John Cuthber

Well, yes, I am aware of the Anchor butter brand. It is made in Wiltshire. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2569867/Anchor-New-Zealand-butter-Wiltshire-Brand-owner-breaks-tradition-120-years-moving-production-UK.html The rest of your post seeme equally devoid of evidence or rationality. Plainly, no. I was involved as a UK representative, ensuring that the science was good. You understand what a veto is, BTW? Fuses are meant to fail- that's their job. And "a fuse must have gone" ia a staple of detective stories far older than the EU standard. No, but thanks for clarifying how much attention you are paying to the facts. So, it's the "availability "cognitive bias that's at work here. Always good to know. No. If it was then this wouldn't be 15 pages. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/869232/marketing-standard-apples.pdf You do realise that, if the UK farmers want to sell apples in the rest of the EU, they will still have to meet the EU's criteria? But they will no longer have any influence over them. As I said, I don't see that as taking back control. I see it as recklessly abandoning a right to veto bad EU decisions that might harm the UK's interests. One side only had lies, but they had better funding. And you are still rehashing those lies; in the face of reasoning. And the wheels have come off the lies. The majority now recognise that it was a mistake. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_on_the_United_Kingdom's_membership_of_the_European_Union_(2016–2020) But Boris won the election on the back of it and isn't he doing a grand job (worst death toll in Europe in spite of being an island. It's almost as if he forgot that we "took back control of the borders"). You do realise that discussion forar are social media, don't you? They don't need to be common; they could be as rare as this one.

Having been involved with both EU and BS standards committees, I disagree. I feel that my actual knowledge may be more valuable than your opinion. It was fairly common for the EU to simply "rebadge" the British standards. The most famous example was the "straightness of cucumbers|" standard. Again, that's not my experience. How? And if ew do then we will have paid for it twice in the name of "taking back control". Do yo uireally think that looks good? I thought everyone, even the diehard brexiteers, had given up on that one. We used to have enormous influence over EU standards for a very simple reason. The discussions and documentation were all done in English. So we always got the job of actually writing them... Since we have now left, we have no influence over them. But, if we wish to sell goods in the EU- and our manufacturing industry is critically dependent on doin gthat, we will still have to comply with EU standards. In what way is that regaining control? Yes, have a look at the billionaires and their support for "free trade" rather than, for example, EU membership. Now, do you think they are doing that so they can relax their grip on all the money? Seriously, Trump is pro brexit . Do you think he's anti "the rich people getting richer"? Would you like a list of the directives? Or perhaps you should just look at the Mersey. I have good news and bad news You can get the lamb. https://www.waitrose.com/ecom/products/waitrose-new-zealand-whole-leg-of-lamb/092701-47653-47654 but only at the expense of realising that you ewre ranting about a non existent problem. (and there's something very ironic about wanting New Zealand "Cheddar" cheese.)

It's not hypothetical. The US farming/ slaughterhouse practice isn't designed to avoid contamination because they always plan to sluice it with bleach. "For years, in the US, instead of preventing that chickens get infected with pathogens during all stages of rearing and slaughter, the poultry industry has resorted to chemicals to eliminate bacteria at the end of the meat production chain. In other words, chemical washes aim to make up for inadequate hygiene on farms and abattoirs." https://www.beuc.eu/blog/what-is-wrong-with-chlorinated-chicken/ "US’s salmonella problem has been particularly hard to control. The USDA doesn’t treat salmonella as an “adulterant,” meaning unlike E. Coli, salmonella contamination won’t trigger a recall. The USDA began routinely testing chicken for salmonella in February 2016, and finally set a “maximum acceptable” rate of contamination at 15.4%." https://qz.com/1037737/will-post-brexit-uk-swallow-americas-chlorinated-chicken-for-a-trade-deal/

I'm saying they don't take care to keep the dead bird's gut in one piece until they have separated it from the edible bits and, as a consequence of this, they need to bleach it It's a matter of not getting the shit onto the meat in the first place. It's not that I'm so naive as to think the birds ordinarily use a bidet. it's that I think that proper slaughterhouse practice is better than trying to clean it up afterwards. If they thought they could wash it clean, they wouldn't need the chlorine, would they?

If there wasn't, there would be no need to chlorinate it. That's the point. Poor slaughterhouse processes. You don't wash salad? "Less likely to get salmonella" Which might kill you "more likely to get unwanted growth hormone". Which won't But the point is that I don't want the US standards that let them sell chlorinated shit as meat. AND I don't want the US food standards that let them sell growth hormone as meat. Not really. Because the UK has to make a deal with the US (among hundreds of others) And the US simply won't let us ban their beef if we want to sell anything in the US. The US isn't going to be in so much of a hurry to sign a deal as the UK is. So they can sit and twiddle their thumbs while the UK economy tanks. I could use a laugh. Remind us what this solution was- the one that teams of trained deal breakers didn't spot, but you did.

I think the death rate from Clostridium tetani is higher than that from covid. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetanus FTFY Well, human cells are aerobic so... are you dead or are the anaerobes dead?

I'm pretty sure that a telescope is an instrument. The point is that, at the time people were drawing pictures of "canals on Mars", they were struggling against the resolution of their telescopes. Now they are struggling against the resolution of their spectroscopes. Steam engines were invented at steam engine time. Up until relatively recently, millimeter wave spectroscopy was so impractical that nobody did it. The technology has changed but it's still not a mature technology. A bit like the old telescopes. It's a valid comparison.

NH4OH pretty much does not exist. I'm not sure how well the reaction of NH3, NO and O2 will work without a catalyst You need the same volume of ammonia (gas) as NO2. And you need to know how much liquid ammonia expands on boiling and heating up to the temperature of the combustion gases. The density of liquid ammonia is pressure and temperature dependent. This isn't a simple calculation. If you know the flow rate (in cubic metres per minute or something) and the temperature then you can use that to calculate the ammonia needed.

We aren't.

I can dry a cotton towel at 20C, by simply hanging it on a washing line outside for a few hours. Putting stuff in a closed box tends to inhibit drying- even if that box is called an oven- because there is nowhere for the water to go. Fitting a vacuum pump to the box does address that issue, but is expensive (also, a lot of vacuum pumps are not designed to handle large volumes of water vapour). Exposing the material, in a thin layer, to the atmosphere will let it dry just like the towel...

So did I But I still don't want to eat bleached shit.

No The concern is the food production process. It's so bad in the US that, even though they chlorinate stuff, they still get lots of food poisoning.* And the point is that, as a proxy for banning poor food manufacturing hygiene, we ban chlorination. But, as a minnow arguing with a shark, we will not be able to do that. * yes, I know, it's more complex than that- better barbecue weather for example.

The EU is big enough to tell the US to stick their chlorinated chicken where the Sun doesn't shine. Post Brexit, the UK will be over a barrel and will have to accept pretty much any offer that the US makes. Anyway; Biden wants the Irish American vote (or, at least, doesn't want to upset them) so it's perfectly sensible US politics for presidential candidates to have a clear view on ensuring the future of the GFA. Since Borris' plan to break international law puts that agreement at risk, it's sensible for any other country to have a view on it. Most countries would prefer to maintain the GFA. If you are Mr Putin- or one of his supporters- you might want to sow discord at the boundary of Europe in order to make Russia look good by comparison. In that case you would want Boris' plan to go ahead. The same would be true for other rogue states with an interest in undermining international law and cooperation.

It's perfectly true in the circumstance he was referring to. and that's the reason for his confusion. In that case the resistance of the voltmeter is irrelevant. Yet he has been told it is important. Why didn't you explain it- rather than saying something that's not true? Here's the question he asked And here's the answer I gave OK, I tried and then I tried the important second part of the comparison.; I searched for 'analog digital meters for sale' And guess what... there are more of them. When you have finished moaning about me, the fact will remain. What you said was wrong. Did you expect that not to get picked up on a science site?

And it's not going to help them learn if people say things that are simply not true any more, is it? In the "good old days" when a voltmeter was essentially a galvanometer with a resistor in series, then the resistor could be calculated from the "ohms per volt" figure for the galvanometer- the figure is the reciprocal of the full scale current. (You needed to subtract the resistance of the meter itself) The OPV was typically just about halved when using AC. But if you got to buy a meter today, you are much more likely to get a digital one where the input resistance is more or less fixed. It's actually quite a useful feature- it means you can use the meter (on the volts range) as a very sensitive current meter.

Are you really not concerned? Are you really happy with bird shit in your food?

Have you seen such a label in a restaurant? "Figures suggest that the percentage of people who fall ill with food poisoning annually is up to ten times higher in the US than the UK." from https://www.sustainweb.org/news/feb18_US_foodpoisoning/ And, not to put too fine a point on it; I'm not very concerned about chlorinated chicken; I'm concerned about chlorinated chicken sh1t.

I hope nobody tells that to the busker.

I think you are half right.

Why tell that lie? Thank you for clarifying the extent of your understanding of the issue. The issue is also about labelling and animal welfare. Did you realise that? There is no reason to assume it will be cheaper, but typically, the people will be in more poverty.

One advantage to social distancing; I don't worry about eating garlic + fenugreek. The human nose is extremely sensitive. Also, i suspect that the metal ions act as a catalyst and what destroys the odorous materials is actually oxygen from the air.

This one has warning lights

You are right but, in that instance, why would you bother to measure the voltage? The voltage would be written on the side of the cell. Unless it isn't. It would, for example, be wrong for systems with effective source resistances of more than 10K or 100K ohms. That depends. It's broadly speaking true for analogue meters but not for digital ones.

They play bagpipes.

Grow potatoes in the buffer. I'm also wondering about that. Over to you Drumbo.