Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.math > #421290 > unrolled thread

Re: Archimedes "Total Failure" Plutonium flunked the lifetime-generation test

Back to article view | Back to sci.math

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Archimedes "Total Failure" Plutonium flunked the lifetime-generation test moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-08-16 03:37 +0000
    Re: Archimedes "Total Failure" Plutonium flunked the lifetime-generation test "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-08-15 20:59 -0700

#421290 — Re: Archimedes "Total Failure" Plutonium flunked the lifetime-generation test

Math Failure Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> fails:

>What we need is an experiment where we actually eliminate all animal CO2
>and have just fire CO2 and see if the plants in fact perish.

Sorry, Archie, my brother, a research biochemist, inadvertantly has done
that "experiment" hundreds, if not thousands of times by now.

You see, he does research with photosynthesis. He often feeds his plants
additional CO2 as part of his research. When he obtains bottled CO2 it may
come from any of multiple sources. One of them is a byproduct of beer
brewing. Many breweries capture and sell the CO2 from the fermentation of
beer. What you would call "animal CO2", except it really comes from yeast.
Another supplier would provide CO2 from combustion. And guess what? No
differences whatsoever! If ANYONE would have noticed a difference related
to the source of the CO2, HE would have! So would the thousands of other
biologists/biochemists who work with plants. So would greenhouse owners,
many of whom introduce CO2 into their greenhouses to help their plants
along.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#421293

On 8/15/2018 8:37 PM, Michael Moroney wrote:
> Math Failure Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> fails:
> 
>> What we need is an experiment where we actually eliminate all animal CO2
>> and have just fire CO2 and see if the plants in fact perish.
> 
> Sorry, Archie, my brother, a research biochemist, inadvertantly has done
> that "experiment" hundreds, if not thousands of times by now.
> 
> You see, he does research with photosynthesis. He often feeds his plants
> additional CO2 as part of his research. When he obtains bottled CO2 it may
> come from any of multiple sources. One of them is a byproduct of beer
> brewing. Many breweries capture and sell the CO2 from the fermentation of
> beer. What you would call "animal CO2", except it really comes from yeast.
> Another supplier would provide CO2 from combustion. And guess what? No
> differences whatsoever! If ANYONE would have noticed a difference related
> to the source of the CO2, HE would have! So would the thousands of other
> biologists/biochemists who work with plants. So would greenhouse owners,
> many of whom introduce CO2 into their greenhouses to help their plants
> along.
> 

Impurities aside for a moment, yes: CO2 is CO2.

For instance, think of automotive vs. food vs. medical grade N2O.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.math

csiph-web