Jump to content


Senior Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Doogles31731's Achievements


Quark (2/13)



  1. The LD50 was an old yardstick used by Therapeutic Goods Agencies as a broad guidelines to the safety of medications. At one stage, it was compulsory in Australia for Drug Companies to present an LD50 with any new pharmaceuiticals. It represented the dose rate that would kill 50% of a batch of mice or rats. It has been discontinued for animal welfare reasons. It had nothing to do with bacterial counts. As far as the dropping of a beverage cap on a floor is concerned, if it occurs in an average household, just pick it up, wipe any dirt off with your finger, a tissue or handkerchief and shove it back on the bottle. Average household floors possibly have more soil or bitumen or cement dust contamination than benches, but the chances of the floor alone containing pathogenic organisms in sufficient quantity to cause any probems are remote. Soil bacteria are mostly saprophytes. If you were compelled to disinfect it, you could place it in a cup or glass of bleach solution at the recommended strength for a few minutes. If you did not wish to have any of the residual bleach contact your mouth, you would have to use sterilized forceps to hold the cap for a rinse under cold, but previously-boiled water. And no matter where you put it after that, it will contact other micro-organisms. So any such procedure would be a waste of time. The floors in hospital-type buildings are a different matter, and there is an article on the importance of considering floor disinfection in this article -- https://infectioncontrol.tips/2021/06/09/floor-hygiene-and-the-under-studied-risk-of-pathogen-dissemination/ . This article also discusses the unlikelihood of picking up pathogenic micro-organisms from floors.
  2. Does this suggest that we should repeat those experiments involving mixtures of H20, CO2, NH3 in flasks with bursts of electricity, but this time adding a range of metallic elements such as iron (catalase), selenium (glutathione peroxidase), manganese and zinc (superoxide dismutases?
  3. That reference you cited, Ken Fabian, is the one that I cited a few posts back. It was the NASA Report about Zwally et al's research in which NASA incorrectly claimed that it contradicted the IPCC 2013 Report. It had in fact confirmed Section 13..4.4.1 of the 2013 IPCC Report.
  4. My apologies. I thought TheVat was questioning the authenticity of the NASA statement that Zally et al's paper was contradicting the IPCC 2013 Report on the Antarctic. He was in fact questioning mistermack's statement that "Although the overall trend might still be downwards (sea ice in the Arctic), it's not in line with the doomsday forecasts that I've been reading for the last forty years." I believe TheVat was correct in implying that no scientific journal appeared to have made any predictions for an early disappearance of sea ice in the Arctic. Popular science stories may have been different, but they are difficult to check. While doing a scientific literature check, I did find a 2000 article in Science Progress that was titled Arctic sea ice and climate change—Will the ice disappear in this century? and predicted that “sea ice could disappear in the Arctic this century, at least in the summer.” -- https://www.jstor.org/stable/43424174. I'm sure they meant 'by the end of 2100'. This seems possible to my mind and it gives us plenty of time to adapt. I mentioned this because, technically, any article published in the year 2000 was still in the 20th century. The 20th century did not end until the END of the year 2000. The whole world celebrated the end of the 20th century at the start, instead of the end, of the year 2000.
  5. The Arctic situation appears to be quite different from that of the Antarctic. In response to TheVat's request, I took it upon myself to check the IPCC position on the Antarctic in 2013 wrt sea level rises -- ""Just to keep things up to forum standards, could we have a citation for those ice free predictions? Were they widely peer reviewed and agreed upon? Or were those modeling approaches being revised at that time and much debated?" In the 2013 IPCC report, Section (https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/WG1AR5_Chapter13_FINAL.pdf), the opening paragraph states “Because the ice loss from Antarctica due to surface melt and runoff is about 1% of the total mass gain from snowfall, most ice loss occurs through solid ice discharge into the ocean. In the 21st century, ablation is projected to remain small on the Antarctic ice sheet because low surface temperatures inhibit surface melting, except near the coast and on the Antarctic Peninsula, and meltwater and rain continue to freeze in the snowpack (Ligtenberg et al., 2013). Projections of Antarctic SMB changes over the 21st century thus indicate a negative contribution to sea level because of the projected widespread increase in snowfall associated with warming air temperatures (Krinner et al., 2007; Uotila et al., 2007; Bracegirdle et al., 2008). ... ” On closer scrutiny, the IPCC did not in fact claim that the Antarctic melt was contributing to a sea level rise. Zally et al’s 2015 paper really affirmed rather than contradicted what the IPCC had actually stated. This implies of course that the Antarctic as a whole is NOT contributing to sea level rises. At least that's my interpretation of the Report. I hope I haven't misinterpreted the above. The trip to the Antarctic, as mentioned in the OP, will no doubt contribute to our knowledge about peripheral ice adding to sea levels, but one would hope that they would mention in their report that the evidence suggests that this peripheral ice breakaway is offset by snowfalls inland.
  6. Just to ease TheVat’s concerns, the Wikipedia article on the subject cites a 2015 NASA report -- NASA (2015; https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/nasa-study-mass-gains-of-antarctic-ice-sheet-greater-than-losses) in NASA Study: Mass Gains of Antarctic Ice Sheet Greater than Losses An excerpt of the Introduction states “A new NASA study says that an increase in Antarctic snow accumulation that began 10,000 years ago is currently adding enough ice to the continent to outweigh the increased losses from its thinning glaciers. The research challenges the conclusions of other studies, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) 2013 report, which says that Antarctica is overall losing land ice.” The report goes on to say that that the original paper was published in the Journal of Glaciology, and it cites many comments made by the lead author Jay Zally.
  7. Once again Joigus, I found that to be a very interesting reference. I found this sentence in the Introduction -- "A remarkable example of change in chirality can be seen in the helical shell of the marine foraminifer Globigerina pachyderma, where in the Arctic and Antarctic oceans the mineralized CaCO3 shells grow in a right-handed (dextral, counterclockwise) direction; however, for unknown reasons, in temperate and tropical waters, left-handed (sinistral, clockwise) shells predominate4,5." This suggests that temperature can have an effect on chirality at the whole organism level. The paper itself was surprising in that the authors were able to reproduce chirality at will in calcium carbonate crystals by adding either dextro-rotatory or laevo-rotatory acidic amino acids to their solutions - aspartic acid and glutamic acid, I assume. They could not produce chirality with glycine, alanine and lysine additions to their solutions. I don't know whether members are familiar with the work of Louis Pasteur or not, but as far as I know he was the first to discover that some crystals were mirror images of one another. As a young chemist (He could have even been a post-grad), he was challenged to solve the mysteries of the chemistry of tartaric acid. Apparently nobody could get consistent chemical reactions with it. He had to go to the wineries to get tartaric acid crystals. In my younger days, every bottle of claret had a sediment of tartaric acid crystals in it. He spent hours using a microscope studying the crystals and was the first to observe that there was a mixture of mirror-imaged crystals. He grew larger specimens in solutions and observed that one type bent polarised light to the left (laevo-rotatory) and the other to the right (dextro-rotatory). He had discovered enantiomeres. It's interesting that only laevo-enantiomeres of amino acids are used in the building of proteins. The fact that he had to go to the wineries of course subsequently led to the discoveries that micro-organisms are in the air, that they can change the nature of fermentation reactions (vinegar or alcohol); and the standardisation of fermented food products of all kinds, and that micro-organisms could also multiply in the tissues of living organisms as causes of disease. Almost every time I see a reference to L- or R- enantiomeres, I tend to recall that story about Louis Pasteur, and how it serendipitously led to huge advances in the standardisation of fermentable food products and awareness of microbiological processes and diseases.
  8. Thanks Genady. Does this particular coral grow in only one locality on the planet?
  9. I liked Joigus' reference. Joigus, just to get my own thinking straight, does this chirality apply to dextro- and laevo- isomers of chemicals such as tartaric acid (Pasteur's discovery) and glucose? I'm interested in an answer to String-Junky's question, and also whether anyone has checked whether the spiral in corals is the same in the northern and southern hemispheres.
  10. Wow Peterkin! Where ever did you come across that video? It boggles my imagination to realise that anybody took that much time and effort into the reasons why Michaelangelo didn't like to paint wings on his angels. You can see that at one stage of his life, he did so reluctantly because he sometimes painted only one wing or else he superimposed a large bird with wings on his subjects to simulate wings. See, according to my hypothesis, he did not have the qualifications to practice angel-wing-painting, and he was scared of the authorities. So he managed to get away with half doing it, with masking it, and if he did do genuine angel-wing-painting, he hoped that the authorities would not discover it -- lol. I'll give you an 'A' for effort, but my hypothesis still stands that angels had to have wings to commute from Flat Earth to Heaven as messengers. You don't see rocket fuel gas appearing from their rear ends, do you? And if they did, the Climate Extinctionists would be protesting on the streets -- lol.
  11. Michaelangelo was a rebel and was known to have deliberately created imperfections in some of his paintings as a personal defiance of perfection. Hence he defied perfection by leaving wings off his angels. It is rumoured that he had manifested this same rebelliousness at wing-painting classes, so they flunked him in that subject and when he went into practice, he didn't have TGA approval to paint wings -- lol.
  12. Yeah, some attended classes conscientiously, but some were work dodgers. You were lucky to see the depictions of the conscientious ones -- lol.
  13. Jesus and Mary were not angels, and Matthew, Mark, Luke and John all have conflicting spins on those last days. All wrote their versions some decades after the event. They were no reports from eye-witnesses at the time. And some of the AD painters who depicted the angels were never trained to paint wings. They opted out of wing-painting classes at Art School. So I'm sticking to my hypothesis that angels had to have wings to commute between the flat Earth and Heaven -- lol. But I love your proof and reasoning that there is professional soccer in heaven. I'd tick your heart if I was fair and decent, but I don't have a heart for you to reciprocate upon. So I'm a bit narked -- lol
  14. I liked Joigus' contributions, and particularly his questioning about why the 'oldtimers' were moved to invent such things as angels. The records of the God actually speaking in a booming voice to mere mortals are rare. Moses' experience comes to mind. But theoretically, there had to be a messenger of some kind to deliver all the 'god-given' words of wisdom that humans listed on their scrolls as the 'word of God'. An intermediary between God and man was needed. And since there was clearly a flat Earth and a heaven where God resided, the messengers had to have a means of travel. Now the only means of travel into the sky in the days of those old-timers was the flight of birds. Hence angels had to have wings. That's my hypothesis, and I'm sticking to it -- lol. Don't bother ticking a like of this hypothesis, because I don't have a heart.
  15. I can make a case to show that ‘freedom’ in a democracy is “the right to have an equal say with everyone else about the rules, at Local, State (County?) or National levels, that govern your behaviour in your culture.” Obviously we can’t have a referendum on every minor issue, but we all get one vote to elect a representative who will have a say on our behalf on the framing of the laws and Acts that govern what we can or cannot do at every level of our lives. These bylaws and Acts of Parliament come into force if the majority of our reps vote for them, and by definition in a democracy, we accept the will of the majority whether we like it at individual level or not. Now every State (in the generic sense) has Health Acts which empower Health Departments to establish Regulations on all health matters. And there are penalties mentioned in these Acts if people flaunt the Regulations. We all know that a percentage of our kind tend to flaunt many Laws and Regulations, so we naturally have to have Law Enforcement Bodies. Prosecutions in such cases are justified to my mind. A corollary of ‘one person, one vote’ in democracies is that we also have ‘free speech’, so we can always resort to eloquence of argument if we believe some Laws can be changed or improved and we can always vote for different reps at the next election. On the matter of quarantine preventing the poor from working, Australia and a couple of other Nations provided a ‘Job Keeper’ allowance for people so affected. That seemed sensible to me and it worked very well here.
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.