HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: parson_r@cubldr.colorado.edu (Robert Parson)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: Where's the "F" in CFCs?
Date: 14 Apr 92 21:22:34 GMT
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder

In article <7530035@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM>, post@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (David Post) writes:
> 
> I have a little trouble with this, though.  Has NASA or anyone else EVER
> found any evidence that CFCs are the source for the chlorine in the chlorine
> monoxide?  As far as I know there has never been a reasonable explanation
> for the *lack of fluorine in any form* in the midst of all that chlorine
> monoxide.   It can't just disappear.  And it hasn't been measured.  So why
> pick on CFCs when there are so many sources of chlorine?

 THere are _very few_ sources of stratospheric chlorine. The principal natural
 source is CH3Cl, produced in the ocean. Tropospheric CH3Cl has stayed
 nearly constant over the past 15 years. A _big_ volcanic blast can eject
 some HCl directly into the stratosphere, but this has been absurdly overrated.
 Direct measurements showed that El Cichon increased strat. HCl by 9% (quite
 a dose but small compared to the factor-of-4 increase from CFC's over 30
 years) while Pinatubo caused little or no increase. On the other hand, the
 measured increase in tropospheric CFC's is quite compatible with the measured
 increase in stratopheric HCl.
>
> So who can account for the missing fluorine?
> 
It's not missing. Most of the Fluorine ends up as HF, just as most Chlorine
 ends up as HCl. The HCl reacts on cloud particles to give Cl2 during the
 Antarctic winter (which goes on to make ClO, etc.), while the HF just sits 
there until it rains out. The concentration of HF in the stratosphere has 
increased by a factor of 4 since 1978. 
 The total HF concentration is compatible with production from CFC's; 
although there is less HF than HCl (outside the hole - I think the ratio
 is about 15-25%, I don't have the numbers by me, and it increases 
 with altitude) this is to be expected since:

 (1) almost as much CFCl3 as CF2Cl2 is released into the atmosphere.
 (2) the former has a shorter lifetime (60 yrs vs. 105), so more of it
 has dissociated.
 (3) There is also a contribution from CCl4, as well as naturally-occurring
      CHCl3.

To be quantitative about this, one has to put in all the rates, the production
 of each of these as function of time, the dissociation rates for the various
species, their rate of removal from the stratosphere... in other words,
 do some modelling.

(Reference: F. S. Rowland, Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem. _42_, 731 (1991).) 

Robert
From: CCPHIL@UMCVMB.MISSOURI.EDU (Phil Leith)
Newsgroups: sci.aquaria
Subject: that's 200PPM, not 20ppm.  Sorry
Date: 15 Apr 92 22:50:07 GMT

As many of you noticed, my discussion about the hardness of my water
(hardest water in the world) I said it was 20+ ppm.  I wish!!!

The correct figure is 200ppm.  Takes 20 *drops* to turn my test solution
blue.  Sorry for the confusion.
                                Phil
From: wsabo@crcvms.unl.edu
Newsgroups: sci.aquaria
Subject: <None>
Date: 13 Apr 92 03:02:43 GMT
Organization: University of Nebraska - Lincoln


Please mail me a Giff location
for fishy and invert stuff.

Somebody said  alt.binary.pictures.misc

but due to censorship at UNL (Lincoln)
(alt.sex.... whatever)

I cannot get them...
so ftp sites?

william sabo
acrc009@crcnve.unl.edu
From: paxton@vax.oxford.ac.uk
Newsgroups: sci.aquaria
Subject: Cichlid & Symbranchidae Diet
Date: 6 Apr 92 12:56:50 GMT
Organization: Oxford University VAXcluster

I am A zoology postgrad at Oxford University, looking at the behavioural 
ecology of fish notably guppies and Cichlids. I am collecting data on diet of 
any (new world only) cichlid species for a phylogenetic analysis. Please note
I'm not interested in their diet in the aquaria, only in the wild e.g stomach
content analysis etc. However the following fishes I would like aquarium
 diet data on (quantitative if possible)

Aequidens pulcher
Teleocichla sps (Please identify species if possible)
Crenicichla sps
Mesonauta insignis and Mesonauta festivus (Please distinguish between species)
                      Thanks Charles Paxton 

P.S Also any dietary detail of Symbranchus (swamp eel ) species.
From: jml@taco.visus.com (Jim Large)
Newsgroups: sci.aquaria
Subject: Novice Question: Filtration
Keywords: novice filtration filter water quality
Date: 16 Apr 92 22:40:24 GMT
Organization: Visual Understanding Systems, Pgh PA


O.K., So I have an undergravel filter (with power head) and a power 
filter on the same tank.  Last week, I "vacuumed" the gravel, and for 
the first time, I also cleaned the filter medium (sponge) in my power
filter.

It looks like I've completely wiped out the biological filtering by
cleaning the power filter.  Shouldn't I still be getting good filtration
from the gravel?
 
----------------+------------------+------------------------------------
     |\ /|      |  Jim Large       |  Visual Understanding Systems, Inc.
     | V |      |  jml@visus.com   |  2100 Wharton St.                  
   \_|   |__    |  (412)488-3600   |  Pittsburgh, PA  15203
From: oleg@Veritas.COM (Oleg Kiselev)
Newsgroups: sci.aquaria
Subject: Re: (f) Aqua-Tronics Soft 'n' Clear
Date: 14 Apr 92 06:24:23 GMT
Reply-To: oleg@veritas.com (Oleg Kiselev)
Organization: Palo Alto Killifish Loft
X-Disclaimer: I speak for myself only unless explicitly indicated otherwise

CCPHIL@UMCVMB.MISSOURI.EDU (Phil Leith) writes:
>Whether it's desirable to add the stuff or just let the fish
>swim in 20+ ppm water?  

Are you missing a few 0's off that number or are you measuring something 
other than carbonate salts?  20 ppm of CaCO3 is just a bit over 1KH -- 
what's usually referred to as *very* soft water.

-- 
"... i heard the droning / in the shrine
	     of the sea-monkey / palace of the brine ..." -- Pixies.
Oleg Kiselev                                             oleg@veritas.com
VERITAS Software                           ...!{apple|uunet}!veritas!oleg
From: jim@helios.austin.ibm.com
Newsgroups: sci.aquaria
Subject: Re: GIFS
Date: 7 Apr 92 15:46:57 GMT
Reply-To: ...@cs.utexas.edu:ibmchs!auschs!aspencer.austin.ibm.com!aspencer
Organization: IBM Advanced Workstation Division


     
      A few people have been posting a lot of fish gifs under
alt.binary.pictures and alt.binary.pictures.misc lately.  You might want
to check it out.  Enjoy!
 

-Jim
From: cse0135@uoft02.utoledo.edu
Newsgroups: sci.aquaria
Subject: (M) Need Advice Starting
Date: 7 Apr 92 12:52:35 EST
Organization: University of Toledo, Computer Services
From: cse0135@uoft02.utoledo.edu
Newsgroups: alt.aquaria
Subject: (M) Need Advice Starting
Date: 7 Apr 92 12:44:55 EST
Organization: University of Toledo, Computer Services


 This is my first posting to this group and I'm asking a question
for a friend.  He currently has a 30 gallon freshwater tank which is
well established - he's had it for a couple of years. He's thinking
about converting it into a saltwater tank when the few fish he has left
die.  Unfortunately neither he nor I have had any experience with
saltwater aquaria.  Can anyone out there give me some advice? Your help
is most appreciated.
From: J_DALY@BIONET.BIO.DFO.CA
Newsgroups: sci.aquaria
Subject: information
Date: 14 Apr 92 12:46:00 GMT

HI, I AM A MICROBIOLOGIST WITH INTERESTS IN FISH PATHOLOGY/DISEASES.
I WOULD APPRECIATE RECEIVING SOME INFORMATION ABOUT SCI-AQUARIA.
THANKS. JIM DALY
From: bsaitow@biker.East.Sun.COM (Bob Saitow - USCS Supervisor)
Newsgroups: sci.aquaria
Subject: Starting a saltwater aquarium
Date: 7 Apr 92 12:17:57 GMT
Reply-To: bsaitow@biker.East.Sun.COM
Organization: Sun Microsystems
NNTP-Posting-Host: biker.east.sun.com


Hi all,

I am a newcomer to aquaria, and just started my freshwater tank
a couple of months ago.  I finally got the ph stabilized and good
bacteria support, so it appears my fish are finally going to live
long lives.

I'm considering starting a saltwater tank in a few months and would
like to hear your experiences with it (things to avoid, costs, easiest
life to start with, etc.).  I've heard they're easier to maintain, but
some have said they are a pain in the #!%, stay away.  What do you
think?  Also, is it more difficult to find dealers for marine life?

Thanks for any responses,
Bob
From: sik@grosz.esd.sgi.com (Seth Katz)
Newsgroups: sci.aquaria
Subject: Water ph and Peacock Bass
Date: 16 Apr 92 23:52:06 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc., Mountain View, CA, USA

Hi

I will soon bring home a peacock bass.
This is not an oscar, but a S American 
game fish with great coloration and character.

Am told to have high pH for this sucker.  I will
also have an African Arowana in the tank.
What do you suggest?  Some crushed coral?
=-s
From: rikard@dc.luth.se (Rikard Stenberg)
Newsgroups: sci.aquaria
Subject: Sick discus :-(
Date: 15 Apr 92 14:07:22 GMT
Organization: University of Lulea, Sweden

Hi!

I have a problem with one of my discus....

It suffers from flagellates (Hexamita - "hole-in-the-head-disease") 
and one of my discus books mentions two German drugs, Simplotan and
Clont. Thease are normally used for treating humans but this book
(Discus, how to bread them by Bernd Degen) says that they could
be used on discus also.

The problem is that those two medications arn't sold here in Sweden
but there is a subsitute, but what concentration do Simplotan and
Clont have.......

I have started to treat the sick one with Sterazine, hopefully is
this effective against Hexamite infections.

Help and suggestions are very much appreciated!

Many thanks in advance!

Rikard
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Rikard Stenberg
Macintosh expert - consultancy and training
University of Lule}, Sweden
---------------------------------------------------------------------
From: CCPHIL@UMCVMB.MISSOURI.EDU (Phil Leith)
Newsgroups: sci.aquaria
Subject: (f) Aqua-Tronics Soft 'n' Clear
Date: 13 Apr 92 20:09:47 GMT

We here in Columbia, MO have the hardest water... *IN THE WORLD*!!!!!!
Well, maybe not, but it's off the scale.  I have angels, and (with the
exception of the two my brother gave me recently) they seem happy.  I
know they like soft water, so I bought this additive called "Soft'n'Clear".
It's a green liquid, and causes a milky precipitate when added to our
liquid limestone.  It takes much more of the liquid than the directions
indicate to lower the hardness to acceptable levels (under 10 ppm, preferably
around 4 or 5, I think).  The water will remain cloudy for a few days (I
don't do diatom filtering except at vaccuum time) and it's kind of an
undesirable side effect.

Has anyone seen/used this stuff?  Anybody know what it is?  What by-products
it produces?  Whether it's desirable to add the stuff or just let the fish
swim in 20+ ppm water?  Would I do just as well or better to soak peat in
a plastic trash can on the porch?

!~~~~~~~~o~~~~~/~~~~~~~ Phil Leith, Meteorologist & Tropical Fish Hobbyist~~~~!
!        o    / \                                                             !
!         o /    \   /                                                        !
!          <  )   =-{         Bitnet     : CCPHIL@UMCVMB.BITNET               !
!           \    /   \        Internet   : CCPHIL@UMCVMB.MISSOURI.EDU         !
!             \ /                                                             !
!______________\______________________________________________________________!
From: CCPHIL@UMCVMB.MISSOURI.EDU (Phil Leith)
Newsgroups: sci.aquaria
Subject: Hard water... that's 200+ ppm, not 20+ ppm
Date: 16 Apr 92 13:11:49 GMT

Just to clear up any cofusion, regarding my hardest water *IN THE WORLD*,
my water is 200+ ppm, not 20+ ppm.  It took 20 DROPS to turn the indicator
blue.

By the way, for those of you who have softened water with peat, how do
you do it?  How long do you let it sit?  What's your peat/water ratio?

!~~~~~~~~o~~~~~/~~~~~~~ Phil Leith, Meteorologist & Tropical Fish Hobbyist~~~~!
!        o    / \                                                             !
!         o /    \   /                                                        !
!          <  )   =-{         Bitnet     : CCPHIL@UMCVMB.BITNET               !
!           \    /   \        Internet   : CCPHIL@UMCVMB.MISSOURI.EDU         !
!             \ /                                                             !
!______________\______________________________________________________________!
From: bsaitow@biker.East.Sun.COM (Bob Saitow - USCS Supervisor)
Newsgroups: sci.aquaria
Subject: PH test kit ?
Date: 10 Apr 92 12:16:56 GMT
Reply-To: bsaitow@biker.East.Sun.COM
Organization: Sun Microsystems
NNTP-Posting-Host: biker.east.sun.com


I have a 5 gallon FW tank.  Don't laugh too hard...it was a gift.
Presently, I have 7 small fish and two baby snails.  There is no 
heater, but I keep the 25W light on all the time, which maintains
the water temp at 75-78.  The filter is a cartridge-type that
is submursed and stick to the side.  Clear something-or-other.

Anyway, It has been relatively easy to keep the PH level stable,
until recently.  I am aided by the fact that our city water is
almost exactly 7.0 out of the tap.  I just draw what I require,
add a few drops of ACE and that's that.  I also use one of those
stabilizer tablets for good measure.

I monitor the PH weekly, and it has been stable at 6.8 - 7.0.
I did my scheduled test the other day and according to the kit
(Bromothymol Blue) I was at 6.2!  No big deal, I added a tiny
pinch of baking soda (disolving it first) and let it run for 24hrs.
I tested it again last night and it was still 6.2.  So I added 
another tiny pinch.  This morning, it was STILL 6.2.

Could there be something wrong with the Bromothymol Blue?  Is there
anything in the aquarium that would cause this?  Could I be over-
feeding them and would that cause this problem?


Thanks for any info,
Bob
Newsgroups: sci.lang
From: Tom Christiansen <tchrist@convex.COM>
Subject: Re: Why are English infinitives so different?
Originator: tchrist@pixel.convex.com
Reply-To: tchrist@convex.COM (Tom Christiansen)
Organization: CONVEX Realtime Development, Colorado Springs, CO
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 18:34:58 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

From the keyboard of steiny@steiny.UUCP (Don Steiny):
:>  I wonder if you could suggest
:> a distinction made with English verbs which is not made in Spanish?
:
:	No.    I did not mean to say that Spanish was in any way less
:expressive than English.   Just that it is more infelected.   Spanish
:expresses the infinitive: "to talk" as "hablar"--it is the inflection
:that means "to"--English is just like that.
:
:	I wonder though.   I have many friends whose first language was
:Spanish that seem to have a hard time with the English prepositional system.
:Searching through dictionaries it seems to me that there are less ways
:to make case distinctions in Spanish.

(You mean fewer ways.)

I don't think this is so.

The problem here is two-fold.  First, there isn't a 1:1 mapping
between words: "for" in English becomes "por" or "para" depending on
context.  The second problem is that one uses certain prepositions
differently.  I just send "depending on", but in Spanish it would be
"depending of/from" (Algo depende *de* otra cosa.)  You have similar
confusions with other verbs, like pensar or pensar in Spanish, which take 
different prepositions, or voyager in French, where one travels to a city 
but in a country.

In fact, it could be easily argued that English is deficient in 
expressiveness, since we can't make a distiction between "for"
in the looking-forward sense ("para") and the looking-backward
sense ("por").  Or between "to be" in a permanent way ("ser")
versus a transient way ("estar"). 

But it wouldn't be a very good argument, because any language will
find a way to do what needs to be done.  For example:

    Como esta tu hermana?

    Literally: 	   How is your sister?
    Idiomatically: How is your sister doing?

    Como es tu hermana?

    Literally: 	   How is your sister?
    Idiomatically: What is your sister like?

--tom
From: cortese@skid.ps.uci.edu (Janis Maria Cortese)
Subject: Re: Why are English infinitives so different?
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Organization: University of California, Irvine
Date: 11 Apr 92 01:06:48 GMT

In article <1992Apr5.190053.12271@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> ritley@uiucmrl.bitnet () writes:
>
>It has always perplexed me that the
>infinitives in English are referred to with the word 'to',
>such as 'to be', 'to make', etc., but that the infinitives
>in some other languages are often referred to as single words
>(sein, machen; ser, hacer; etc.).
>
>Might anyone know why this is so, or whether there are
>other languages which refer to their infinitives as English does?

From what I understand, English didn't do it at first.  The powers-that-
be (read: the church) was trying to ape Latin as closely as possible, so
they made up the idea of an infinitive by slapping another little
particle onto the verb.  

This is also where we get the bit about not splitting 'em.  Some bishop
someplace decided that since you can't split infinitives in Latin (of
course not, you moron.  They're one word), then you shouldn't split them
in English either.  Before that, they were perfectly acceptable.

I'm sure someone will give the correct info if this is wrong.

Regards,
Janis C.

Newsgroups: sci.lang
From: sf@88opensi.88open.ORG (Steven Finney)
Subject: Re: Optative and Admirative
Reply-To: sf@88opensi.UUCP (Steven Finney)
Organization: 88open Consortium Ltd., San Jose
Distribution: sci
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 92 16:19:05 GMT

In article <92094.160925IO11412@MAINE.MAINE.EDU> IO11412@MAINE.MAINE.EDU writes:
>Bulgarian has a mood that is used to describe an event which is known
>to the narrator indirectly (the narrator has not been a witness of the
>event.
>Dragomir R. Radev
>
>e-mail : Io11412@MAINE.BITNET ,     or
>         radev@gandalf.umcs.maine.edu

I believe this is not uncommon in languages of that geographical region; e.g.
Turkish (I think) has it as well. I know that Victor Friedman (I believe)
has an article on "Evidentiality in the Balkans", and Christina Kramer may
have done some work on it as well (on Yugoslav Macedonian?).

sf


-- 

<Opinions are my own, you betcha>

..... "absolute chaos is guaranteed."  (SVR4 Programmer's reference).
Newsgroups: sci.lang
From: bon6@quads.uchicago.edu (rahul  bonner)
Subject: Re: Latin alphabet
Reply-To: bon6@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 19:24:00 GMT

In article <1992Apr9.044135.4640@cs.yale.edu> horne-scott@CS.YALE.EDU (Scott Horne) writes:
 
>Someone claimed in e-mail that Devana^gari^ is not an alphabet.  Is there
>need to refute this statement on the net, or should I just handle it in
>e-mail?
>
>					--Scott

Please make your case in public.

                                               -- Rahul
From: markrose@spss.com (Mark Rosenfelder)
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Subject: Re: Latin alphabet (was: Inventing a writing system?)
Date: 13 Apr 92 17:44:23 GMT
Organization: SPSS Inc.

In article <8940@scott.ed.ac.uk> iad@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Ivan A Derzhanski) writes
(quoting Janis Maria Cortese):
>>The quirks are kind of neat, but they get a little irritating,
>>especially once you learn something like Spanish or, dare I say,
>>Esperanto.
>
>No, you dare not.  I have yet to meet a planned language whose
>orthography wouldn't be at least as reasonable as that of Spanish.

Spanish has an undeserved reputation for orthographic regularity.
In Latin America, at least, you have to worry about s, z, and c; g and j
(and occasionally x); ll and y; h; b and v; and you'll have worse problems
if you're one of those speakers who likes to leave out s's and d's.

Yeah, this is a lot better than English spelling, but then, anything is.
Newsgroups: sci.lang
From: horne-scott@CS.YALE.EDU (Scott Horne)
Subject: Re: Animal Grammar
Organization: Computer "Science" Dept, Yale University
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 02:06:03 GMT

In article <29E640CC.8634@noiro.acs.uci.edu>, cortese@skid.ps.uci.edu (Janis Maria Cortese) writes:
<In article <1992Apr10.062713.27446@cs.yale.edu> horne-scott@CS.YALE.EDU (Scott Horne) writes:
<>
<>Conflating non-human animal "languages" and human languages is not useful.
<
<I can't say that this is valid reasoning.

No reasoning was involved; I simply asserted it.

<Animal languages *are* analyzed a lot.

Yes, but I'd prefer to reserve the word `language' for something of a somewhat
higher order.  I don't consider something a language if the only utterances
that it can express are `Yes', `No', and `Help!'.  This is not to suggest
that all animal "languages" are so simple, but they do lack features common
to all human languages (damn, I'm talking about universals :-)).  I don't know
of a single animal language with metaphor, for instance.

					--Scott

-- 
Scott Horne                               ...!{harvard,cmcl2,decvax}!yale!horne
horne@cs.Yale.edu      SnailMail:  Box 7196 Yale Station, New Haven, CT   06520
203 436-1848                Residence:  Rm 1848 Silliman College, New Haven, CT
ZANG4 HAN4 YI4 JIA1 / GONG4 JIAN4 ZHONG1HUA2!
From: dtate@unix.cis.pitt.edu (David M Tate)
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Subject: Re: inventing a writing system?
Date: 8 Apr 92 15:56:36 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

In article <1992Apr8.050324.9598@leland.Stanford.EDU> richwing@leland.Stanford.EDU (Rich Wingerter) writes:
>
>I'd also like to ask some pointed questions of whoever invented the '&', for
>starting it on the right, &c.  :-)

Smiley noted, but I thought I'd point out (for anyone who might possibly
care) that it started as a ligature for Latin 'et', and was written with pen
strokes that started on the left...

-- 
          David M. Tate            |"The man who hath no music in himself
     dtate@unix.cis.pitt.edu       | Nor is not moved by concord of sweet sound
  A poem should be dumb, / As old  | Is fit for treason, stratagems, and spoils
 medallions to the thumb.-MacLeish | 	Shakespeare, "Merchant of Venice", A.V
From: sharder@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Soren Harder)
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Subject: Re: Animal Grammar
Date: 13 Apr 92 18:07:50 GMT
Organization: Centre for Cognitive Science, Edinburgh, UK

arild@milan.philosophie.uni-stuttgart.de (Arild Hestvik) writes:

>This thread is confusing two things: Language (as in English) and
>communication. Noone denies that animals communicate, and may have quite
>sophisticated means of doing so. 

Compared to human language, it isn't very sophisticated.

>But linguistics is not about
>communication. It is about a mental computational system (which has
>communication as one of its uses). 

I don't think you are right if you think we (normally) use language to
think in. Soem people have suggested that we have some kind of
language of thought (e.g. Jerry Fodor), but I don't think they claim
that it actually is a language in the same sense as English or German,
just that it shares some features. (Remark: I am not trying to deny
some kind of weak Sapir-Whorf hypothesis by saying this!)

>Whereas both animals and humans
>communicate, only humans communicate using this type of system. Animal
>communication (as far as is known) do for example not employ a syntax of
>the *type* human language do. 

Does any animal except of bees have any kind of syntax in their
communication system? The syntax in bee-'language' is rather
primitive: it is analogue and restricted to one parameter only. 

>Therefore, most linguists don't find it
>helpful to study animal "language" if they want to find out about human
>language. (Although there may be other parallels between human and and
>animal language development, such as the "critical period" of language
>acquisition).

Animals don't usually aquire their communication system in the same
sense as humans do, it is usually innate reflexes.

>-Arild Hestvik

Soren Harder

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Soren Harder, (MSc student)
Centre for Cognitive Science, 2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh
E-mail: sharder@cogsci.ed.ac.uk
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^