True Facts About The Star Nosed Mole has been added as a related post - related requested by PlayhousePals on that post.

The Star Nosed Mole. One STRANGE animal. has been added as a related post - related requested by PlayhousePals.

The commentator sounds like Ze Frank ... could it be?

*related=http://videosift.com/video/The-Star-Nosed-Mole-One-STRANGE-animal

True Facts About The Naked Mole Rat has been added as a related post - related requested by PlayhousePals on that post.

True Facts About The Naked Mole Rat has been added as a related post - related requested by PlayhousePals on that post.

True Facts About The Naked Mole Rat has been added as a related post - related requested by PlayhousePals on that post.

True Facts About The Naked Mole Rat has been added as a related post - related requested by PlayhousePals on that post.

Hmm. I don't get what's so controversial about it; but I'll bet, knowing pet people, it was the cat in the oven. Or maybe someone with a mole on their face was offended.

O by the by, neutrons decay in free-space, in other words, free neutrons are radioactive. With a decay time of less than 15 mins, it means 2 things: slow neutrons will be less detectable at distance because they decay, you still need to be relatively close to the source of neutrons to detect them regardless of speed. Neutrons are also the only form of radiation that will make things radioactive, meaning if you get to close and the bombardment is to intense , you can cause damage to your equipment via internal radiation of beta and gamma rays.

This is also why they use water in nuclear reactors, hydrogen, and in particular deuterium (hydrogen with a neutron) slow neutrons better than anything. Water is mostly hydrogen by mole, so it is a very good moderator, both light water (regular water) and heavy water (deuterium water).

What is happening in this particular case is known as nuclear spallation. When a high energy proton hits something like carbon or nitrogen, it will at times knock a proton or neutron loose. Those neutrons are moving at relativistic speeds in most cases, so on the flip side, when those neutrons bounce their way out back to space, if there is water in the way they get slowed way down...enough that they decay before they reach the detector.

This is the same exact effect that allows for carbon dating, sometimes, the high energy neutrons that come out via spallation will in turn knock out a proton from a nitrogen atom, it then becomes mildly radioactive carbon. This happens at a relatively predictable rate, and since the decay of carbon 14 is also predictable, dating is possible.

Science rant over

My first thought "Who's the mole?"
Someone on the other side is letting this info get out...

>> ^KnivesOut:

Well you know he's a secret gay muslim terrorist who is going to start governing the US under Sharia Law. I mean, he only had to fake 4 years as a "normal" president so he could get his second term, so that now he can REALLY fuck up this country by inviting his Al Qaeda mole operatives to attack the waffle house down the street.
Muslim.
9/11.

Really? Damn, that Obama is one cunning motherfucker. Good thing those Pakistanis are onto him.

Well you know he's a secret gay muslim terrorist who is going to start governing the US under Sharia Law. I mean, he only had to fake 4 years as a "normal" president so he could get his second term, so that now he can REALLY fuck up this country by inviting his Al Qaeda mole operatives to attack the waffle house down the street.

Muslim.

9/11.>> ^ChaosEngine:

>> ^Hybrid:
As a non-American, I and the rest of the world, want Obama to win. I simply do not understand how it is such a close call in America itself, yet the rest of the world clearly sees that Obama is the only logical vote...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-20008687

Amen, brother. Romney should put that in his campaign.
"Romney! Slightly more people in Pakistan reckon he'd be a better president than Obama"
@shinyblurry, you said that "Obama is going to radically transform this country even further (for the worst)". Exactly what "radical" transformations has the US undergone? From the outside, it looks pretty much as it always did (with marginally more humane healthcare).

Dunno, @Stormsinger is suggesting it isn't a real thing, just some indignation over a perhaps mole hill event. TYT does do that kind of thing like all of us do, so it wouldn't be to shocking.

Personally, though, I would think homosexuality is a large enough "anomaly" to at least be worthy of mention to the person that is getting the sample. I don't know a thing at all about the sperm donation process, I assume some kind of profile is already given to people who accept the sperm, and homosexuality seems like a genuine attribute a person should know about before you accept it. To that end (anecdotal), I heard of a blind, lesbian couple that wanted to find a blind male sperm donor to inseminate one of them to increase to likelihood of a blind child. That is all just to say choice is always a good thing to have, and edifying choices require information and freedom to act. If the FDA was mandating sperm banks to provide a profile that includes homosexuality as a listed trait of the donor (which is what I thought this video was going to be about), that is one thing, but wholesale misunderstanding of the risks of spreading HIV as it was mistakenly understood as Gay-related immune deficiency seems so folly that I almost can't believe it is true. However, being that I produce sperm well enough on my own; my own desire to google if this was a story worthy of actual merit escapes my attention span.

>> ^swedishfriend:

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:
Hmmm when I read the title, I thought it was going to make at least some sense, like...since homosexuality might be genetic (though it could be epigenetic or in utero) to not allow that "anomaly" into the sperm bank. That makes at least some sense to me; this though is retarded. It makes me laugh when recollecting people wanting to put the FCC in charge of the internet...because this is the type of shit that would start happening. Perhaps not a fair comparison, but I think their respective track records are pretty similar.

It is genetic. Going with the notion that it is an anomaly, it isn't an anomaly that is medically unsafe in any way so why would it matter? If you get sperm from a clinic you must realize that there is a chance of at least some genes from the donor being expressed in the child. Are people staying away from sperm banks or are they lining up in droves?
So why FDA? who is asking for this? Business competition would lead to sperm banks with genetic controls if this is something people were clamoring for.