Jump to content
Caelum

What's on your mind?

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, Nich... said:

Who means pollution?

He Does !

 

1 hour ago, chrisg said:

I've been aware of it longer than most of you have been alive... you might want to think on that...

Now you're telling me I can think ?! ... wow . I'm flattered, I think

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

🙂

 

If by fresh water fish being contaminated Nich you mean pollution then I completely agree, but aside from Lucas Heights there really is no source of radioactive waste, that is not natural, anywhere else in Australia.

 

The closest you would get I suppose would be places such as the now decommissioned power plants in Port Augusta where burning brown coal for decades has left a thorium imprint on the region. But even that is not particularly radioactive and no one seems to suffer from eating fish caught in the area.

 

Cheers

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That really is distressing.

 

Like it or not we are an ageing population who are also living longer, more and more of us are going to end up in these homes.

 

Personally I really have no interest in even getting old but it eventually gets to us all I suppose.

 

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know people with BUPA health insurance. I'm guessing it's cheap ... whether you can get money out of them is another issue.

Edited by Jeruselem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, chrisg said:

🙂

 

If by fresh water fish being contaminated Nich you mean pollution then I completely agree, but aside from Lucas Heights there really is no source of radioactive waste, that is not natural, anywhere else in Australia.

 

The closest you would get I suppose would be places such as the now decommissioned power plants in Port Augusta where burning brown coal for decades has left a thorium imprint on the region. But even that is not particularly radioactive and no one seems to suffer from eating fish caught in the area.

 

Cheers

 

 

I'm not talking about contamination.  I'm talking about nucleotides.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

🙂

 

Oh, you want to use nucleotide in its proper definition  ?

 

That's fine, but people have been bandying it around for so long as shorthand for unstable isotopes - perhaps you did not get the memo oh pedantic one ?

 

I'll grant you, it has been mis-used for so long I was using shorthand myself.

 

What I should have said is "radioactive nucleotides" but most people do not understand the classic meaning.

 

Cheers

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Severe fire warning for the Darwin area, but I assume there will idiots insisting on throwing ciggie butts out the the window anyway.

 

Edited by Jeruselem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, chrisg said:

 

I've been aware of it longer than most of you have been alive... you might want to think on that...

 

 

Image result for eye roll meme

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, chrisg said:

🙂

 

Oh, you want to use nucleotide in its proper definition  ?

 

That's fine, but people have been bandying it around for so long as shorthand for unstable isotopes - perhaps you did not get the memo oh pedantic one ?

 

I'll grant you, it has been mis-used for so long I was using shorthand myself.

 

What I should have said is "radioactive nucleotides" but most people do not understand the classic meaning.

 

Cheers

 

 

 

 

Do you mean radionuclide - or a 'radioactive nuclide', or 'radioactive isotope'?  Because sure you can have those inside nucleotides, making radioactive nucleotides which are commonly used in medicine, but why would there be any of those in stored cooling water?  Fish make poor cooling mechanisms for this kind of thing, I imagine, and it's not like hospitals are lining up to get some cheap materials for their radiodiagnostic departments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

🙂

 

I'm just using over-used short-hand, people have been referring to radio active nucleotides as "nucleotides" for rather a lot of years, - rather thought you might have noticed but perhaps you do not get out much  🙂

 

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

888.jpg

49 minutes ago, chrisg said:

I'm just using over-used short-hand, people have been referring to radio active nucleotides as "nucleotides" for rather a lot of years, - rather thought you might have noticed but perhaps you do not get out much  🙂

Yes.  But radionucleotides and radionuclides are different.

 

You have no interest in getting old but it may have jumped the gun on you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

🙂

 

Amusing, but, irrelevant  🙂

 

Meems - which I dislike,  are not going to stop me from asking why you always ask questions but rarely provide answers.

 

I  do not think that unreasonable.

 

Cheers

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had an emotionally draining day today ... then I opened here to twinair's little gem up there and laughed ... I don't even care that it was a tad hysterical laughter, it felt great :)

 

Personally I'd like educated people that are going to do important sciencey stuffs to use the right terms just so's there's no discrepancy in understanding and communication all round ... I freely admit to google-fu to get some idea of the meaning which made me  chuckle at Xen's preference for fish with the nucleotides

I have to wonder at the use of short-hand terms used  ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I mean I didn't ask any questions in that last post, but if you want to dodge that particular issue, I've been asking them to make sure you're using the words you're intending to and not using the wrong word.  I kept asking those questions because you didn't seem to understand them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

🙂

 

 I tend to think most of your questions are irrelevant to the discussion - all questions - few answers, I thoroughly understood them, my mistake was in thinking others understood what I was alluding to - I thought on average  enough Atomicans had sufficient IQ to appreciate the reference - apparently not.

 

Your loss.

 

Cheers

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, twinair said:

Image result for eye roll meme

this needs a second airing ... and given chrisg's current state of being it may just get a third, fourth and fifth airing tooooooo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, chrisg said:

🙂

 

 I tend to think most of your questions are irrelevant to the discussion - all questions - few answers, I thoroughly understood them, my mistake was in thinking others understood what I was alluding to - I thought on average  enough Atomicans had sufficient IQ to appreciate the reference - apparently not.

 

Your loss.

 

Cheers

 

 

So we're back to the 'I'm older than everyone so I'm right'?  Cool cool cool.

Like, I'd love to see something showing the usage being so radically different outside of medicine and  biology, but I wouldn't want to question you, Dr Chris.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

🙂 

 

Not at all,  just my bad for assuming too much,.  I didn't really think we were having a deep scientific conversation.

 

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, chrisg said:

 

 

Meems - which I dislike...

 

 

 

And Facebook.

And "young" people.
And anyone that disagrees with you.
And probably colour TV.

GET OFF MY LAWN!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

🙂

 

I choose not to let FB bother me or, as happens, rule my life, I have zero problem with young people, I'm perfectly willing to be proven wrong and I've been watching colour tv longer than you have been alive.

 

I wouldn't set foot on our lawn if you paid me, dickhead.

 

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WOMM?

 

This:

 

https://defence-blog.com/news/senate-panel-approves-air-forces-plan-to-buy-strike-eagles-on-steroids.html?utm_source=quora&utm_medium=referral

 

Pretty damned good for an aircraft conceived on the basis of "not a pound for the ground."

 

Seems more like putting the toe in the water, possibly to hedge bets on the F-35, or, somewhat more cynically throwing Boeing a bit of a lifeline but it's a pretty good decision - the -15 still has a lot of stretch in it, it's that good.

 

it could make you wonder why they bothered with the -35 in the first place but a V/STOL -15 I cannot imagine 🙂

 

Cheers

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, chrisg said:

WOMM?

 

This:

 

https://defence-blog.com/news/senate-panel-approves-air-forces-plan-to-buy-strike-eagles-on-steroids.html?utm_source=quora&utm_medium=referral

 

Pretty damned good for an aircraft conceived on the basis of "not a pound for the ground."

 

Seems more like putting the toe in the water, possibly to hedge bets on the F-35, or, somewhat more cynically throwing Boeing a bit of a lifeline but it's a pretty good decision - the -15 still has a lot of stretch in it, it's that good.

 

it could make you wonder why they bothered with the -35 in the first place but a V/STOL -15 I cannot imagine 🙂

 

Cheers

 

 

 

 

 

China has gone off buying Boeings ... Boeing needs more customers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×