Subject:
|
Re: Why the founding fathers limited government scope (was Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 14 May 2001 16:55:21 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
934 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bruce Schlickbernd writes:
> > > > Ummm, the air flows in behind the rocket. :-)
> > >
> > > It's not as simple as just "air", it's the ozone layer, it's ionized
> > > particles, it's air flow currents that are disturbed. We still cannot verify
> > > what harm comes to the upper atmosphere during a launch and what effect it
> > > has on ultraviolet radiation poking through the atmosphere.
> >
> > Can't say that I've heard it causes any appreciable damage (the number of
> > launches is miniscule).
>
> A few years ago I read in a less-than-scrupulously-researched article that
> each launching of the space shuttle depletes between 8% and 10% of the ozone
> layer. Now, I'm not a mathematician, but we've had considerably more than 10
> or 12 launches, have we not...?
>
> Dave!
Our society tends to be quite liberal with the use of percentage figures to back
up a supposed presupposition or argument. Did anyone see that Nova episode
about meteors? "We don't know how many [large] meteors there are in the solar
system, but we've discovered about 10% of them." Eh? How do you know what 10%
represents if you don't know the total? I understand probablilities, yadda,
yadda, yadda, but it's still an example of the sloppy science that results when
folks throw around unconfirmed percentages.
james
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
246 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
