/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15436158

>What gives?

Heavily flawed technology. Can be very useful in a lab setting with cell lines, the moment you introduce it into actual mammals however ... aos the biggest flaw is that for insertions it still relies on nothing but lucky hits and the cell's own DNA repair. Plus usually you gotta hit not only one but both alleles with this, pushing down the chances of it working by yet another magnitude of probability.

Heh, and yet the fat bitch did fly.

>>15432440

You'd need to combust it at high enough temperatures, guesstimate well above 700 °C. And unless you got some oven specifically designed to keep the material fully at that temperature to burn rückstandsfrei you'd also need some kind of particle filter. So it is possible, question is if it is feasible in a small scale setting.

>precede

That kinda thinking won't close the loop.

>>15411156

>Most cancers untreated would lead to a better outcome than, the """detection""" of a potential cancer, and then coercing people with a fear meme campaign into signing a contract, to get poisoned with the hope it also poisons the cancer away.Bingo. The actual cellular and immunological stress of the therapy triggers malignancy. Surgery can be decent treatment where feasible and if post-operative tissue stress is reduced.

>>15422803

>can someone with no natural talent still get gud with top-tier training?

Proper technique can make for good results here, even with suboptimal vocal chords. It is mostly about muscle control, so unless you got zero talent for that ... problem being, proper technique isn't taught anymore today.

>>15423011

Czeched, trippy. :)

>>15423761

Jep. Just an ongoing process. Well, until the process runs out at least. Just swirls in the river. :)

>>15415297

>What is your personal opinion here?

It's all just a bunch of sneks in a shell.

>>15419565

Oh, are we if you want it done right posting again? ^^

>>15420406

>A human running hard might get to 100 watts

>>15421278

Because deep down the lessers do still remember ... and it would be much healthier for them to act accordingly. Otherwise gotta cull the stubborn ones again.

>>15413603

>but the evolutionarily most recent around 100 of the LINE-1 family (this is in humans) are so new, that the traditional zinc-finger proteins which silence transposons permanently have not evolved to silence them yet

... and never will, as some of them do play important physiological functions. The more destructive ones (although in some like syncytin there is a clear overlap between functionality and harm) kinda ride along like freeloaders as full silencing is not an option ... and selective one is usually "not worth the effort", meaning there is simply no selective pressure to get rid of them as you easily get through reproductive age before they show any deleterous effects.

>>15416987

>escape

Heh. Wrong approach, my dear.

>>15415880

>Our instincts aren't always working for our well being

Jup. Primarily as they're not working at all anymore in most today. Enjoy the outcome. :)

>>15408500

>Why are humans the only "species" that ca supposedly live together?

Easy. Because we're capable of making the black ants know their fucking place and put them at least to a semblance of use. Sadly not doing this anymore.

>>15412971

Pebble fission, obviously.

>>15415214

I am an intelligent creator, so yeah. Can't really say that about most "people" around me tho.

>>15409298

>arising at the right time to see this

We're lucky punks that's all. All as it should be. ;)

>>15409036

Srsly?!

>>15403576

Gusch bist, bleds Kind ... :)

>>15403362

>If it works I need to have a plan for nuclear waste. Concrete? Havnt looked it up, cant be too expensive, maybe lead plates.

The poor bunny. Nevertheless ... uhm .. how much bequerel are we talking here? Because if not too much ... roadside. Or dump in a lake. Now srsly, depending on half life (if we're talking days here as with 103Pd maybe and not years), a solid lead box (perhaps inside a small water tank, is a cheap and simple absorber) and then sit it out for a year or so.

>>15403145

Ehehehe, I do like you already. :D

>Maybe test it on animals, but they wouldnt be able to give me a report, also would cost about $1,000 per test, one's Physiology may play a major role so it could be all for naught.

The last part applies in general, yes. Not that I outright endorse human experimentation here but with lab animals you mostly cannot draw direct conclusions ...

>>15401807

>srsly why