Only a fool believes he didn't really believe it would work and that he just had a genius idea nobody thought of, just like his other idea, massive doses of uv. Nobody knew that wouldn't work, nobody. *facepalm
He's now claiming it was sarcasm since someone apparently told him how stupid he is, but that's obvious bullshit, he meant every word. No wink, no smirk, no "just kidding", he was dead serious.
Edit: now he's claiming it was a genius practical joke on the press not revealed for 18+ hours, putting his worshipers lives at risk to trigger the fake media....uh....yeah, that's much better.
Technically he didn't actually say people should inject it, he said doctors, actual real medical doctors this time, should test direct injection....but when he says that his moronic cultists just do it because he knows more than doctors....they didn't get their hydroxychloroquine through a doctor for the most part, they went black market because reputable doctors wouldn't prescribe it. They took it because Trump said it was perfect, a miracle cure with no downside. Turns out it may double the likelihood of death along with multiple life altering side effects.
Wait and see, people will do it. Probably drinking bleach or rubbing alcohol, but some morons will inject it. Trumpsters are not rational. Just look at homeless cocaine dad here, or you thinking he's convincing in any way. Remember, some Trumpster idiots took fish tank chloroquine because he said "chloroquine good". You think more morons won't inject rubbing alcohol because Trump said "injecting disinfectants good"?!

The president absolutely suggested it might be a way to fight the virus. That's exactly what he did. This whole video was a lame frantic attempt to deny it, then he played the audio that proves he did.

The confusion at the fish tank was excellent. I can almost see the wheels turning...."So now the fish can fly and I just waddle?"

i dunno...

i have a 100gl saltwater reef tank and a 50gl fresh water tank.

this woman just looks like a customer who has little knowledge or know-how in regards to fish.

i suspect this video starts near the end of the argument,because it is common practice for pet stores to request a water sample.though her putting the dead fish IN the water sample is contamination and will result in a false reading.

i also suspect that this customer has been back with multiple dead fish,and has little understanding the basic tenants of good husbandry,and the owner is just at the end of his rope having to deal with woman over and over again.

sadly many people who decide to start a fish tank do not do their due diligence,because owning a successful fish tank takes a LOT of time,research and dedication.

meh...i am making a ton of assumptions here because the video does not make the actual conflict clear.

the woman should just get a betta,or a goldfish.those bad boys can live through anything.

To the guys who do the CGI effects, please learn from this.

Sometimes reality is way better then some computer effect.

Take Close Encounters for example. All done with paint and a fish tank.

Fish tanks are fine if they're made from the same glass as the bear exhibit at the Minnesota Zoo, those are only susceptible to bears carrying large rocks. If we're talking Doom, I don't know about a Catzooka, but there was a Chicken Launcher.

Nonsense.

Fish tanks would be DOOMED.

Your video, Cat Chases Tail While Stuck In Fish Tank - Dog Looks On, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

This achievement has earned you your "Pop Star" Level 43 Badge!

Ooh you beat me to it.

Who on Earth would be dumb enough to buy a 33.5 ton fish tank that was made in China? Don't they know everything made in China breaks in no time?

I'm not bitter about my GE dishwasher. Not at all. Just because I've had three major breakdowns in two years, and it doesn't work very well when it's 'working'. Not bitter at all.

>> ^chingalera:

>> ^Quboid:
This is exactly why the internet is such a wonderful thing. How else would we ever get to see things like this?

Public Swimming pool
In your bathtub with goggles
International Space Station
A friend's fish tank
In you mate's Guinness when they're not looking
Lot's of places to see eggies in agua mon~


Yeah, but I'm not going to do any of these. I'd never in a million years even think about this, never mind do any tests. Yet here I am, a few clicks and I've seen it all.

>> ^Quboid:

This is exactly why the internet is such a wonderful thing. How else would we ever get to see things like this?


Public Swimming pool
In your bathtub with goggles
International Space Station
A friend's fish tank
In you mate's Guinness when they're not looking

Lot's of places to see eggies in agua mon~

This one ?

>> ^GenjiKilpatrick:

Wow that's a large wall of text, @newtboy.
But yes, it appears that:
"Calleja has developed a lighting system that requires no electricity for power. Instead it draws CO2 from the atmosphere and uses it to produce light as well as oxygen as a byproduct. The key ingredient to this eco-friendly light? Algae."
I guess that's why the video empathized that Calleja has been a biochemist for twenty years. i.e. years of research have helped developed a strain of algae with such properties
Apparently the electricity the algae produces is stored in a battery underneath the unit.
http://www.geek.com/articles/geek-cete
ra/biochemist-creates-co2-eating-light-that-runs-on-algae-2012055/


>> ^newtboy:

The written description said 'with no electricity for power', but the video clearly shows an electric light in the center of the tank...not bioluminescent, electric. They tell you it only works 'in a lighted aquarium'. You even see the operator plug it in and the light turn on at :32, and again at :40, with the electric cord also clearly visible. The audio never claims the device or the algae MAKES light or electricity, only that it takes in CO2 and releases O2. The video of the garage version also shows this clearly, with the plain fluorescent lights turned on while they add the algae to a fish tank. If the power is supposed to be coming from the algae, not the grid, how is the light supposed to be being powered without any algae in the tank? There is never ANY mention of POWER being produced from the algae in the video itself, and the few ways I've read this could be possible are NO WHERE NEAR being financially viable, just possible. They require specialty genetically altered algae (expensive) and reactors with exotic materials to capture electrons from charged algae (also expensive), and the algae must be exposed to light to become charged. If, as the written description claims, they have solved this problem and ARE generating electricity from nothing more than an anaerobic reaction without external heat/light/energy required, you would think they would have said so in the video itself, and made a HUGE deal about it. They did not.
If this really worked without outside electricity added, they could put panels of the algae and reactors outside and run the white light (now inside the algae tank) indoors as a living solar panel/light setup, I note they did not do or even suggest this.
Without the 'magic', unmentioned light/electricity generating portion, this is NOT a new idea in the least as he claimed, people have advocated using simple algae and micro algae to scrub CO2 for decades, and usually in sun light rather than electric light so it's better than carbon neutral. What this really seems to be is a filter you can put OVER a light to make it produce some O2, but it also gives off far less light. There is no indication whatsoever from the video that this is intended to produce light or electricity itself without external power. I can't see where the poster got that idea. Perhaps they are involved in the project and want 'investors' that can't see the difference and can't do any research?

>> ^newtboy:

The written description said 'with no electricity for power', but the video clearly shows an electric light in the center of the tank...not bioluminescent, electric. They tell you it only works 'in a lighted aquarium'. You even see the operator plug it in and the light turn on at :32, and again at :40, with the electric cord also clearly visible. The audio never claims the device or the algae MAKES light or electricity, only that it takes in CO2 and releases O2. The video of the garage version also shows this clearly, with the plain fluorescent lights turned on while they add the algae to a fish tank.


If you follow the chain of reposting and adding more sensational claims that goes through shashdot and their source geek.com you eventually arrive at this site, which has already redacted it's claims about the algae in the lamp producing any light or power.

Going only from what's said in the video, I think the entire point is carbon sequestration. But keep in mind the algae is also absorbing some of the light from the lamp, requiring the use of more lamps to light the same area.

The written description said 'with no electricity for power', but the video clearly shows an electric light in the center of the tank...not bioluminescent, electric. They tell you it only works 'in a lighted aquarium'. You even see the operator plug it in and the light turn on at :32, and again at :40, with the electric cord also clearly visible. The audio never claims the device or the algae MAKES light or electricity, only that it takes in CO2 and releases O2. The video of the garage version also shows this clearly, with the plain fluorescent lights turned on while they add the algae to a fish tank. If the power is supposed to be coming from the algae, not the grid, how is the light supposed to be being powered without any algae in the tank? There is never ANY mention of POWER being produced from the algae in the video itself, and the few ways I've read this could be possible are NO WHERE NEAR being financially viable, just possible. They require specialty genetically altered algae (expensive) and reactors with exotic materials to capture electrons from charged algae (also expensive), and the algae must be exposed to light to become charged. If, as the written description claims, they have solved this problem and ARE generating electricity from nothing more than an anaerobic reaction without external heat/light/energy required, you would think they would have said so in the video itself, and made a HUGE deal about it. They did not.
If this really worked without outside electricity added, they could put panels of the algae and reactors outside and run the white light (now inside the algae tank) indoors as a living solar panel/light setup, I note they did not do or even suggest this.
Without the 'magic', unmentioned light/electricity generating portion, this is NOT a new idea in the least as he claimed, people have advocated using simple algae and micro algae to scrub CO2 for decades, and usually in sun light rather than electric light so it's better than carbon neutral. What this really seems to be is a filter you can put OVER a light to make it produce some O2, but it also gives off far less light. There is no indication whatsoever from the video that this is intended to produce light or electricity itself without external power. I can't see where the poster got that idea. Perhaps they are involved in the project and want 'investors' that can't see the difference and can't do any research?

I bet they have Starbucks in Vanuatu, that company is EVERYWHERE. Hell it is even in my auto dictionary.

In reply to this comment by dystopianfuturetoday:
I think there are some Tim Horton's in the Northwest, in Washington and Oregon. Do you have Starbucks in Canada?

I only try to be honest and contribute constructively to the discussion.

In reply to this comment by dystopianfuturetoday:
gorillaman is so edgy.>> ^gorillaman:

I had a fish tank. Fish are boring so I killed them. Pets are ridiculous. When I want that heart warming feeling I look at tranny porn.