Interesting Stuff Thread

[-0-]

While I'm at it, this sickens me:
http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/five-year-sentence-for-limerick-accountant-who-sexually-abused-young-girl-594722.html

So this took place between 2002 to 2007, two to three times per week. He raped someone possibly 780 times in that time frame and he only gets five years. He got one year behind bars for for every year he raped her. One year for raping someone 156 times.

You would think, because of all priests who raped kids that very strict sentences would be handed down these days.

kylith

Sycopat wrote: »

There are definitely acidic ones. An acid is anything with a pH below 7. Hence the point of mentioning toilet ducks low pH. The acid specifically used in these bombs are HCl. I don't know if it works with other acid types (Though it is possible that it would).

And a lot of the time with drain unblockers it's Sodium hydroxide is the active ingredient. Which is a base. (And that stuff really is truly nasty if you get it on you.) Other times it's sulphuric acid, again particularly nasty if you get it on you.

HCl can be dangerous at very high concentrations, I don't know the molarity of this works stuff though, without that neither of us can really comment on the strength of it.

I can see this possibly causing minor burns to someone if it went off too close to them, which would indicate a disregard to safety on either there or the makers behalf.

Because teenagers who make homemade bombs are usually so safety concious.

It was not set up and set off by someone who knew what they were doing, who knew what a safe distance to be was. She started an unstable reaction in a sealed container on her school grounds. She is very lucky that neither she, nor anyone else, was hurt.

I can see this blinding people who stupidly get way too close or set it off beside someone. And I can see this going off with people a safe distance away and causing no damage to anyone or anything. In this case, the last one actually happened, but she's getting punished as if she did one of the other things.

So people who do dangerously stupid things shouldn't be punished because they were lucky enough not to injure themselves or someone else?

No it isn't and I didn't say it was safe either. But a dilute acid, handled with a bit of respect, can be harmless.

This Works stuff is apparently 20% HCL which, according to a safety sheet I've just come across* means burns, respiratory distress, possible cyanosis, corneal burns, and blindness. That's hardly 'harmless'. It also wasn't handled with respect. It was put into a sealed container with something she knew would react with it. This is, imo, the exact opposite of handling something 'with respect'.

I now think you're overreacting for calling it super mega dangerous, and thinking the only alternative to 'super-mega dangerous' is being snuggled by bunnies.

And I now think that you must be one incredibly literal-minded person.

Milk is an acid.

How does it compare to Hydrochloric acid?

Acids aren't scary. Chemicals aren't scary. They deserve respect, not fear.

She did not handle the acid with respect, she stuck it in a sealed container, added something she new would cause a reaction, did this on school ground, and did this without permission, supervision, or any kind of safety equipment. Just because she managed not to injure herself or anyone else doesn't mean that she didn't do anything wrong. She was incredibly reckless, and very lucky not to have been hurt.

What's scary is the kind of person who will use them without respect. There's nothing to suggest to me this girl didn't respect what she was creating.

Do you really think that what she did was in any way safe to do in a school playground with no supervision or proper safety procedures?

But is not old enough to be able to set up a potentially harmless, but impressive and fun, chemical reaction safely?

See I can see a kid being old enough to understand the rules, know how to set something like this up, and still be young enough to think they'd get away with it. (Especially if it didn't cause any harm.)

She is very lucky that it didn't cause harm. If she was curious about the reaction then I'm sure her school has science teachers who would have been help her to do it in a controlled and safe manner. She did not do this. She could have left the lid off so that the hydrogen produced would have dissipated without causing the bottle to explode. She did not do this. She could have set up the device in a field, away from other people. She didn't do this either. She knew that the bottle would explode, she behaved in a reckless and irresponsible manner, and she deserved to be punished for it. Whether purposefully or not she put herself and her fellow students in danger.

Did you go to school in this country?

Every year, around halloween, school yards all over the country have fireworks going off.

Kids caught with them have them confiscated and get in trouble, but are rarely, if ever, expelled. Certainly never if they are an otherwise excellent student.

Not all of them let them off, but enough of them do that it's common.

Yes I went to school in this country. I never saw fireworks in school. None of my siblings ever reported seeing more than fun-snaps in school. My parents, and the teachers and principals, would have come down like a ton of bricks on anyone caught with fireworks, and rightly so.

Hell, I'd wager almost everyone has set off a weak homemade banger in school.

Nope, and you know why? Because I knew as a child that things that explode are dangerous, and I knew enough to know not to mess around with them.

*http://apps.risd.edu/envirohealth_msds/MuriaticAcid20Percent.pdf

Sycopat

kylith wrote: »

Because teenagers who make homemade bombs are usually so safety concious.

It was not set up and set off by someone who knew what they were doing, who knew what a safe distance to be was. She started an unstable reaction in a sealed container on her school grounds. She is very lucky that neither she, nor anyone else, was hurt.

Why is it luck? Why isn't it she did it where no one else was around or kept people back from it? No one got hurt and no damage was caused. It was obviously premeditated, and these chemicals are dangerous if handed badly so if she wasn't trying to prevent someone getting hurt, somebody would have.

Also what's inherently wrong with an unstable reaction in a sealed container?

So people who do dangerously stupid things shouldn't be punished because they were lucky enough not to injure themselves or someone else?

Again with the luck. Luck is just a fluke of probability. Should people who do things that aren't dangerous, but might be if a different person did them, be punished because of the possibility someone else might hurt themselves.

This Works stuff is apparently 20% HCL which, according to a safety sheet I've just come across* means burns, respiratory distress, possible cyanosis, corneal burns, and blindness. That's hardly 'harmless'. It also wasn't handled with respect. It was put into a sealed container with something she knew would react with it. This is, imo, the exact opposite of handling something 'with respect'.

I know, I checked the ingrediants and MSDS. 20% is not a measure of acid concentration, and those effects can occur from many household chemicals.

Once again, I never said it was harmless. Quite the opposite. You are holding a very binary point of view about this.

And again, why is intentionally setting up a chemical reaction disrespectful, or dangerous? She managed to do it in a way that caused no harm or damage so obviously she handled it all with enough respect to avoid causing damage to anyone or anything. Is that not enough? Or would you rather people never did anything with anything that might be dangerous if they were foolish with it.

And I now think that you must be one incredibly literal-minded person.

I am, and I certainly see that as better than over reacting to everything and acting like there are only two possible points of view on anything.

How does it compare to Hydrochloric acid?

As I've already mentioned the dangerousness of HCl you must be asking for some other comparison. Here's one: Every human secretes HCl, only females secrete milk.

She did not handle the acid with respect, she stuck it in a sealed container, added something she new would cause a reaction, did this on school ground, and did this without permission, supervision, or any kind of safety equipment. Just because she managed not to injure herself or anyone else doesn't mean that she didn't do anything wrong. She was incredibly reckless, and very lucky not to have been hurt.

I haven't even said she didn't do anything wrong. I said the punishment is over the top. Again with you're hand wringing about luck. I think we're going to have to disagree on what the necessary level of respect for toilet cleaner is though.

Do you really think that what she did was in any way safe to do in a school playground with no supervision or proper safety procedures?

I think what she did could be done safely under those conditions, yes.

She is very lucky that it didn't cause harm. If she was curious about the reaction then I'm sure her school has science teachers who would have been help her to do it in a controlled and safe manner. She did not do this. She could have left the lid off so that the hydrogen produced would have dissipated without causing the bottle to explode. She did not do this. She could have set up the device in a field, away from other people. She didn't do this either. She knew that the bottle would explode, she behaved in a reckless and irresponsible manner, and she deserved to be punished for it. Whether purposefully or not she put herself and her fellow students in danger.

It's an exploding plastic bottle with toilet cleaner in it. The bang is the fun bit. And handled correctly it can be perfectly safe. And again punished, sure. Expelled is extreme.

Yes I went to school in this country. I never saw fireworks in school. None of my siblings ever reported seeing more than fun-snaps in school. My parents, and the teachers and principals, would have come down like a ton of bricks on anyone caught with fireworks, and rightly so.

Wow, I'm really not sure how you managed to avoid it. That seems utterly bizarre to me, and I say that as one of the kids who could never get fireworks. Bangers made from caps and watching other peoples stuff was the most I ever got.

You think what this girl did was bad, I've had black cats, smoke bombs and screamers fired at me* while I was in school and no one ever got expelled for it. There was even one or two actual injuries and iirc correctly someone got suspended once, but definitely no expulsions.

Nope, and you know why? Because I knew as a child that things that explode are dangerous, and I knew enough to know not to mess around with them.

*http://apps.risd.edu/envirohealth_msds/MuriaticAcid20Percent.pdf

Well if you were so safety minded as a child, why can't this girl be safety minded enough to pull something like this off safely? It's not difficult.


*not really targeted at me, more 'in my general direction'. Screamers along the playground surface were some peoples particular favourites.

Bannasidhe

Learning an awful lot about making explosive devices which is interesting as I didn't do chemistry at school. :cool:

kylith

I think we're going to have the agree to disagree on this because otherwise we'll be here saying 'Was', 'Wasn't' all night.

Sycopat

kylith wrote: »

I think we're going to have the agree to disagree on this.

Fair enough, have a good day.

kiffer

10% HCl tastes like vinegar... also the tongue is one of the fastest healing tissues in the human body, don't ask.
I would not want to be anywhere near someone making a HCl based bomb... inhaling a mist of 20% HCl would be nasty... isn't that about 6M? Or is it 2M...?
Let me check my notes.

Sycopat

kiffer wrote: »

10% HCl tastes like vinegar... also the tongue is one of the fastest healing tissues in the human body, don't ask.
I would not want to be anywhere near someone making a HCl based bomb... inhaling a mist of 20% HCl would be nasty... isn't that about 6M? Or is it 2M...?
Let me check my notes.

~5 and a half M if it's HCl by weight. Definitely not fun to get splashed with. pH < 1. (Seems excessive for toilet cleaner)

The reaction is actually a neutralising one as 6HCl + 2Al > 2AlCl3 + 3H2, although pH around time of bursting the bottle would probably still be very low.

Hotblack Desiato

Are we sure it was HCl? Drain unblockers like Drano (US) / Mr Muscle etc. (Europe) have solid pearls of NaOH and aluminium scraps. Just add water and you have a good gas/heat liberating reaction going on, would be interesting in a closed vessel especially one that takes a couple of seconds to seal up (less time to run away) and when you've no idea how much it'll take before it bursts, or what direction it's going to spray in (could produce quite a jet of spray if the bottle doesn't burst rapidly) Of course the liquid spray / mist is caustic, which is worse than acids as acids produce a burning sensation on contact, but caustics can do serious damage before pain is felt.

Concentrated HCl would still be pretty bad but isn't available for purchase in any supermarket, so would have to come from the school lab, and the school should have controls in place to stop it leaving the lab.

Hotblack Desiato

Saw this in the Politics forum - someone found a newspaper from 1975 when deValera died, and as well as the main article they scanned some ads from inside:



£5 would've been a fair bit of money then. According to Finfacts a pint of Guinness cost 38p in 1976. Elsewhere in the paper mentioned there was an order for the maximum price of cigarettes, the average for a pack of 20 was 39-41p. Average manufacturing wage in 1976 was £53.28.

Selling indulgences - not quite as no spiritual payback is mentioned (a shared mass doesn't really cut it) but it is kind of implied

Bannasidhe

ninja900 wrote: »

Saw this in the Politics forum - someone found a newspaper from 1975 when deValera died, and as well as the main article they scanned some ads from inside:



£5 would've been a fair bit of money then. According to Finfacts a pint of Guinness cost 38p in 1976. Elsewhere in the paper mentioned there was an order for the maximum price of cigarettes, the average for a pack of 20 was 39-41p. Average manufacturing wage in 1976 was £53.28.

Selling indulgences - not quite as no spiritual payback is mentioned (a shared mass doesn't really cut it) but it is kind of implied

When they were doing up St Peter and Paul's Church in Cork in the early 80s- a lovely example of Victorian Gothic - one could buy roof tiles which would be inscribed with the person's name. I bought one for a friend of mine named Genesis P-Orridge and he was delighted.
I'm still chuckling... and s/he - he was a him at the time, he is no longer a him and is now a h/er - has been over to see h/er tile. That was a hoot and a half!

I also 'bought' York Cathedral (genuine Gothic) for my mother for a minute. They specify the time on the cert and as it was coming up to 'her' time I warned her she better not declare she was 'returning it to Rome' - I was a bit nonplussed as she loudly proclaimed 'F Rome - This is for the Mórrígan!' - great acoustics in yer gothic cathedral so it echoeds for ages.

Hotblack Desiato

I'd be happy to buy a brick provided I was allowed to throw it

LOL at Genesis P-Orridge's personalised roof tile! They don't like teh gheys but will take pink pounds :rolleyes:

Some guy where I work is putting up notices about a church in Dublin city centre (can't remember which one) which is having a roof appeal, buy a slate etc. Dunno if they are doing inscriptions on them. Can I temporarily change my name to 'F**K DA POPE' or something? Any better suggestions?

Obliq

Bannasidhe wrote: »

. I bought one for a friend of mine named Genesis P-Orridge and he was delighted.
I'm still chuckling... and s/he - he was a him at the time, he is no longer a him and is now a h/er - has been over to see h/er tile. That was a hoot and a half!

Ha! Doesn't surprise me in the least that you know him/her An interesting individual I'm sure.....still have Psychic TV's "Beyond thee infinite beat" on a scratched record that weirdly sounds better with the scratch. Or it did, when I had a record player.

Bannasidhe

Obliq wrote: »

Ha! Doesn't surprise me in the least that you know him/her An interesting individual I'm sure.....still have Psychic TV's "Beyond thee infinite beat" on a scratched record that weirdly sounds better with the scratch. Or it did, when I had a record player.

I still have the three Throbbing Gristle singles with the camouflage sleeves. They are my retirement fund.

I am one of the group of people pictured on the inner sleeve of PTV's Dreams Less Sweet I was all of 18 at the time- that's my claim to avant-garde fame that is.

Obliq

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I still have the three Throbbing Gristle singles with the camouflage sleeves. They are my retirement fund.

I am one of the group of people pictured on the inner sleeve of PTV's Dreams Less Sweet I was all of 18 at the time- that's my claim to avant-garde fame that is.

Ooooh! I'm impressed anyway. Good claim

Kivaro

Will Google’s new Nexus Q, the H2G2-42, be the answer to life, the universe, and everything?

H2G2-42 was submitted to the FCC for regulatory testing.

More here.

Check out the video at the bottom of the article, especially if you are a Hitchhiker's fan.

robindch

Ever wondered how powerful a plane's suction loo is?

Wonder no longer!

http://science.discovery.com/tv-shows/outrageous-acts-of-science/videos/monster-flush.htm#mkcpgn=fbsci1

With video goodness.

magicbastarder

How religions change their mind

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22250412

Hotblack Desiato

Odd that they mention Mormonism changing its doctrine in the 19th century but not a thing about its 1978 U-turn on admitting black men to the priesthood...

[-0-]

ninja900 wrote: »

Odd that they mention Mormonism changing its doctrine in the 19th century but not a thing about its 1978 U-turn on admitting black men to the priesthood...

Or about the Pope having slaves.

fisgon

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/21/wolf-blitzer-atheist-tornado-survivor_n_3316312.html?utm_hp_ref=fb&src=sp&comm_ref=false#sb=2155689b=facebook

Reporter asks atheist if she thanks "The Lord" for being saved. F**king moron.

The obvious question that I wish just one believer would attempt to answer is, if he saved the survivors, then he let the others die, including kids. In what universe is this "Lord" deserving of praise and worship and thanks?

robindch

Grab your towels folks -- next Saturday is the 25th of May!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Towel_Day

kiffer

robindch wrote: »

Grab your towels folks -- next Saturday is the 25th of May!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Towel_Day

That's this Saturday... next Saturday is the First of June. Schism! Worse than biscuits.

Sarky

Next Thursday is payday. It trumps all y'all.

PopePalpatine

That reminds me, I can never seem to find a Douglas Adams book in any Eason's.

magicbastarder

kiffer wrote: »

That's this Saturday... next Saturday is the First of June. Schism! Worse than biscuits.

argh.
'next tuesday' and 'this tuesday' are the same day.

kylith

PopePalpatine wrote: »

That reminds me, I can never seem to find a Douglas Adams book in any Eason's.

Where are you looking?

Bannasidhe

PopePalpatine wrote: »

That reminds me, I can never seem to find a Douglas Adams book in any Eason's.

I can't find any bloody books in Easons as they seem (in Cork anyway) to have no interest in shelving them in any kind of alphabetical order.

The only person I know who can find the books she wants in Easons is my mother. The same woman who is first into a certain city centre car park every Thursday morning so she can park in 'her' spot - if by some bizarre set of circumstances 'her' spot is gone she can't find her car - ever- even if it's in the next fecking space. So she phones which ever of her children/grandchild she reckons is nearest 'town' to come help her. Few years ago 3 of us spent an hour looking for her blasted car and Easons are enabling her by validating her - allowing her to say 'well, at least I can find the book I want in Easons' *smirk*. *mumble* Well call the people who shelve the books in Easons next time your car is 'missing' then *mumble*:mad:

That is nothing to boast about - my OH can navigate IKEA like a boss -'spoons - follow me. Kitchen taps..we need to go back...just follow me' - it's not normal I tells ya!

Rant over.

Bannasidhe

magicbastarder wrote: »

argh.
'next tuesday' and 'this tuesday' are the same day.

Noooo - this Tuesday is the coming Tuesday and next Tuesday is the one after.... or have I been doing it wrong all along???*...



*Distinctly possible.

robindch

magicbastarder wrote: »

'next tuesday' and 'this tuesday' are the same day.

Far as I can figure out, "next" in this context refers to any day after the immediate next day.

So, given that today is Thursday 23, "Next Saturday" refers to Saturday 25th, "Next Sunday" to Sunday 26th, but "Next Friday" refers to Friday 31st.

Comments welcome*



* up to a point...!