🚀 go-pugleaf

On Sat, 10 Sep 2005 00:05:21 -0700, wrcowan1@hal-pc.org wrote:

>
>
>slim wrote:
>> 
>> Phil wrote:
>> 
>>>On Thu, 08 Sep 2005 18:09:12 GMT, slim <pickin's@nyc.rr.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>Phil wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 22:24:03 -0700, wrcowan1@hal-pc.org wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>Besides, a flood and a toxic atmosphere are two very different scenarios.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The flood is a toxic environment.  Every first responder knows that.
>>>>>>The chemicals and waste in the flood waters can be just as deadly as the
>>>>>>toxic atmosphere from 9/11.  The difference is that the effects from the
>>>>>>Flood can be immediate or quick, whereas the 9/11 situation will play
>>>>>>out years from now.
>>>>>
>>>>>Don't confuse Mike with facts.  It only hurts his head.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Floods and toxic atmospheres are two different events.
>>>
>>>How are they different, Mike?  
>> 
>> 
>> I am not going to give you a lesson in the differences
>> between gases and liquids and how they are affected
>> by the laws of physics.
>> 
>>
>
>
>Yes, liquids and gases are affected by the laws of physics but you 
>forget that the most important factors to consider are chemical and 
>biological.  In this case, the water is a worse source of contamination 
>than the air was on 9/11.  With the water you have chemicals that are 
>now being transported that affect both dermal, internal and airways. 
>With liquids contaminats have the ability to be transported a much 
>greater distance that the particulates from 9/11.  In addition you have 
>the biological component in water in New ORleans that you did not have 
>in New york during 9/11

Is that what you were thinking Mike?


Phil
======
visit the New York City Homebrewers Guild website:
http://www.hbd.org/nychg