ALERT: Water polluted with drugs around the world!

Edufer

04-30-02, 01:22 PM

Sorry friends if I am intruding to spoil your fun. If it were not a serious matter, the links to webpages like Organic Consumers Association and "Rachel website", would have been a source of fun and laughter. Who's in chage of "Rachel"? Peter Montagu, reknown scaremonger, famous for his unscientific stance when it comes to environmental issues. The fun is gone when you see how the matter of infinitesimal amounts of drugs found in the wastes is used to push political agendas. Don't think so? Read:

Quote from Organic Consumers Association: "The concentrations, however, were near the limits of detection, a few parts per trillion. Moreover, he found that running this water through an activated-carbon filter removes all vestiges of the drugs".

Besides giving a proof of the efficiency of activated-carbon filters, the statement does not supply nothing new --at least for those who knows something about the matter. If man had the means of performing chemical analysis in sludge and residue waters back in the past centuries, he would have discovered that they were full of the medicins used those days, specifically, arsenic, mercury, belladona, and other highly toxic substances. These concentrations, however, doesn't seem to have played a damaging role in human health then or today. Or perhaps it did? Maybe as those substances were being replaced by modern medicines and antibiotics, the health of people started to improve. This argument has the same validity as the one that states the present levels of drugs in residues have an effect on humans. If this is the case (highly improbable) the replacement of toxic compunds by antibiotics and other safe compounds has been proven useful.

But I wonder, who are the people who go to sewage-treatment plants and drink the water there, so they can get contaminated? The clear waters from sewage-treatment plants go to rivers, where they get diluted to an astronomically small concentration. If right at the sewage plant the concentrations found are in the trillionths per parts" (near the limits of detection, according to the link), what is the concentration found in the river one mile down? It escapes the limits of detection. It is non-existant. Perhaps a few molecules by cubic meter.

Let us go a step further. The link asys: "... reports finding a broad mix of drugs, including anticancer agents, psychiatric drugs, and anti-inflammatory compounds. 'Levels of prescription drugs that we have leaving sewage-treatment plants in Canada are sometimes higher than what's being seen in Germany,' he says." . Well, it seems then that drinking water directly from the sewage-treatment plants would give you protection from cancer, depression, and inflammatory diseases. I wouldn't reccommend it, though. Those studies would have made a better use of the money if they looked for E-coli and cholera bacteriae, or eskytosomiasis or ankylostomiasis parasites (hook worm), hystolitic amoebas and other nasty things.

But do you know why they didn't look for these? Because those analysis are already being performed, on a routine basis, by the sewage treatment plants. But never let the people know this. Better make people think they are being poisoned by "callous corporations".

Quote from the links: "Now new studies by Chris Metcalfe of Trent University in Peterborough, Ontario, Geochemist Mike Meyer of the U.S. Geological Survey in Raleigh, N.C., and his colleagues have begun looking for antibiotics in hog-waste lagoons." . I really wonder if there is somebody bathing ar drinking water from hog-waste lagoons! These studies should have been published in the National Lampoon instead. Or MAD magazine.

Quote: "The same three antibiotics, which are also prescribed for people, often appear in local waters..." Good! Now you can cure your gonorrhea by drinking water from your home faucets!

Quote: "It's because these relatively costly technologies aren't employed for treating sewage, he notes, that a large share of the drugs flushed down toilets can reach open waters. That makes me wonder if they made test on waters for all the marihuana and cocaine flushed down toilets during police raids. Maybe we can get high drinking from open waters?

But what did not surprise me at all was finding the following at the bottom of the links: Please support our work, send a tax-deductible donation to OCA , and You could help by making a tax-deductible contribution (anything you can afford, whether $5.00 or $500.00). Please send your tax-deductible contribution to: Environmental Research Foundation They make fortunes from scaring people with unproven theories and imaginary risks.

Finally, Peter Montagu says: "When a human or an animal is given a drug, anywhere from 50% to 90% of it is excreted unchanged. The remainder is excreted in the form of metabolites. So don't give medicines to humans or animals. Let them die.

"We should assume that anything we do will have negative consequences on the rest of the planet. We must limit our technological interventions into nature long before we have definitive scientific proof of harm. This is the principle of precautionary action, and if we don't adopt it, nature will get along just fine without us". --Peter Montague (National Writers Union, UAW Local 1981/AFL-CIO) if Montague hates mankind so much, he should stop his vain efforts in educating people and let nature work its way on that hideous species.

The morale Montague has always preached is: "Stop progress, go back to the Golden Days of the 18th Century. Let us kill as many men as possible, so there will be comfortable room for the remainders". Good. He should give the example and lead the way. Let's begin with him. :D

(Q)

04-30-02, 01:37 PM

Edufer
Thanks for taking the time to show once again that Truthseeker is polluting (pun intended) this message board with his nonsense and that he has no idea what's going on in the real world.

Truthseeker

For how long the ignorance will continue...?

The ignorance will stop the instant you cease posting your nonsense in the science forums.

TruthSeeker

04-30-02, 08:17 PM

Edufer... (Q)...

Really... for how long the ignorance will last...? :rolleyes:

Hello-oooooo!!!!
The number of drugs is raising REALLY fast!!!!
It's the long-term thing that we are looking at... :bugeye:
Some years ago they didn't find anything... now it's increasing FAST!!!!! :eek:

*sights

And you (Q)... you couldn't prove me wrong could you? Edufer is the only one that actually tried to prove me wrong (as usual...). :rolleyes:

But you are completly ignoring everything that is happening in the world!!!

Wake up! Before you realize that I'm right too late... :(

Love,
Nelson

(Q)

04-30-02, 09:11 PM

And you (Q)... you couldn't prove me wrong could you? Edufer is the only one that actually tried to prove me wrong (as usual...)

Proving you wrong is childs play and a waste of anyones time because whatever you say is usually complete nonsense. Others continuously show you how wrong you are but you ignore it and continue on la-de-da. I couldn't be bothered to tell you anything. I just sit back and laugh my ass off.

And besides, you didn't say anything.

btw - Increasing the size of your font in a vain attempt to get your point across is something an immature child would do.

Are you going to throw a tantrum next?

Xev

04-30-02, 09:39 PM

All:

To put a concentration of a few parts per billion (not to mention trillion!) into context, imagine a copy of the complete works of Shakesphere with one typo. That's roughly the same concentration.

Or so my chem lab teacher explained it.

Hardly anything to worry about.

My thanks to Edufer for an excellent post. It's a pity that Nelson cannot respond to criticism....

Edufer

04-30-02, 11:05 PM

Gentlemern, I didn't try to prove truthseeker is wrong, because nobody is the owner of the truth. I just tried, as usual, to show some facts that could prove the studies mentioned by truthseeker are just a piece of scaremongering, the best way to keep coming huge amounts of money into the pork barrel that environmental sciences has become.

Everytime I read that kind of studies (on pollution, global warming or any other issues) I just sit back, analyze the "facts" presented, compare them with what sound science has established, and then make my comments, or sometimes, post the conclusion of studies that say the opposite.

Maybe that way the truth can raise its head, today covered with garbage.

TruthSeeker

04-30-02, 11:30 PM

Hello....

Excuse me, but the situation is much worse than you think. It's always covered... :rolleyes:

Do you know how much pollution there really is? Do you know how much chemical pollution a common industry can really generate and throw in the rivers during night (hidden, of course...)...?

Go there and see... ;)

Edufer... lots of information is twisted nowdays only because people want money...

Really... you guys are completly in the hands of US imperialism... :(

Love,
Nelson

(Q)

05-01-02, 01:40 AM

Truthseeker

Excuse me, but the situation is much worse than you think. It's always covered...
Do you know how much pollution there really is? Do you know how much chemical pollution a common industry can really generate and throw in the rivers during night (hidden, of course...)...?

I see you've added paranoid delusionist and conspiracy theorist to your resume.

Xev

05-01-02, 01:49 AM

That's because you're in the hands of US imperealism, Q.

Nelson, chill. Just, chill.

Now, you thought there was a problem. There isn't much of a problem. Shouldn't you be happy, rather than insulting the people who disagree?

Do you know how much pollution there really is? Do you know how much chemical pollution a common industry can really generate and throw in the rivers during night (hidden, of course...)...?

Do you? Do you have evidence? Somtimes we think things are obviously true, but they are not true.

Really... you guys are completly in the hands of US imperialism...

Damn, you got me. I'm in the hands of US imperealism. That's why I disagree with you. That's the only reason people disagree with you.

(Q)

05-01-02, 01:56 AM

Xev

What really irks me is that Truthseeker is a foreigner who doesn't pay taxes and lives off the labors of others. And here he is bashing the US and everyone in it. On top of that he's living in Canada. He's a parasite.

What a jerk.

Xev

05-01-02, 02:08 AM

Q:
Yeah, US bashing seems to be a sport that Nelson has elevated to Olympic proportions.

It is easy for the simple-minded to blame America for all the world's problems. It is harder for them to actually get off their asses and realize that no matter how much they hate America, they won't solve any problems by spewing said hatred.

Either on the streets or on discussion boards.

Yes Nelson, that was aimed at you. You think spewing hatred of the US will solve the world's problems? Guess again kid.

Edufer

05-01-02, 11:41 AM

Truthseeker: "Edufer... lots of information is twisted nowdays only because people want money...

You said it. I agree with you on this. But you should know that the environmental movement in the US earns more than 15 Billion dollars a year --TAX FREE, what makes alarming claims and environmental denunciations a fantastic business. "The monkey dances for the money".

It is a well known fact industries pollute when they can get away with it. It is also a fact that most industries are cleaning after what they pollute. That's why the air in Europe and the US is much cleaner now than forty years ago (lots of control on sulphur and nitrogen dioxides, etc) and then scientists discovered that even though tha air was cleaner, the acid rains continued. That made scientists discover that,

1) rains are naturally acid. Only in few desertic regions there is "neutral" rains, or slighty alkaline.

2) the acid rains were not produced by sulphur emissions from the industries. The main reason is the decrease in alkaline chemicals in the air, as a result from more paved roads, strict controls over emissions by cement and lime factories, etc. This lack of alkaline chemicals in rains slowly acidify the soils, streams, lakes and rivers. This also led to an increase of bogs in the forests that started to kill (suffocate) tree roots.

The slight acidity of rains does not interact with tree leaves. If you people are interested, I can tell more about it, sending you to scientific articles appeared in Scientific American, Science, Nature, etc.

About being in the hands of "US imperialism": If I were a simple minded person I would tend to agree with you, especially as we people outside the US suffer the consequences of such imperialism, aggravated since the inception of "globalization". But things are no that easy. Of course there exists the so-called US imperialism, but you couldn't put the blame on the common US people, as they are suffering from the same evil. This would lead us to a nice and interesting discussion about the way American people see their government and their system, and the way people from other countries see it. About the composition of the US political system, where there is only one Party (the corporations and owners) and two factions of that party: Reps and Democrats.

People in the US believe they are electing their governments, but they are simply voting for candidates previously chosen by the corporations (war industry, electronics, communications, Wall Street, etc). What I see, as an experience of many years living in the US, is that the US has become a "police state", where the freedoms of their inhabitants have been seriously impaired. My wife has decided never go back to the US because the people and the police persecutes her because she smokes, and some other minor details that she thinks are very important for feeling free. Big Brother is watching you. (remember Orwell's 1984?).

Maybe most Americans are not really aware how it is to live outside the US, because they are not aware of the "environment" they live in. Like fish, they only notice there is something called "water" (or freedom, in this case) when they are taken out of the water.

But this is a sensitive matter, quite difficult to discuss with Americans, so I don't like to talk about this to Americans. They are proud of their country, and I would be proud too, if I looked only at confort, gadgets, public services, scientific and technological advances, and the living standard. You must start with that, of course, but Americans have paid quite a high price for their confort. Somebody said once: "War is an excellent business. Invest you son.". How many Americans have done this without knowing their sons were not dying for "Freedom or Democracy" but for making richer a bunch of corporations? Nobody ever asked the US to be the world's Cop. The corporations did. Kissinger, Brezsinsky, David Rockefeller, the CFR, the Trilateral Commission, and the like did. And the American people bought the ticket to a ride they might be feeling sorry now.

Americans gave up their personal freedom, they lost the individuality and became bits and bytes in a system that I would like to research some more. No offense meant, though. The US of America is a great country, but not in the sense most Americans believe.

TruthSeeker

05-01-02, 07:20 PM

(Q),

Get lost...

Xev,

Now, you thought there was a problem. There isn't much of a problem. Shouldn't you be happy, rather than insulting the people who disagree?

I know there is a problem... It's not the first time I heard about those things...

Do you? Do you have evidence? Somtimes we think things are obviously true, but they are not true.

Well... perhaps someday I might buy a camera and film them doing that, then I get the evidence... but in this stage of my life... it's impossible...

I read about this is many places...

Damn, you got me. I'm in the hands of US imperealism. That's why I disagree with you. That's the only reason people disagree with you.

Because they can't see it...? :bugeye:

Yes Nelson, that was aimed at you. You think spewing hatred of the US will solve the world's problems? Guess again kid.
I don't think so... but if people realize what's really going on... I have more hope on what can be done about it...

Edufer,

I agree about the enviromnmental business... there's some of this.. actually... in all areas... :bugeye:

But...
1) rains are naturally acid. Only in few desertic regions there is "neutral" rains, or slighty alkaline.

So why the monuments in Athens are being literally dissolved by rain...?

About being in the hands of "US imperialism": If I were a simple minded person I would tend to agree with you, especially as we people outside the US suffer the consequences of such imperialism, aggravated since the inception of "globalization". But things are no that easy. Of course there exists the so-called US imperialism, but you couldn't put the blame on the common US people, as they are suffering from the same evil. This would lead us to a nice and interesting discussion about the way American people see their government and their system, and the way people from other countries see it. About the composition of the US political system, where there is only one Party (the corporations and owners) and two factions of that party: Reps and Democrats.

Yes! :)

Maybe most Americans are not really aware how it is to live outside the US, because they are not aware of the "environment" they live in. Like fish, they only notice there is something called "water" (or freedom, in this case) when they are taken out of the water.

I've been having problems with "fishes" here... :D
Do you know Zen-Buddhism...? ;)

But this is a sensitive matter, quite difficult to discuss with Americans, so I don't like to talk about this to Americans.
I should have known this before... now it's too late... :D

Somebody said once: "War is an excellent business. Invest you son.". How many Americans have done this without knowing their sons were not dying for "Freedom or Democracy" but for making richer a bunch of corporations?

I'm happy to see that someone sees it!!! :)

Americans gave up their personal freedom, they lost the individuality and became bits and bytes in a system that I would like to research some more. No offense meant, though. The US of America is a great country, but not in the sense most Americans believe.

I stress "become bits and bytes" by saying "slavery of the system"... :D I guess I shouldn't do that... :o

Excellent post!! :)

Love,
Nelson

Tyler

05-01-02, 10:19 PM

Nelson. The funniest part is that you think you're the only one who realizes this. We've all been fed this stuff through the media for like the past 10 years.

TruthSeeker

05-01-02, 11:22 PM

REally...? :rolleyes: :bugeye: :eek:
So why do you act as if you believed in the opposite of all those things...? :bugeye: :eek: :bugeye: :eek:

Love,
Nelson

Tyler

05-02-02, 12:50 PM

How do you know how I act? Pretty arrogant of you to assume I do things detremental to the environment. How do you knwo I don't lead rallies against polution? And only eat organic food?

Hey Nelson, I got a new idea for you. You think if everyone just all of a sudden started loving each other there would be no problems, right? Well how about this. If everyone just unquestionably did what I tell them to, there would be no problems.

(Q)

05-02-02, 12:54 PM

Truthseeker

The rebuttal:

(Q),

Get lost...

For once you actually were able to string two words together that made sense. Congratulations !

Are you asking me to "get lost" that I may digress to your level of fantasy?

Lesion42

05-02-02, 01:45 PM

To put a concentration of a few parts per billion (not to mention trillion!) into context, imagine a copy of the complete works of Shakesphere with one typo. That's roughly the same concentration.

I have a complete volume of shakespeare with one typo. It drives me nuts...:bugeye:

It is really sad, though. No one seems to care that much about the environment anymore.

Xev

05-02-02, 03:35 PM

Nelson:
I believe Q has offered to 'get lost' once you stopped filling the science forums with your pseudoscientific mush.

I will 'get lost' as well once you stop filling the science forums with you inane and irrelevent hate of America.

Fair?

TruthSeeker

05-03-02, 06:22 PM

Tyler,

How do you know how I act? Pretty arrogant of you to assume I do things detremental to the environment. How do you knwo I don't lead rallies against polution? And only eat organic food?

I know how do you speak... that's enough...

Lesion42,

It is really sad, though. No one seems to care that much about the environment anymore.

Yes... :(

I talk, and talk, and talk... and anyone wants to listen what's true... people don't accept easily this kind of thing...

Love,
Nelson

Stryder

05-03-02, 07:20 PM

Firstly, as I've said previously TS, if your going to start a thread, write an introduction PLEASE!, rather than just a bunch of links.

As for water being drugged, It's been known for many years that the average sewer rat has been increasing in size and varociousness. In truth, any drugs pumped into the sewers is usually after it's passed through humans or through "Waste Disposal". In fact there is even the point that certain hormones produced by men and women can have catalysing effect on the water systems.

To put it bluntly, Ladies having that time of the month contribute to rat size.

When looking at water treatment, there have been steps to try and remove bacteria, which does mean that alot of chemicals are used within the process of cleaning water. This water is then pumped through holding areas to "Settle", before eventually being piped to houses or pumped into reservoirs.

The only other way that drugs end up into the water system would be through junkies flushing their stash or from chemical concotions created from fertilizers and the like.

TruthSeeker

05-03-02, 07:31 PM

Stryderunknown,

Firstly, as I've said previously TS, if your going to start a thread, write an introduction PLEASE!, rather than just a bunch of links.

Yeah... I should have done this...

The only other way that drugs end up into the water system would be through junkies flushing their stash or from chemical concotions created from fertilizers and the like.

There's much illegal dumping and such thing going on... I've heard that many industries illegally throw out chemical waste in rivers and such thing... :(

Love,
Nelson

Tyler

05-03-02, 08:47 PM

"know how do you speak... that's enough..."

Oh? In that case I have full right to consider you the least intelligent human being ever. You can't learn grammar or spelling (I met a man from Bangladesh who learned English fully in 8 months, though he still had an accent of course), you don't understand the most basic logic, you seem to think that every other human being is wrong and you are the supreme truth.... It goes on and on.

(Q)

05-03-02, 08:59 PM

There's much illegal dumping and such thing going on... I've heard that many industries illegally throw out chemical waste in rivers and such thing...

You've "heard." That means absolutely nothing. You have zero evidence. Stop polluting this forum with made up nonsense.

TruthSeeker

05-04-02, 12:22 PM

(Q),

You've "heard." That means absolutely nothing. You have zero evidence. Stop polluting this forum with made up nonsense.

I prefer to believe in what someone says (which is full of emotions and easily to prove it) then to believe in a bunch of numbers that actually means nothing at all... Believe in the number statitics gives to you is worse then believe in what someone is saying... :bugeye:

Tyler

05-04-02, 01:21 PM

Hitler was a pretty good guy.

Someone said that to me the other day.

Statistics would say otherwise...

TruthSeeker

05-04-02, 01:41 PM

Use common sense... :bugeye:
Besides that, how do you know the statistics are right?

Tyler

05-04-02, 01:52 PM

I can't believe how ignorant you are. So if someone comes up and tells you some random fact that seems like it could be true, you believe them?

You will never be a scientist. That is the opposite mentality of a scientist.

'Besides, how do you know the statistics are right?'
Besides, how do you know what this person is saying is right?

TruthSeeker

05-04-02, 02:07 PM

Besides, how do you know what this person is saying is right?

Emotions, body language... The information passed through words is only about 10% of the communication...

And the statistics...?

Tyler

05-04-02, 02:19 PM

Whether they believe what they are saying is true or not is not what is at debate, idiot.

For instance, if someone EXTREMELY sincerely (such as myself) looked at you and said; 'I have spent my life searching within myself and others and discovered there is no God'

would you believe them?

Tyler

05-04-02, 02:20 PM

As for statistics. I usually look for 3 sources. If 3 DIFFERENT sources say the same thing and are scientifically done, I take it as truth.

Xev

05-04-02, 02:26 PM

Nelson:
I prefer to believe in what someone says (which is full of emotions and easily to prove it) then to believe in a bunch of numbers that actually means nothing at all...

That is so utterly unscientific. Statistics mean nothing? Statistics are data....are you saying that data means nothing?

Now, since you have no understanding of science, kindly do not post in science.

Besides that, how do you know the statistics are right?

You look at how they were gathered. This takes an understanding of math and methodology. You look at how well they agree with other statistics, gathered in a valid way.

Now, you do not understand science - do not post in it unless you are willing to learn.

TruthSeeker

05-04-02, 02:35 PM

For instance, if someone EXTREMELY sincerely (such as myself) looked at you and said; 'I have spent my life searching within myself and others and discovered there is no God'

If one looks to one's Heart... such thing will never be said...
If you look to your mind, it will certainly say the opposite.
My mind still say there's no god but my Heart still say there's...

Xev,

That is so utterly unscientific. Statistics mean nothing? Statistics are data....are you saying that data means nothing?

Why do you believe in numbers? What makes those numbers more credible then people's opinion?

Now, since you have no understanding of science, kindly do not post in science.

I have understanding in science... do you know that science is taught at school? :bugeye:

Love,
Nelson

Xev

05-04-02, 02:50 PM

Nelson:
If one looks to one's Heart... such thing will never be said...
If you look to your mind, it will certainly say the opposite.
My mind still say there's no god but my Heart still say there's...

My 'heart' says differently.

Why do you believe in numbers? What makes those numbers more credible then people's opinion?

An opinion is merely an opinion - statistics are more than numbers, they are data.

Data is more reliable than opinion because

A: It is true - an opinion might be false.
B: Opinions change all the time - data, a form of truth, does not.

False data does, of course. In any case, opinions are much more likely to be wrong.

I have understanding in science...

But you do not follow the methodology.

do you know that science is taught at school?

Very poorly, yes.

TruthSeeker

05-04-02, 04:41 PM

Xev,

My 'heart' says differently.

That's your mind... :D:D

An opinion is merely an opinion - statistics are more than numbers, they are data.

A person's experience is data too... :D:D
Besides that, saying how many people lost their lifes in a war is nothing compared to listen from someone that WAS in the war. In this sense, statistcs have a certain lack...

False data does, of course. In any case, opinions are much more likely to be wrong.

You can now when someone is saying the truth or not... it's not hard. If the person is sweating, the expressions and the body movement... all those things are indications. Numbers are a convenience though...

But you do not follow the methodology.

In that you are right... I might follow it though as soon as I get some evidence... and statistics... :D

Very poorly, yes.

Yeah I know... I finished by learning more with books. They should teach Philosophy at school... :bugeye:

Love,
Nelson

Xev

05-04-02, 05:43 PM

Nelson:
That's your mind...

Nope, it's my heart. At least, what you mean by 'heart' - not my actual heart which says

Gla glump
Gla glump
Gla glump
Gla glump

A person's experience is data too...
Besides that, saying how many people lost their lifes in a war is nothing compared to listen from someone that WAS in the war. In this sense, statistcs have a certain lack...

Yes it is, but an opinion is not data in the way that you are using it. Statistics are much more usefull precisely because they are not emotional.

You can now when someone is saying the truth or not... it's not hard. If the person is sweating, the expressions and the body movement... all those things are indications. Numbers are a convenience though...

A person can 'cheat' with body language. For instance, a woman can flirt with a man she has utterly no interest in and convince him. (That's 'cause y'all men are stupid that way - hehehe - STOP IT!)

In that you are right... I might follow it though as soon as I get some evidence... and statistics...

Then why post in 'science' if you don't follow the methodology of science? All you manage to do is annoy Q, Tyler and everybody else because we expect you to use the methodology - and you don't!

Yeah I know... I finished by learning more with books. They should teach Philosophy at school..

Yes they should!

TruthSeeker

05-04-02, 06:06 PM

Xev,

Do you actually understand what I mean by Heart...?

Yes it is, but an opinion is not data in the way that you are using it. Statistics are much more usefull precisely because they are not emotional.

Believe in statistcs is not very different then believe in people's opinions... if you doubt, why don't you go there and see it by yourself?

I said:
There's much illegal dumping and such thing going on... I've heard that many industries illegally throw out chemical waste in rivers and such thing...

Go there and see by yourself instead of believing in statistcs... ;):D

Statistics can be twisted easily... but when you see it by yourself...

A person can 'cheat' with body language. For instance, a woman can flirt with a man she has utterly no interest in and convince him. (That's 'cause y'all men are stupid that way - hehehe - STOP IT!)

Unless you are a very good actor. Mainly because there are reactions that you can't control nor imitate like trembling, for example.

Then why post in 'science' if you don't follow the methodology of science? All you manage to do is annoy Q, Tyler and everybody else because we expect you to use the methodology - and you don't!

Instead of using evidences I use reasoning, comparisons and philosophy. If I want evidence I will have to do my own experiments, what's not very easy with what I'm trying to prove here... :bugeye: :eek:

Love,
Nelson

Xev

05-04-02, 06:18 PM

Nelson:
Do you actually understand what I mean by Heart...?

I think - you mean a sort of inner understanding, an intuition, not a rational understanding but a feeling?

Believe in statistcs is not very different then believe in people's opinions... if you doubt, why don't you go there and see it by yourself?

I don't doubt that there are companies who will do that sort of thing - if allowed the oppertunity. I have read of cases of this happening.

However, that does not make it a major problem. We have federal regulations and lawsuits to keep the companies under control.

In the US, at least.

Unless you are a very good actor. Mainly because there are reactions that you can't control nor imitate like trembling, for example.

Possibly. But many people are good actors like that.

Instead of using evidences I use reasoning, comparisons and philosophy. If I want evidence I will have to do my own experiments, what's not very easy with what I'm trying to prove here..

Well I won't argue with you there! But it's not science at all, and shouldn't be posted in 'science'.

See my point?

TruthSeeker

05-04-02, 07:00 PM

Xev,

I think - you mean a sort of inner understanding, an intuition, not a rational understanding but a feeling?

Yeah... you are in the right track... :)

In the US, at least.

Well... that's what it's said... but I have my doubts...

Many countries (not only in the developing world, but also in the developed) might be doing this. It's much easier and less expensive to throw the waste in the rivers than to treat it...

Good to see that you know about that!

Possibly. But many people are good actors like that.
Oh!
Have you ever tried? :)
It's really hard to imitate the trembling of the legs of someone that fears... ;)

See my point?

Yes, I see... :)

Love,
Nelson

kmguru

05-04-02, 09:04 PM

ALERT: Another thread on this topic started a day before....

May be they can be merged...

http://www.sciforums.com/t6909/sa67aeb392fff83f4356206560333e9e8/thread.html

TruthSeeker

05-05-02, 11:27 AM

Thanks kmguru :)

Now... Xev, Tyler, (Q) and Stryderunknown...
What do you think?

Enough evidence or the Scientific American Magazine is "crackpot" (or wathever...) too?

How many things I'm saying here are true and you don't listen to me...?

We will find out... :);):D

Love,
Nelson

(Q)

05-05-02, 12:08 PM

Truthseeker

How many things I'm saying here are true

Percentage wise, I'd estimate about 99.999999999999999% is crap.

you don't listen to me...?

You'll be happy to know that I am no longer going to respond to your drivel. From this point on, I am going to ignore you. It took Mr. G to bring me back to my senses (quack quack). Therefore, you may quack all you want and will probably (no promises) not hear a word from me.

That said, if you continue to pollute the science forums with your drivel and it escalates to new heights, the Q will simply stop posting and move on. I am not interested in science forums that are run by trolls like you.

Ciao

Q

Xev

05-05-02, 12:31 PM

Nelson:
Oh!
Have you ever tried?
It's really hard to imitate the trembling of the legs of someone that fears...

I'm not much of an actress. But watch Kenneth Branaugh's 'Hamlet' some time - he is very convincing. As are most professional actors.

Enough evidence or the Scientific American Magazine is "crackpot" (or wathever...) too?

Not enough evidence - if you will read the article, you will note that the magazine did not take a position on the problem. In addition, the article only described the need for further studies.

How many things I'm saying here are true and you don't listen to me...?

Ego, ego, ego.

Don't know - how many things am I saying that are true, yet you do not listen? :p

Now, since you do not follow the methodology of science, why do you post in science?

Edufer

05-05-02, 04:41 PM

Gentlemen: you've gone into a dead alley in this discussion. I wanted to stay away from it, but there is a little demon inside me that makes me intrude where I am not called.

I said once (quoting someone much wiser than me), that "Statistics are the Most Elegant way of lying".

Said that, I would add that statistics, when properly used, in well designed statistical models, made by honest and competent people, that have no agenda to fulfill, is a highly valuable tool for understanding some issues.

However, present science is using highly unreliable statistics, full of dishonest data, trying to prove hypotesis that already have a unique conclusion: that designed by groups interested in pushing forward their agenda. They put money forward and say: "Build a statistic that will prove this". And money talks, loud and clear!

Using the data (provided by governmental health agencies) a Dr. Sternglass "proved" statistically that the Trojan nuclear station in Multnomah county in Washington state, was causing high levels of leukemia. He claimed a 76% increase that made headlines and almost provoked the station shutdown.

Using the same data, I proved to them that Trojan was curing leukemia! The leukemia cases had droped 42% in the next two years of the opening of Trojan.

Of course, both "studies" are utter nonsense, a work of idiots, or quite dishonest persons. If you are interested in the graph showing both "studies" (Sternglass and mine), I will be glad to link you to it.

And about believing in what other people say, this is a field where people are commiting mistakes every minute in their lives. I think only experience and lots of knowledge of the person who is telling you something, will make the difference. An example: politicians. you still believe in them? Your wives, sons and daughters: how can you tell they are not lying to you? How many times did they get away with their unrecognized lies? Someday you'll learn that you were the last one to know what was going on... :D :D

Tyler

05-05-02, 05:20 PM

"How many things I'm saying here are true and you don't listen to me...?"

I think I've said it before.....my only regert in life is that I will never get to see you as you're 75 and you never succeeded in your crap.

"We will find out..."

How? Are you actually going to try and get your b.s. published? And then get famous? If you do this, please come to Toronto, find Tyler Cohen and hunt me down and laugh in my face. Because you can bet that if I actually do meet you when you're 75 and a failure, I'll laugh in your face.

"I'm not much of an actress. But watch Kenneth Branaugh's 'Hamlet' some time - he is very convincing. As are most professional actors."

Don't even need to be a pro. Hell, a lot of actors/actresses are less convincing than my dog. All it takes is someone with enough experience and control over their reactions and actions. I went out with a 27 year old woman last summer for a while who had not a doubt in her mind taht I was 21 and attending Queens University. And she wasn't exactly a dummy herself.

Edufer - Stats can be improperly used, agreed. But you are failing to see what Nelson is saying. If I provide three sources like the Oxford Dictionary, Websters and a third dictionary that state the English language has 400,000 words but his friend says that he heard somewhere the English language has 1,000,000 words, he would definetly not believe me. Which is just truly idiotic. And besides that, completely unscientific.

Edufer

05-05-02, 06:13 PM

Tyler, yes, you are right. Sometimes (most of the time) I fail to see what Nelson's point is because I try to reason in a scientific way, that is, using a thinking methodology that cannot argue with "feelings", "sentiments" or "religious beliefs". Nelson seems to be a strong believer in Gaia's religion, and think that the environmental gosspel is science. It is not. Or at least I think it is not.

People tend to miss the important part of thingsm and ask irrelevant questions when an extraordinary event happens, as when somebody says: "A UFO just landed right in Main Ave. and Elm Street, and two huge amoebas emerged from it!"

Most people will say: "What? At main Ave and Elm Street? I don't believe you!".

They miss the main point of almost everything.

Xev

05-05-02, 06:19 PM

Edufer, take that bit about Gaia down now! He hasn't mentioned it yet, and you will just encourage him! :p

No, it's not that he's an enviormentalist per se....it's that he believes anything anybody tells him, as long as it 'feels good'.

Seriously, I agree with you on statistics. However, when properly used, they are an wonderful tool.

However, Nelson does not have a complete understanding of the scientific method. It's not somthing you can learn out of a textbook...

In any case, he does not use the methodology. Why he continues to post in science is beyond me, but, there you have it.

TruthSeeker

05-05-02, 06:54 PM

Xev,

No, it's not that he's an enviormentalist per se....it's that he believes anything anybody tells him, as long as it 'feels good'.
Not exactly...

However, Nelson does not have a complete understanding of the scientific method. It's not somthing you can learn out of a textbook...

I do have it... but I'm not a professional scientist, you know... I've never gone to university... :bugeye: :eek:

In any case, he does not use the methodology. Why he continues to post in science is beyond me, but, there you have it.
I continue to post because people will knock me down... but in some years they will say:
"Uh-oh... the kid was right...!"
:D:D:D:D

Love,
Nelson

TruthSeeker

05-05-02, 07:00 PM

Edufer,

Said that, I would add that statistics, when properly used, in well designed statistical models, made by honest and competent people, that have no agenda to fulfill, is a highly valuable tool for understanding some issues.

Yeah... go dreaming...:cool:

Do you know how many people fit your description...?
I tell you... VERY FEW... :bugeye: :eek: :(

They put money forward and say: "Build a statistic that will prove this". And money talks, loud and clear!

Thanks for bringing it... :eek:

I would like to add that there was a company of tooth paste that proved statistically that 2 out of 3 dentists recommend their products. Well... they asked three doctors... and the third said: "It doesn't make any difference the tooth paste you use"... :bugeye: :eek: :D

Love,
Nelson

Tyler

05-05-02, 07:21 PM

"Yeah... go dreaming...

Do you know how many people fit your description...?
I tell you... VERY FEW..."

That's why you get 3 sources. Like I said.

"I continue to post because people will knock me down... but in some years they will say:
"Uh-oh... the kid was right...!""

I reffer you to my last post on my life's regret.

TruthSeeker

05-05-02, 08:25 PM

That's why you get 3 sources. Like I said.

Not enough... in the way things are going... not enough...

Tyler

05-05-02, 08:41 PM

If three unrelated sources say the same thing, it's not enough?

But one person who may or may not be right is?

You said you've heard that companies dump chemical waste. Who told you this? The people who work at the companies and are privelaged enough to see this illegal act?

If not, then do you know where the info came from? Statistics.

bbcboy

05-10-02, 06:53 AM

Nelson Dear, are we to understand from all this that you have stopped drinking water ?
Or that you think we should stop drinking water?
I am mostly water!

Most medical bodies would recommend that we drink at least 2L of water a day as well as any other fluids. Maybe you should do this.

Who knows you may develop bosoms.... Then you could feel a tit when you talk like one :D

TruthSeeker

05-10-02, 08:57 PM

bbcboy,

I'm discussing the problem of lack of water in the world. In only a few years we may experience the price of water increase pretty much...

Love,
Nelson

bbcboy

05-13-02, 07:37 AM

No Nelson, you're not. There is no lack of water,indeed evidence suggests that the polar ice caps are melting and the amount of free water in the world is increasing.
The technology for ensuring water is clean and drinkable has already been adequately impressed upon you in this thread and the evidence for same has been presented.

I'm curious as to why you believe all that you read and yet when you present such claims here in a forum full of informed scientific minds, you refuse to back down and admit that you could have mis-interpreted what was originally said.

It's no wonder people lose patience with you. You have the intelligence to put an argument across well. Try applying some of it to your own agenda and analysing why you can't be wrong

TruthSeeker

05-14-02, 12:37 AM

bbcboy,

Doesn't the water of the ice caps go to the ocean, where the water is salty...?:bugeye:

Will this melting increase the level of water and destroy cities in the shore...?:bugeye:

Love,
Nelson

bbcboy

05-14-02, 10:29 AM

Let's stick to one branch of armageddon at a time shall we.

Yes the polar ice caps will melt into the sea. This is what they float on so logic would dictate this as a probable course of action. De-salinisation is a complex but fairly cheap method of removing the undrinkable parts of sea water leaving it safe, however this should not need to be an issue as it's hardly likely to stop raining in the near future and this does most of the work for us,(Evaporation/distillation. etc) The world is a funny old place Nelson and what's really funny is that people still want to live on it. I'm sure should any major problems with clean drinking water occur then the powers that be will spend no time fixing it.

Unless of course you live in sub-saharan Africa where it's all up to U2 and Bob Geldof

Stop panicking there's a dear. Go out and have sex. Once you fully discover this you won't give a shit where your next H2O comes from I kid you not:D

Edufer

05-14-02, 06:48 PM

Hold it!. This topic is going nowehere. The original topic was concerned with the minute amounts of medicines, antibiotics, estrogens, and other chemicals that have found their way into the undergroung waters. That's what seems to scare truthseeker, a person easily scared, in my opinion.

Remember "Little Chicken", whern an accorn fell from an oak and struck his head? He started yelling: "The sky is falling!, the sky is falling!". And people like Nelson believed him...

As for the polar ice caps melting: if the Arctic ice melts (a wild assumption and an impossible event) the oceans will not rise a millimeter. When floating ice melts down, it returns the same VOLUME of water it took when it froze. that's why the icebergs float. they are less dense (More volume at equal weight) than surrounding water. Result: levels do not vary. Simple physical laws you have learned at school (I hope).

The amount of water in Earth is the same one that existed at the time of the planet's formation. No more, no less (except for infinitesimal amounts of water dissociated by industrial processs to make hydrogen --counteracted by the formation of water by some other industrial processes).

If our tap water gets polluted (and that claim is highly doubtfull) that's another matter. Drinkable waters in poor countries has been lousy since the formation of Earth and the ruling of politicians. So, there seems to be no solution for Nelson's concerns. So, let's go out, and have lots of fun before the planets collide!

Xev

05-14-02, 07:02 PM

Doesn't the water of the ice caps go to the ocean, where the water is salty...?

Desalination. Easy enough.

http://resources.ca.gov/ocean/97Agenda/Chap5Desal.html
http://www.coastal.ca.gov/desalrpt/dsynops.html

Will this melting increase the level of water and destroy cities in the shore...?

Depends on how much water melts. I haven't reviewed the figures, but I find the extreme figures (Japan being flooded) to be a bit, well, unbelievable.

Edufer:

As for the polar ice caps melting: if the Arctic ice melts (a wild assumption and an impossible event) the oceans will not rise a millimeter. When floating ice melts down, it returns the same VOLUME of water it took when it froze. that's why the icebergs float. they are less dense (More volume at equal weight) than surrounding water. Result: levels do not vary. Simple physical laws you have learned at school (I hope).

Archimedes principle. Interesting. However, the ice in the Antarctic is behaving as a solid, as a glacier almost...

If it melts, the water level will rise. However, this problem has been exaggerated:

The ice sheet's disappearance is of concern because of estimates that its complete melting could raise the global sea level by 15 to 20 feet, swamping low-lying coastal communities around the world.

At the current rate of melting, that will take about 7,000 years, the researchers estimate. Conway said the melting annually contributes about 1 millimeter - nearly one-twenty-fifth of an inch - to sea-level rise.

So if the antarctic ice sheet completly melts (likely - NOT!), we won't have much to worry about for hundreds to thousands of years.

May as well worry about asteroid strikes. -Not that I'm saying it's horridly stupid to worry about those.

Also note that the proposed human caused global warming did not start this trend:

"It seems like the rate (of melting) that been going since the early Holocene is similar to the rate right now," Conway said in a telephone interview. "Collapse appears to be part of an ongoing natural cycle, probably caused by rising sea level initiated by the melting of the Northern Hemisphere ice sheets at the end of the last ice age."

From http://www.usatoday.com/weather/antarc/aicesheet.htm

(The source was published in Science, though)

P.S: Edufer, this is off topic, but you have (if memory serves) claimed that DDT was not much of a threat - that banning it was a bad move. I got into an argument about this at work.....

Could you re-post the links on DDT? I'd really appreciate it.

P.P.S: Edufer, I just remembered 'Captain Planet and the Planeteers' from my childhood - it was a cartoon. I think you'll get a kick out of it:

http://www.turner.com/planet/static/graphics/captain.gif

More on the Planeteers:

http://www.turner.com/planet/static/heroonly.html

*Grins*

TruthSeeker

05-14-02, 08:08 PM

Xev,

Desalination. Easy enough.

Isn't it expensive...?

Love,
Nelson

Xev

05-14-02, 09:27 PM

Not horridly. All depends on how much water you produce - the more plants, the cheaper water gets.

wet1

05-15-02, 01:25 AM

Isn't it expensive...?

Having had some experience with desalination units, I can tell you the expense depends on the method. Those that use osmosis use chemicals to keep the membranes in working order. Very frequently, and they are maintaince intensive. The last membrane unit I worked with had to have the membranes replaced about every 2 years and membranes are not cheap!

I have worked with another model that used a set of core bundles in the process that was a little less maintaince intensive and used a vaccumn process. It still required a lot of time spent to keep the unit in optimum operating range.

No matter which methods are used, the water requires furthur processing before it is fit for consumption. Filtering, treating, ect. and that is ongoing.

These methods will not remove any chemicals and contaimination that are present in the water at the start. They only remove the salt.

TruthSeeker

05-15-02, 02:27 PM

For all:

Originally posted by wet1:
These methods will not remove any chemicals and contaimination that are present in the water

And if the water is polluted with drugs? :bugeye:

What bring us back to the subject of the thread... ;)

Love,
Nelson

Xev

05-15-02, 03:35 PM

Nelson:

And if the water is polluted with drugs?

Oceans are very large, so any pollution would be diluted by the vast quantities of water.

However, there are ways of filtering out 'drugs' - charcoal, and chlorine and genetically-modified bacteria.

Edufer

05-15-02, 06:21 PM

"... the ice in the Antarctic is behaving as a solid, as a glacier almost... If it melts, the water level will rise. However, this problem has been exaggerated:"
You can bet it was. The Antarctic ice is not melting, on the contrary, it has been growing at rates hard to believe. Why? The increased evaporation from the "warming oceans" became clouds that deposite huge amounts of snow on the Antarctic ice cap. It was posted in these forums that the figure was around 75 billion tons a year (perhaps 750 billion?). If I were not so lazy I would search the forum and find out, but I will stay with the lower figure. The "prophesized" temperature increase of 2 to 4°C will take average Polar temperatures from -25°C (minus) to minus 21°C, so there will be no melting of the ice cap.

But forget about it: satellite and radiosondes (baloons) have shown that the Antarctic has been cooling since the readings began. See this nice data page on temperatures of the whole world:

<A HREF=http://www.john-daly.com/stations/stations.htm>"What the Stations Say"</A>
"Collapse appears to be part of an ongoing natural cycle, probably caused by rising sea level initiated by the melting of the Northern Hemisphere ice sheets at the end of the last ice age."
Sorry, but no sea levels increase either. In the website provided above, there is a page on "sea levels", and the last Chicken Little Scare: the Tuvalu islands' claimed sea levels increase. It turned to be a hoax by the Tuvalu government to get "resident visas" to the Tuvalu people in Australia. Clever, isn't it? It didn't work.

"Could you re-post the links on DDT? I'd really appreciate it./i>

Here they are:
<center>
<A HREF="http://mitosyfraudes.8k.com/INGLES/CaseDDT.html">"The Case of DDT"</A>
<A HREF="http://www.junkscience.com/ddtfaq.htm#ref16">"DDT FAQs"</A></center>

If this is not enough, I could scan some articles I have in our archives and email them to you (and other people interested in the subject).
"Desalination. Easy enough" ... "Isn't it expensive...?"
As Wet1 said, depends of the method you use. The osmosis way is the most expensive. Much cheaper and "ecologically friendly" is the boiling and condensing, (as ol' good bottleggers used to do with booze) where you would get "distilled water", no pollutants, no drugs ... but also no useful and essential minerals dissolved. This side of the matter is solved by the addition of controled amounts of minerals (iron, potasium, magnesium, and others considered essential for the human health).

This technique needs a lot of energy for the boilers, and the cheapest and safest is by all means nuclear energy. There was a project in Israel, a few years ago to build a series of small but highly efficient nuclear centers called "Nuplex" (where some industries would use the surplus electricity generated by these nuclear plants), for obtaining water for irrigating the deserts of the Gaza strip and surroundings, and conveting them into useful lands for agriculture, cattle, and, why not, also people.

But green organizations started their Little Chicken cry and put the project to sleep. Don't you think that irrigating the desert and making thousand of square miles available to Jews and Palestinian for farming, wouldn't transform the economy there and give some peace to the Near East? (and the rest of the world that's getting sick and bored with the problem). Maybe the oil cartels had something to do with that. Unstable conditions of the region keep the oil price up. Or have we had not experience in this matter before? OPEP's oil embargo in the early 70s; the 1991 Desert Storm clownish war; the present "threat" to US National Security imposed by Saddam Hussein, etc. The threat is about oil, because Irak is a threat to the US in the same way Nicaragua, Honduras, El Salvador and Haiti were "threats" to the US National "security". Whose security? The US people? No, the "security" of corporations that are behind big business. But this a topic for another forum.
"However, there are ways of filtering out 'drugs' - charcoal, and chlorine and genetically-modified bacteria."

Much better is boiling and condensing the water. Cheaper too...:D