Thread: Science

Originally Posted by Tombie

When I “traumatically amputated” (medical phrase) my Left thumb I was given fentanyl. I also had it when my Gall bladder was playing up.

It’s great stuff, hits quick, fades just as quick though!

Posted from Whyalla, I presume?

Originally Posted by Tombie

When I “traumatically amputated” (medical phrase) my Left thumb I was given fentanyl. I also had it when my Gall bladder was playing up.

It’s great stuff, hits quick, fades just as quick though!

Did the gall bladder settle down or have to be removed, as a mate's had to be taken out the 2nd time it played up?

Originally Posted by RANDLOVER

Did the gall bladder settle down or have to be removed, as a mate's had to be taken out the 2nd time it played up?

Removed. Reasonably painless, I was operated on at 5pm and discharged 7am the next morning.

Science and averages collide at times

"Australia flood crisis: 'Once in a century'Australia flood crisis: 'Once in a century'



Western Australia has been experiencing heavy rain, causing communities to be stranded and leaving hundreds of people in need of evacuation.

An emergency services minister said it was "the worst flooding Western Australia has had in its history".

"

BBC headline. Click on the link and I notices several "ONE' in a hundred suggesting it might not be just ONE

"Trend is your friend" at times in finance. Not so with floods of course

Dito for another Once in a Centry event which is not going to take a hundred years to bite again' New Scientist explains it best

"You call the current pandemic a “once-in-a-century event” (28 March, p 20). True, that is the elapsed time since the “Spanish flu” outbreak of 1918 to 1919, but this is no guide to the future. Since then, our population has quadrupled. The United Nations estimates that it was only in 2007 that the majority of humanity came to live in cities rather than the countryside. For much of the century, we couldn’t fly across the world in hours.
The production of animals for food has massively intensified, increasing the chances of new pathogens emerging, as we have tragically seen. The dangerous effects of climate change, those with the potential to disrupt ecosystems and societies in a way that creates more opportunities for the spread of diseases, have started to be experienced in the past 20 years.
If I had to guess, I would say that a return to “business as usual” will result in another major pandemic within the lifetimes of most people reading this. Of course, we now have the science and technology to cope with almost any pandemic. Yet current events are proving that we are very reluctant to make even the most basic pandemic preparations.

"

Mr Smith's 30 time Century might be said to have done it as well with not many with the expectation Don Bradmans record would fall

Originally Posted by superquag

Not disagreeing, ... Family member in Dubbo area still tells of how their dams would supposedly (on Tim's calculations...) "never". fill up... Till they did. And more besides.

Nope, I reckon the Carbon Dioxide / Global Warming ~ 'Climate Change' Story is THE greatest rort of Modern Times. CO2 Levels over the past million or five years have never been so LOW, as they are today. MUCH higher in Roman (Empire) times, as was prevailing climate / temperatures. You'd reckon someone by now, would have questioned the term. "Medieval WARMING". applied to a time, Long Ago, when there was less snow in Blighty.

Preindustrial levels of Co2 were around 280 ppm and had been for at least 6000 years, to my knowledge "Roman Times" were around 2000 years ago.
Current levels of Co2 are around 410 ppm

If you are going to state "facts" perhaps they should be factual.

Originally Posted by Dorian

Preindustrial levels of Co2 were around 280 ppm and had been for at least 6000 years, to my knowledge "Roman Times" were around 2000 years ago.
Current levels of Co2 are around 410 ppm

If you are going to state "facts" perhaps they should be factual.

ICE cores give a very cool C02 record for a LONG time

Not new science - "1977 paper has "On purely glaciological grounds it appears that the ice age gave way to present-day climates some 10 000 ± 1000 a B.P., the coldest period being 20 000 + 3000 a B.P., when the climate in Antarctica was 6-8 °C colder than at present. Glaciological data suggest a duration of 50 000 to 100 000 years for the last ice age. Before this period, climates in Greenland and Antarctica appear to have been around 2-3 °C warmer than at present." Link

One aspect of Science is it evolves and is refined by research not biased by anything hopefully

That 1977 'Royal Society' science paper has for example "Greenland and Antarctica appear to have been around 2-3 °C warmer than at present" (1977 present )

Trend is interestingly cooler





What that doesn't show is the impacts of high highs and lower lows!

Not pretty at all Greenland/Antarctica Ice Sheet Today | Surface Melt Data presented by NSIDC

"September set records for high temperatures, melt extent, and ice loss. " (2022)

Measurement is key to most things of course.

Originally Posted by superquag

Not disagreeing, ... Family member in Dubbo area still tells of how their dams would supposedly (on Tim's calculations...) "never". fill up... Till they did. And more besides.

Nope, I reckon the Carbon Dioxide / Global Warming ~ 'Climate Change' Story is THE greatest rort of Modern Times. CO2 Levels over the past million or five years have never been so LOW, as they are today. MUCH higher in Roman (Empire) times, as was prevailing climate / temperatures. You'd reckon someone by now, would have questioned the term. "Medieval WARMING". applied to a time, Long Ago, when there was less snow in Blighty.

Mate - if you think 8 BILLION people aren't having an effect on our climate then there's nothing anyone can say or show you to convince you otherwise - there's a Forrest Gump saying about this I think...

Next you'll tell me you've never been in a room full of people that has been hotter than outside? Or is that just the heating turned up to far???

Give me strength...

Yet the solution and daily desperate objective if you’re a mayor, premier, prime minister, basically any elected official is - more people and bigger populations fast as you can. At the same time the other half of government tells us we need to conserve power and use less fuel, timber, fish and most raw materials. Go figure.