MN>CT> Well, that was from the end of a Stephen Segal movie, so consider
MN>CT> the source.
MN>  Sounds like he can produce fifty three percent of the world's
MN>CO2 if he goes on like that.
Heheheheh.  Again, I don't know how valid it was, but from what I
understand of the ocean's part in our continued existence, I wouldn't
doubt it that much.
MN>CT> From the diatribe he delivered, I can only assume that the
MN>CT> numbers were right, though.  It looked so totally out of context for 
the
MN>CT> film that it looked like something he negotiated into his contract.
MN>He might have gotten the numbers right but I think he blew his line
MN>and said North America where he was supposed to say land.  It would
MN>make more sense that 53% of the O2 was produced by vegetation and the
MN>rest by algae.
I think he meant by the entirety of the continent, but again, I can't be
sure.
MN>CT> i.e. "I'll do your movie if you allow me to pop off for two minutes at
MN>CT> the end of it."  Since he's a huge box-office draw, they probably
MN>CT> shrugged, looked at each other and sighed, and said, "Okay."
MN>Probably; and then when he blew the line they didn't want to do the
MN>scene all over again so they let it slide.
Heheheheh.  Well, I don't know how accurately he does his lines, so I
can't comment.
MN>CT> MN> On the one hand, we're pumping in tons and tons of industrial
MN>CT> MN> pollutants, and on the other, tons and tons of fertilizing
MN>CT> MN> agents. Then too, some of it's hard to tell which is which.
MN>CT> I've heard that both cause equal problems.  Having too much O2
MN>CT> production is just as bad as not enough.
MN>Yes, I can see why it would.  A higher concentration of O2 would slow
MN>plant growth, thereby decreasing food production.  However, there are
MN>greater problems than that.  A higher O2 concentration would also
MN>promote easier combustion.  I remember reading somewhere that an
MN>increase of atmospheric O2 by only a couple of percent would make
MN>combustion so much easier that the micro-sparks caused by friction
MN>between machine parts, like say your brake shoes and the brake, would
MN>start fires.
So we would be living in a pyrotechnics dream, eh?   Hmmm, that much
fire going on all the time would probably raise the ambient temp by a
couple of degrees too, wouldn't it?  Melting ice caps, etc. and bye bye
tillable land....
MN>CT> MN> CT> So we could convert a carbon dioxide atmosphere into
MN>CT> MN> CT> something resembling ours in a matter of WEEKS?  Whoa....
MN>CT> MN> under _ideal_ conditions; which do not exist in nature,
MN>CT> Doh. The old, "Yeah, it works, but not in nature" thing again. 
MN>Pesky thing, ain't it?   Just imagine some of the things we could
MN>do if we could work under ideal conditions.
Damned reality. 
MN>CT> There were two possible endings to that story.  In one, the games 
aker
MN>CT> was filthy rich and lived happily for the rest of his life.  In the
MN>CT> other, he lost his head.  Knowing what I know about the Chinese, I 
would
MN>CT> put money on that latter....
MN>I'm not sure I would.  I tend to think that the king was so bemused
MN>and befuddled and he didn't know what to do and let the games maker
MN>off the hook. 
Well, if his kingdom was at stake, the game maker would find himself
there too....;-)
MN>That scenario would make a good bar bet though.  Another good one is
MN>Zeno's Paradox.  You bet some sucker that he can't get from one side
MN>of the room to the other by moves of one half progression, and double
MN>the bet at each move.  Allow him to buy out the bet at whatever the
MN>rate is for that current move and start small, say like one dollar.
MN>I read a short story based on that premise one time.  I think it's in
MN>the volume of Hugo winning stories Isaac Asimov edited.
I read that one as a joke, only the punchline was an "engineering
approximation."   The object was to get to the beautiful young woman
or some such worthwhile goal.
MN>CT> MN> Recycling.  There's going to be a lot empty high rise
MN>CT> MN> buildings wasting away. :-)
MN>CT> I told a friend of this possibility, and he said that it wouldn't 
happen
MN>CT> because the affected regions reproduce faster than they are dying off.
MN>CT> It makes sense.  Considering that AIDS can take ten years to kill
MN>CT> someone, that person can have a passle of kids by the time they're
MN>CT> incapacitated.
MN>True, but something to take into account is the point at which the
MN>parent is infected with the virus.  If it happens young, and he passes
MN>the virus on to his partner, or she is the one with the virus to start
MN>with, the children could be born already infected.  With a ten year
MN>life span, they will die before they have a chance to reproduce.
There is that.  Then again, the hispanic guy I sold my house to in San
Antonio was the ninth of eighteen children, so we know his parents were
in there pitching....
MN>Of course, if they get married young enough that they haven't fooled
MN>around, your friend's scenario would work out.  Still, there are
MN>places that take in medical garbage, such as used syringes--though I
MN>don't know what they do with them, exactly; I think they recycle the
MN>stuff--and they make kids work with the junk without any protection at
MN>all.
Sigh.  Also, approximately 1/3 of the kids born to HIV pos. parents do
not have the virus.  I don't know if they're immune to it or not,
though.
 * SLMR 2.1a * ...and if you think THAT'S weird...
--- PCBoard (R) v15.21/M 2
---------------