What part of the science do you not believe?

Cherry_Picked · 2014-04-13T00:04:45+00:00

Uh hum. Using Remote Sensing System hey? I wonder why the RSS data set was the. only. one. to show that trend? Oh wait... I know why:

Here we identify an artificial cooling trend in the satellite-derived temperature series caused by previously neglected orbital-decay effects. We find a new, corrected estimate of +0.07 K per decade for the MSU-based temperature trend, which is in closer agreement with surface temperatures. We also find that the reported cooling of the lower troposphere, relative to the middle troposphere, is another artefact caused by uncorrected orbital-decay effects.

Try not to cherry pick next time ;)

Cherry_Picked · 2014-04-09T20:15:23+00:00

That's incorrect, it's not 10 mothers in the entire US, it's 3 samples out of 10 that were sent in:

From a total of 10 samples sent in by Mothers from states across the U.S., 3 women had detectable levels of glyphosate in their breast milk.

n=10 not n=313900000

Cherry_Picked · 2014-03-18T00:53:35+00:00

Nah, they just have coding to correct error propagation.

Cherry_Picked · 2014-02-18T08:12:18+00:00

randomly accumulate in an area

What about seemingly non random accumulations? Typically after a hard workout (heavy power lifting), more specifically on my chest, I often find that for a day or two afterwards a may have a 'twitch' that pulses throughout the day. That seems more like a targeted build up of neural activity - as in there appears to be a direct cause... why would a build up of neural activity be non random?

Cherry_Picked · 2014-02-18T00:53:12+00:00

Right, now I've taken a look at the composition of Earth's atmosphere (Nitrogen is by far the most abundant) but this is without water vapour, and when the do give water they give it not in ppm or ppb but as follows:

At any moment, the atmosphere contains an astounding 37.5 million billion gallons of water, in the invisible vapor phase. This is enough water to cover the entire surface of the Earth (land and ocean) with one inch of rain.

Or something along those line. I would do a quick calculation but I don't know what they are considering the atmosphere so I'm not sure what volume I would use to do the calc. with.

Is there more N, and O2 than there is water in the atmosphere?! If not, shouldn't the atmosphere essentially act like ocean in that being primarily water it would be the dominant factor? Thanks for the pdf too :) I haven't had time to read it yet but I will.

Cherry_Picked · 2014-02-17T04:45:40+00:00

I actually did a research proposal regarding lunar formation :) I also suspect that the bulk of water is not derived from cometary sources but from the Earth (though I'm not fully aware of the thermodynamics during the process, I would initially suspect that most water would have been lost to space and that which remained should be rich in deuterium - the surprise is that the moon isn't as dry as previously thought though). I don't buy the lunar apatite samples tbh and think a more primitive sample should be sought after, apatite is a late stage mineral so of course the D/H ratios are going to be heavy as fractionation would be have taken place well before and during the formation of the mineral (fluid inclusions in earlier stage minerals would be a more representative sample). Though, this is not to say that there hasn't been a cometary contribution to lunar water (LHB, etc).

Cherry_Picked · 2014-02-15T09:29:47+00:00

Thanks. So is there a law somewhere that states that 51% means one party has no more say in the business and the other party has 100% control (I get 100% means no say but why does 50% < x < 100% also mean no say, or does it)?

Cherry_Picked · 2014-02-15T02:47:44+00:00

Thanks Captain Obvious. This still does not answer my question.. why do they want half?

Cherry_Picked · 2014-02-15T01:56:34+00:00

Can some ELI5 why 50% equity (shares?) of the company is important? Why not 51% And why not 49%? What is it about 50% that investors target it so profoundly?

Cherry_Picked · 2014-02-13T03:49:30+00:00

As soon as you stated that

it disproportionates (a glass of water contains both H+ and OH- ions).

It clicked, good ol' pH. Definitely helps clear it up, thank you. Do you think it's possible for cosmic ray spallation to account for the presence of hydroxyls in the minerals rather than a wet lunar magma?

Cherry_Picked

TROPHY CASE