees and 50 km/s, odds are one hasn't hit the Earth since initial formation. Energy is 1.63 x 1011 MegaTons TNT. You'd feel it on the other side of the world (in less then an hour), might even break windows. The shock wave (arriving about 12 hours later at 350 mph) will collapse most everything. There will be survivors, especially anyone in bomb shelters. Half an hour later the 1700 ft tsunami will arrive and wipe out everything remotely close to the coast. At this point there are still survivors and a chance that some will survive the following wild weather.
It takes a pretty good sized asteroid/comet hitting just right to wipe out humanity.
Numbers taken from the Earth impact calculator at http://impact.ese.ic.ac.uk/Imp...
There seems to be a lot of people on here who equate expanding into space with colonizing the new world and seem to think that in the near future we'll have a self-sustaining colony on Mars, the Moon and/or on the asteroids.
Seems pretty nutty to me.
Now the idea that we should explore and learn isn't a bad idea
When I speak about GMO, I speak only about the science and nothing else.
The science is pretty simple. GMO is a tool, nothing else. Like most tools it can be used for good, eg making a tomato that has more vitamins and flavour, or for making a tomato that ships better with no flavour or nutrition.
It's impossible to generalize that a tool is always going to be used in the best manner or the worst manner. Each use has to be evaluated separately. Throw in the motivations of the for profit agribusinesses such as Monsato and the odds of some uses of GMO not being for the benefit of the average person goes way up.
The problem with taking your own life with a firearm is it is messy and can severely traumatize the people around it.
A breathable atmosphere is a lifting gas on Venus and the temperature is good at the height where the Venus atmosphere is 1 bar. The big problem is the amount of corrosive acid in the atmosphere. I believe there are pretty good winds at that altitude as well.
Those pesky living things depend on hydrogen, in the form of H2O, of which there is a severe lack of on Venus.
There's a severe lack of hydrogen on Venus, so no water and much too much oxygen if it is possible to remove the carbon.
Even though it does seem that the cat has much more free will then a human, even a cat can be conditioned to take a bunch of actions for an imaginary (actually remembered) reward, it's just harder then with a human or dog.
The difference is that a human can be conditioned over years to take very complex series of actions as you show in your post. I do like how you reference Pavlov by using a bell/alarm to trigger your complex set of conditioned actions.
We're talking minimum wage workers, people without an internet connection or computer and probably no credit card, little well enough disposable income to buy stuff on ebay.
Just like the poor often can't grocery shop at the cheap stores as they're often in the wrong location, they often can't shop online.
On the other hand, in an age of lowering wages (inflation means that $7.25hr has less buying power every year) and basics like food, transportation and shelter increasing in costs faster then inflation, who is going to have spare money for luxuries like McDonalds.
Used to be 3 McDonalds where I live. Population has gone up (almost doubled) along with the cost of housing and now there is only one. Hasn't really been other restaurants opening up either. We do have a Walmart now though.
I guess you're implying that *you* have a brain and obviously you can explain this:
"Almost nobody has any real savings and so borrowing savings at a normal interest rate is impossible"
How do you borrow savings? I can't wait to hear this.
It's how banks used to work. People put their savings into the bank, the bank paid them interest on the savings. The bank lent out the savings at a higher interest rate and made money that way.
There were 2 lunar orbit missions, one mission that swung around the Moon due to an oxygen tank explosion changing the mission as well as 6 missions that landed on the Moon.
Dust storms on Mars? You're reading too much into The Martian [go.com].
Don't remember Mariner 9? It had to wait for months before the planet wide dust storm settled down enough to image anything besides the tops of some volcanoes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... More recently there were issues with the rovers solar panels getting covered with dust which were solved by dust devils clearing them.
Martian dust is mostly iron oxide and very small so would likely play havoc with electronics as well as potentially blocking the Sun for months making solar energy hard to acquire.
And the Martian atmosphere is too thin for aerobraking so it has to be rockets all the way down with only minimal help from parachutes and due to the higher gravity, the rockets need to be bigger to land any substantial mass on Mars. Things can only be made so light.
Still safer then living in Chicago.
Probably a flat area to land will be a requirement, especially if supplies are launched first. Lava tubes are often on volcanoes, not the easiest thing to land on.
Of course that raises the question of just how they're going to land. Rockets are about the only option, which means packing a lot of fuel.
How would a 100 mega-watt reactor work in space? You need to turn that heat (and a 100 mega-watts of heat is quite a bit of heat) into electricity, usually done with a fancy steam engine, and you're not going to have a handy river, ocean or even evaporation towers with you to cool down that steam for another cycle. I guess with big enough radiators you could do it but I hate to think how big the radiators would be as they would only work by radiating the heat away.
How would a multi-megawatt reactor function in space? Need coolant and generally a reactor boils water or such which is used to drive a turbine+generator and then the steam is cooled down to start the cycle over. The part I'm not sure about is the cooling down of the steam, especially the amount to generate multi-megawatts. Then there is the shielding etc that would be needed to have the reactor running on a space ship.
Even on Mars it'll be a bitch to generate much power using fission for the same reasons.
Most of it was not digitized and I've heard at least one fisheries scientist, researching something as harmless as where Cod breed, that papers that he had referenced were no more.
The anti-science and need to control goes deep with this government
Different type of library. These are science libraries, things like all the fisheries research that us taxpayers have paid for over the last 125 years. They claim that citizens aren't using the libraries, which is true as they are targeted at fellow scientists and shut them down including dumping and burning all the years of research. The idea is to do away with the fisheries, which bring in $100s of millions of dollars as well as food in favour of selling raw bitumen. If there are no records of the salmon, it can't be argued that the bitumen spill hurt the salmon.
The local libraries are not a Federal responsibility.
but I didn't realize then that every form of wildlife in Australia wants to kill you
Oh bullshit. Everyone knows that some of the sheep are harmless.
While the left has a pretty bad record, they have managed to have the odd anti-authoritarian leader whereas the right has yet to produce one successful anti-authoritarian leader.