OT: For Jamie on vaccination

By one measure, an electron is bigger than a proton. And a proton is an (ionized) hydrogen atom.

Only Bill Nye the Science Guy knows for sure.

The left thinks AGW skeptics don't trust science. Vanity prevents them from seeing that we don't trust them.

There are evangelical creationists who campaign and volunteer for environmental causes including AGW. They're creationists because of dogma, not because they don't trust science. Dogma has a hold on them that goes beyond trust. But they aren't political so they don't distrust the left in general.

is remarkably profitably invested. Jamie won't believe it, but Jamie does s eem to have been brain-damaged at some stage.

d to be a failed stratgey, there is now a developing science to science com munications. "Rather than fill the information deficit by building an arsen al of facts, scientists should instead consider how they deploy their knowl edge. They may have more luck communicating if, in addition to presenting f acts and figures, they appeal to emotions. "

when the

the

l that anthropogenic global warming is real, and something that should be d ealt with, but he wants to raise his social standing with James Arthur and Jim Thompson.

think it might be the former.

John Larkin ought to know that anthropogenic global warming is real, but th e company he keeps has other ideas. The fact that he posts links from the M urdoch media to denialist propaganda web-sites suggests that he is sincerel y gullible, rather than actively dissembling. Virtue signalling doesn't hav e to be a conscious choice. John probably doesn't know - and wouldn't accep t - that his ideas are driven by the company he keeps, but it would be hard to hang onto James Arthur as a friend if you took anthropogenic global war ming seriously.

How could I possibly compete with Jim-out-of-toch-with-reality-Thompson for that kind of emminence, or krw, Cursitor Doom or Julian Barnes, to add a few more contendors.

I'm here to correct errors. John Larkin makes a lot of mistakes, and experiences every correction as an insult.

If I wanted to look smart, I'd avoid a user group where people like Phil Hobbs and Win Hill posted fairly frequently.

It's not just the left that that thinks the AGW sceptics don't trust scienc e, and vanity doesn't come into it.

Somebody who is evangelical, campaigns and volunteers is - by definition - political. These are all political activities. Quite a lot of political act ivity transcends the left-right division.

Scepticism about anthropogenic global warming is an essentially right-wing phenomena.

does explain why. Essentially, scepticism about anthropogenic global warmin g is a public relations campaign, bought and paid for by the fossil carbon extraction industry, where the sub-contractors doing the public relations e xercise are a bunch of right wing think tanks, mnay of them originally set up by the tobacco companies to lie about the effects of tobacco smoking on health.

Yeah, that's the right question. It's the size of its orbital, when attac hed to an atom. It's the size of a chunk of metal, when it's degenerate with other electrons in the conduction band. And, it's a point particle.

There's no single right answer, though, if you want something with SI unit s of length.

rote:

is remarkably profitably invested. Jamie won't believe it, but Jamie does s eem to have been brain-damaged at some stage.

to be a failed stratgey, there is now a developing science to science comm unications. "Rather than fill the information deficit by building an arsena l of facts, scientists should instead consider how they deploy their knowle dge. They may have more luck communicating if, in addition to presenting fa cts and figures, they appeal to emotions. "

Right, the mass of an atom is all in the nucleus, the size of an atom is all in the electrons. (well not "all" but I'm using engineering "speak" anything close to zero is ~zero.) Quantum dots are engineered "atoms".

If you believe in photons, (which are lighter than electrons.) then I can make really big ones... meter's at least.

George H.

Ughh, B. Nye... let's not go there. GH

Hmm something like that... one of my pet peeve's is this notion that atoms are mostly empty space, cause the nucleus is small, and the electron is even lighter... so it takes up less space. That is exactly backwards. You are sitting on your chair, and not falling through it, because of all the electrons. (and the Pauli exclusion principle.. electrons have spin 1/2)

Yeah should you give the answer they want, or the one you think is right?

George H.

I try to give the answer they want, but sometimes there are two correct choices and you had to guess which one they overlooked. When you have an odd way of thinking and the teacher is a mundane, you usually guess wrong.

Of course if you are JT then you give the right answer and lobby to have the test changed, so everyone who gave the other answer hates you.

This reminds me of the story of the two adoms working down the street.. first Adom: "I think I've lost an electron", second Atom: "Are you sure?" First Atom: "Yes, I am positive"

Now, taking that into account, I must conclude that an electron must be very small and easy to lose track of thus explaining Adom's confusing of keeping track of these small pesky things.

I am sure Slow-Man would say different only because it's me of course! He simply can't deal with superiority beyond his own, which isn't anything significant by the way..

I never claimed to be an expert in the fields of everything like slow- man dreams of, but I can say with out a doubt that i am conscious, something that I would dispute if Slow-Man ever claimed it!

jamie

ote:

s remarkably profitably invested. Jamie won't believe it, but Jamie does se em to have been brain-damaged at some stage.

to be a failed stratgey, there is now a developing science to science commu nications. "Rather than fill the information deficit by building an arsenal of facts, scientists should instead consider how they deploy their knowled ge. They may have more luck communicating if, in addition to presenting fac ts and figures, they appeal to emotions. "

Anybody who wrote "Adom" where he intended to write "Atom" would get the sa me response.

I seem to be able to cope with Phil Hobbs being better informed on photodet ectors than I am. Being superior to Jamie is something that pretty much eve rybody who posts here has to cope with and Jamie doesn't seem to appreciate quite how obvious this is.

Jamie's intellectual arrogance is limited to the delusion that he has an in tellect. He does exhibit some signs of consciousness, but processing new da ta and changing his opinions in consequence does seem to be beyond him. He' s similar to krw in this respect, but he does have smaller range of opinion s than krw (and rather more of them are are wrong than even krw's).

te:

remarkably profitably invested. Jamie won't believe it, but Jamie does see m to have been brain-damaged at some stage.

o be a failed stratgey, there is now a developing science to science commun ications. "Rather than fill the information deficit by building an arsenal of facts, scientists should instead consider how they deploy their knowledg e. They may have more luck communicating if, in addition to presenting fact s and figures, they appeal to emotions. "

How many times bigger than an atom. Check out quantum dots.

George H.