/sci/ - Science & Math

No, it is not. Nerves fire off pretty fast,, yes, but remember they have to convert electrical and chemical energy every step of the way. It happens pretty fast, but not near the speed of light.

>>7745480
And you sir do not understand what efficiency is. Energy is spent producing the corn. Energy is spent shipping the waste and fuel to and from it's destinations. There's a lot of health risks when using waste in anything. No matter how you slice it, there's too much cost and not enough actual fuel production for it to be viable.

>>7745472
"Cheaper" doesn't mean cheap. They still cost a lot of money, and need to be maintained.

Evolution doesn't work like that. Felines and Avians are not humanoid, and therefore would not evolve further with these characteristics. Ape ancestors did.
Also, we didn't evolve -from- the monkeys, we share a common ancestor with monkeys.

Hydrogen is too dangerous to use as fuel. Also pretty energy inefficient. You'll have to spend energy obtaining it, then more storing it, then even more utilizing it. It has to constantly be kept under pressure at all times, making simple transportation and refuelling a nightmare. Keeping it in cryo storage is a problem too. Cars fitted for this will be way more complex to maintain and repair, and more expensive than current models. It's nowhere near mass production efficiency yet.

>>7745388
I wouldn't say to discount nuclear energy completely, though. Despite the risks, a little uranium goes quite a long way, and it is way more efficient than oil based energy production, something few others can say. But as for replacing completely? Not yet. But soon.

Alternative energy sources are far from replacing fossil fuels as main energy sources. Wind energy is very dependent on location, and requires quite a lot of land to build it around. Also they're loud as hell and far from reliable, and you need a fuckton of maintenance to keep them running smoothly. Solar panels are expensive and unwieldy. The ones people usually stick on the roof is for heating because the electric ones are in short supply, expensive as fuck and aren't efficient enough to run an entire household. You're going to need quite a lot of them to power a city, and sticking them on every available surface won't actually help much. It will help, though. They are far from easy to make, and require rare earth materials in large amounts which takes a lot of strip mining. Dependent on weather conditions, not even climate. Impossible to store.
Biofuel from waste is very, very inefficient and hazardous to health. Fuel from corn competes with food.
Also, realistically more people have been negatively affected and killed by fossil fuel energy production than nuclear incidents. Chernobyl has more stigma than anything else, and Fukushima didn't even melt down. The actual minimum safe amounts of radiation is up to 8 times less than the actual safe limit is. 2 isolated incidents in 50 years is somehow worse than literal hundreds of incidents in fossil fueled generators in the same time frame? Grow up.

He's a science communicators, and we need many, many more people like him to combat stupidity.

Here's some more reasons, puck what you wish:
-The modern world needs more kids. Most working people don't have more than 2, and a large amount don't have any at all. Eventually we'll end up with an aging population like Japan. Not a good thing.
-We need more thinkers, and there in short supply in this generation. More likely than not you can raise a kid to think for themselves instead of being a filthy conformist or whatever you are against.
-Source of income for your golden years. Hey, the can't all be selfless.
The points you have aren't stupid. One is biological, one is societal, and one is actually personal. I'm just a random anon, so take all this with a grain of salt, but talk it over with your wife, map it out between you and then make your decision. A child isn't something you should just jump into.

>>7744545
>ignores literally every other point I make to point out Venus bring closer to the sun
Kek
Listen dude, even if it is closer to the sun, it isn't close enough to be hotter than Mercury. The atmosphere is filled with carbon dioxide and methane, so all the heat just sits there in the atmosphere. 5th grade science, everyone. Also, are you denying the fact that gases absorb heat in different amounts? Because it sounds like you are.

>>7744476
Are you really this dense? Was I talking about CO2 affecting plants? No, I was talking about the atmosphere. And it doesn't matter if it's good for plants- stay with me here - if you cut down the fucking trees. The greenhouse effect is well documented, in fact it's one of the reasons Venus is so hot. Get that; the greenhouse effect happens on other fucking planets but you think it doesn't exist. We know how much heat CO2 absorbs. We have an idea of the conditions of the Earth before plants took over and sealed most of the carbon on the planet underground in the form of fossil fuels. We can test the air trapped in ice deposits years ago to record the conditions. There's skepticism, then there's outright denial of facts.

More science communicators would help immensely.

>>7744268
As someone has said before, the ice rings of permafrost regions can give an analysis to previous surface temperatures.

>>7744249
They exercise in space to keep their bones from atrophy since gravity isn't there. They spend a fuckton of time doing that and it still isn't perfect, because most astronauts end up with kidney stones on returns to Earth. Sex is heavily dependent on high blood pressure for the entire process - arousal, actual copulation, orgasm - the entire time of which your heart spends up to 3 times more energy pumping the same amount of blood it does all the time without the assistance of gravity, while other things such as your sense of balance and direction are also being fucked up while you jiggle yourself vigorously. The female body, too, has quite a lot going on in there, mostly the same issues with blood flow among other things. In short, it would be a frustrating, dangerous waste of time for both parties since even if you get pregnant, the embryo needs gravity to develop properly and will come out deformed as fuck without it.

Tap water couldn't kill your fish with the amount of fluoride in the water. (it's the chlorine actually)
The pineal gland being, get this, calcified by fluoride, somehow, is some woo peddling shit because it happened way before fluoride was even introduced to drinking water. It's a natural process, that doesn't really negatively affect the gland except in dire cases. Mostly you hear stuff about mind control and your third eye when it comes up.

We know what the greenhouse effect is and what causes it, and we know which substances create the effects. Carbon dioxide rates have skyrocketed since the industrial age, attributed to fossil fuels. The agents that usually keep this in check, forests and oceans, are prevented by deforestation and water pollution respectively. The average temperatures on earth have risen by 1.8 degrees so far, greater than any previous record in such a short time span. Even if you can ignore all that, we still have to do something about it.

The lack of gravity keeps blood pressure too low for serial experiences, it has been said. Also 0G fucks up a lot of the human body so it's not recommended.

They are the primary food source for a massive amount of animals. Simply taking them out will be disastrous.

Decalcifying your Pineal gland does not benefit you in any way. Your pineal gland doesn't really get calcified in the first place unless you have some sort of bone or kidney disease. It's a thing woo peddlers use for their tonics.