Morons

[Anonymous]

There were 2 16 year olds killed west of Clinton Ia last summer on UP double track. They were walking on westbound track as an EB went by. They had their backs to WB. Never knew what hit them. Sad

[blhanel]

A similar situation (or maybe the same incident you're referring to?) happened here in southeast CR near a popular nature center. The tracks where they were hit are rounding a pretty sharp bend at that point. I sometimes take pictures there, such as this shot:
http://blhanel.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=210968
You have to be paying careful attention to hear them coming- lots of trees to block the sound, and no grade crossings for two miles in either direction.

[CopCarSS]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098
Now if you really want to stop people you use HEP.

Hmmmm...is that why Amtrak is so slow! [:p]

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

A similar conversation came up at our house tonight about plasma and uranium. It stopped me in my tracks, because it was my 7 year old doing the explanation![:O] Upon some discussion, it turns out his information is in reference to a Star Wars movie.[alien] It makes me wonder what your point of reference might be?[;)]


"May the farce be with you Luke Skywalker" <<<my son's name is Luke!

As to weather it is SABO or sabot I will have to check. But, my source is a ex-Marine tank commander. He knows his stuff. Plamsa does form on the end of our fast anti-tank round, which when fired form the M1-A1 can hit a pie plate three miles away.

[CANADIANPACIFIC2816]

I have a cousin living in Denver, Colorado and a good many years ago while she was living in Fort Morgan, Colorado, she had attempted to beat a BN train to a crossing in Fort Morgan. She drove around the lowered crossing arms, actually shearing one of them off. She was extremely lucky that she was not killed or injured. I think my cousin learned her lesson because the BN gave the broken crossing arm to her husband, who then took it home, gift wrapped it and gave it to my cousin for her birthday!!

And then of course there is a dummy who I know, and lives in my hometown of Sioux Falls, South Dakota.
The Burlington Northern had a stretch of track which ran past Lincoln High School here at home and in the early 1980's while my youngest brother was practicing with that school's marching band on the football field, this dumb broad was seen jogging down the middle of the BN's line, right in front of my brother and the rest of the marching band. She had a train right behind her and the engineer had slowed his locomotive to a crawl. In her mind, she had every right to jog on the track because the railroad had abandoned it a long time ago. WRONG!!!!! It all ended with Anne King exchanging obscenities with the BN engine crew! You talk about morons, I would have bought this dummy a brain and planted into her skull if it were really possible to do such a thing.

CANADIANPACIFIC2816
Sioux Falls, South Dakota

[cpbloom]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

A similar conversation came up at our house tonight about plasma and uranium. It stopped me in my tracks, because it was my 7 year old doing the explanation![:O] Upon some discussion, it turns out his information is in reference to a Star Wars movie.[alien] It makes me wonder what your point of reference might be?[;)]


"May the farce be with you Luke Skywalker" <<<my son's name is Luke!

As to weather it is SABO or sabot I will have to check. But, my source is a ex-Marine tank commander. He knows his stuff. Plamsa does form on the end of our fast anti-tank round, which when fired form the M1-A1 can hit a pie plate three miles away.

It is Sabot, but it is pronounced "say-bow".

cpbloom......ex-Army Tank Gunner/Driver/Loader [:)]

[TomDiehl]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

A similar conversation came up at our house tonight about plasma and uranium. It stopped me in my tracks, because it was my 7 year old doing the explanation![:O] Upon some discussion, it turns out his information is in reference to a Star Wars movie.[alien] It makes me wonder what your point of reference might be?[;)]


"May the farce be with you Luke Skywalker" <<<my son's name is Luke!

As to weather it is SABO or sabot I will have to check. But, my source is a ex-Marine tank commander. He knows his stuff. Plamsa does form on the end of our fast anti-tank round, which when fired form the M1-A1 can hit a pie plate three miles away.

This just keeps getting better all the time. This "tank commander" believes his round fire with such velocity that the friction with the air causes plasma to form at the tip. Again I have to say LMFAO.

[CopCarSS]

Sorry Elliot, couldn't resist.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl

QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

A similar conversation came up at our house tonight about plasma and uranium. It stopped me in my tracks, because it was my 7 year old doing the explanation![:O] Upon some discussion, it turns out his information is in reference to a Star Wars movie.[alien] It makes me wonder what your point of reference might be?[;)]


"May the farce be with you Luke Skywalker" <<<my son's name is Luke!

As to weather it is SABO or sabot I will have to check. But, my source is a ex-Marine tank commander. He knows his stuff. Plamsa does form on the end of our fast anti-tank round, which when fired form the M1-A1 can hit a pie plate three miles away.

This just keeps getting better all the time. This "tank commander" believes his round fire with such velocity that the friction with the air causes plasma to form at the tip. Again I have to say LMFAO.

If you must know this tank commander, was one of the few (if not the only one) to ace the test to become one. He was a Gunnery Sergeant, due to eyesight, he couldn’t become an officer. Though he served a position of one in the Gulf-War. He was a platoon commander. Well, it does go that fast, maybe it is one of things they don't tell normal people, like the tank only has a top speed a 45MPH. What's your source that says it doesn't, and are going to fight everything I say? Can somebody tell me what LMFAO means, and LOL?

[dharmon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by cpbloom

QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

A similar conversation came up at our house tonight about plasma and uranium. It stopped me in my tracks, because it was my 7 year old doing the explanation![:O] Upon some discussion, it turns out his information is in reference to a Star Wars movie.[alien] It makes me wonder what your point of reference might be?[;)]


"May the farce be with you Luke Skywalker" <<<my son's name is Luke!

As to weather it is SABO or sabot I will have to check. But, my source is a ex-Marine tank commander. He knows his stuff. Plamsa does form on the end of our fast anti-tank round, which when fired form the M1-A1 can hit a pie plate three miles away.

It is Sabot, but it is pronounced "say-bow".

cpbloom......ex-Army Tank Gunner/Driver/Loader [:)]

CP ......As an ex-gunner I ask, why, in a non-armor vs armor, urban environment would a crew have a silver bullet in the tube with minimal blast/frag capability....being a KE round, when a HEAT round would provide a better result against buildings, bunkers and personnel firing from defilade? The tankers I know wouldn't waste an expensive penetrator to punch a hole through a building when a HEAT can blow it up and collapse it on the bad guys.....

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dharmon

QUOTE: Originally posted by cpbloom

QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

A similar conversation came up at our house tonight about plasma and uranium. It stopped me in my tracks, because it was my 7 year old doing the explanation![:O] Upon some discussion, it turns out his information is in reference to a Star Wars movie.[alien] It makes me wonder what your point of reference might be?[;)]


"May the farce be with you Luke Skywalker" <<<my son's name is Luke!

As to weather it is SABO or sabot I will have to check. But, my source is a ex-Marine tank commander. He knows his stuff. Plamsa does form on the end of our fast anti-tank round, which when fired form the M1-A1 can hit a pie plate three miles away.

It is Sabot, but it is pronounced "say-bow".

cpbloom......ex-Army Tank Gunner/Driver/Loader [:)]

CP ......As an ex-gunner I ask, why, in a non-armor vs armor, urban environment would a crew have a silver bullet in the tube with minimal blast/frag capability....being a KE round, when a HEAT round would provide a better result against buildings, bunkers and personnel firing from defilade? The tankers I know wouldn't waste an expensive penetrator to punch a hole through a building when a HEAT can blow it up and collapse it on the bad guys.....

And heat would work in a pinch anyways, on a tank. Beats me, maybe our military expert will know!

[chad thomas]

QUOTE: Originally posted by CopCarSS



Sorry Elliot, couldn't resist.

I was wondering where Chris went with the popcorn machine.

[cpbloom]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dharmon


CP ......As an ex-gunner I ask, why, in a non-armor vs armor, urban environment would a crew have a silver bullet in the tube with minimal blast/frag capability....being a KE round, when a HEAT round would provide a better result against buildings, bunkers and personnel firing from defilade? The tankers I know wouldn't waste an expensive penetrator to punch a hole through a building when a HEAT can blow it up and collapse it on the bad guys.....

I don't know why but I think its a waste to use SABOTs against anything except "bonafide" tanks (no armored cars/recon vehicles, apcs, self propelled guns/missiles/aa, armored engineer vehicles, recovery vehicles and bridge launchers).
All of those I would use HEAT rounds against and would definitely use HEAT on those you mentioned.

Where's the HEP and BEEHIVE rounds when you need them [:p]

[Anonymous]

Ok, checked with my tank commander. The SABOT (proper spelling) round, travles at 5,200 feet per second. Plasma forms on the end of the round as it hits the target, vaporizing and melting the armor.

[TomDiehl]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098

Ok, checked with my tank commander. The SABOT (proper spelling) round, travles at 5,200 feet per second. Plasma forms on the end of the round as it hits the target, vaporizing and melting the armor.

Tell your "tank commander" (I hope we're not talking a video game here) that his physics just doesn't wash.

1. What temperature is required to "vaproize and melt the armor" on contact?

2. What muzzle velocity would be required to attain this temperature from simply air friction (hint: a HECK of a lot more than 5200 feet per second)

It's not much fun arguing a point with someone with a concrete mind.

And really messed up "facts."

[TomDiehl]

QUOTE: Originally posted by chad thomas

QUOTE: Originally posted by CopCarSS



Sorry Elliot, couldn't resist.

I was wondering where Chris went with the popcorn machine.

Didn't I tell you on the other post. [:D]

[dharmon]

Tom,

1. I don't think he knows what Picatinny is or what you do.......

2. I think he may be confusing APFSDS with some of the older shaped penetrator charge concepts...

Dan

[TomDiehl]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098

If you must know this tank commander, was one of the few (if not the only one) to ace the test to become one. He was a Gunnery Sergeant, due to eyesight, he couldn’t become an officer. Though he served a position of one in the Gulf-War. He was a platoon commander. Well, it does go that fast, maybe it is one of things they don't tell normal people, like the tank only has a top speed a 45MPH. What's your source that says it doesn't, and are going to fight everything I say? Can somebody tell me what LMFAO means, and LOL?

[Anonymous]

I was wrong, I talked to him, it doesn’t form from air friction, but it does form when it hits a target. He did a lot more than "pull the trigger" he was in command of four tanks. His gunner pulled the trigger. He was given briefings on the weapons; these were not shown to everyone. Now I will see if I can find some proof you will believe that the round traveling at twice the speed of a .270 hunting rifle literally melts right through armor, forming plasma in the process.

[Anonymous]

Here check this out. http://www.army-technology.com/contractors/ammunition/apfsds.htm
Particularity this part
The sub-projectile's hyper-velocity ensures that it strikes its target with devestating impact. By using very dense materials in the sub-projectile the stored kinetic energy is magnified greatly. The terminal effect of the sub-projectile striking the target sees huge kinetic energy release. In miliseconds the sub-projectile punches through the target armour, instantaneously generating massive heat and pressure. As the long rod penetrator enters the vehicle friction with the armour plate creates burning incandescent spall which sprays the interior. The burning spall has an explosive effect. What do you say "burning incandescent spall" is? So, I think I will listen to Marine veteran, at least he has been right before.

[dharmon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098

Here check this out. http://www.army-technology.com/contractors/ammunition/apfsds.htm
Particularity thispart
The sub-projectile's hyper-velocity ensures that it strikes its target with devestating impact. By using very dense materials in the sub-projectile the stored kinetic energy is magnified greatly. The terminal effect of the sub-projectile striking the target sees huge kinetic energy release. In miliseconds the sub-projectile punches through the target armour, instantaneously generating massive heat and pressure. As the long rod penetrator enters the vehicle friction with the armour plate creates burning incandescent spall which sprays the interior. The burning spall has an explosive effect. What do you say "burning incandescent spall" is? So, I think I will listen to Marine veteran, at least he has been right before.

No one here has disputed this. The impact of the penetrating rod is what causes the damage. The vacuum (if it passes completely through the vehicle) and "spall" are by products of the impact and pentration, not the cause. There is no plasma burning through the armor. It is a rod punching through, simple as that and physics of that collision create the effects ie...... X amount of mass at Y veocity, focused on a small area of impact to create intense pressure resulting in structural failure of the armor at that point.....I'm pretty sure that this is what Tom has been saying all along. I know I have.

To put in a railroad perspective, it's similiar to the weight of a railcar at any given time being supported on the eight points where the wheels touch the rail. All that weight supported by a few inches of rail. It's fine if it's sitting there, but lift the car up and drop it on the rail and the rail will be dented. Drop it from higher and the rail will bend or break. It's the same concept, takien to a higher degree of focused pressure such that additional consequeces occur as a result of impact.


And by the way...my occupation...Naval Aviator......a bit familiar with weaponeering.

[TomDiehl]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098

Here check this out. http://www.army-technology.com/contractors/ammunition/apfsds.htm
Particularity this part
The sub-projectile's hyper-velocity ensures that it strikes its target with devestating impact. By using very dense materials in the sub-projectile the stored kinetic energy is magnified greatly. The terminal effect of the sub-projectile striking the target sees huge kinetic energy release. In miliseconds the sub-projectile punches through the target armour, instantaneously generating massive heat and pressure. As the long rod penetrator enters the vehicle friction with the armour plate creates burning incandescent spall which sprays the interior. The burning spall has an explosive effect. What do you say "burning incandescent spall" is? So, I think I will listen to Marine veteran, at least he has been right before.

"Burning Incadescent Spall" is a bit different than "vaporize the armor plate" as you stated earlier, and the point I disputed.

Of course I understand, your mind is made up and I shouldn't try to confuse you with the facts.

[Anonymous]

If it doesn’t strain you seemly feeble mind I will confuse you with some facts.
The SABOT round forming plasma common knowledge, it has been mentioned on the Discovery and the Military channel on television.. This was discovered form the Army testing grounds in Aberdeen, Maryland. The plasma is unique to depleted uranium, and only when moving as fast as the sabot rounds do. First of all I would like to discuss a little bit of the physics behind this. Matter can be in for states; solid, liquid, gas, and plasma, an extremely high energy state. Plasma in on the inside of some neon lights, and lighting. When a sabot round hits a target and the found is moving fast enough, it strikes the target creating enormous amounts of friction, it melts trough the armor and the tip of the round turns to plasma, burning into the enemy, that’s why it is so darn effective. This doesn’t happen to other metals because they are not as dense. I talked to my grandfather, who is a atomic engineer for the Navy, he said that the plasma effect was logical. He is a real expert on physics.


If you can read; study the following.

Uranium can be engineered to be “self-sharpening” so that when it hits a target, it retains its punching point as material erodes off the warhead (titanium and tungsten will not do this). Uranium’s molecular structure can re-formed, using metallurgical and “nano-technologies” to deliver a selected range of ballistic features, including kinetic, thermal, pyrophoric, liquid metal and high-pressure/high-heat, plasma effects. Uranium is a readily available metal, cheap to produce and is in abundance in DOE’s, DOD’s and their weapon’s contractors’ stockpiles. Uranium has been designated a high priority material for scientific research on new weapons and “stockpile re-cycling” as a strategic and capital asset into multiple military applications.
This is from: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/UMR306B.html

It is a well-known fact on both sides of the argument for the safety of using depleted uranium.
The impact of a kinetic energy weapon turns part of the the armor and all of the projectile into plasma and a shock wave with a vector towards the target. This plasma jet and shock wave, in turn, penetrates inside the hull by blowing a larger hole. The resultant shock wave, plasma, and metal fragments cause some or all of the ammo to sympathetically detonate, and, not so incidentally, kill the crew.
This is from: http://timblair.net/ee/index.php/weblog/comments/its_all_about_soil
This is also from a solider, but I guess all the people in the military and the real experts in Aberdeen are wrong!

As said it is a known fact to both sides of the argument.
According to the US Army the single-shot kill ratio of DU penetrator rounds into heavy armored vehicles such as tanks is approximately 8% greater than conventional tungsten cored penetrators. Against light armor that ratio is significantly higher due to the pyrophoric nature of DU - it basically converts on impact into a superheated plasma jet that burns through the armor.
This is from: http://www.thehypertribe.net/forum/printthread.php?t=8011&pp=100 Who doesn’t even believe they should be used.

Even according to the Encyclopedia.
Depleted uranium is favoured for flechette construction due to two particular properties: being self-sharpening and pyrophoric. On impact with a hard target, such as an armoured vehicle, the nose of the flechette rod fractures in such a way that it remains sharp. Further, the impact and subsequent release of heat energy causes it to disintegrate to dust and combust when it reaches air (compare to ferrocerium). Against an armoured vehicle this is devastating, piercing the hull to create an extremely hot ball of dust and gas in the interior, killing or injuring the crew and igniting fuel and ammunition.
Did I not say it melted through armor?

If you need any more here is some more proof.
Uranium can be engineered to be "self-sharpening" so that when it hits a target, it retains its punching point as material erodes off the warhead (titanium and tungsten will not do this). Uranium's molecular structure can re-formed, using metallurgical and "nano-technologies" to deliver a selected range of ballistic features, including kinetic, thermal, pyrophoric, liquid metal and high-pressure/high-heat, plasma effects. Uranium is a readily available metal, cheap to produce and is in abundance in DOE's, DOD's and their weapon's contractors' stockpiles. Uranium has been designated a high priority material for scientific research on new weapons and "stockpile re-cycling" as a strategic and capital asset into multiple military applications.

Or even read this about aircraft.
A-10 Thunderbolt
Designed in the late 1970s, this aircraft was built around a single anti-tank weapon, the largest airborne gun in existence. It fires extremely high velocity three cm. diameter Depleted Uranium (DU) tipped shells. These shells turn to plasma (an iodized gas of protons and neutrons) which burns streaming holes through the hulls of armored vehicles.
This is from: http://coat.ncf.ca/air_show/links/background.htm




If what I have presented isn’t enough, just get on Yahoo, and do some searching you can find as many articles about it as you want. http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=depleted+uranium+penetration+plasma&prssweb=Search&ei=UTF-8&fl=0&xargs=0&pstart=1&fr=FP-tab-web-t-297&b=1
Or if you want, just pretend it doesn’t even happen.

[Anonymous]

Well, grab your popcorn during the intermision here.

[edkowal]

Just because something has been mentioned in a special on the Discovery or Military channel on cable TV, does NOT mean that it is error free. There have been many instances of material on these specials having errors in them.

As to some of the quotations which are being bandied about here:

From Global Research's website: "Uranium's molecular structure can (be) re-formed, using metallurgical and "nano-technologies"... " This statement is in error. Uranium doesn't HAVE a molecular structure. It is not a molecule. It is an atom. It has an atomic structure. If they are claiming that their technologies are reforming uranium's atomic structure, well, they are mistaken, because you can't do that using metallurgical or "nano-technoloies." You can only do that using nuclear technologies. What they probably meant was that they are re-forming or modifying the metal's CRYSTAL structure. That you can do. But it is incredibly sloppy for them to make the statement that they did. As well as being incorrect.

From the encyclopedia: "... the impact and subsequent release of heat energy causes it to disintegrate to dust and combust when it reaches air..."

This is combustion, also known as burning. That is, the metal itself burns, creating heat and hot gases. One of the components will be vaporized metal. Although it's hot, lethal and very damaging, vaporized metal is not a plasma. It would be the metallic equivalent of steam, which is vaporized water. This is a lot different than forming a plasma. If you are making the two equivalent, that is similar to saying that wood when it burns creates a plasma. Not true, and, neither does it happen when uranium or other metals burn.

Many of the posts which are on Tim Blair's blogsite contradict each other on the technical details. This is true even for people who share the same basic viewpoint on that website. And, if I recall from my recent viewing of that site, the quote which was used in this discussion was later modified by its author later on in a subsequent posting. The people on that site are not necessarily expert in that field.

One of the reasons that depleted uranium is used is that it is denser than other metals. Since the kinetic energy delivered by a projectile depends on its mass, the greater the mass, the greater the kinetic energy delivered to the target, even if the impact velocity is the same. The 8% difference in efficiency of depleted uranium versus tungsten may be entirely due to the greater density.

-Ed

[Anonymous]

So, you are saying all the other sources, the Army, an atomic engineer, and the Marines know less than you do. Interesting[wow] I can find some more proof to please you guys, but you two are right and the world is wrong, so why agrue.

[edkowal]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098

So, you are saying all the other sources, the Army, an atomic engineer, and the Marines know less than you do. Interesting[wow] I can find some more proof to please you guys, but you two are right and the world is wrong, so why agrue.

I have a B.S. in chemistry, a Ph.D. in biochemistry, and years of experience in scientific research. If you ask any other chemist about the statements that I've made here, I believe that they will agree with me.

-Ed

[Anonymous]

Here is some more proof of the well documented plasma effect.
Uranium can be engineered to be “self-sharpening” so that when it hits a target, it retains its punching point as material erodes off the warhead (titanium and tungsten will not do this). Uranium’s molecular structure can re-formed, using metallurgical and “nano-technologies” to deliver a selected range of ballistic features, including kinetic, thermal, pyrophoric, liquid metal and high-pressure/high-heat, plasma effects. Uranium is a readily available metal, cheap to produce and is in abundance in DOE’s, DOD’s and their weapon’s contractors’ stockpiles. Uranium has been designated a high priority material for scientific research on new weapons and “stockpile re-cycling” as a strategic and capital asset into multiple military applications. From: http://www.umrc.net/os/AfghanistanOEF.asp
This should start to sound very familiar, if you people would read this stuff.
Uranium can be engineered to be "self-sharpening" so that when it hits a target, it retains its punching point as material erodes off the warhead (titanium and tungsten will not do this). Uranium¼s molecular structure can re-formed, using metallurgical and "nano-technologies" to deliver a selected range of ballistic features, including kinetic, thermal, pyrophoric, liquid metal and high-pressure/high-heat, plasma effects. Uranium is a readily available metal, cheap to produce and is in abundance in DOE's, DOD's and their weapon's contractors' stockpiles. Uranium has been designated a high priority material for scientific research on new weapons and "stockpile re-cycling" as a strategic and capital asset into multiple military applications. From: http://www.peace-actionnm.org/issues/new/uranium.html
Ahem, it would seem to anyone, not so stubborn as to ignore the evidence, that it certainly does happen.
[i] Uranium can be engineered to be “self-sharpening” so that when it hits a target, it retains its punching point as material erodes off the warhead (titanium and tungsten will not do this). Uranium’s molecular structure can re-formed, using metallurgical and “nano-technologies” to deliver a selected range of ballistic features, including kinetic, thermal, pyrophoric, liquid metal and high-pressure/high-heat, plasma effects. Uranium is a readily available metal, cheap to produce and is in abundance in DOE’s, DOD’s and their weapon’s contractors’ stockpiles. Uranium has been designated a high priority material for scientific research on new weapons and “stockpile re-cycling” as a strategic and capital asset into multiple military applications. From: http://www.interactorg.com/Uranium%20Medical%20Research%20Centre.htm
Or this, at least it is worded differently.
[i]The Sabot Round is a truly elegant piece of engineering. Once the round has exited the Barrel, the weapon is purely Kinetic. No additonal Guidance and no conventional explosives. One of the kinetic effects of the now fast flying Depleted Uranium (D-38) 'Lawn Dart', is when it hits the armor plate of, say a Russian Built T-72 tank, it makes a loud 'Thunk', then penetrates the armor plate with such force that the D-38 Rod turns into white hot, radioactive Plasma... which immediately incinerates the contents of the target. Normally you'd see an almost immedite explosion of any onboard ordinance, but if the target has no ordinance you could see a much less spectaular (Though no less effective) result.... From: http://www.strategypage.com/messageboards/messages/480-289.asp

Now I can dig up some more, or can we admit that it does?

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by edkowal

QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098

So, you are saying all the other sources, the Army, an atomic engineer, and the Marines know less than you do. Interesting[wow] I can find some more proof to please you guys, but you two are right and the world is wrong, so why agrue.

I have a B.S. in chemistry, a Ph.D. in biochemistry, and years of experience in scientific research. If you ask any other chemist about the statements that I've made here, I believe that they will agree with me.

-Ed

So you know more about it than the Army, I see.

[dharmon]

Gosh what were we thinking...to challenge the teenage intellect....everyone knows they're smarter....