Spotlight, the movie

[default]

I had a chance to see it this weekend and it's pretty good. The
Washington Post's exposé of Watergate is no less complicated than the
Boston Globe's exposé of the RCC child abuse scandal.

Challenged and blocked at every turn, it is a wonder that they managed
to pull it off. Even their staff as well as the lawyers that were
fleecing the church with undisclosed settlements were doing everything
they could to squelch the investigations. The lawyers and victims had
no incentive to wreck the gravy train by making the abuse public. The
lawyers were pocketing 1/3 of money each time the church settled a
case, and had the victims convinced that there was no reason to go
public.

They also said something like 50% of priests are celibate, but didn't
elaborate on what celibacy consisted of.

I recently heard a speech by Pope Franny where he was showing his
indignation at the 2% of priests or "1 in 50" that were miscreants in
his words. The Boston Globe found 6% of priests in Massachusetts were
child molesters.

I'm wondering if the pope's taking the problems in Europe, Australia,
and the US and coming up with an average based on the number of
priests world wide...

That would make the numbers come out much lower since most of the
third world hasn't the legal system or monetary incentive to solve a
problem of abusing priests.

[djinn]

"default" wrote in message
news:j1mo9bd7vhg7801ol...@4ax.com...

>They also said something like 50% of priests are celibate, but didn't
>elaborate on what celibacy consisted of.

strictly speaking "celibate" means not
married and "chaste" is strictly no sex.
celibate's meaning came to include
no sex when back in the day it was
assumed that there was no sex if there
was no marriage.

[Mitchell Holman]

default <def...@defaulter.net> wrote in
news:j1mo9bd7vhg7801ol...@4ax.com:

> I had a chance to see it this weekend and it's pretty good. The
> Washington Post's exposé of Watergate is no less complicated than the
> Boston Globe's exposé of the RCC child abuse scandal.

At least Watergate was not excused with the
"but look at all the good the Church does" defense
that the Spotlight reporters hit. "Yes we know there
is a problem but there is no use advertizing it"

Argh......

>
> Challenged and blocked at every turn, it is a wonder that they managed
> to pull it off. Even their staff as well as the lawyers that were
> fleecing the church with undisclosed settlements were doing everything
> they could to squelch the investigations. The lawyers and victims had
> no incentive to wreck the gravy train by making the abuse public. The
> lawyers were pocketing 1/3 of money each time the church settled a
> case, and had the victims convinced that there was no reason to go
> public.
>
> They also said something like 50% of priests are celibate, but didn't
> elaborate on what celibacy consisted of.
>

Loved the retired priest line of "Of course I
molested boys but I didn't rape anybody".

Amazing.

[L.Roberts]

for every priest that molested there had to have been a few, if not dozens (and in some cases many more) of other priests who 'looked the other way' and are therefor just as fucking bad

[default]

The small numbers of abused children and parents complained to more
than one priest about it, and nothing was done. Those priests are
every bit the criminals as those they protect, as well as the priests
that ignored what they heard and saw first hand.

[viva padrepio]

Another scandal for the public to munch on is the methane gas tragedy in California. Short of Yellowstone, it's the biggest catastrophe currently going on. Btw, this methane stuff is lethal, in case you didn't know.

This is punishment for Gov. Brown for his liberal policies, one of which is signing the equal pay act which will have many companies leaving the state.

[Marvin Sebourn]

Lethal in what respect? Please be specific.

Marvin Sebourn
osugeo...@aol.com

[default]

You can't scream "Liberal" without taking responsibility for
conservatives gutting environmental rules and manpower, deregulation
and other assorted ills which make methane leaks just part of the cost
of doing business.

See how that works?

[nature bats last]

.> Lethal in what respect? Please be specific.

"Lethal" in the sense that if you were to breathe
pure methane, you would die -- of hypoxia.
In other words, "lethal" in exactly the same way that
nitrogen -- which comprises four fifths of the
air we breathe -- is "lethal".

Typical padrepio hysterical hyperbole.

Seth

[Marvin Sebourn]

On Monday, January 18, 2016 at 10:08:24 AM UTC-6, viva padrepio wrote:

And viva padrepio wrote:
"Another scandal for the public to munch on is the methane gas tragedy in California. Short of Yellowstone, it's the biggest catastrophe currently going on. Btw, this methane stuff is lethal, in case you didn't know".

I'll come back to the "methane gas tragedy in California", and focus first on your claim: "Yellowstone, it's the biggest catastrophe currently going on". What current catastrophe would that be, vp? Tourists mauled by bears in the park? Backpackers brutalized by bison?

And your "methane gas tragedy"--How much methane is venting each day compared to the daily production of natural gas in the USA? How does that vent volume compare with historic blowouts on natural gas wells, in the USA and around the world?

And again, vp, tell us more about the lethal methane.

Marvin Sebourn
osugeo...@aol.com

[Marvin Sebourn]

Yes, Seth, and the insertion of "ignorant" referring to vp is appropriate. I do admire your "hysterical hyperbole" alliteration.

Marvin Sebourn
osugeo...@aol.com

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <2c4fd51a-bf1c-4bd8...@googlegroups.com>,

Clearly, he was talking about the future eruption of the Yellowstone
super-volcano. Which would be way beyond catastrophic.

> And your "methane gas tragedy"--How much methane is venting each day compared
> to the daily production of natural gas in the USA? How does that vent volume
> compare with historic blowouts on natural gas wells, in the USA and around
> the world?

It's the pollution/carbon equivalent of 7 million cars a day.

> And again, vp, tell us more about the lethal methane.

--

JD

I¹ve officially given up trying to find the bottom
of the barrel that is Republican depravity.--Jidyom
Rosario, Addicting Info

[duke]

On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 22:35:16 -0500, default <def...@defaulter.net> wrote:

>I had a chance to see it this weekend and it's pretty good. The
>Washington Post's exposé of Watergate is no less complicated than the
>Boston Globe's exposé of the RCC child abuse scandal.
>
>Challenged and blocked at every turn, it is a wonder that they managed
>to pull it off. Even their staff as well as the lawyers that were
>fleecing the church with undisclosed settlements were doing everything
>they could to squelch the investigations. The lawyers and victims had
>no incentive to wreck the gravy train by making the abuse public. The
>lawyers were pocketing 1/3 of money each time the church settled a
>case, and had the victims convinced that there was no reason to go
>public.
>
>They also said something like 50% of priests are celibate, but didn't
>elaborate on what celibacy consisted of.
>
>I recently heard a speech by Pope Franny where he was showing his
>indignation at the 2% of priests or "1 in 50" that were miscreants in
>his words. The Boston Globe found 6% of priests in Massachusetts were
>child molesters.

Same as in CaleeFornia. That means other places had 0%.

>I'm wondering if the pope's taking the problems in Europe, Australia,
>and the US and coming up with an average based on the number of
>priests world wide...

>That would make the numbers come out much lower since most of the
>third world hasn't the legal system or monetary incentive to solve a
>problem of abusing priests.

They don't. The huge success in the US is projected to be the blueprint for the
rest of the world.

the dukester, American-American

*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****

[default]

On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 02:28:38 -0800, Jeanne Douglas
<hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:

>
>Clearly, he was talking about the future eruption of the Yellowstone
>super-volcano. Which would be way beyond catastrophic.

Volcanoes emit around 0.3 billion tonnes of CO2 per year. This is
about 1% of human CO2 emissions which is around 29 billion tonnes per
year.

source:
https://www.skepticalscience.com

The most significant climate impacts from volcanic injections into the
stratosphere come from the conversion of sulfur dioxide to sulfuric
acid, which condenses rapidly in the stratosphere to form fine sulfate
aerosols. The aerosols increase the reflection of radiation from the
Sun back into space, cooling the Earth's lower atmosphere or
troposphere. Several eruptions during the past century have caused a
decline in the average temperature at the Earth's surface of up to
half a degree (Fahrenheit scale) for periods of one to three years.

source:
http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/hazards/gas/climate.php

I imagine sulfur dioxide and sulfuric acid could also spell the
destruction of mankind..

I was in the lab one day and took an unintended hit of pure hydrogen
sulphide from a "lecture bottle" with a stuck valve. It contacts
water (as in mucus membranes) and turns to sulphuric acid. Fortunately
the pain was enough that I stopped inhaling it almost as soon as it
hit my nose, but a single hit of the pure stuff can kill a person.

[nature bats last]

One word: selfies.


Seth

[djinn]

"default" wrote in message
news:d0ks9bpndd952268h...@4ax.com...

```````````````

when I was a kid I used drain cleaner and aluminum
foil in a 7up bottle and put a balloon over the bottle
to catch the hydrogen and then attached a fuse to
the balloon and made flame balls up in the sky, but
I got a whiff of the hydrogen and was sick in bed
for days.

[W`T`S` = Golden_Truth ^^||^^Golden_Light!!!*}]

duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in
news:h8cs9bln4vnjrc1pk...@4ax.com:

> On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 16:10:18 +0000 (UTC), gaz...@shell.xmission.com
> (Kenny McCormack) wrote:
>
>>In article <3d2q9b558g1m0fdo5...@4ax.com>,
>>default <def...@defaulter.net> wrote:

>>>On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 07:14:33 -0600, Mitchell Holman
>>><noe...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> At least Watergate was not excused with the
>>>> "but look at all the good the Church does" defense
>>>> that the Spotlight reporters hit. "Yes we know there
>>>> is a problem but there is no use advertizing it"
>>>>
>>>> Argh......
>>>>

>>> One of the choice justifications in the movie: "I'd rather let a few
>>> child molesters go free than rob people of their faith."
>>>
>>> I'm paraphrasing, my memory isn't that good.
>>
>> And rightly so. Assume that religion (Specifically, Catholicism) is
>> true.
>
> It's directly form the lips of Jesus Christ himself.
Bull shit. What a con game!
>
>> Assume further that many Catholics will abandon their faith because of
>> these revelations - and, thus, go straight to Hell for all eternity.
>> You can't really argue that that would be anything other than a
>> catastrophe.
>
>> Or, to put this all another way, no, people should be abandoning their
>> religion because of anything so superficial and irrelevant as finding
>> out about their leaders sex lives. They should be abandoning religion
>> because it is bullsh*t.
>
> What is? Celibacy was elective by the priesthood so as to give full
> attention to the flock, rather than place them 2nd to a man's wife and
> kids.
Perhaps the elected Congressmen and Senators, even the President should
all be celibate. Then, why not policemen, military people, firemen,
Doctors, and on and on. It would've been simpler to sterilize them and
have a corp of special prostitutes for them. We get along fine without
a priest, but not without our Doctors and nurses, or police, or firemen
or our military. Damn, what a corner the Church painted itself into!!!
There aren't enough "Aces" to populate the priesthood with (asexuals,
look them up in Wikipedia, they're only 1% of the population).

[W`T`S` = Golden_Truth ^^||^^Golden_Light!!!*}]

Jeanne Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in
news:hlwdjsd2-BD9378...@news.giganews.com:

Yes, it has caused, and could cause in the future an "extinction event"
in the Earth's history.

>
>> And your "methane gas tragedy"--How much methane is venting each day
>> compared to the daily production of natural gas in the USA? How does
>> that vent volume compare with historic blowouts on natural gas wells,
>> in the USA and around the world?

Concentrate any gas in a smaller area, and you have a problem. The
people that live there will provide interesting test subjects.

>
> It's the pollution/carbon equivalent of 7 million cars a day.
>
>> And again, vp, tell us more about the lethal methane.

Open a gas pipe and fill your home with it, and you can find out
directly.

[Marvin Sebourn]

Wow, you were fortunate in not suffering harm, default. For the greater part of my working life I worked "around" methane, at least with the commonly termed "natural gas". I was fortunate in that roughly 99% of my work was around "sweet" gas, as opposed to "sour" gas containing significant amounts of hydrogen sulfide. I remember, and you will likely clarify this, that an exposure to H2S that increased slowly was particularly insidious--although at first the presence of H2S was easily noticeable, with increasing concentrations the characteristic odor disappeared, creating a false, and potentially dangerous sense of security. Living in Oklahoma, I sometimes see natural gas production sites with a wind sock on site.

Marvin Sebourn
osugeo...@aol.com

[Mike Duffy]

On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 10:15:42 -0500, default wrote:

> I was in the lab one day and took an unintended hit of pure hydrogen
> sulphide from a "lecture bottle" with a stuck valve. It contacts
> water (as in mucus membranes) and turns to sulphuric acid.

Make that hydrosulphuric acid. It is sulphur trioxide that creates
sulphuric acid on contact with water.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_sulfide
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulfur_trioxide

Sulphur trioxide (SO3) is MUCH more corrosive than hydrogen sulphide (H2S).

Notwithstanding that, H2S is considered quite dangerous to breathe as you
did. From the first a/n website, see the last bullet:

0.00047 ppm or 0.47 ppb is the odor threshold, the point at which 50% of a
human panel can detect the presence of an odor.

10 ppm is the OSHA permissible exposure limit (8 hours)

10–20 ppm is the borderline concentration for eye irritation.

20 ppm is the acceptable OSHA ceiling concentration

50 ppm is the acceptable maximum peak limit (10 minutes)

50–100 ppm leads to eye damage.

100–150 ppm the olfactory nerve is paralyzed. (Smell disappears)

320–530 ppm leads to pulmonary edema with the possibility of death.

530–1000 ppm causes rapid breathing, leading to loss of breathing.

800 ppm is the lethal concentration for 50% humans (5 minutes)

1000+ ppm - (even one breath) immediate collapse with loss of breathing

[default]

That seems to be true of a lot of toxic gases, the perception
threshold and toxic threshold don't really smell all that different
and long exposure to low levels decreases sensitivity.

[nature bats last]

.> Wow, you were fortunate in not suffering harm, default. For the greater part of my working life I worked "around" methane, at least with the commonly termed "natural gas". I was fortunate in that roughly 99% of my work was around "sweet" gas, as opposed to "sour" gas containing significant amounts of hydrogen sulfide. I remember, and you will likely clarify this, that an exposure to H2S that increased slowly was particularly insidious--although at first the presence of H2S was easily noticeable, with increasing concentrations the characteristic odor disappeared, creating a false, and potentially dangerous sense of security. Living in Oklahoma, I sometimes see natural gas production sites with a wind sock on site.

I have a friend who cannot smell sulfur compounds. Very odd.
She has detectors all over her house for that reason. I thought
this might be a common anosmia, but but a quick google turned up
very little, just one paper mentioning someone who could not smell
n-butyl mercaptan (and said that was autosomal recessive). The common
odorant in natural gas (as I imagine you know) is t-butyl mercaptan.

When I was in high school, and very interested in chemistry,
the teacher gave me the run of the lab -- unsupervised -- after
hours. A really really bad idea, as I can now see. One afternoon
I read about the use of sulfide to precipitate metal ions for analysis.
And my goodness, lookie what we have here -- a bottle of hydrogen sulfide
in solution. Some minutes later the principal came in, came in from
his office which was quite some distance away. I was filling the school
with the odor and, as you point out, my nose had quickly accommodated,
and I could no longer smell it.

Thinking back, I should have been injured, or even died, a number
of times.


Seth



>
> Marvin Sebourn
> osugeo...@aol.com

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <d0ks9bpndd952268h...@4ax.com>,

Ouch!

[Marvin Sebourn]

You certainly were fortunate, Seth. My only experience, not even approaching yours in danger was "Study Hall Chemistry". At that time, carbide lanterns were sold at the local Firestone or Otasco store. And naturally they also sold calcium carbide... One warm afternoon in study hall, I threw out a generous handful of pieces of calcium carbide into a rainwater puddle present on a large ledge. Wow! Instant acetylene generation! I quickly tired of the fizzing, and the horrid smell, then only in my area, of the impurities of some other gases, and requested a hall pass and was gone for about twenty minutes. When I returned, the study hall classroom was a bit stuffy, and about ten degrees warmer with all the windows closed. The study hall teacher in charge gave me a bit of a dirty look, and I returned to my seat and ever-after never took calcium carbide to school. In today's world, I would likely have been deemed a terrorist.

[Cloud Hobbit]

On Sunday, January 17, 2016 at 7:35:20 PM UTC-8, default wrote:

I also saw Spotlight and as I remember it they were talking to a guy who was an expert on abusive priests and he told them that 6% was the common percentage of priests who were molesting children in THE UNITED STATES, not just Massachusetts.

[nature bats last]

.> You certainly were fortunate, Seth. My only experience, not even approaching yours in danger was "Study Hall Chemistry". At that time, carbide lanterns were sold at the local Firestone or Otasco store. And naturally they also sold calcium carbide... One warm afternoon in study hall, I threw out a generous handful of pieces of calcium carbide into a rainwater puddle present on a large ledge. Wow! Instant acetylene generation! I quickly tired of the fizzing, and the horrid smell, then only in my area, of the impurities of some other gases, and requested a hall pass and was gone for about twenty minutes. When I returned, the study hall classroom was a bit stuffy, and about ten degrees warmer with all the windows closed. The study hall teacher in charge gave me a bit of a dirty look, and I returned to my seat and ever-after never took calcium carbide to school. In today's world, I would likely have been deemed a terrorist.


Heh!

Yep, I remember calcium carbide well -- we had that too.

Seth

[nature bats last]

I do remember the smell too, I think. Which now has me puzzled:
acetylene is odorless, and I'm hard put to imagine any other products
from reacting with water that would be smelly. I'm guessing it must
be due to impurities; that stuff would be technical grade at best.


Seth

[Marvin Sebourn]

Seth, I had read sometime, somewhere, that the smell was due to impurities. I seem to remember that acetylene in the bottle of cutting torch/welding/brazing rigs, Oxygen/Acetylene, had a slightly sweet smell, but that memory is faint and from long ago and a bit suspect.

Marvin Sebourn
osugeo...@aol.com

[Cloud Hobbit]

I never cease to be amazed at how stupid you really are. The 6% number they gave in the movie was a national average. It applied to any state.

[Marvin Sebourn]

Why do you even bother to post, if you consider this to be a meaningful answer?

Marvin Sebourn
osugeo...@aol.com