search results matching tag: seal

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.001 seconds

    Videos (329)     Sift Talk (7)     Blogs (37)     Comments (1000)   

I'm on a boat, motherf... no wait, I'm in a Tesla

Mordhaus says...

The S has a biodefense mode option. The cabin becomes somewhat airtight if you activate it. Also, the battery pack is sealed vs leaks or water.

Musk tweeted in response: We *def* don't recommended this, but Model S floats well enough to turn it into a boat for short periods of time. Thrust via wheel rotation.

Ken Burns slams Trump in Stanford Commencement

bareboards2 says...

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/17/opinion/campaign-stops/a-week-for-all-time.html?emc=edit_th_20160617&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=40977923

Golden quote:
"In this week of trial and tragedy, Trump showed us how he would govern — by fear, by intimidation, by lies, by turning American against American, by exhibiting all the empathy of a sociopath. Seal this week. Put it in a time capsule. Teach it. History will remember. But come November, will we?"

By the way, I've stayed out of this extremely boring back and forth. There was nothing to be gained by weighing in. It finally has come to a blessed end, just as this op-ed was published in the New York Times.

So I'll say it again, since this video is my contribution to the Sift and I am claiming final word. I may not be accorded it, but I am claiming it.

It is a stone hard fact that eligible does not equal fit. A brain-damaged accident victim with the right birth certificate, with the right age, is eligible to be president. That person is not fit to be president. This is logic. It just is. You can ignore the crystalline beauty of the fact of this analogy and have a fine time talking around it. Doesn't change the fact that Ken Burns is right, Timothy Egan is right, Mitt Romney, both Bushes, Meg Whitman, and the Republican strategist who is quoted in this op-ed are all right.

Trump is unfit for the Presidency.

Monsanto, America's Monster

bcglorf says...

@newtboy

If you are only growing twice what you can eat yourself, you are describing a large garden, not a farm.

More over, what you class as 'industrial' farming is in fact the entirety of all grain farming. If there is a place in farming for wheat, corn, soy, canola and so on, 99% of it is done on what you class 'industrial' farming.

Your typical family farm is over a thousand acres today. If I go out and start naming the family farms of just friends and family I know, I can come up with 30-40+. They all farm over a thousand acres, they use tractors and combines and they make a fair bit more food than twice what they can eat. They aren't the ultra rich land barons that your 'industrial' moniker would imply either, at most they have a singular hired hand to help out with the work. The ones with children interested in taking over often don't need to hire anyone at all.

If you want to abandon that agricultural production and the methods used you mean raising the cost of production more than 100 times over. I can't even fathom the cost of weeding a thousand acres of wheat by hand, let alone removing grasshoppers from a corn crop that way. I'm sorry, but what works for your garden doesn't scale to grain crops.

Oh, and the conflation of herbicide and pesticide was done by the fear monger crowd. Listing round-up as a chemical that only kills plants and not insects and animals didn't fit their agenda so now everything is supposed to be called a pesticide across the board. Maybe that's just a Canadian thing, but the bottom line is that if you had a crop completely over run with insects you could spray it once a day with stupidly high concentrations of round-up and the water in the sprayer would do about the same damage to the insects as would the round up.


As for the video's other claims, I stand by my characterisation. You can't honestly tell me the video is trying to put forward on open and honest picture of Monsanto's actions and history. For example, the Manhattan Project, here's a transcription for clarity:
"Monsanto head Charles Allen Thomas was called to the pentagon not only asked to join the Manhattan project, but to lead it as it's co-director. Thomas put Monsanto's central research department hard to work building the atomic bomb.Fully aware of the implications of the task the budding empire sealed it's relationship with the inner cicrcles of washington with two fateful days in Japan.
"
- queue clip of nuclear blasts-

I think I stand by my summation.

The fastest mochi pounder in Japan

The fastest mochi pounder in Japan

A Ford Flathead V-8 Rebuild Time-lapse

newtboy says...

At 1:50, they appear to be making the cylinder hole larger. They would then either 1)buy new pistons to fit the larger bore or 2) if they just took off a tiny bit to remove a scratch and it's still within tolerance they could just reuse the old pistons with new rings. In this case, those certainly looked like new pistons, which should be matched to the bore they just cut. Notice at 3:48 you can see ".030" stamped into it, which likely means .030 inches over stock.
At 2:05, I think they are 'dressing' the bore, which puts a cross hatch pattern in the cylinder wall that helps the rings seat and seal.

As to your side note...it's a style choice. Some people love the old, stock, unrefinished body paired with new running gear for a car that looks like junk but runs like a top. At least that's my guess...and that's how both of my cars are built.

RFlagg said:

So here's a question. When they redrill the holes at 1:50 and 2:05, does it not make the bore bigger and therefore allow more gas to escape the pistons?
Side note, I have to wonder why they didn't restore the truck itself while the engine was out being rebuilt.

Vantablack can make a flat disk of aluminium float on water

newtboy says...

OK, as I said, I don't know exactly how Vantablack is applied, but nanotubes could easily be incorporated in powder coatings and be totally sealed in the coating.
If Vantablack is grown on the surface, it should be even more 'attached' at the molecular level to that surface, shouldn't it? Once the loose powder was cleaned off, that seems like it would be much better than paint at sticking permanently, no?
A sprayable paint version would have to be mixed with a liquid that makes it sprayable and makes it stick, so I would expect it to be 'sealed' in that liquid once it cures, just like any pigment in any paint. Also, clear coats could seal it in if that's not the case, at least as good as any other toxic paint. EDIT: Since nanofibers can withstand high temperatures, they could even bake on a clear powder coating that's WAY tougher than clear coat to seal it if needed.
Most paints use highly toxic chemicals too. Just because there's no lead doesn't mean it's non toxic....in fact, it might be MORE toxic, just not in the same "brain damaging" way.

I have actually personally worked with nanotubes. I had a friend I worked with that had a carbon fiber business that did dozens of experiments with it for multiple projects, including a carbon fiber bullet and machine-able solid carbon blocks. He'll probably be the one to watch to see how dangerous they are, he rarely used any type of protection and I'm sure he inhaled multiple grams worth of nanotubes in his time, and has them imbedded in his skin all over his body. All of his products used resin to liquefy and harden the nanotubes into the shapes he wanted, so in the end products, it was "sealed" into a non-powder form, but not during production.

ForgedReality said:

Okay first off, powdercoating is different. It's a powder that is closer to glass than paint, and it's cured in an oven which melts it onto the surface. Vantablack is grown on a surface and they recommend it is never used in an application where skin contact is involved as it would be unsafe. The sprayable paint version uses another form of carbon nanotubes in a different structure, which is considered "safer," but there's not enough data on it for me to trust it. They also make no mention of it being "sealed" as you claim.

You can if you want. Lead paint was once considered safe, as was asbestos, and aspartame, and cigarettes (at least publicly). Go for it. But we won't agree.

Vantablack can make a flat disk of aluminium float on water

ForgedReality says...

Okay first off, powdercoating is different. It's a powder that is closer to glass than paint, and it's cured in an oven which melts it onto the surface. Vantablack is grown on a surface and they recommend it is never used in an application where skin contact is involved as it would be unsafe. The sprayable paint version uses another form of carbon nanotubes in a different structure, which is considered "safer," but there's not enough data on it for me to trust it. They also make no mention of it being "sealed" as you claim.

You can if you want. Lead paint was once considered safe, as was asbestos, and aspartame, and cigarettes (at least publicly). Go for it. But we won't agree.

newtboy said:

Try looking up powder coating...it's WAY stronger and tougher than paint, which is also highly toxic and chips off far easier. I'm not certain the Vantablack nanotubes are applied that way, but I'm certain that your hypothesis that powder coatings are not as tough or as sealed as paint is wrong.

You gonna let your baby suck on paint chips? Did your parents let you? ;-)

Yes, I don't disagree that in powder form nanotubes can get into everything and may be toxic....but in a sealed coating, they are not loose. Be afraid if you wish, but your fear is misplaced IMO. The only one's in danger of breathing the powder are factory workers.

Vantablack can make a flat disk of aluminium float on water

newtboy says...

Try looking up powder coating...it's WAY stronger and tougher than paint, which is also highly toxic and chips off far easier. I'm not certain the Vantablack nanotubes are applied that way, but I'm certain that your hypothesis that powder coatings are not as tough or as sealed as paint is wrong. EDIT: Powder coating is going to stay better than paint over time. Yes.
You gonna let your baby suck on paint chips? Did your parents let you? ;-)

Yes, I don't disagree that in powder form nanotubes can get into everything and may be toxic....but in a sealed coating, they are not loose. Be afraid if you wish, but your fear is misplaced IMO. The only one's in danger of breathing the powder are factory workers.

ForgedReality said:

Right, they've been used in products that the consumer has no way of accessing without destroying said product. A paint-like application wouldn't be something I would trust to stay applied to the surface. You've seen paint rub off of objects, right? A fine powder is going to stay better than paint over time? You gonna let your baby put it in its mouth?

There have been studies dating back to 2005 or so outlining the possible dangers of these substances, yet we still don't really know all there is to know about it. I'm not so quick to trust that something like that would be safe.

But but thanks for correcting my misinterpretation about the hydrophobic thing.

Two Veterans Debate Trump and his beliefs. Wowser.

Mordhaus says...

I think you will find that most veterans, and currently serving men and women, simply want a clear objective that allows them to win the conflict and return home. Unfortunately the nature of terrorism means that while we follow long held rules that prevent collateral damage, or seek to limit it, the enemy we are fighting do not.

Just as we learned to our sorrow in Vietnam, as the British learned in fighting the IRA, the Russians in fighting the Mujaheddin, and we are learning again in our current battles, terrorists do not feel the need to adhere to the laws of warfare. They use civilians to support them, protect targets, or provide them escape methods. They attack civilians gleefully, knowing we cannot respond in kind.

While I do not support Trump, I do think we seriously need to have a new Geneva Convention to clarify how to treat terrorists and their civilian supporters. I think that is what the ex-Seal meant at the heart of his argument, that fighting terrorists using the old "Wink, wink, nudge, nudge, we have rules here" is an absolute losing proposition. Even Obama found that we needed to work outside the rules sometimes to be successful, hence his invasion into a sovereign allied nation to kill or capture Bin Laden, and his current extremely heavy use of drone attacks on suspected targets.

As far as the second veteran, I feel it is absolutely valid to question his integrity. He could have claimed CO status prior to going to conflict or simply not joined the military in the first place. Instead, he decided to claim it after experiencing combat, something my friends who have served noticed happening in the first gulf war. You really don't want a recap of some of the things they called people who left the service after seeing combat.

acidrom86tx (Member Profile)

transmorpher says...

The truth is one of the reasons I'm vegan is because I'm very worried about our own species. We only have one planet to live on, and and worrying about what we eat, and the methods to produce it have far reaching consequences, one of which is the death of a large amount of humans via global warming and the various environmental issues it sets off.

On a more personal scale I'm worried about peoples health. It's no secret that meat causes and encourages cancer, and all animal products cause a range of health issues which lead to death. There are around a million completely preventable deaths each year in the US alone. Not to mention quality of life issues. All of which could have been prevented, treated and even reversed on a proper plant based diet.

That's the beautiful thing that I have found with veganism, is that everybody wins. The people are thinner and healthier, the environment thrives, and no animals are harmed unnecessarily.

Here is a question for you. How will you explain to your son's children that there are no more fish in the ocean, why we have no jungles left? Because "you really like bacon" doesn't seem like a good answer all of a sudden

When you see what horrible things people did in the past, such as whaling, or seal beating, don't you think to yourself, why were they so blind, so greedy and selfish? They could have done things a lot differently. Perhaps they didn't know better, but we don't have that excuse anymore, because we are aware of what impact our choices have for everyone and everything on this planet.

acidrom86tx said:

Ah but I bet you're one of the people that advocates the murder of human souls in the womb. if so you're demented. you're literally more worried about food than your own species.

GHOSTBUSTERS Official Trailer #2 (2016)

Badass 9 Year Old Completes Navy Seal Obstacle Course

newtboy says...

Oh. I was going to be right there with you on this...because it didn't read like clickbait to me....BUT...there was no video of her completing the course, or on it at all. I think that's why it's being called clickbait.

It should have said 'the badass 9 year old that completed navy seal obstacle course', because the title as is clearly falsely implies that the video is of her on the course. I'm guessing that you copied the title, but YT titles are often click bait.
What this video was wasn't worth watching, but seeing her compete on the hard core adult course might be.

Gratefulmom said:

Really Sagemind? Clickbait again...now how is this click bait? This one was much shorter, but I happened to like it better than the others, it gave just enough info, but still got the story told..where is the click bait there? I believe the words click bait are being used to generally around here....:(

Badass 9 Year Old Completes Navy Seal Obstacle Course

Badass 9 Year Old Completes Navy Seal Obstacle Course



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon