FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB Philosophical Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 05:55 AM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 02-18-2003, 04:28 PM   #21
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Lebanon, OR, USA
Posts: 16,829
Default

Its intended purpose is to keep air from going through cracks, such as at doors and windows and the like -- which will keep out poison gases and radioactive dust.

As to ionizing-radiation shielding, what's really important is the column density: (ordinary density)*(thickness). So even air can shield against ionizing radiation -- if there is enough of it in the way.

There are some delightful additional complications like:

Betas will emit secondary X-rays if they pass by heavy nuclei -- so concrete or water or wood is better than lead for shielding against them.

Neutrons scatter most easily off of hydrogen, meaning that water or wood is better than most other materials.
lpetrich is offline  
Old 02-18-2003, 06:11 PM   #22
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: LALA Land in California
Posts: 3,764
Default

I love duct tape. Now it comes in a variety of lovely colors. All the better for repairing my shoes.
Mad Kally is offline  
Old 02-18-2003, 08:56 PM   #23
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Orion Arm of the Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 3,092
Default Re: Red Green

Quote:
Originally posted by parkdalian
Someone caught my reference. :-)

Duct Tape Forever!
Valentine Pontifex is offline  
Old 02-18-2003, 09:16 PM   #24
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 2,832
Default

All I know, is that North American hampsters have never been so afraid.
echidna is offline  
Old 02-18-2003, 10:05 PM   #25
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: LALA Land in California
Posts: 3,764
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by echidna
All I know, is that North American hampsters have never been so afraid.
echidna, WHY did you have to say that? Now I can't stop laughing! I even snorted.
Mad Kally is offline  
Old 02-18-2003, 10:17 PM   #26
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 2,832
Default

echidna is offline  
Old 02-19-2003, 07:00 AM   #27
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Madison WI USA
Posts: 3,508
Default

I heard that the government was recommending that people go buy lots of plastic sheets and duct tape...I thought the Bush administration was against kinky sex?
Gooch's dad is offline  
Old 02-19-2003, 12:08 PM   #28
Beloved Deceased
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Carrboro, NC
Posts: 1,539
Talking

^ I was waiting for a joke like that.
WinAce is offline  
Old 02-19-2003, 12:41 PM   #29
Moderator - Science Discussions
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Providence, RI, USA
Posts: 9,908
Default

Here's a good NYTimes article about how not only will duct tape not do much to protect you, but the danger from biological and chemical attacks has been greatly exaggerated...it's conventional explosives and nukes that we should worry about.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/16/we...w/16EASTE.html

Quote:
Last week, a Washington talk radio host discussed what listeners should do if "a huge cloud of poison gas is drifting over the city." No nation's military has the technical ability to create a huge, lingering gas cloud: in outdoor use, chemical agents are lethal only for a few moments, because the wind quickly dilutes them. Chemical agents are deadly mainly in enclosed circumstances — subways, for example, or in building ventilation systems. The duct-taped room in a home is of little use in such a scenario.

A 1993 study by the Office of Technology Assessment found that one ton of perfectly delivered sarin, used against an unprotected city, could kill as many as 8,000. But the possession by terrorists of a ton of the most deadly gas seems reasonably unlikely, while perfect conditions for a gas attack — no wind, no sun (sunlight breaks down nerve agents), a low-flying plane that no one is shooting at — almost never happen. Even lights winds, the 1993 study projected, would drop the death toll to about 700.

Seven hundred dead would be horrible, but similar to the harm that might be inflicted in a crowded area by one ton of conventional explosives. Because these explosives are about as deadly as chemicals pound for pound, but far easier to obtain and use, terrorists may be more likely to try to blow things up. Almost all recent terrorist attacks around the world have involved conventional explosives.

The image of millions cowering behind plastic sheets as clouds of biological weapons envelop a city owes more to science fiction than reality. The Japanese use of fleas infected with bubonic plague against Chinese cities in World War II was the only successful instance of bioattacks in contemporary warfare. In 1971, "weaponized" smallpox was accidentally released from a Soviet plant; three people died. In 1979, an explosion at another Soviet site released a large quantity of weapons-grade anthrax; 68 people died.

In 1989, workers at an American government laboratory near Washington were accidentally exposed to Ebola, and it was several days before the mistake was discovered; no one died. A coordinated anthrax attack in the fall of 2001 killed five people, a tiny fraction of the number who died of influenza during the time the nation was terrified by the anthrax letters.
Jesse is offline  
Old 02-19-2003, 06:42 PM   #30
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Frozen North
Posts: 9,920
Default

Duct tape use #65:

Shpongle is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:08 AM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.