Annoying Questions I'd Like Answered...

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Sat Dec 15, 2012 1:17 am

Ok, look. Thanks for the thermos suggestion, but it's not what I want to do. I want to have a set up where I can brew coffee pretty much anywhere.

Cynic · Post by **Cynic** » Sat Dec 15, 2012 2:44 pm

Have you considered using hot water from bathroom or other faucets?

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Sat Dec 15, 2012 4:12 pm

Not hot enough. Though when on campus, I might be able to beg hot water off of the culinary department I'm finishing up with.

Avoraciopoctules · Post by **Avoraciopoctules** » Sat Dec 15, 2012 5:17 pm

Neeeek wrote:

Avoraciopoctules wrote:I am taking a Geography Field Studies class with a disorganized professor who didn't provide any recommended reading. I have been asked to write a pretend proposal for a "dream project" that involves field work to show my grasp of the material. I need to cover budget, project objectives, permits required, and an outline of the project itself from start to finish.

Does anyone know where I could find something similar (a written proposal for a field-work research project including budget) I could use to compare my draft with, so I could see if I'm phrasing things clumsily or leaving important concepts out?
You could make your dream project hiking in a national park, observing geological effects. The costs involved would be "getting there" and "about $50 for fees" with no permits required. If you need a place, the Pinnacles is handy, just go to priceline or wherever for plane tickets to central CA, check rental car prices and go with that.

Whatever wrote:

If this is purely theoretical, then you likely want to go with a more complex proposal, so that you can include more stuff. Here's a couple links that may help, courtesy of google:

http://www.nps.gov/gate/naturescience/u ... l-Form.pdf

http://www.geog.ox.ac.uk/graduate/apply ... posal.html

http://www.hf.uio.no/english/research/d ... ption.html

http://www.fas.nus.edu.sg/soc/documents ... oposal.pdf

samples:

http://www.anat.stonybrook.edu/IDPAS/st ... 042908.pdf

http://www.nsf.gov/sbe/bcs/grs/propsamples.jsp

Just wanted to say thanks, you made Finals week a bit easier to deal with.

Ted the Flayer · Post by **Ted the Flayer** » Sun Dec 16, 2012 8:38 pm

Cynic wrote:Have you considered using hot water from bathroom or other faucets?

Bro, do you even coffee?

Cynic · Post by **Cynic** » Mon Dec 17, 2012 10:04 am

Ted: I was running out of ideas and since Prak was resistant to the suggestions, I figured I'd try something that could at least come *close* to the experience using the parameters set by him.

But in answer to your question, yes.

ishy · Post by **ishy** » Mon Dec 17, 2012 10:15 am

Back when I was in the university I just went into the teachers lounge and asked if I could grab a cup of coffee there. Most were okay with it.

Jilocasin · Post by **Jilocasin** » Mon Dec 17, 2012 11:09 am

For the coffee, something like these maybe. You'd have to take ground coffee with you, but I can't imagine a scenario in which you wouldn't have to do that if you want to brew it on site.

okay it's late and the url tags aren't doing the thing they do

here are the links

edit: hmmm...

Code: Select all

http&#58;//www.amazon.com/Travel-Immersion-Water-Heater-Voltage/dp/B000AXS0UE
http&#58;//www.sweetmarias.com/aeropress/aeropress_instructions.php

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Mon Dec 17, 2012 12:00 pm

@Cynic: Resistant? I just don't want to carry a giant thermos around. I liked the MRE heater suggestion, and just planned to source a lot of them, possibly from the local army surplus store.

@Jilocasin: That's almost exactly what I planned, actually. When I first had this idea about a year ago, the immersion heater was the plan, but I couldn't find them (and couldn't really afford this whole plan, either). The aeropress is exactly what I'm planning on using.

Cynic · Post by **Cynic** » Mon Dec 17, 2012 1:00 pm

@Prak: While I didn't actually intend a negative connotation to the word "resistant", I can see that happening from the phrasing or perceived sarcasm. Also, I would think you were being resistant or adamantly against it when you tell us that you don't want to use our advice/options.

So, yes resistant.

On the other hand, the immersion heater seems cool. Just don't stick your hand in the water while it's being heated.

Ted the Flayer · Post by **Ted the Flayer** » Mon Dec 17, 2012 5:07 pm

Here's the thing about giving advice on the internet: None of us REALLY know each other, and most of the advice we give are way off base. These are things that if we were sitting at the lunch table or waiting in line to see a movie or participating in a circle jerk that we'd be able to tell from each other non-verbally. As a result, most people don't really put every single piece of information on the internet when they ask something (because most of us don't even think about it).

So most of the time, advice is wrong, off-base, doesn't take into account other things the person has tried, or other factor that's not obvious when you don't actually know them.

Not to mention that in my experience. people who give advice on the internet start doing so before they actually read the question thoroughly and can give advice that they'd know wouldn't apply in the situation if they had read for more than two sentences.

So in my opinion, Prak wasn't "resisting" everyone's advice. A lot of people were giving bad advice and he shot it down as bad. Everyone might not have REALIZED they were giving bad advice due to not actually knowing Prak so it's not like it's their fault either, but it IS your fault if you get butthurt that someone isn't following your advice.

Plus, there's a theory I have that most people on the internet give advice to make themselves sound smarter than the person they're advising rather than actually being altruistic, but I don't have any information that would prove that was happening here. I'm just saying it seems to happen a lot.

Maj · Post by **Maj** » Mon Dec 17, 2012 8:07 pm

Prak's argument doesn't really make sense, so advice cannot be given.

The objections to carrying around an electric kettle include finding a plug, desk space, and being a noticeable production, not the awkwardness of transporting it - despite the fact that electric kettles and thermoses are comparable in size.

After doing more research {OK, PDF}, it didn't seemlike MRE heaters are a good idea. They may get hot, but they don't generally heat water up to coffee brewing temperatures. You can't use the water in the heater itself - it's full of salt and metal shavings. So in order to use it, you're going to have to have some sort of contraption that passes heat from the MRE heater to water in the mug. And then once the water is heated, another device must be employed to actually brew the coffee from the water. This is far more of a production than sitting a kettle on a desk (or the floor next to an outlet, even) and letting it heat and brew itself. Furthermore, MRE heaters are another continued expense - part of complaint against continuing to just buy coffee.

If you don't want to make a production of things, have a large expense, take up a lot of desk space, or go to the cafeteria to get plain hot water, then the most logical option is a small thermos. This is the age of Starbucks - good two-cup thermoses are easy to find. But thermoses are not acceptable.

The only reasonable conclusion that I can come to here is that caffeine pills should employed. They are small, cheap, highly portable, require no electrical outlet or batteries, don't have a foul taste, take up no desk space, aren't a production to use, and don't require a visit to the cafeteria.

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Mon Dec 17, 2012 11:03 pm

Ok, look, I never said my arguments make sense. (In my defense, I'm about a month and a half into a job that lets me get about 6 hours of sleep before going to, unless I want to go to bed at 6pm. And they're giving me a lot of hours, so I'm not getting a lot of sleep). I'll try to explain my thinking as best as I can:

1- I like coffee. We have a small thermos, which just barely fits in the bag I usually carry (about 12"x9"x4"), and will easily fit in my other commonly used bag (~14"x16"x4"). The problem is, I can drink through that in about twenty minutes, maybe thirty, and it's a bit of a tight fit when I have all my other stuff. I have another bag, but it's ridiculously big for what I usually carry.
2- They make travel cups with integrated french presses. There are also Aeropresses, which give espresso level pressure, all from this. I don't drink espresso roast, because it's expensive, and typically actually has less caffeine, but espresso's brewing method (ie, high pressure) is amazing. I can get shelf stable milk. I can get water pretty easy. I can carry a pencil case with a ziploc bag of ground coffee and a dozen or so sugars, with very little space commitment (hell, I can stick that it my pocket, and only get vaguely annoyed that it sits on top of my keys or cigarettes when I go for one of those things). So, it's very easy to have a mobile coffee brewing set up. It is in fact preferable to carrying around coffee you brewed before leaving, because, 1) it's more space efficient, which matters a lot when you don't have a car, and 2) Thermoses and other temperature reserving containers aren't perfect. Eventually, your coffee will be hot, and full of bacteria, because the milk sat around between 35 and 140 degrees for long enough.
2a- The other problem with a giant thermos is that it will bounce around while I'm walking around, with it hooked to my messenger bag shoulder strap, I'll get the hell beaten out of my side or back.
3- The last obstacle to a portable coffee brew setup is heating water. I would most likely be making some coffee in the back of a class room, but my friend who showed me the aeropress wants to be able to make coffee anywhere. I could carry a hot plate, and probably get an acceptable heat, but I won't always be near a plug. Same is true for an immersion heater, but it's at least even more discrete. Also, I've generally found that teachers care most about big distractions, not weirdness that doesn't turn heads, so them more discrete, the less likely a teacher is to object to me making coffee in class.
6- When the immersion heater was mentioned, I'd forgotten I was looking for something that didn't plug in. The MRE heater was assumed to be a sealable bag that I could dip in a cup of water.

shadzar · Post by **shadzar** » Tue Dec 18, 2012 12:51 am

Ted the Flayer wrote:So in my opinion, Prak wasn't "resisting" everyone's advice. A lot of people were giving bad advice and he shot it down as bad.

no, this is wrong. it is no one yet everyone's fault, because it was a thought exercise without all the parameters presented. new parameters were gained at each step. its jsut trial and error. any "resistance" wasnt out of malice or anything, but new data was coming in as each suggestion was made.

so starting out:

-need more coffee
-dont want to have to plug in to make it

became a LOT more data. thus the mother of invention is necessity, so as Prak learned what he needed or "didnt want", it was expressed and the data used to provide newer suggestions via trial and error.

so none of the advice was "bad", just didnt meet the criteria needed until the criteria was found by the one seeking the advice to state it, such as "don't want to get beat up by a thermos of coffee".

there are still other ways, but they would bring into question the temperature of coffee needed, or brewing method.

it was a fun brainstorming session, and it yeilded at least one acceptable result and method.

Cynic · Post by **Cynic** » Tue Dec 18, 2012 1:42 am

@Prak, I've got the perfect solution for you!

nockermensch · Post by **nockermensch** » Tue Dec 18, 2012 6:01 pm

Right, so I was reading this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse ... ouse_Earth When the following quote made me stop and think.

Wikipedia wrote:Without the human influence on the greenhouse gas concentration we would be heading back towards a glacial period. Predicted changes in orbital forcing suggest that in absence of human-made global warming the next glacial period would begin at least 50,000 years from now[24] (see Milankovitch cycles).

So, the annoying question: Everybody that's not lying and/or a retard admits that Global Warming is REAL. But what if Global Warming is GOOD? While this can be some Conspiracy Keanu grade thinking, I'm wondering now about the effects of a drop of a few degrees in global temperatures over things like staple food crops. Remember that we had a mini ice age as recently as in the 1600s.

Finally, in b4 the current deniaslists grasp the implications of that page and change their strategy: "Greenhouse Effect: Good for a warm, life-giving Earth."

Ted the Flayer · Post by **Ted the Flayer** » Tue Dec 18, 2012 6:06 pm

If you believe in Gaia theory, then humans are only doing what Gaia wants, and Gaia is wanting higher CO2 levels in the atmosphere, among other things.

I don't believe in it. Mostly because it takes away my personal power and just makes me another organelle with no free will, and I like to think I have more power than that. I'm sure there's less stupid rebuttals to it but I haven't looked it up.

sabs · Post by **sabs** » Tue Dec 18, 2012 6:15 pm

Just because Gaia wants higher CO2 levels, doesn't mean higher co2 levels are good for human habitation of the planet. I mean, lets face it. We're like a bad case of the flu for Planet Earth. Yeah, it's irritating right now, but it's only going to last a week or two.

nockermensch · Post by **nockermensch** » Tue Dec 18, 2012 6:28 pm

Ted the Flayer wrote:If you believe in Gaia theory, then humans are only doing what Gaia wants, and Gaia is wanting higher CO2 levels in the atmosphere, among other things.

I don't believe in it. Mostly because it takes away my personal power and just makes me another organelle with no free will, and I like to think I have more power than that. I'm sure there's less stupid rebuttals to it but I haven't looked it up.

I don't believe in the Gaia theory and even if I did, I'd have no reason to believe Gaia wants to treat us differently than she treated the trilobites. Mother nature is a rather uncaring mother, that thinks nothing on extinguishing like 80% of all genera. The hardcore hippy/ambientalist position that we should leave nature alone is short-sighted, because nature is a blind process that cannot reciprocate our best intentions.

We need to somehow act, and up to reading that article I was pretty firmly in the camp of "we get to stop global warming" but now I'm not so sure anymore.

Maxus · Post by **Maxus** » Tue Dec 18, 2012 6:38 pm

A warm planet -is- a life-giving one. I mean, dude. The planet was, like, 15 degree hotter on average during the time of the dinosaurs when climate scientists crap their pants over a quarter of a degree. They had life all over the place. Precambrian times? Life all over the place. Sea level rise sucks for cities on the coast, but from the perspective of shallow-water (say, 10 meters or less) marine life and plankton and junk, it's pretty awesome.

For the land dwellers, well, it's not END OF THE WORLD like it's been made out to be. There's going to be extinctions, yes. And we certainly shouldn't be gleefully polluting and assuming it'll all sort itself out, and we need to figure out sustainable, cleaner energy and ways to minimize environmental impact. Saying otherwise is just fucking willful negligence. But on the whole, most life will continue.

But there isn't enough water to actually cover the whole planet, Waterworld-style. Not nearly enough water. There are broad low-lying areas that'll be covered up when the seas come back (say, a lot of Florida and the US. Gulf Coast. And San Francisco, Los Angeles, and New York. Not sure about notable spots elsewhere in the world.)

tl;dr: Pretty good for life as a whole, not good for a lot of people because we built a whole lot of cities right on the fucking water.

Now that said, we're in an ice age.

Right. Fucking. Now.

And it's been going on for about two million years.

Ice Ages, thanks to various cyclical effects (wobble of the earth's axis, the distance to the sun also wobbles around an average), contain periods of glacial advance and retreat. We're during a retreat. You can talk about "the last ice age" all you want, but what that actually was, was the last glacial maximum. We're...pretty close to the glacial minimum before it kicks back over.

So, really, what's unusual for Earth is not that the glaciers are melting, but that there's glaciers at all.

Well, correction: Continental glaciation. The majority of earth's history, there hasn't been significant continental glaciation. You might get a few on the mountains, and the poles getting a bit of ice is nothing unusual. It has to be really fucking hot to keep ice from forming at all on the poles.

And in fact, if the cycles are just right, there'd be very little we, as a species, could do to stop the planet from completely thawing out/icing over (whichever end of the swing we're on). It's just too big, too much. I'd have to check some astronomical data, but I seem to remember us being on an upswing right now, which would be helped along/exacerbated by the extra CO2 in the atmosphere and so on

Anyways, Antarctica and Greenland are both covered in continental glaciers. They're the remnants of the glaciers 10,000 years ago. They both act like a damper on the heat--ice reflects sunlight back into space more than most stuff does, and it chills air on a huge scale. Hell, we only really -get- bigass ice ages when there's a continent on one of the poles. The polar ice freezes there, doesn't go away, and acts like, say, a bigass bowl of ice in front of a fan. It cools everything off.

So this is all Antarctica's fault. And will be until its fat ass moves along enough.

The jerk.

Maj · Post by **Maj** » Tue Dec 18, 2012 6:51 pm

Maxus wrote:A warm planet -is- a life-giving one. I mean, dude. The planet was, like, 15 degree hotter on average during the time of the dinosaurs when climate scientists crap their pants over a quarter of a degree. They had life all over the place. Precambrian times? Life all over the place. Sea level rise sucks for cities on the coast, but from the perspective of shallow-water (say, 10 meters or less) marine life and plankton and junk, it's pretty awesome.

I have seen evidence of this, and I see this parroted quite frequently, but the world isn't turning into a nice lush, wet place. The deserts are expanding and things seem to be getting dryer.

This has led me to conclude (weren't CO2 levels higher in dinosaur times, too?) that there is some other problem walking hand-in-hand with global warming that's doing harm.

Maxus · Post by **Maxus** » Tue Dec 18, 2012 7:05 pm

Well, that gets into environmental fuckery. Deforestation, improper agricultural techniques for the climate/region/etc.

When the planet gets hotter, the climate's going to get a whole lot more interesting. Hurricanes and other badassed forms of weather will form more easily and be stronger. There's going to be more water vapor, and other crazy.

It's possible that once the sea level rises up to "How do you feel about Cat 4 Hurricanes, New York?" that increased storms and rainfall will help deal with some deserts, simply by dumping enough moisture on them that they won't be deserts. But with rainshadows and other geographical/environmental factors, yeah. Deserts will be there.

CO2 levels were up during dinosaur times. But you also have to remember, every bit of coal and oil was once a living thing, too. All that carbon used to be moving around the ecosystem instead of being locked up. Oxygen was at some high levels, too.
-----------------------------
Oh, yeah, oxygen. Most of our oxygen comes from photosynthesizing plankton, because there's photosynthetic plankton down to the level that light can reach. All over the ocean. Which is a fucktons more area than grasslands, forests, rainforests, and your garden combined.

That doesn't have anything to do with this, really. it's just an interesting fact.

Username17 · Post by **Username17** » Tue Dec 18, 2012 7:38 pm

Note: while "life can evolve" to live in different temperature gradients, it doesn't actually do so all that quickly. Plants, for example, take an excruciatingly long time to migrate to their new favored latitudes. Probably because they don't "migrate" so much as colonize and die off sequentially in every single patch of land between where they were and where the new temperature profile would have them do well.

If things change too quickly, then the plants don't really move so much as die. And then you get things like the growth of the Sahara Desert. Where plants that might enjoy the temperatures there don't get their seeds there fast enough and the plants that are no longer happy under the new management die off and their roots stop gripping the top soil and then everything fucking blows away and everything is damn near indistinguishable from a lifeless moon.

Getting all excited about how we could have tropical hardwoods growing in Canada is fucking retarded, because in order to have that happen there would need to be tropical hardwoods growing right next to Canada to drop their seeds on it. So if we get tropical temperatures in Canada the tropical hardwoods will not fucking flourish there because they aren't fucking there, they are somewhere else dying off because it is now too fucking hot even for them. And then we all die and it's not at all clear things ever recover.

-Username17

shadzar · Post by **shadzar** » Wed Dec 19, 2012 12:13 am

a few things to remember in regards to global warming, etc:

1. life needs water to live
2. water is always leaving the planet, and moreso with less ozone and other protective layers.
3. liquid water leaves quicker than solid water
4. solid water becomes liquid water due to global warming

the warmer it gets, the less life the planet can sustain through levels of water, and people wont stop breeding due to recreational sex and unplanned pregnancy, so the population rate isnt going down. Earth is always being dehydrated.

Avoraciopoctules · Post by **Avoraciopoctules** » Wed Dec 19, 2012 7:45 am

I'm contemplating a prospective PC for an Origin Story game of After Sundown, but I'm not sure where to look for source material.

The setting is California in the 1920s. My PC is a traditional Chinese doctor, immigrated to the U.S. from his homeland. What would traditional Chinese medicine be capable of in the 1920s, and what areas would it be likely to make things worse?

I'm Googling a few leads, but I'm not sure where to start. Most of the stuff I'd go to if I wanted to learn about specific areas of medicine are focused on the present.