olofscience

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content

    2,536

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

  • Feedback

    N/A

Everything posted by olofscience

  1. olofscience
    It's always been a part of human nature. Don't think you've made any major scientific discoveries in the field of human psychology, it was just a cover for "kids these days are too soft" rant. Complaining about participation trophies is actually to make you feel better about yourself and avoid bad emotions. From Plato's "The Republic", 380 BC:
  2. olofscience
    But you did, you started it. You dug yourself into this hole by criticising the coffin he was buried in, when people came to defend George Floyd and/or his family you suddenly came out with the double standard line. Ironically using photos linked to a person you keep defending - so I pointed out that the one with the double standard is you. Literally no one was criticising Trump's gold garishness in this thread until you brought it up.
  3. olofscience
    Not in this thread, though. I agree. Please start with yourself.
  4. olofscience
    Speak for yourself, you've never complained about Trump's garish gold elevators and toilets yet you complained about a coffin.
  5. olofscience
    Oh stop it with the sensible answers, billvon - Turtle will just conveniently ignore that and tell himself "nobody was able to answer my question", or somehow twist it into "hah, none of this is Trump's fault. He's only the most powerful man in the country after all".
  6. olofscience
    This reply is so vague, and addresses no specific point, it basically contains no argument. You could have saved yourself the effort and said nothing at all.
  7. olofscience
    Phil mentioned that Trump was selling Goya like a salesman and what do you reply? As if Trump's reply was someone else's fault. Nope, it's all about not blaming others. Trump's blatant ethics violations promoting Goya is entirely his choice. Just like it's entirely your choice to avoid replying to my other arguments because, well, you have none really. But you're right, you're not hiding. I'd better call it "running away".
  8. olofscience
    Remember how Trump supporters tried to boycott Keurig when they pulled advertising from his show by destroying their expensive, already-paid-for coffee machines?
  9. olofscience
    Well, it's ironic that you think Trump has a requirement to respond to "cancel culture" by hawking Goya like a salesman and blaming the 'libs' for it.
  10. olofscience
    So...this thread is where you're hiding after I pointed out why positive cases were different from positivity rates in the covid-19 thread? Or where you're hiding after me asking you a simple question on the Susan Rosenberg thread? Hiding in your bubble must be nice. Alternate opinions aren't evil...yours just happen to be rather brain-dead.
  11. olofscience
    Even with an all-out nuclear war, plenty of bacteria, algae, nematodes, possibly roaches will survive. Maybe not much else. Then over millions of years something else will evolve. But if roaches are brenthutch's favourite animal then he probably won't mind. I kind of do, though.
  12. olofscience
    What is it then? Please provide more details.
  13. olofscience
    Since Turtle didn't really have an argument against my point that positivity rates are not the same as positive test results, we'll just assume he's admitted his mistake in doing that. However, reports are now out that the White House (DHHS) has ordered hospitals to bypass the CDC on COVID-19 data collection: https://www.theverge.com/2020/7/14/21324688/white-house-covid-19-coronavirus-data-collection-cdc-bypass-trump-hhs This is probably so they can manipulate the numbers more easily. However, this order doesn't seem to be that legal:
  14. olofscience
    I think some on the left are exaggerating a bit if they think it's a threat to all life on earth. The earth has been hotter in the past, and life will go on. It might be jellyfish and roaches instead of fish and mammals, but some sort of biological life will survive. Maybe even some humans will hang on by eating those jellyfish. But our complex civilisation, with very expensive cities built near coasts, depending on food and water sources competed for between nuclear-armed countries, we're going to be in for a hammering. I don't know about brenthutch but I kind of like my current lifestyle. I like driving around so it will be with an electric car instead of gas, I'll vote for more green energy so I don't have to move my expensive house to higher ground, and will eat less dairy and meat (big CO2 footprint) so I can enjoy a steak every now and then instead of having to fight other humans for a scrap of jellyfish from the overfished oceans.
  15. olofscience
    Ok, no worries then, let's get back to the topic. What's likely happening is that those labs simply do not report negative results, which is a natural thing to do - if negative there's nothing to worry about, but of course they should still report this correctly as the positivity rate is quite important to the health officials trying to control the outbreak. Forgetting to report the negative results correctly, which probably happened here, doesn't suddenly make the tests that come back positive, inaccurate.
  16. olofscience
    Um...any of the three being correct isn't very flattering. Just saying...
  17. olofscience
    well it's even simpler than that...the number of positive cases is X. The total number of tests is Y. The positivity rate is X/Y. Kallend posted something which said "X equals 60,000 cases". Turtle posted "too bad the data is incorrect - some labs are reporting the value X/Y incorrectly!" so I pointed it out.
  18. olofscience
    It's english.
  19. olofscience
    The data kallend was quoting was the number of positive results. The link you posted was showing an error in the positivity rate reported for a few testing labs. The second value can be wrong without the first one being wrong (for example, if they got their denominator wrong).
  20. olofscience

    Q

    olofscience replied to yobnoc's topic in Speakers Corner

    That was way before that terrible symbol from the past spent too much time on my computer screen.
  21. olofscience

    Q

    olofscience replied to yobnoc's topic in Speakers Corner

    You mean where you accused me of lying about mentioning the upturned/level wings, then I linked to my earliest post which said exactly that? That shut the argument up quite nicely. Look, I'm not going to get dragged into that argument again. You might, but you know what they say about mud wrestling a pig and all. Have fun.
  22. olofscience

    Q

    olofscience replied to yobnoc's topic in Speakers Corner

    If I make a strawman argument, you know, it requires that *I* be the one to say it? You link to one of your own posts...
  23. olofscience
    Also note that while the lithium in electric car batteries can be recycled, it's "burned" and used up in a fusion reactor to generate more fuel. No recycling. We'll need to mine the moon for Helium-3 to remove this dependence on lithium for fusion. (Neutron bombardment of Helium-3 generates tritium (H3), similarly 7-Lithium generates tritium via n,t reactions from neutron bombardment)
  24. olofscience
    This shows that you know absolutely nothing about fusion power. Remember how you keep saying lithium batteries for electric cars are environmentally damaging? Fusion will probably need LOTS of lithium and make the electric car industry look tiny in comparison. Neutron activation of the rest of the reactor parts will be a big problem too. One of the reasons why fusion won't be limitless nor cheap - it needs to pay the salaries of people like me.
  25. olofscience
    I worked in a company involved with ITER (you know the nuclear fusion test bed), and while it's very interesting technologically, we'd be at near 100% renewable tech WAY before it's commercially viable.