Microplastics are raining down from the sky

What does 'nutritious amounts' mean? Sounds like wishful thinking. There's a threshold problem, in getting a bacterium to attack micro-plastic, it needs to stay in CONTACT with the plastic: forming some kind of biofilm would do that. Polymers aren't easy to attach a biofilm to. So, look instead at filter-feeders, I say.

So what? Observations have been made, now we can draw inferences from them. Science predictions aren't predicated on popularity.

Biofilms grow on glass, plastic, teeth, ceramic tiles, other organisms, even ice. Practically any surface. It's difficult to prevent them.

Or on probability.

tic, it needs to

that.

er-feeders, I say.

What is also plentiful is wishful thinking that man made problems will take care of themselves. Unfortunately that is near the bottom of the list of probable outcomes.

Larkin believes it is overall better for the world if CO2 rises and tempera tures rise because he thinks plants will thrive ignoring that each plant ha s a range of temperatures and other environmental features it is optimized for (called a niche) and changing these aspects will not universally create a more habitable planet for either plants or us. In other words, pollute MORE!!!

Larkin seems to also believe that by polluting our environment with a wide variety of plastics and petroleum products the environment will adapt to in corporate those pollutants as food for organisms this time not ignoring the fact that for this to happen the level of pollution must significantly inc rease. In other words, pollute MORE!!!

Bon appetit!

tic, it needs to

that.

er-feeders, I say.

Not the kind of assessments of probability that John Larkin can be bothered to try to understand.

Anthropogenic climate change looks at the observed fact that the atmospheri c CO2 level is rising (and that the extra CO2 is coming fossil carbon) and the observed fact that global temperature is rising (and pretty much as you expect from the rising CO2 level) and predicts that if we keep on burning fossil carbon a the current rate the world will end up inconveniently warm.

There's not a lot of probability in that, but John Larkin puts his faith in the improbable eventuality that something else is going on and is going to stop going on before the world gets even more inconveniently warm.

In fact he has been mislead by denialist propaganda, paid for by people who want to keep on digging up fossil carbon and selling it as fuel, but he is much to vain to admit that he has been played for a sucker.

A basis on observation gives better probability than a basis in wishful thinking. Do you wish it didn't? That's very low probability.

Books and studies have confirmed that rural, religious, conservative people are kinder and more generous than urban liberals, and adopt more and voluntarily donate much more to charitable causes.

Ironically, leftism is associated with selfishness and anger and intolerance and stinginess. But all populations have some good and some nasty people so it's plain ignorant to stereotype an entire race or sex or religion or region.

They donate a lot to "charitable causes", billions of dollars in fact, things like pro-life and anti-gay organizations that lobby to remake the United States into their theocratic vision of how it should be, much of which is entirely contrary to how the Founding Fathers thought it should be. so when required quotations of Founding Fathers like Jefferson saying things that they never said are manufactured for the purpose. There are also "faith-based charities" that provide more pedestrian aid to the poor but there are usually strings attached - tell the local faith-based charity in Trump Country you are a gay atheist who needs assistance paying for food and see how far you get.

The very wealthy tend to be right-wing and many of them go to church from time to time and often have a home or five in rural areas. they often make large charitable donations the tax benefits alone are very appealing. Including them in the picture and on sheer dollar value the charitable contributions of any other demographic will be beaten handily.

It's easy to find books and studies funded by the Heartland Institute, Cato, or the John Birch Society which reveal Conservatives to be the best at whatever topic you care to mention. On the topic of charity there are also plenty by more reputable sources like MIT that can't come to a conclusion as to whether there is any statistically significant difference.

It would be extremely ironic, if it were true. It's also worth mentioning the urban areas of New England, New York, and California have many many conservatives and right-wingers of all types living there as well, as you know.

And if "flyover country" were as in love with our President as you seem to think they are one would expect attendance at his rallies there to be significantly better.

It's nice looking at election maps of all of America covered in red except the coasts but keep in mind dirt doesn't vote:

to

ce

ike

ng. My family is from Appalachia, in Eastern Kentucky. They are all good, h ard working people. Mostly farmers who never met a stranger. My grandmother never let anyone leave her house hungry, and the only time the old man's r ifle was taken down was when something was after his animals. There aren't many left, that grandmother died in the mid '60s and my dad was the younges t of their large family. Their farm was about 20 miles from the nearest hig hway, and most of that was down a private gravel road. The hospital that I was born in was closed in the '60s, and is on the 'National Register of His toric Places'. I guess that I'll have to put his messages in the Sloman buc ket from now on.

As someone who lives in Trump country, all I can say is you don't know what you are talking about. But keep it up, you're confirming the stereo-type of a liberal, coastal, elite. And we'll probably have T for another 5-6 years.

George H.

That's OK. He has already done all the damage he can do. Meanwhile, he is destroying the republican party.

Make America Grate Again!

Make America Grape again. Sorry I should have kept my mouth shut. We need civility, not name calling.. well I guess that's what I want.

GH

George you act like it's my job to say pleasantries for your benefit to dissuade you into not to voting for a histrionic game-show host as president for life till the end of your days. I hope you do! I will not raise a finger to stop you.

Sure, everyone knows sci.electronics.design swings elections...

to

ce

ke

. My family is from Appalachia, in Eastern Kentucky. They are all good, har d working people. Mostly farmers who never met a stranger. My grandmother n ever let anyone leave her house hungry, and the only time the old man's rif le was taken down was when something was after his animals. There aren't ma ny left, that grandmother died in the mid '60s and my dad was the youngest of their large family. Their farm was about 20 miles from the nearest highw ay, and most of that was down a private gravel road. The hospital that I wa s born in was closed in the '60s, and is on the 'National Register of Histo ric Places'. I guess that I'll have to put his messages in the Sloman bucke t from now on.

Book and studies aimed at getting sold into John Larkin's demographic say w hatever it takes to generate that feel-good factor in the target audience. John Larkin is desperate for flattery, and is a particularly gullible custo mer for this kind of book. Audience flattery was particularly obvious in "T he Bell Curve" which claimed that it's readers were cleverer than everybody else (rather than kinder) on the basis of an incompetent statistical analy sis (which happened to produce the - erroneous - results they wanted).

Only in John Larkin's demographic. People who have actually met people that John Larkin would describe as a "leftists" like trade union members don't seem inclined to make that kind of association. Right-wing media owners - R upert Murdoch comes to mind - make every association that helps them to sel l newspapers to people with enough money to be still buying them.

Which didn't stop John Larkin from doing it in his previous paragraph.

ily

ns to

ence

like

was

ck

mming. My family is from Appalachia, in Eastern Kentucky. They are all good , hard working people. Mostly farmers who never met a stranger. My grandmot her never let anyone leave her house hungry, and the only time the old man' s rifle was taken down was when something was after his animals. There aren 't many left, that grandmother died in the mid '60s and my dad was the youn gest of their large family. Their farm was about 20 miles from the nearest highway, and most of that was down a private gravel road. The hospital that I was born in was closed in the '60s, and is on the 'National Register of Historic Places'. I guess that I'll have to put his messages in the Sloman bucket from now on.

he

ld

ly.

me

ve

be

Huh, no. It's more complicated than that.

George H.

What causes do you donate to? How much?

Are you asking for my tax returns?

Kidding aside tho you can fit a decent amount of gear and test-equipment stuff inside the "Large"-sized postal boxes from the USPS, for about $80, insured, and it's about 10 days to e.g. South Africa plus around another two weeks to clear customs. "Humanitarian aid/no retail value" declaration seems to work OK for a customs-value forms so long as you limit it to once a month.

For smaller items the "book/VHS mailer" is a good value when sending stuff overseas, about $30 but not too many people know about it.

Do you actually do that?

Yep, that's why I'm familiar with what a good value the good ol' USPS is at getting packages to many places in Africa is! The customs clearance usually takes significantly longer than the transit time. But customs there is measured in days or a couple weeks at the outside, not months like Brazil is sometimes

DHL would want like $220 for the same size box to Johannesburg and it still has to clear customs.