Very true. Compare Trondheim's average daily temperatures to those of inland cities at the same latitude, such as Yakutsk. Due to the ocean and the gulf stream, Trondheim is something like 35C warmer in January than you might expect. Even a ways inland here in Skreia, Oppland, my outdoor thermometer is reading -13C, which is still a bit lower than average for this time of year. This is fine for working outside and skiing; grade school recess is outdoors and some kids around here walk 1km to their bus stop in these temperatures.

There's a world of difference between Norwegian and Russian winter temperatures. -10C isn't any sort of problem; -40C is trees exploding, frostbite to your dick if you pee outside.

Except not. As has already been pointed out, passaging through ferrets likely reduces virulence to humans, rather than increasing it. You must know this, unless you only read some of the replies to your posts. I'm tired of responding to you, as are others. You really do deliberately misunderstand.

Just no. That's totally wrong. Are you deliberately misunderstanding? A mutation found to allow binding of human tissue was developed, but not by infecting ferrets. Subsequently, aerosol transmissibility amongst FERRETS was selected for. Not transmissibility amongst humans.

Don't even bother replying with more incomprehension.

Incomprehensibly, the stall alarm ceased to sound when airspeed went below some minimum limit. Pulling back on the stick dropped the airspeed below the limit, silencing the alarm. Whenever the crew attempted to correct the stall by reducing angle of attack, the stall alarm came back. Add to that the crew's belief that the aircraft would not permit a stall in the first place, and you have a coherent picture of why the aircraft descended nose-up 38,000ft into the ocean.

That is, it was pilot error, to which various Airbus inconsistencies and false assurances contributed. I wonder if pilot training included alternate law stalling and a stall alarm that only sounded when the pilot attempted to correct the stall. Presumably not, due to the typical asinine Airbus instance that "such a thing could never happen - our software prevents it!"

I figured you'd write this. Gasoline with ethanol has to be shipped in sealed containers because, if exposed to the atmosphere, the ethanol in the gasoline will dissolve water from the atmosphere. Your idea is that the ethanol in the gasoline will act as a desiccant in that it will absorb free water in the gas tank. True - but it also absorbs water from the air. The net result is more water in your gas tank.

Just think through the physics a bit. The ethanol in your gasoline absorbs water from the atmosphere. Think about it.

Please read the wikipedia entry on ethanol fuel. Specifically:

"Ethanol is hygroscopic, meaning it will absorb water vapor directly from the atmosphere. Because absorbed water dilutes the fuel value of the ethanol (although it suppresses engine knock) and may cause phase separation of ethanol-gasoline blends, containers of ethanol fuels must be kept tightly sealed. This high miscibility with water means that ethanol cannot be efficiently shipped through modern pipelines, like liquid hydrocarbons, over long distances.[31] Mechanics also have seen increased cases of damage to small engines, in particular, the carburetor, attributable to the increased water retention by ethanol in fuel.[32]"

So, the exact opposite of what you wrote. All your posts are like this. What universe are you from?

Uhh yeah, how about no?

Octane is a hydrocarbon and an alkane with the chemical formula C8H18.

Please, before you spout off, make sure you're not completely fucking wrong.

*looks up at you through nerd glasses with 1cm thick lenses*

ACTUALLY, we refer to that as rate of change of power, and it is certainly relevant. E.g. in the case of maintaining constant non-zero acceleration of a friction-lossless car.

*snorts, resumes tipping torso back and forth in chair, looks back down at stack of papers*

What are you babbling about? The Chinese treat addiction with rehab programs, the recidivism rate for which was 80% in the 90's (Mao 1999, 151), and is documented to be over 90% in the '00s (China Daily Youth, 27/4/04). You will need access to Lexus Nexus or a similar thing to easily follow these citations, unfortunately.

Perhaps you are thinking of their trafficking penalties. It is true that being found in possession of over a kilo of cocaine or heroin in China is often punished with the death penalty. However, stepped up enforcement efforts are met by increased prices, inducing repair to the supply chain, resulting in no long term gain. As a result, China has been investing heavily in a multifaceted program of treatment, interdiction, social welfare targeting at-risk populations, education, rehabilitation, and diplomacy seeking to convert drug growers abroad to production of legal staple crops.

The Chinese government is already aware that they can't make significant progress solely by killing all addicts, or even just major drug traffickers - there is an unlimited supply of people who will accept any risk. Fear has become just one component of the Chinese strategy. Read up on what they're doing - in many ways, they are actually more progressive than the United States. Unlike you, they aren't entirely naïve.

You're right. We shouldn't even discuss these problems.