pippo

Thanks, swan.....OK, moderator, not coolant. Still, it was the main difference in why Chernobyl was more serious than 3 mile, I understand. I learned something. Funny- thats how I remember the sec of Energy explaining it. I didnt confirm that though- just took it for scripture. Still, I feel we shouldnt give up on nuclear, just cuz Japan.....oh well, we shall see....

OK, heres more on the exfoliants in skin care products that are manufactured by the many tens of thousands of gallons: Mark Browne, a then PHD candidate at the Univ of Plymouth (they both focused on the same project) determined these brands- Neova Body Smoother, SkinCeuticals Body Polish, DDF Strawberry Almond Body Polish, Pond's Fresh Start, Colgate Icy Blast, Neutrogena and Clearasil - most of these have gone the way of adding plastic polymer "bits" for the purpose of scrobbing "unwanted ugly " skin cells from your body. Poly ethylene beads/granules. Shocking as HE**. This "shampoo" product goes down the drain, ending up in the oceans. Simple as that. Jellyfish have been known to ingest this junk, believing them to be plankton.

Thanks, swan. Well, I am not a physicist, but that doesnt prevent /preclude us from having a discussion/opinions, I figure. I understand, (from a former DOE Secretary, oh, and theres also literature on this) chernobyl and 3 mile are like apples and oranges. You probably have a point in yes, nuclear generates plutonium, but the way I understood it, the big difference was WEAPONS grade plutonium. Also, the graphite being a key factor in the cooling mechanism, unlike 3 mile...... Chernobyl was really bad..............

Right, SM, I would just add plastics and alum cans are worth recycling, but like you said, glass is not. Glass is sand/sod carbonate. But plastics are of course, petrol, and petrol is kinda up there in price. Also, aluminum is electricity intensive, so its worth it (most alum plants are near hydro power plants that provide cheap power like Alcoa in N NY(niagra)..... Jorge, heres something to start with: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:DBu7KFSsgNAJ:www.plymouth.ac.uk/staff/rcthompson+m Hes the guy that did much research in the Gyre. Also did studies in the waters of the Shetland Islands, Scotland, Iceland, etc. Its all over books on the subject. Now, gotta find that reference on that lady's shampoo plastic stuff.......dang, where did I read that(!)

May be so.....still, its no 3 mile island. nothing like it. They made no plutonium at 3 mile...

So, SM, this "right science" you refer to, does then the heavy snow indicate GW or not? My point was that Gore was /is still an influence, therefore, if its good for the GW argument (Kilamanjaro), then you cant use it against GW when the heavy/unusual snowfalls occur. Even though this may be irrelevant (more snow/less snow), the public gobbles it up, get it? Do YOU know the "right science" regarding Kilamanjaro's decline of precipitation? I have read and studied some scientific opinions on this. You are assuming I am not an informed scientist, based on your accusation. You should choose your words more carefully before making accusations, SM, and not do such while hiding in the halls of anonimity in cyberspace. I dont believe (dont recall) I have done this to you.

Whew, glad the tone has changed here a bit. No use in becoming agitated ....we're all fellow members here trying to find answers to the screwed up world we are prisoners in. Sorry I did not reply in time, people. Just got back and was hoping to get back into the plastic thing. First, yes, any chem 0101 student knows Cr hexavalent is of course, Cr+6. Cr++, well, I shoulda maybe typed Cr** (Oh, Cr+3 , the trivalent is of course, no where near as cancer causing as the hexa...). Just trying to prevent using foul language, thats all....LOL Still, sorry as I kinda am a culprit in having added confusion. But, no big deal, eh? OK, so you asked me to find my reference to this "garbage patch" study from that prof at Univ of Plymouth. AND, a fellow member asked incredulously, about the reference on plastic sh** in skin care products for refined women that pollutes water in the ocean. OK, gimme some time...........

Well, maybe, Max. Reminds me of Gore who won the peace prize. Probably the biggest champ of the GW (global warming) debate. One of his original arguments was that Kilamanjaro was getting less and less snow/precip (popularized in his movie for tha mass audience). But now, hes saying that this past winter's unusually high snowfall anmount does NOT mean GW is not real. Well, which is it? It was convenient to argue the Kilamanjaro stats but now its not convenient when snow's falling all over the US. This is just one example of the hypocrisy. There are more. There still is no scientific evidence that proves GW (and calling it climate change- just arbitrary). For that, you need a control, as any scientist understands in doing experiments. The only "control" is another earth that would have been subjected to a climate without man;s influence. . There is no other earth, therefore, no control, therefore, no evidence based on the scientific method.

Professor, Interesting for sure. You also may have stumbled across this but at Chernobyl, like you said, many people died- actually, it was close to or exactly 70 people (I didnt get that from today's AOL news/recent CNN reporting). But of course, that reactor was much different than what we had in 3 mile island=- it was cooled by graphite- much riskier setup. Russians were bent on designing plants to also manufacture weapons grade Plutonium- unlike 3 mile island. The details I forget, other than that. nobody dies at 3 mile island, as you probably are aware of. We'll see what happens to the nuke program- so much progress in recent years now this.........

LOL.....first, we BOTH need to get real on spelling chiwawas. Second, animal behaviorists would vote canines as, except for mustelids, probably the meanest animal,pound for pound animal . Third, strength in numbers. Ants on an elephant, Russians attacking NAZI's on the eastern front, 10 chiwawas on ONE tiger, OK, 20 of them, etc etc.

Forget 2 great Danes- you need 10 chiuawas (sp??) to take on a tiger...........

Interesting, people. well, maybe I can add something to the speculation on how much plastic waste if floating in that Great Pacific Garbage Patch: A researcher at the Univ of Plymouth (Englland, of course), actually went out there a few yrs ago. Calculated with his crew, there is about 3 million tons of plastic floating there. And that does NOT include the submerged/suspended in layered water columns all the other plastic. Yup, it is a shame. They traced it to LA area streams/rivers/etc that have the plastic blown there from atop of land fills/dumps in CA. Dont remember exactly if that book (which detailed this research) attributed blame to other countries or not. I heard Europe just last month banned plastic bags. As far as government, I dunno about that. Seems like govt is expected to solve our problems. Danish and German and Spanish govmt got nowhere with their green agenda- windmills/solar/etc . Denmark ended up importing electricity from Norway, companies are leaving Spain for the US, Italy is planning to build now Nuclear plants (at least, before the Japan thing) Taxes are sooo high. I'll be the first one to say my life will,be a little tougher without some plastics, but Id be for some stricter usage of the dammed material. A member above mentioned we can substitute glass/alum cans for packaging- Well, this at least is more eco friendly. Not to mention some regulation (govmt again) with products that pollute so bad in the oceans- skin care products for example- these exfoliants. Contain plastic! Who woulda guessed! This plastic, which is so finely ground up (necessary to do its job on women's skin to help abrade off their layer of dead skin- like it really matters), goes down the drain to the oceans. Researchers have found such a material in the stomachs of jellyfish, etc, who mistake the stuff for planktonic foods. I say ban the cr++. Studies have shown that this convenient material, like many others will not go away cuz people/markets are too addicted. Its gonna take a catastrophe. Human nature.

Mr Skep, couldnt one try to plot on an x-y axis some parameters, products on the x axis and cost on the y axis. Then see if theres a correlation. Right? I mena, yeah, the more parameters the more credible the graph may become and start to take on a shape......

huh?

hehe......I dont have all the answers. I know "weeds" are NOT vulnerable to "bugs". Cultivars/monocultures grown in square miles ARE, period. OK, we dont have to stick with my original querry exactly- its OK if we verge off a tad......on the issue of pesticides being necessary for todays population, its absolutely necessary, based on what I have read about world population/economies/energy/politics. Growing weeds that I happen to enjoy in my back yard a few days out of the whole year is not a ag farming model for feeding the world, Im sure we accept that here as Im not implying anyone has suggested this. The US, Canada, Australia are about maxed out- 6+billion people now.......And lets be thankful the ethanol scam is over for the most part. On Johns point of [why do I feel I must use pesticides] since I grow just a few plants....well, hehe, you cant even grow a pot of the most aromatic basil without bugs attacking it big time- one pot or one square mile! I mean, yeah, if one wants to fuss daily with soap solution yes, it could be done. But man, every day after day, after....... \ That s my whole point about weeds. No need to bother at all. They are hardy as He++.

Thanks, guys, for the opinions. Many good points. "Italians have probably the most developed "taste" for bitter flavors. " You might want to discuss that with these people http://www.camra.org.uk/ hehe....this could become a debate like the one on deciding if British soccer/football is superior to the Italian League soccer.....LOL Obviously, no one intends to compare gathering a few edible "weed" plants from one's yard and enjoying that meal to agribusiness's economy of scale. Toolate to go back to "Little House on The Prairie" for most Americans. Buffalo are gone too. Pretty soon, wild edible weeds will be gone perhaps too. Still, on the idea of growing your own natural "wild" varieties, why wouldnt that work? I purposefully sow/spread the seeeds of my wilds in hope of a better crop next season. I could do the same with man made plants but instead choose to "cultivate" wild. When those wilds sprout/grow, hey, no need to do anything to them. Instead, had they been the man made, guess what- spray poisons/etc to get them to produce. The issue with the "pasticide residue" is more than that of residual intake- its the exposure to higher levels WHILE one is applying them! Rubber gloves, carbon mask, safe rinsing of containers afterward, etc etc.

Pop culture, SMF?? Man, where have you been. Are politicians in Congress pop culture? Is Obama Pop culture? Its become a shell game. It cant be substantiated by all the scientific community, so they have to re brand it to the word of the day. Last I heard, it was climate change. Its more palatable. For now.

Either way, its not so sexy any more to talk about acid rain as it was in the 80's. Now its GW (global warming).......And GW is morphing into climate change. Next week, it may be called something else........ BTW, anybody know it the black forest in Germany that was reportedly affected by "acid rain" has recovered? Just curious.

Tanks, people, for all your replies. Yes, I understand the technical difference between what a weed is ...based on point of view. I still didnt think I had to explain.....figured you would know a weed plant in this context is a wild plant, not cultivated/whose seeds are not available say, at Home Depot. Im my case, Im talking of years of experience eating just 2 or 3 leafy , dandelion "like" foliar/leafy plants. I dont take chances with unknowns. No fungi either......I learned years ago even experts can screw up. Slight bittering though, is not a big deal. Wild asparagus is wicked bitter, but Im still alive. I have pods of semi wild, and man, what a treat. Italians have probably the most developed "taste" for bitter flavors. One soft drink is actually called/marketed/labelled "Bitter", and is a huge seller in Italy. Yes, it is bad good for you as it has loads of sugar, not the bittering. Like I said, Cap- they are GREENER, and NO PESTICIDES APPLIED TO THEM (assuming they are not growing on a field that had DDT sprayed there 50 years ago, or theyre not in a Superfung Hazmat Waste Site). Just with that, you are already ahead of the game on nutrition. Beats white iceberg lettuce.

People, I believe that a plant is a plant, and basically the system that plants utilize to grow/propagate/flourish generate the same chemical compounds whether its a cultivated one or wild. BUT, I feel better if a wild one is better for you if ingested. At least, they are native, and dont need pesticides to grow healthy. Also, generate very green leaves vs some lighter green "lettuces", etc. What do yous think? Thanks, Weed eater

Thanks, Sisy. But oops....I goofed on the spelling of the word "mind", having typed "mond" instead. You took it as a mispelled "mood", I take it, but no matter....I think your perspective is still valid to your point. Biologists changed their "mind", vs "mood". Again, same thing. Right, thaTS WHAT i MEANT...THAT THEY WILL FIND ADDL INFO TO AUGMENT THEIR CLASsIFICATIONS, IF THE CASE WILL BE SUCH. mAYBE not the rat, but they did it with monerids/fungi/bacteria, and then protozoa. Split them up from the plant kingdom we understood going back to the early 70's. Oh well. Funny how the Norway rat got its name when it never came from that climate, I heard..........the English coined that name to it...... Starting another thread on evolution soon........

Right....good point, ewmon. Hey, just recently, biologists "changed their mond"....LOL, on what genus the skunk belonged to!! Yeah, for eons they categorized it along with other mustelids (mink, weasels, wolverines, badgers, etc etc). Now, they proved the skunk has a different protein produced in, not sure, their genes, whatever. So, hey, tomorrow, maybe they will put out pack rat in with the ugly Norway rat, eh?

Thanks, Charon.....for some reason, it finally hit me. Yes, now I get it...the idea of common ancestry back in the tree, some place back a few branches away. And not to imply that azure did not explain it well, he did. Now, what are these differences? I looked up some info but couldnt find why pack rate are different regarding their separate genus. I imagine its kinda like a fox vs a wolf. Vulpes vs Canis. Is it their snout? length of their legs? Hoppers vs walkers/crawlers?

Makes sense. But azure, you said : Old world rats and packrats don't comprise a monophyletic group. First, I should look up the word monophyletic. I have a rough idea what it might mean, so Biologists decided they are not the same genus for specific reasons (which one could ascertain with some research, of course). It sure seems like splitting hairs, I need to find out why they are split up...I mean, geez, theyre rats for goodness sake. But noooo, someone decided maybe the ugly/distainful Norway Rat is no where near as cute as the pack rat, .....just kidding. But, theres got to be a reason for the split...........Lets see.....hmmmm, wikipedia........