EdEarl

As I understand some statistics on flu shots only include people who have the flu and have or have-not had a flu shot, for example rates of coronary events while sick with flu. Some studies track side effects or suspected side effects of flu vaccination, for example Guillain-Barré syndrome. Has anyone checked for the rate of coronary event (or other complications from flu that may be mediated by having a flu-shot of people who have a coronary event (or other complication) who do not have the flu but have or have-not had a flu shot? People who have not had flu or flu shots may or may not have a lower heart attack rate than those who have had flu or flu shots; however, one would have to account for older people tending to have more heart attacks and more flu or flu shots, and other as yet unidentified mediating factors--meaning other unidentified things that change both heart attack rates (as age does) and number of times one has had the flu or flu shots (as ages does). It seems to me that unidentified mediating factors confound results from such a study, and consequently mean such studies might not be attractive to researchers. I would argue that if data is already available from insurance files, that insurance companies should have done them. If they have been done, have they been published?

This link between biology and quantum mechanics should convince some skeptics. It is about photosynthesis. Ultimately, everything boils down to physics. Everything living is in motion, microscopically within cells and macroscopically whenever cells cooperate to move food and fluids within organisms and when entire organisms move. Motion is described by thermodynamics and Newton's laws of motion, and they can be used to model biological systems. Of course non-living things are also described by physics, and until now physics was almost exclusively delegated to describing non-living systems, because biological systems are so much more complex and difficult to describe using physics. But, now biologists are learning more about biological systems, down to nano-scale, and computers are more capable of processing very complex systems. Thus, more and more biologists need to understand physics, and physicists who know biology can apply their trade.

I don't get any cable or satellite television; just depend on the Internet for news.

Television news in the US is so biased that I no longer watch it, and stopped watching Fox News first, when they became overtly anti climate change. News in the US is a travesty, IMO. If it were state controlled, it would be a scandal, which is tragically not the case; although, the federal government is highly biased towards corporate interests and the news is controlled by them.

IMO biodiesel is a better fuel than ethanol, because algae for biodiesel can be grown using saline and soda water; whereas, ethanol crops so far require fresh water. Moreover, by about 2050 estimates are that 1/5 of the Earth's population will be short of fresh water due to climate change. However, there are many untapped salt water aquifers and much of it is under semiarid or arid land that is not being used to grow crops. In addition, ethanol is not as powerful a fuel as gasoline; whereas, biodiesel is more concentrated and thus, a better fuel than gasoline. Another option is to use fuel cells or a flow-battery, as described below.

Actually, I love a good steak, salmon, chicken, etc., and dairy. However, I've given it up for better health and fewer pills.

Isopropyl alcohol is toxic, it is ethyl alcohol that has methyl alcohol or another toxin added to be sold for medical purposes.

My isopropyl alcohol 50% has no other ingredients listed; thus, I believe it should contain only distilled water.

The source of this quote attributed this quote to Frederich Nietzche, but I could not confirm its source.

I don't want to change the subject, but I'm concerned my post will do so. Fat, oils, and protein are too rich in calories, and digesting protein makes our blood acid which leeches calcium from our bones, causing osteoporosis. Thus, IMO we should eat vegetables exclusively or only rarely eat meat, for health reasons. I know that almost everyone will argue otherwise. Since this thread is not about eating vegan, I will not respond to arguments.

What? Sound is energy of molecules vibrating, many molecules. Though individual molecules vibrate, they are not individual particle-waves of sound as photons are of light. The vibrating molecules pass their energy by transferring it to other molecules; photons do not pass their energy to other photons.

If you want to learn about time travel, Stephen Hawking has published his ideas on the subject in a video titled, Into the Universe with Stephen Hawking, Part 2.

Welcome to SFN RonPrice. Enjoy

I cannot find the article which I though I had read; perhaps it was a dream.

I don't know, but if there are quakes, there is energy being dissipated, and the source must be neutrons from a star made of neutrons.

I believe neutrons within neutron stars do decay, cause quakes, and release energy from the neutron star. Even black holes release energy. Few things are stable forever.

True, if you disassemble a living being, it will die. And, if you examine microscopic parts of a living being, the parts may be animated (or not), yet indistinguishable as living, just as water flowing in a stream is not living.

Don't panic, trash it. Almost everyone gets those.

Joshua, Thank you for the accolade; well said. Now we expect you to join us in making SFN a great forum.

I don't know what you mean. If I understand the situation correctly, the climate scientists are saying that the 4C change will occur by 2100; we cannot avoid it. It would be nice for climate to be static, but it is not. A mere 2C increase will bring sea level increases as mountain glaciers evaporate, and the Greenland ice sheet is significantly reduced. Billions of people will move from flooded shores and 1/5 of the worlds population will face severe water shortages. I am sober. How does one redefine the problem? I think everyone will have to live with things as they occur. And, we should expect Katrina type flooding around the world for many years, starting sometime after 2050. Although, the flooding will creep up the shore, until a storm or tsunami occurs.

Some scientists believe in God and some do not. Some people on this forum believe in God and some do not. The rule apply to all equally. I neither believe nor disbelieve in God, and I try to follow the forum rules, too, but I've been admonished by moderators. There are many clever people who post on this forum, and mostly people try to help novices posters; however, they have limits like everyone does. Your response to my post shows you completely missed my message, and IMO it shows you have missed the message from the moderators. Posting on this forum is a conversation; monologues are discouraged. You can try to teach, but you may not have anyone who listens. Consider listening to earn respect and credit for being open minded, and maybe others will listen to your message. However, the message you are trying to relay in this thread is disrespectful, IMO. I do not worship science, and I believe few scientists would characterize their relationship with science as worship. In my opinion you tried to start flame wars with this thread, and I refuse to participate. I will treat you with respect and honesty. I expect you to treat me the same way. If you do not, I shall not converse with you.

Religion: Believing Jesus walked on water. Science: Believing water always tastes wet. There is a difference; you will never experience Jesus walking on water. But, if you do and you can show it to me and all my friends, Jesus walking on water will become science.

The people displaced by ocean level rising can be relocated in farms of a few acres. The UN suggests such land should already be farmed to reduce world hunger. See below.

Cells divide into two cells, and this process begins the symmetry. But, that is not really an answer, it is merely an observation of the mechanics that make things symmetrical. No one knows why cells divide into two to replicate, why don't they randomly divide into many? I suppose you could say, DNA is split to cause cell replication, but why is that method chosen rather than another that allows random multiple divisions?

Swansont is a moderator of this forum and thus part of the staff. It says so beneath his picture on the right of the page.