/sci/ - Science & Math

omg so spooky!

>>15065001
>>>/pol/
Posting some wikipedia tier stuff as you preach to the choir is even more cringe than the pol bots that you will inevitably host in this thread, just go back please.

>>15065001
People generally are capable of competence if it is made accessible to them as an individual and they are willing. But as a herd the trend is to go with the flow which unfortunately dumbs down the whole by multiple orders of magnitude. You will never stop the herd from retarding itself into extinction, Machiavellianism is unironically the most moral form of government, just fucking lie to them and manipulate them into doing what they need to do and to get what they want. Doing it honestly and clearly does not work and never will until the problem of herd mentality can be solved.

Now with the word salad above said, none of what your post states is new or controversial here. This surface level analysis is unpleasant to consider, imagine working in STEM for a living with all that entails.

Every cell contains DNA that must be faithfully copied upon cell division. DNA duplication starts in 'bubbles' and spread out kind of like a hole in a zipper when pulled at. This requires loading of so-called MCM helicases onto the DNA template. Using cryo-electron microscopy, this process can now be visualized all the way from assembly of the first molecules to finished product, as demonstrated by this figure in a landmark nature paper. I think that is incredible.

>>15065006
Looks robust to me

>>15065056
>robust
looks like a nothingburger to mw

>>15065056
look man, i get it. the CO2 in the air at Mauna Loa (a specific region) has increased from 0.03% to 0.04% in 60 years. if you want it to be a robust study, you need to track how much the other molecules in the air changed by. notwithstanding, a raw increase of 0.01%? fuck off. this is within the margin of error of air content.

>>15065006
Hurr

>>15065001
>I'm in molecular biology
Cool. Do you have a proof that e.g. the measles virus exists and causes the disease?

>>15065154
These core samples lack the fine detail to show short spikes like the one we're experiencing. For all you know each of the prior spikes in the cycle corresponds with a much larger increase like we see now.

Radiative forcing is what happens when the amount of energy that enters the Earth's atmosphere is different from the amount of energy that leaves it. Changes in the concentration of greenhouse gases act directly on the radiative forcing, but has until 2015 only been demonstrated in experimental setups. In '15, a nature study used real-world data to directly demonstrate the connection between CO2 concentration and surface forcing. This supports the idealized greenhouse model.

>>15065178
Except for the times when it didn't. Oopsie! They just had to erase the global warming pause from that chart.

>>15065170
Not true at all. Even averaging 50 years of data a CO2 anomaly of 50 ppm would absolutely be significant

>>15065160
Today, viruses can be seen with sophisticated microscopy. Their structures can then be reassembled to yield information about their 3D topography. Here from the journal Structure, you can appreciate a 2D-slice of several bacteriophages, a commonly found virus family.

>>15065200
When the averages are more like 100s of years and spikes are short-lived you see them smoothed out. Anyway there's a known cycle of spikes in CO2 directly preceding a cooling event.

>>15065206
I was specifically asking about the measles virus, but you can replace it with sars-cov-2, HIV, poliovirus, variola, influenza viruses, HCV etc.
The existence of bacteriophages is not disputed as they can be properly isolated, analysed, and photographed with an electron microscope. (One can dispute their function, however). Aforementioned viruses were conjectured to function in a way similar to bacteriophages, but as far as I know, that has never been proved. Such viruses have never been properly isolated even.

Every word of OP's first line are excuses, every measurement addressing these supposed "problems" only results in greater reaction and resistance and it is still not enough. Those who blindly submit to that fairs far worse.
And every solution to address these climate problem has only benefitted global RnD, manufacturing, and shipping but also massively eroding the general public.
Researchers have gone down from polymath of royal or extremely rugged background, untouchable and unyielding by every metric in their search for truth, even if it is heresy at the time, to pathetic single focus funding beggars and career climbers easily succumb to coercion and bribery, propped up as savior delivering the gospel.

>>15065001
How much fossil fuel was burned in that time period?
How much still remains in the earth that will be cheaper than renewables?
What is the optimum co2 ppm for plant growth?

I don't think we will be able to put enough co2 in the atmosphere to overcome the negative feedback loop of increased co2 uptake by plants.
As fossil fuel becomes more scare/expensive, we will just naturally shift to renewables due to market pressure.