StringJunky

+1 on that Baby Astronaut, I was going to mention your point myself...negative rep is open to abuse if given anonymously.

Biogerentology is the subject you are looking for I think. Here is a link to familiarise you with it and where to go from there. Hope this helps:

http://www.senescence.info/career.html

Actually, Firefox 3.5.3 has few dependencies, and runs right out of the package on Ubuntu 8.04 - so it should be as easy on Mint.

 

You can get the tar.bz2, unpack it somewhere in your home directory, then make a link to "firefox" on your desktop, allowing you to run ff3.5.3 at will. It will use your current prefs and update your plug-ins.

 

It's not the best way to go about it, but it works.

Got the instructions from the Mozilla website to install it in Linux then I created a link, like you said, which worked but is a bit ugly like you said. I later found out how to create a Launcher complete with the Firefox icon on the desktop so it works like any other app.

Thanks for that Jill and I.A. I'm now running 3.5.3. Now to find out if Firefox crashes when I thank you!

P.S. PROBLEM SOLVED!

Thanks for your responses, but I don't think I've been very clear.....If we put two pieces of wire of equal length, say 24inches, and diameter, say 0.012", one is brass and one is plain steel, both are brought under the same tension, would they both have the same flexibility despite being made of different metal materials or would one have more 'give' than the other? Ignoring the wound strings.

A question has been prompted in my mind, from another forum ( guitars) about the 'feel' (tension) of guitar strings: If two pieces of wire with the same diameter but made from different alloys (bronze and phosphor bronze) are brought to the same tension (pitch), would there be any difference (everything else being equal) in the amount of pressure required to move them laterally ie press them down on to the fret? I don't think there is because metals don't have longitudinal elasticity.....what's the fact?

I think I'm using 3.0.1.1. This is from the Mint Repository. If I wanted to use v3,5 I'd have to get it from somewhere else as a tar .bz file and deal with it myself, satisfying all dependencies etc, which I'm not savvy enough in Linux to do it...it's not simple like Windows .exe files.! I'd like to do this but there is a learning curve first before I can...or just wait 'til 3.5 is in the Repo'

I might post the problem in the Mint Forum.

I've thanked 2 people for their posts and both times firefox has locked up and crashed to the degree that I have to reinstall it when I hit the 'ok' button...anybody any ideas why this happens? I'm using Linux Mint 7. I daren't thank anybody now! My computer is completely stable 'til I do this. I've even downloaded a new copy of Mint with the same result.

 

Now, to more directly address your question, people who say "race" tend to imply skin color, and ignore the fact that there is tremendous genetic overlap, tremendous variance in backgrounds of people, and ignore how we are more often closer genetically with people of different skin colors than people with the same skin color as ourselves.

 

It's a meaningless term... at least in the context of biology, which is the underlying theme of each of the OPs claims. I hope that has clarified.

 

 

. [/indent]

Thanks iNOW for explaining yourself.

As our species moves forward in time the genetic differences between human subgroups becomes more blurred due to population mobility and interbreeding making it harder to distinguish these groups along genetic lines....these different groups were created by geographic isolation and interbreeding over very long periods of time.

I understand why people, particulary in some sciences, want to distance themselves from using this type of word because of its negative social undertones and potentially misinferred implications ie apparent superiority of one subgroup over another, which can be used to abuse another or for political purposes.

In short, I have no stomach for a debate into this subject and am happy if sectors of the scientific community wish to render this term or concept redundant!

No, it's not. Race is actually a rather meaningless and empty word.

What's wrong with this definition of 'race', iNOW?:

" A local geographic or global human population distinguished as a more or less distinct group by genetically transmitted physical characteristics."

How is it meaningless?

If one uses the word strictly related to a a person's genetic origins (NOT cultural) it is pertinent, meaningful AND can be subjected to the scientific method to define those categories ie races. Through genetic analysis we can unravel and understand the human genome and, hence, the various physiological characteristics members of a human sub group share, specific to their original geographic origins.

Clarification would be nice.

Remember not to touch or rub the leading with anything, because if you do the exposed shiny parts will produce the basic lead carbonate deposits again that started the stains (run off) in the first place.

Dr Syntax: Is this what you are looking for?

http://www.genomenewsnetwork.org/articles/02_01/Sizing_genomes.shtml

http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ultranet/BiologyPages/G/GenomeSizes.html

I found this which seems to support your thought:

" 7.- Security

The issue: Protecting the transmission against eavesdropping

IEEE 802.11 compliant DSSS systems use one well known spreading sequence of 11 chips, and

can modulate one of the 14 channel defined in the standard. As the sequence used is apriori

known, the carrier frequency is fixed for a given system, and the number of possible frequencies is

limited, it would be quite easy for a listener to “tune in” on the DSSS transmission. Message

protection should be achieved by encrypting the data. This option increases the price of the

product, while lowering its performance, because of the processing power needed for the

encryption process.

In FHSS, the frequencies to be used in the hopping sequence may be selected by the user. In the

unlicensed band, any group of 26 frequencies or more (out of the 79 available) is legal. To “tune

in”, a listener should know the number of frequencies selected in the system, the actual

frequencies, the hopping sequence, as well as the dwell time! The FHSS modulation acts as a

layer 1 encryption process. There could be no need for application level encryption!"

http://www.sorin-schwartz.com/white_papers/fhvsds.pdf

Your right, but you missed out the salt!:

This is from a site called TipKing:

" Dissolve 1 teaspoon salt in 1 cup white vinegar. the add enough flour to make a paste. Use the paste as you would any commercial cleaner. Rinse clean and buff to a shine with a soft cloth. "

Hermanntrude: I had a hunch there wasn't any safe chemicals to remove these compounds because they are highly stable and resistant to reaction once the process of patination is complete...that's why lead is used for these sorts of purposes isn't it?

I think mechanical removal is probably the ony solution, hence, my suggestion of Jewellers Rouge which is the finest of the abrasives that I'm aware of. My Grandad used to polish out the scratches in my watchglass with it when I was a boy.

Jewellers Rouge is Iron (111) Oxide and is used to put the final polish on gemstones and lenses...one doesn't need any finer than that!

I've tried to find a chemical solution but it's beyond me..my chemistry is too limited and I don't know what to look for.

If you don't get any positive feedback, I suggest you get some Jewellers Rouge which is an extremely fine abrasive paste/powder for polishing gemstones...it can remove scratches from glass without marks when used properly, so it should shift your stains quite easily. . Google: 'Jewelers Rouge: to check it out.

When new lead is exposed to the weather it goes through several stages of oxidation. This process is called patination. I found this:

" When lead comes into contact with moisture, rainwater, condensation etc., at early stage, discoloration, spotting and white powdery deposits (usually basic lead carbonate) can form and may ‘run-off’. The degree to which all these occur is governed by the environmental conditions, but with longer term weathering, the lead will take on its’ familiar appearance.

Investigations have shown that the patina formation follows the route: lead, lead oxide, basic lead carbonate, normal lead sulphite, and normal lead sulphate. The ‘run-off’ stage occurs when non-adherent basic lead carbonate is formed, usually through contact with moisture. Each of the stages in patina formation is adherent, highly insoluble lead salts and in practice, as these salts develop with weathering, they stifle the basic lead carbonate release. The final patina being approximately 30% normal lead sulphite, 60% normal lead sulphate and 10% normal lead carbonate. However, this can vary dependant upon location, time and airborne impurities.

Suggested after care

In the event that you experience an accelerated rate of oxidation directly after installation, you should make every effort to clean the ‘run-off’ deposits, as soon as possible. Failure to do so could result in the deposits drying onto the glass and becoming more difficult to clean. This effect can be compared to lime scale on a shower screen.

To clean the glass, simply use a water-based glass cleaner with a paper or cloth towel, whilst removing any stubborn stains with a household non-abrasive cream cleaner. Avoid agitating the surface of the lead, as much as possible, as this will slow down the weathering process."

It looks like you've left the deposits long enough to develop to the more resistant lead compounds beyond basic lead carbonate

Maybe one of the chemistry experts can help you now they know what they are dealing with.

I don't know the extent or depth of commitment in your relationship....If it's only a matter of months, I would ask myself: do the positives in my relationshjp outweigh the negatives?

If it's that big an issue in your mind , maybe it's time to call it a day, especially given her reluctance to discuss it. This matter will probably fester in the back of your mind spoiling any progress in other areas of your relationship with her. It would not be fair on her to advance this relationship any further if she is shy about the matter and it continues to bug you.

You have 4 options:

!,Discuss the situation with her, then explore and engage in methods of stimulation, other than intercourse, that work for both of you...mutual satisfaction does not have to be a simultaneous event to be fulfilling.

2' Vaginal Reduction Surgery: http://www.ehow.com/about_5283576_surgery-decrease-vagina-size.html. There are links further down the page there. This is a major step dependent on many things.

3. Ignore the problem (See No.4)

4. Leave, rather than let your dissatisfaction propagate into something worse....the issue will probably create an undercurrent of tension that may pervade throughout all areas of your relationship, interfering with any hope of happiness or contentment.

Looking at the bigger picture: Your situation is almost definitely not unique since a large proportion of women have babies and this problem will occur to a greater or lesser degree in most of them, but they (both partners) deal with it, accepting it as the price they pay for having children.

Hypothetical scenario: You leave this otherwise lovely girl and find another with a nice tight vagina, that probably hasn't had babies...NIRVANA!. Some time later, you both decide to start a family, she has that baby and later on you have sex. Wha t will we find? A BAGGY VAGINA!

Back to square 1.

Welcome to the real world.

It really doesn't matter if your current girlfriend is that way now, without having children, because she, most likely, would go that way anyway when she does have them..there is no escape.

I hope that scenario puts things in perspective.

I looked around for you. 15-20% Hydrogen Peroxide is used to clean and bleach the bones white but I would not bother for one job.

If that skull was mine I'd put it in bleach solution (I part bleach to 10 parts water) for 1 hour should do it..I got this info off a website advising on growing cultures of micro organisms and the cleaning of petri dishes etc when finished . so it should be safe afterwards to handle the skull freely. If there's any fleshy bits afterwards put it in a good strong warm (30-35 degree c) solution of biological washing powder to help free and break those fleshy bits down....leave it a couple of hours for the enzymes to work before you pick and clean it. I would wear household rubber gloves to prevent skin irritation..

What you are probably thinking of is the telomere problem. The end of each DNA molecule in a chromosome has a special repeating sequence of bases called a telomere that is added by an enzyme (telomerase). With each time the chromosome is replicated, a number of repeats are lost (not copied) at each end. After a number of cell divisions (and thus chromosome replications), you run out of telomere repeats, and start losing parts of the genes at the ends of the chromosomes. Eventually you accumulate enough damage that the cell division cycle halts, and the cell apoptoses.

 

Telomerase operates in your germ cells and stem cells: once your stem cells differentiate away from their pluripotent form, the countdown timer starts ticking... Telomerase also functions in certain other cells, but we usually call those "tumors"...

 

Cells that express telomerase can continue replicating essentially forever, as in the case of immortalized cell lines.

Thanks for that GDG. With your words, I checked out to see if the action of telomerase occured in trees and as luck would have it, it does. The authors of this research suggest it may help to explain the longevity of trees like the Bristlecone Pine. Abstract here:

" Normal somatic cells have a finite replicative capacity. With each cell division, telomeres (the physical ends of linear chromosomes) progressively shorten until they reach a critical length, at which point the cells enter replicative senescence. Some cells maintain telomere length by the action of the telomerase enzyme. The bristlecone pine, Pinus longaeva, is the oldest known living eukaryotic organism, with the oldest on record turning 4770 years old in 2005. To determine what changes occur, if any, in telomere length and telomerase activity with age, and what roles, if any, telomere length and telomerase activity may play in contributing to the increased life-span and longevity of P. longaeva with age, as well as in other tree species of various life-spans, we undertook a detailed investigation of telomere length and telomerase activity in such trees. The results from this study support the hypothesis that both increased telomere length and telomerase activity may directly/indirectly contribute to the increased life-span and longevity evident in long-lived pine trees (2000-5000 year life-spans) compared to medium-lived (400-500 year life-span) and short-lived (100-200 year life-span) pine trees, as well as in P. longaeva with age."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16034678

Mooeypoo: I hope it is clear from my earlier posts my personal opinion on this matter but I am just highlighting one or two realities...I am minded to take the position of Devil's Advocate sometimes to see how an opposing view may stand up. I hope it helps to ultimately strengthen the case not weaken it.

As an individual, I agree, but as a community, no. Democracy is the tyranny of the majority over the minority, and if you don't like that, go find a desert island.

This was a reason I used in post 114,:

"Afterthought: A relevant secular reason against gay people marrying is that more people don't like the idea...this is democracy in action...it is the will of the majority,,,for now."

This is similar to yours but iNow shot it down with (post 115):

"We are a constitutional republic, with constitutional guarantees of equality for all citizens... regardless if they are part of a minority or a majority. We are not a direct democracy, so the "tyranny of the majority" opinion, I contend, is not relevant whatsoever. The only way that opinion becomes relevant is if there is a valid secular reason for the opposition/differential conferment of privileges and benefits (as per the Enumeration Clause of the first amendment, the Equal Protections Clause of the 14th amendment, and the "Lemon Test" put forth by the SCOTUS in Lemon v. Kurtzman [1971])."

I would contend that our thought is relevant , because it is the reality, but the present state of affairs in the US is not justified A definition:

Relevant....having a bearing on or connection with the subject at issue;

Justified... To demonstrate or prove to be just, right, or valid:

The Pro Rights camp are using a word with the wrong definition in mind...an important

semantic error, since it can only confuse any opposition who may be working on the correct definition and is a principal word used in the original post.

Let's make sure we have the same meanings in mind.

Since you put it like that Severian, yes, my interpretation of the statistic was ill-considered.

Would this 'genetic drift' be a strong factor at all in the higher organisms (above bacteria, fungi, plants where reproductive success is a random, precarious event)? I can see this idea being applicable to this order of organisms but less so in the higher organisms where there is an element of reproductive bias ie have more control over who, where and how they reproduce to varying degrees. I've ony read a Wiki on this idea of genetic drift and responded to you, but will look into it further.

Merged post follows:

Since you put it like that Severian, yes, my interpretation of the statistic was ill-considered.

Would this 'genetic drift' be a strong factor at all in the higher organisms (above bacteria, fungi, plants where reproductive success is a random, precarious event)? I can see this idea being applicable to this order of organisms but less so in the higher organisms where there is an element of reproductive bias ie have more control over who, where and how they reproduce to varying degrees. I've ony read a Wiki on this idea of genetic drift and responded to you, but will look into it further.

Better check again. I got slapped by reality being unaware of the extent of religious political influence here (in the U.S.)

 

Learn from our errors mate

 

 

 

........

But all the major religions have become more assertive, more vocal, more demanding and therefore more salient in the public domain.[/i][/indent]

My perception of the situation here is that the Islamic religion is trying to get more influence here like having Sharia courts to deal with problems within the Muslim communities eg marriage breakdowns...which is allowed but is purely voluntary on the part of the participants and cannot supersede English Law.

The way I see it here is that religious influence (like the bishops in the Lords) tempers things like controversial issues in scientific research and causes the secular elements to pause and reflect on the human consequences...the end result being that we end with more robust and considerate Laws and Procedures because they are minding the 'moral' side of any debate... without any ranting attitude. They may slow progress down a bit but this is not necessarily a bad thing. The Church of England guys in Parliament are a mellow bunch compared to their American counterparts.

But now you mention it,; I shall look again!

It is a fact of life that we are not all born equal. I know what you mean when some people here look like geniuses, but they are most likely a along way down the road of their respective interests compared to you, hence, the apparent disparity between you and them...they have done their time.

Intelligence is relative. No matter how clever you are (including some of the 'smart' ones here) there is always someone 'out there' capable of making you feel intellectually inadequate....it is a common experience for everyone.

If you can fulfil your potential...that is as much as you can ask of yourself. Once you have done this you can be content.

As a matter of fact, to pinch some of iNOW's words, most of the Geniuses in history did not bring about acts of brilliance spontaneously, they achieved through Effort, Diligence and Patience...it is no different for them!

It would appear that the UK statistics for people accepting Evolution iis not much better than the US...just under half. Only half the people in that half believe it's 'definitely' true...the rest of that half say it's 'probably' true.....pathetic! The irony of it all is that the UK does not have a sizable active religious congregation like in the US, I think we are a largely agnostic nation.

I put it down to ignorance resulting from the poor take up and promotion of science in education. A comment to this survey I found amusing and to the point about this subject:

" It says more about the quality of British education than about evolution. Evolution is a fact, just like gravity. If you don't understand that then either you have had a lousy education or are very thick. No other options exist. So in that sense the survey makes sense: the headline can then read:

Half of Britons are thick or have had a lousy education."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/feb/01/evolution-darwin-survey-creationism