kslusherplantman

kslusherplantman t1_j1qgzo9 wrote

Reply to comment by h3lblad3 in Logged forest compared with an unlogged forest could be better for climate change. A detailed assessment of vegetation growth, bird and mammal numbers, and energy flows in logged and unlogged forests offers some surprising findings. by Creative_soja

This is a totally important point.

Could you imagine what this continent looked like before all the massive trapping that happened? Beavers were one of the most trapped animals.

Meaning there had to be millions of beaver ponds across Canada, the US, and into Mexico holding water and preventing erosion.

33

kslusherplantman t1_j1eg7v9 wrote

Reply to comment by nancyapple in Despite improvements in insulin formulations and delivery over the last 30 years, diabetes control has not improved among US adults, and disparities for minority and uninsured adults worsens by Ordinarymangodoctor

30 years ago we were being told Fat was bad for your diet, ignoring all the sugar and processed carbs.

Now we know the opposite is true essentially.

Yes avoid bad fats, but fats are highly important to our diet. And they don’t do as much damage to the body as the sugars and processed carbs

17

kslusherplantman t1_j17eojw wrote

Reply to comment by Chetkica in Climate Impacts Are Increasing; Textbooks Aren’t Keeping Pace: "biology textbooks are failing to share adequate information about climate change" by Additional-Two-7312

Using your own words against you…

do they study ecosystems in every biology class? Nope!

So therefore expecting to have that in EVERY biology class is also a false analogy.

I was being hyperbolic to prove a point.

−8

kslusherplantman t1_j17egjc wrote

Reply to comment by Timigos in In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover study 60% of insomnia patients "no longer classified as clinical insomniacs" after just 2-weeks of using medical cannabis oil by BoundariesAreFun

When I went to visit my uncle in the hospital after he had a heart attack, I nearly had one when they came to cauterize his nose because it kept bleeding… and injected cocaine HCL into the membranes of his nose.

Bottle of liquid cocaine. Even said it right on the bottle. Blew me away

3

kslusherplantman t1_j149dns wrote

Reply to comment by Opcn in World's first rice seeds harvested in orbit onboard China Space Station return to Earth by Opcn

So what’s a 1% loss on 1500 gallons per system? Per kg… so even 2% loss of 1500 gallons per kg.

60 gallon x 8 lbs per gallon.

Remember 1500 is per kg WITHOUT FLOODING.

1 kg of rice feeds 6-8 people ONE TIME.

So that would feed the space station for two days, and you still have to add additional nutrients.

So let’s say they only eat a half portion per day.

That 1 kg of rice doesn’t even last a week…

Yeah, they aren’t going to be growing it for consumption for a while. Why?

It’s cheaper to move the bloody dry rice than the water for the rice….

It’s all good, you still agreed LONG ago in this thread it’s not going to happen for a while.

Again I’m just being practical on the matter.

Now, do I say it won’t ever happen. Nope…

I said as of now it’s not feasible, especially considering it’s cheaper and more effective to take a kg of rice to space, than to take the water to make the rice.

I notice you aren’t offering any math to the solution, so I’ll put it this way.

I’m being pragmatic about the situation, you just seem to want it to be a reality even if the logic of the situation deems otherwise.

Do we need to be able to do it? Yes

Are we there yet, and still a while in the future? absolutely

1

kslusherplantman t1_j11i0t4 wrote

Reply to comment by Opcn in World's first rice seeds harvested in orbit onboard China Space Station return to Earth by Opcn

In a perfect system, yes. Which also doesn’t exist

But you already admitted their capture of vaporous water wasn’t 100%

And composting would also not be 100% efficient either.

Willfully obtuse…

And this is so odd, considering you agree with me that growing them in space isn’t feasible…

1

kslusherplantman t1_j11beio wrote

Reply to comment by Opcn in World's first rice seeds harvested in orbit onboard China Space Station return to Earth by Opcn

Oh, so you eat the whole plant?

Or are you just eating the “seeds” and leaving the rest of the plant?

You do realize there is more plant left behind the when you harvest rice?

Oh, that’s right, you are only eating a tiny section of the plant itself………..

Yes you are ignoring the whole weight of the plant that is still carbohydrates, but we can’t digest.

Or can you, amongst all humans, break down cellulose??? Oh you can’t…. Cool cool cool cool

Yes, still being willfully obtuse. And being quite dumb about it also

1

kslusherplantman t1_j10scf5 wrote

Reply to comment by Opcn in World's first rice seeds harvested in orbit onboard China Space Station return to Earth by Opcn

You are again ignoring that not all the carbs a plant produces goes into what we eat……………

All this for you to say, like I was saying, it’s not feasible to use rice to produce food on a space station.

You are dense aren’t you?!?

I’m done with this since you are clearly being willfully obtuse of my stance and your stance LEADING TO THE SAME CONCLUSION

Or do you disagree we cannot feasibly with current technology grow rice for consumption on a space station?

Do you need me to copy and paste where you said that?

I’m done

1

kslusherplantman t1_j10csii wrote

Reply to comment by Opcn in World's first rice seeds harvested in orbit onboard China Space Station return to Earth by Opcn

No, you showed stuff about transpiration. Which is only part of the story.

You totally ignored the fact that you can’t recapture the water lost to carbohydrate production. You know sugars and cell walls and all that jazz…

Which is not insignificant!!!

And as you showed, water recapture still isn’t perfect in its own right.

It would still take 1.5 thousand gallons to grow a kg of rice, even if it’s recaptured, you are still missing part of the equation lost to carbohydrate production.

I do love how you keep acting like your ideas aren’t missing a section.

So remind me, vast majority… is that all? Nope…

So since you are so smart, please link where you talked about loss to carb production. Oh, you didn’t.. hmmm

Stop being a little piss baby and admit you forgot a massive part of where water goes, carb production.

So vast majority can be recaptured FROM TRANSPIRATION.

What about the rest of the water a plant needs that isn’t lost to transpiration??? Hmm…

And all this for you to agree with me that it can’t feasibly be grown on a space station

Hahhahahaaaaaaaaaaaaa

Carbon dioxide + Water + Sunlight = Sugar + Oxygen or 6 CO2 + 6 H20 + Energy => C6H1206 + 6 02

Every single simple sugar takes 6 water molecules to produce 1 simple sugar.

So… what you have to say about that? Hmm… not lost to transpiration. Hmm…

Edit: and depending on the plant, it’s only something like 40% of the water intake is lost to transpiration.

So 60% still goes solely to the plant.

60% of water use, is the majority of water use not lost to transpiration.

1

kslusherplantman t1_j10aq2r wrote

Reply to comment by Opcn in World's first rice seeds harvested in orbit onboard China Space Station return to Earth by Opcn

Just because you have counter evidence, which is missing parts as you admitted… well. Not sure what I can say to change your mind anyway.

Yes I fully understand every point you make.

You also say it’s not feasible to grow these crops on the space station, which is literally all I was getting at from the beginning.

So you use a bunch of words, and arguments… to agree with me in the end.

Cool cool

Sorry you feel that I’m being derogatory. But one could say you are doing the same for arguing to make the same point I’m making, and then attacking me for your own short fall in logic.

Cool cool

1

kslusherplantman t1_j0zy5kr wrote

Reply to comment by kslusherplantman in World's first rice seeds harvested in orbit onboard China Space Station return to Earth by Opcn

It’s around 1500 gallons per kg even without flooding. It still is not a drought tolerant species

And you are over assuming what can be recaptured also.

Water is physically destroyed to create sugars during photosynthesis. So no, you aren’t getting that part back.

Hahaha

If that was the case, we could eat nothing but carbs and get much water back… but we don’t. So…

0

kslusherplantman t1_j0igcha wrote

Reply to comment by dbx999 in The new omicron boosters are very effective at preventing seniors from being hospitalized with Covid. The latest omicron boosters are 84% effective at keeping seniors 65 and older from being hospitalized with Covid-19 compared with the unvaccinated by Wagamaga

Essentially we have the seasonal flu, but now with Covid… not enough people vaccinate or stay home when sick with the flu, leading much to the same situation we are seeing with COVID.

There were doubts really early whether herd immunity was even possible due to the nature of coronaviruses. Again, much like how herd immunity with the flu is also impossible

−4