Area54

I strongly suspect that is not going to be the case in manner which is significant for this discussion. The Himalaya are, as you know, vast and contain a wide - and typical - variety of rock types. Their elevation and associated deep levels of erosion expose that range of rocks. I would be surprised if the deviation was significant. Certainly, the variation could not possibly be sufficient to make a meaningful dent in the CO2 released by human activity annually, which I understand is the point you are focusing on. Or, were you heading in another directIon? I think the climate change situation is alarming. What makes it more alarming is the refusal that you note by much of the public (and interested corporate bodies) to believe there is a problem. In that setting sober, documented and justified estimates of climate change and its consequences can be seen as alarmist by those who refuse to accept that there is a significant risk. "Alarmist" then becomes a rhetorical catchphrase used to excuse acceptance of the evidence. On the plus side, evolution may one day produce an animal that is not only as intelligent as homo sapiens, but is actually able to use that intelligence in a consistent and organised way.

A good question. I shall trawl through some textbooks, but the simple qualitative answer is - a substantial amount. A more nuanced answer would be to note the following: Major silicate minerals fall into the following groups: Ortho-silicates: these include the olivine group minerals, in which the eponymous mineral is a solid solution of Fe silicate and Mg silicate. It is a major mineral in basic lavas, including basalt, the commonest lava on (and off) the planet. The ortho-silicates also include several common metamorphic minerals, such as garnet and staurolite, which contain calcium or magnesium as principal elements. Chain Silicates: These, especially the pyroxenes and amphiboles, are major minerals in both igneous and metamorphic rocks. There are many varieties, but magnesium is common in such minerals as the pyroxenes enstatite and hypersthene, and the amphiboles hornblende and glaucophane. Calcium is abundant in the pyroxenes pigeonite, augite and wollastonite. (The latter is CaSiO3). There are many more examples, but the ones mentioned are all important rock forming minerals. Sheet Silicates: Serpentine and chlorite are important metamorphic minerals rich in Mg. (Mg is the only metallic element present in chlorite.) Biotite, one of the two common micas, contains significant Mg. The clay minerals are exceptionally varied, but most varieties include Mg, or Ca, or both in their structures and are thus abundant in many sedimentary rocks. Framework Silicates: Of relevance here are the hugely important feldspars, in particular the plagioclase group. These contain Na and Ca as the dominant metallic ions. Mg is present in lesser amounts in some feldspars. So, you see that the major minerals, incorporating significant amounts of Ca, or Mg, or both are to be found in all major rock groupings, igneous, metamorphic and sedimentary. I recommend An Introduction to Rock Forming Minerals, by Deer, Howie and Zussman for anyone looking for something more on minerals. This is the classic on mineralogy. I think the latest edition came out in the early 90s, but I used my 1966 1st edition to check that my memory wasn't too far adrift on the brief notes above. On a separate point, re-atmosphere history, Chemistry of Atmospheres, by Richard P. Wayne Oxford University Press 1991, contains a chapter on atmosphere evolution. I've found it useful. Drat. I am not thinking logically. What you are actually asking is the proportion of Ca and Mg in the crust. That is readily available, as in this Wikipedia article. It give Ca as 4.15% and Mg as 2.33%, making them the 5th and 7th commonest elements in the crust. Those percentages may seem low, but keep in mind that almost 75% of the crust is composed of silicon and oxygen.

The majority of the rocks you mention are composed predominantly of silicate minerals. These are weathered by carbonic acid, converting for the most part to clays, with a portion of the carbon dioxide now "trapped" as calcium carbonate. Unfortunately, the amount of CO2 removed by weathering globally is an order of magnitude less than the amount being released by human activity. The weathering/ocean sink is important for the long term carbon cycle, but does little to help us with the rapidity of change we have introduced. This is a basic summary of the factors involved. I agree with you, it was an excellent post by joigus .

It is quite common for "retired" politicians to become much more statesman like in their words and actions. Freed of the need for political machinations they can speak more from the heart (something I thought May did not have). Taking a leaf from the fight against the virus, I wonder if we could take plasma from such politicians and inject it into the present incumbents, hoping that the antibodies would deal with the hypocrisy and kant flowing in their veins.

Former UK Prime Minister, Theresa May, did little - in the opinion of many - to distinguish herself in that role. In an opinion piece in the Times she has delivered a forthright and seemingly sensible critique of the inadequacies of the global response to the corona virus crisis by governments. (It pleasently surprised this observer, but maybe that's just me.) Here is the link to the article. And Here is the BBC's take on the subject. I stole the thread title from them.

Welcome to the forum. Your labset up looked interesting, however your mention of colloidal silver called to mind your earlier comment. I think that may well apply in that context; hopefully not in others. Again, welcome.

I suspect your central message may be going past most members. I think you are saying, in summary: we have shown the ability, to varying degrees of success, to tackle large problems that we previously ignored. On the back of that we have an opportunity to make that approach an essential part of our way of running society. Let's not miss it. I wonder if you are not over-influenced by the situation in the UK where we have, as I understand it, at a stroke, eliminated homelessness and found cash, that was never there before, for the NHS. Sadly, in America the situation seems to have become yet another bi-partisan battleground and the only legacy may be mass graves and provocative invective. In the third world, where many are already at the bottom, what's another problem to add to the violence, the endemic illnesses, the corruption, the lack of work, etc? In Hong Kong and South Korea they dealt with problem efficiently and effectively. Arguably, they have no need of change. Each country and continent is different. That said I share your optimism in that we have do an opportunity to do things differently, to do them better. How we grasp it, time will tell.

You beat me to it. I was going to post this under the title "Good things can come in small packages". The annual death toll from malaria runs just under half a million. Great to see a potential solution. Some more information on malaria in general here. (It's from the WHO, so Trump supporters should look away now.)

I can't agree. @Angelo You are missing a great opportunity to learn from some knowledgeable people. Don't pass it up for some lightweight reason.

This one caught my eye: Hydrocarbon seepage in the deep seabed links subsurface and seafloor biospheres Anirban Chakraborty, S. Emil Ruff, Xiyang Dong, Emily D. Ellefson, Carmen Li, James M. Brooks, Jayme McBee, Bernie B. Bernard, Casey R. J. HubertProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Apr 2020 From the paper: Significance The marine subsurface is one of the largest habitats on Earth composed exclusively of microorganisms and harboring on the order of 1029 microbial cells. It is unclear if deep subsurface life impacts overlying seafloor diversity and biogeochemical cycling in the deep ocean. We analyzed the microbial communities of 172 seafloor surface sediment samples, including gas and oil seeps as well as sediments not subject to upward fluid flow. A strong correlation between typical subsurface clades and active geofluid seepage suggests that subsurface life is injected into the deep ocean floor at hydrocarbon seeps, a globally widespread hydrogeological phenomenon. This supply of subsurface-derived microbial populations, biomass, and metabolic potential thus increases biodiversity and impacts carbon cycling in the deep ocean.

I am clueless on this, but because of my wife's passion for gardening I have learned that the BBC program Gardeners World and their associated magazine is well regarded, so the following to links may be of use: https://www.gardenersworld.com/plants/pruning-fruit-trees-in-winter/ https://www.gardenersworld.com/how-to/grow-plants/how-to-winter-prune-apple-trees/ The first link is a magazine article, the second a video.

I'm still not clear what law of physics that would violate. Current engineering technology couldn't achieve that, but I still fail to see which physical laws are violated. The apparent absence of a supersonic shock wave would be surprising, but perhaps there is an engineering workaround. So, I ask again, can anyone suggest what laws of physics are actually violated? It just seems that this is an all to common claim with UFO sightings, that the objects did things "that just aren't physically possible". That appears more like a lack of knowledge or imagination on the part of the observer. I'm quite ready to accept an assertion that it is a violation of physical law because . . . reason, complete with detailed justification, including the maths. But those never seem forthcoming. And, of course, your alternative explanation is highly plausible and negates the need to go for ephemeral violations of unamed physical laws.

Just for the record, the Wikipedia article on the beast. It has a neat animation constructed from the radar observations by Arecibo.

You should watch them. The rise they cause in blood pressure and vigorous exercise, thumping the wall with ones fists and kicking the furniture to pieces, obviate the need for regular exercise.

I am troubled when an obsevation is combined with an interpretation based upon that observation. It is a form of equivocation and that, either intentionally, or accidentally may mislead. The observers saw a suite of manouvres. Given the status and training of the observers we may find their description of what they believe they saw moderately reliable. However, they then interpret those manouvres to "defy the known laws of physics". That interpretation seems both exaggerated and questionable. What laws of physics does it defy?

Yes, humans are inherently racist. However, some of us are fed up with that oudated, antiquated, destructive instinct-derived mindset and have deciced to say, loudly and clearly, fuck racism, fuck racists, fuck idiots who make a positive argument for racism. (If required, I can provide a lengthier and more eloquent justification for that position.)

This is true, but has already been pointed out by others, in-law tensions can occur because of other diferences: religion, income, educational background, work ethic, etc. If you want to experience true in-law tension go to Glasgow and find a Rangers supporter who has married a Celtic supporter. Do you wish to claim that the Scots and Irish are racially distinct? Such a claim would be inline with your other errors. I am not even certain this is true, but is the possibility of requiring a bone marrow transport really high on the list of critical concerns when deciding on your life partner? On the other side, as pointed out already, there will be distinct advantages of a mixed race marriage related to hybrid vigour. Breaking News: raising children is a complex process filled with challenges. These challenges can be viewed as limitations and threats, or as enriching opportunities. Then again, their exposure to diversity may well have broadened their minds, deepened their experience and made them more interesting and attractive. Tell me, do you actually know anyone from a different ethinic group or culture, or are all your contacts from Central Casting's Hicksville?

What about them? The second denotes intent. Course may include intent, but need not. Heading might, in some contexts, contain a whiff of intent, but it would generally be absent. They are contrasting words, rather than different ways of saying the same thing.

That is an enormous difference in my lexicon. A boulder dislodged from a mountainside by an earthquake has a heading, but it has no purpose.

Comparison of genomes reveals the relative closeness of animals and fungi. Further information here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opisthokont#cite_note-pmid8469985-12 For one thing, plant have chloroplasts, fungi do not.

Fungi are not plants, though many people think of them as such. They are more closely related to animals than to plants. In an indirect way that matches your question.

Those on this forum who have chosen to give you advice have decades of personal experience that says otherwise. If you can write an analytical essay you can better analyse real life problems; make well informed decisions; manage your time effectively; organise events; plan projects. The list is a long one. That is a defeatist attitude. Just because you cannot do something today does not mean you cannot do something tomorrow. Very few people are naturally talented at writing, yet many are skilled at it. That skill was developed through commitment and practice. Thank you for your thanks. The most sincere way of expressing your thanks would be to make a determined effort to improve your writing skills. That would be a genuine reward for all who have contributed their suggestions.

The major benefits would appear to be the same as attach to any relationship. If I were a concert pianist and married a Brazilian cellist I would have much more in common with her than if I married a punk rocker with a drug habit who was raied in the same town as me. Same for the major cons. People are different and the significance of some of the differences may not emerge until some considerable distance into the relationship. @mad_scientist What are your views on the matter? (Another member has made the suggestion you are unlikely to reply. I would not advise that approach.)

Oh, I know precisely why they exist: humans are often a disreputable, weak bunch of assholes. I certainly don't intend to encourage weakness and immorality by remaining silent. Now I have not looked at in detail at any of these sites, so it may be that some of them offer services that are commendable. My distaste is directed against those which prey upon the lazy, or upon those who lack confidence in their own abilities. You almost appear to be saying: well that's the way the world is; I can't fight it, so why should I be placed at a disadvantage by not also making use of it. I hope that's not what your thinking. I'd be interested to know either way.