Both the blame- One of the physicians who fueled the flames on this was apparently manipulating the data, check this out:Sunday Times (UK) article 8 Feb
The issue is the accuracy of the prediction of the hurricane path, not whether, when, or how the hurricanes form. And it's 16% less accurate as applied to the 2 day path estimation, which I believe is in the ~10% range on average. (Yes, I pay attention to this stuff being a resident of Southern Louisana for the past 5 years).
Don't kid yourself: a significant increase like this in the 2 day path estimate has REAL impact on REAL people: 2 days is essentially the absolute minimum required to evacuate an area with any substantial population. A 2 day projection for may already span several hundred miles in terms of landfall, making this a significant change. Also consider the sea-side impact of prediction: increased need to pre-emptively abandon oil rigs in the Gulf and other significant effects on ship transport
Seems like there's a majority opinion here. So instead of slashdotting the h*** out of the CO guy with the web-based xmas lights, let's take down http://uclaprimatefreedom.com/.
And while you're at it, offer some support to the blacklisted "vivisectors". Don't know about you, but a read-through of their web site (I believe in doing my own research) has got me really steamed.
This was mentioned in another post, but the fact that these hypocritcal criminals list their targets and don't have the guts to stand up and say their own names says it all.
Well, claiming that benefiting from a vitamin supplement as being inconsistent with animal testing is stretching it a little... vitamin supplements are (unfortunately) not held to nearly the standards that drugs are- but that's a different thread-
"I'm with the 'terrorists' on this one."
So you're swearing off all drugs, OTC and prescribed? No cosmetics? OK, do it and I'll respect your opinion. A possible alternative is to sign off and volunteer yourself for testing.
Unless you are willing to either, you're a hypocrite. Period. You can't both benefit from and decry a system at the same time, unless you're willing to take consistent action.
Consistent action in this case specifically means valuing the lives of others as you claim to value the animals.
I think a distinction between management and leadership is worthwhile considering.
I agree the programmer-manager duality is tough and there are few who can handle it. The programmer-leader can be tenable- the question then becomes whether the "ex"-programmer can recognize this and (as needed) bring in the 'management' as appropriate/needed.
Caveat: I am now, after many bounces between "mgmt" and "technical" position, in a high-level management position, and therefore by I expect these comments to be modded-down. Sigh. However, there are many who would swear to my continuing geek-status. yes, I still code. As often as possible. Just don't tell my boss.
Yes, alpha-emitting isotopes aren't an issue: unless you injest them. Skin is a sufficient shield, but I wouldn't suggest breathing deeply.
Beta emitters are worth knowing about- there are many isotopes that emit high-energy betas. Beta particles have reaonsable good mean free paths in air (usually in measurement of meters), and you really wouldn't want to injest them. Metal shielding is generally recommended.
Since beta is directly ionizing radition (as opposed to gamma), they have a much higher 'quality factor' (one of the more ironic terms I've ever had to use...)
Hands down, the most dangerous part of her whole visit is the possibility (probability?) of injestion. Whatever the meter says in air doesn't mean squat if you get even a microgram in your lungs. Seen a few too many health-physics versions of "Red Asphalt" to want to think much about that...
Her meter was roentgen- see posts above for roentgen vs. REM. For gamma/x, nearly the same, but not for beta and other forms. You'd need some other measurements to map the meter she had into mREM.
Roentgen is a measurement of ionization energy in air. rem is a measurement of human-risk/exposure.
for the high-energy forms of ionizing radiation (gamma/X), roentgen=rem, but for other forms (beta/neutrons, notably, alpha and sf would only be an issue if internalized), rem >> roentgen
Slashdot Mirror
Both the blame- One of the physicians who fueled the flames on this was apparently manipulating the data, check this out:Sunday Times (UK) article 8 Feb
Already computed as 42. The Cosmological Question, however, remains a mystery.
The issue is the accuracy of the prediction of the hurricane path, not whether, when, or how the hurricanes form. And it's 16% less accurate as applied to the 2 day path estimation, which I believe is in the ~10% range on average. (Yes, I pay attention to this stuff being a resident of Southern Louisana for the past 5 years). Don't kid yourself: a significant increase like this in the 2 day path estimate has REAL impact on REAL people: 2 days is essentially the absolute minimum required to evacuate an area with any substantial population. A 2 day projection for may already span several hundred miles in terms of landfall, making this a significant change. Also consider the sea-side impact of prediction: increased need to pre-emptively abandon oil rigs in the Gulf and other significant effects on ship transport
And while you're at it, offer some support to the blacklisted "vivisectors". Don't know about you, but a read-through of their web site (I believe in doing my own research) has got me really steamed. This was mentioned in another post, but the fact that these hypocritcal criminals list their targets and don't have the guts to stand up and say their own names says it all.
Well, claiming that benefiting from a vitamin supplement as being inconsistent with animal testing is stretching it a little... vitamin supplements are (unfortunately) not held to nearly the standards that drugs are- but that's a different thread-
"I'm with the 'terrorists' on this one." So you're swearing off all drugs, OTC and prescribed? No cosmetics? OK, do it and I'll respect your opinion. A possible alternative is to sign off and volunteer yourself for testing. Unless you are willing to either, you're a hypocrite. Period. You can't both benefit from and decry a system at the same time, unless you're willing to take consistent action. Consistent action in this case specifically means valuing the lives of others as you claim to value the animals.
I think a distinction between management and leadership is worthwhile considering. I agree the programmer-manager duality is tough and there are few who can handle it. The programmer-leader can be tenable- the question then becomes whether the "ex"-programmer can recognize this and (as needed) bring in the 'management' as appropriate/needed. Caveat: I am now, after many bounces between "mgmt" and "technical" position, in a high-level management position, and therefore by I expect these comments to be modded-down. Sigh. However, there are many who would swear to my continuing geek-status. yes, I still code. As often as possible. Just don't tell my boss.
Hands down, the most dangerous part of her whole visit is the possibility (probability?) of injestion. Whatever the meter says in air doesn't mean squat if you get even a microgram in your lungs. Seen a few too many health-physics versions of "Red Asphalt" to want to think much about that...
Her meter was roentgen- see posts above for roentgen vs. REM. For gamma/x, nearly the same, but not for beta and other forms. You'd need some other measurements to map the meter she had into mREM.
grammatical skills completely dwarfed by "dramatical" skills
Roentgen is a measurement of ionization energy in air. rem is a measurement of human-risk/exposure. for the high-energy forms of ionizing radiation (gamma/X), roentgen=rem, but for other forms (beta/neutrons, notably, alpha and sf would only be an issue if internalized), rem >> roentgen