Page 2 of 2

Re: Moronic bull

Posted: Mon Sep 02, 2013 5:15 pm
by Paul McKeown
David, I think that the worry of releasing sarin/VX by attempting to destroy the weapons is not a problem, as the warheads will contain harmless precursors which need to be mixed to create their toxins (binary weapons). I would have thought that blowing up the warheads should be safe, although I could certainly be wrong, as, naturally I'm not privy to such secrets. But there are very obvious risks which do need addressing, which you would have to get right without any room for error whatsoever. That Parliament didn't talk through any such issues just seems part and parcel of the whole ad hoc approach to the proposals.

Re: Moronic bull

Posted: Mon Sep 02, 2013 5:43 pm
by John McKenna
Come on Paul, Parliament was never meant to even discuss such matters in any depth, if at all. It has always been smoke & mirrors and secret deals done in cabals, at least since just prior to English Civil War. Before that they discussed even less.

Re: Moronic bull

Posted: Mon Sep 02, 2013 8:34 pm
by Neil Graham
John McKenna wrote:Come on Paul, Parliament was never meant to even discuss such matters in any depth, if at all. It has always been smoke & mirrors and secret deals done in cabals, at least since just prior to English Civil War. Before that they discussed even less.
John sorry to pull you up on a historic note. The word "cabal" originates from the initials of a group of ministers (Clifford, Arlington, Buckingham, Ashley & Lauderdale) from the time of Charles II. Therefore although a group of ministers may have acted in this way prior to the English Civil War it wouldn't have been a "cabal"!

Re: Moronic bull

Posted: Mon Sep 02, 2013 10:50 pm
by IM Jack Rudd
Neil Graham wrote:
John McKenna wrote:Come on Paul, Parliament was never meant to even discuss such matters in any depth, if at all. It has always been smoke & mirrors and secret deals done in cabals, at least since just prior to English Civil War. Before that they discussed even less.
John sorry to pull you up on a historic note. The word "cabal" originates from the initials of a group of ministers (Clifford, Arlington, Buckingham, Ashley & Lauderdale) from the time of Charles II. Therefore although a group of ministers may have acted in this way prior to the English Civil War it wouldn't have been a "cabal"!
Wikipedia suggests otherwise.

Re: Moronic bull (Minotaur)

Posted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 12:57 am
by John McKenna
More insights into the curiosities of English can be heard on Fry's English Delight (BBC Radio 4).

Re: Moronic bull

Posted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 7:56 am
by Kevin Thurlow
"You were lucky it wasn't highly purified and de-ionised dihydrogen monoxide they were after."

Actually, the IUPAC systematic name is oxidane, (by analogy with methane), but they do stress that this is only if you are desperate to use fully systematic names... I am sure I have written articles about such things, and they may be online somewhere.

Re: Moronic bull

Posted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 8:01 am
by Greg Breed
IM Jack Rudd wrote:
Neil Graham wrote:
John McKenna wrote:Come on Paul, Parliament was never meant to even discuss such matters in any depth, if at all. It has always been smoke & mirrors and secret deals done in cabals, at least since just prior to English Civil War. Before that they discussed even less.
John sorry to pull you up on a historic note. The word "cabal" originates from the initials of a group of ministers (Clifford, Arlington, Buckingham, Ashley & Lauderdale) from the time of Charles II. Therefore although a group of ministers may have acted in this way prior to the English Civil War it wouldn't have been a "cabal"!
Wikipedia suggests otherwise.
Did you read further down Jack?...
Wikipedia wrote:The term took on its present meaning from a group of ministers of King Charles II of England (Sir Thomas Clifford, Lord Arlington, the Duke of Buckingham, Lord Ashley, and Lord Lauderdale), whose initial letters coincidentally spelled CABAL, and who were the signatories of the public Treaty of Dover that allied England to France in a prospective war against the Netherlands

Re: Moronic bull

Posted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 9:08 am
by IM Jack Rudd
I did. Neil claimed the term originated from that group of ministers, and it doesn't; it already existed and its meaning changed somewhat.

Re: Moronic bull

Posted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 9:51 am
by Paul McKeown
Kevin Thurlow wrote:Actually, the IUPAC systematic name is oxidane, (by analogy with methane)
The vagaries of systematic nomenclature. The chemistry is so analogous. :shock:

In which case hydrogen sulphide shall henceforth be known as sulphane. Or perhaps sulfane. Hydrogen chloride becomes chlorane, hydrogen bromide, bromane, lithium hydride, lithane. Molecular hydrogen must henceforth be referred to as hydrane. I like that. Wonder what happens if you deuterate the molecule. The mind boggles.

Re: Moronic bull

Posted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 11:09 am
by Neil Graham
Greg Breed wrote:
Neil Graham wrote:
John McKenna wrote:Come on Paul, Parliament was never meant to even discuss such matters in any depth, if at all. It has always been smoke & mirrors and secret deals done in cabals, at least since just prior to English Civil War. Before that they discussed even less.
John sorry to pull you up on a historic note. The word "cabal" originates from the initials of a group of ministers (Clifford, Arlington, Buckingham, Ashley & Lauderdale) from the time of Charles II. Therefore although a group of ministers may have acted in this way prior to the English Civil War it wouldn't have been a "cabal"!

Did you read further down Jack?...
Wikipedia wrote:The term took on its present meaning from a group of ministers of King Charles II of England (Sir Thomas Clifford, Lord Arlington, the Duke of Buckingham, Lord Ashley, and Lord Lauderdale), whose initial letters coincidentally spelled CABAL, and who were the signatories of the public Treaty of Dover that allied England to France in a prospective war against the Netherlands
An interesting sub-debate. As Jack points out below the word was in existence beforehand but its meaning has changed somewhat. Perhaps trying to decide what the usage was in the 17th century is a step too far even for this board! Incidentally I subscribe to an excellent newsletter called "World Wide Words" and here's what the author has to say on the subject:-

http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-cab1.htm

Re: Moronic bull

Posted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 11:32 am
by Paul McKeown
And back to the subject of the original post, hydrogen fluoride must henceforth be referred to as fluorane, whilst molecular fluorine is, naturally enough, fluorofluorane, by analogy with fluoromethane. :lol:

Re: Moronic bull

Posted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 11:59 am
by Christopher Kreuzer
Read an interesting article in The Times 2 section today on the Assad family and Bashar's wife Asma. The whole dynamics of the Assad family make for depressing reading.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Assad_family

Re: Moronic bull

Posted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 12:18 pm
by Kevin Thurlow
"In which case hydrogen sulphide shall henceforth be known as sulphane. Or perhaps sulfane. Hydrogen chloride becomes chlorane, hydrogen bromide, bromane, lithium hydride, lithane. Molecular hydrogen must henceforth be referred to as hydrane. I like that. Wonder what happens if you deuterate the molecule. The mind boggles."

Hydrogen sulfide is sulfane (sulfur has been the official chemical spelling since 1979!) Hydrogen remains hydrogen, but the others are right. You did forget ammonia (azane), and I should have mentioned that the systematic name for methane is carbane. Hydrogen peroxide becomes dioxidane...

If anyone cares, see http://www.acdlabs.com/iupac/nomenclature/93/r93_8.htm

molecular fluorine would probably be "bifluorine", but as I said earlier, these names are only used if you are desperate to use systematic names. A colleague did label his water bottle "oxidane" to stop people stealing it.

Re: Moronic bull

Posted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 1:27 pm
by Greg Breed
Kevin Thurlow wrote:A colleague did label his water bottle "oxidane" to stop people stealing it.
Label it "piss" or "urine" and you can be almost sure no one will want it. Label it something scientific and someone somewhere will want it. Mind you, when you start drinking from it the game's up!

Re: Moronic bull

Posted: Wed Sep 04, 2013 2:06 pm
by John McKenna
From Chris Kreuzer's wiki link above (this bit is regarding Bashar's father Hafez, or is it - who's the daddy here??) -

"Hafez al-Assad's father Ali Sulayman, who was born in 1875, inherited many similar characteristics of his own father and became well-respected among the locals, and like many others, he opposed the French occupation... he was called al-Assad, the lion..."

Note that the French have said they regret they will not be able to follow their principles and punish Bashar's forces without following their principal, the US, into the fray.

PS (to Greg) - Indian yogis have been happily drinking their own for ages, but probably draw the line at drinking other people's. (Urine has played its part in the history of chemistry by aiding in the discovery of phosphorus and hormones, etc.)