<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_10_30_1216230</id>
	<title>How Terahertz Waves Tear Apart DNA</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1256907300000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>KentuckyFC writes <i>"Great things are expected of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terahertz\_radiation">terahertz waves</a>, the radiation in the electromagnetic spectrum between microwaves and the infrared. Terahertz waves pass through non-conducting materials such as clothes, paper, wood and brick and so cameras sensitive to them can peer inside envelopes, into living rooms and 'frisk' people at distance. That's not to mention the great potential they have in medical imaging. Because terahertz photons are not energetic enough to break chemical bonds or ionize electrons, it's easy to dismiss fears over their health effects. And yet the evidence is mixed: some studies have reported significant genetic damage while others, although similar, have reported none. Now a team led by Los Alamos National Labs thinks it knows why. They say that although the forces that terahertz waves exert on double-stranded DNA are tiny, in certain circumstances resonant effects can <a href="http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/24331/">unzip the DNA strands, tearing them apart</a>. This creates bubbles in the strands that can significantly interfere with processes such as gene expression and DNA replication. With terahertz scanners already appearing <a href="//yro.slashdot.org/story/08/03/10/0124215/T-Ray-Camera-Sees-Through-Clothes-Preserves-Privacy">in airports</a> and hospitals, the question that now urgently needs answering is what level of exposure is safe."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>KentuckyFC writes " Great things are expected of terahertz waves , the radiation in the electromagnetic spectrum between microwaves and the infrared .
Terahertz waves pass through non-conducting materials such as clothes , paper , wood and brick and so cameras sensitive to them can peer inside envelopes , into living rooms and 'frisk ' people at distance .
That 's not to mention the great potential they have in medical imaging .
Because terahertz photons are not energetic enough to break chemical bonds or ionize electrons , it 's easy to dismiss fears over their health effects .
And yet the evidence is mixed : some studies have reported significant genetic damage while others , although similar , have reported none .
Now a team led by Los Alamos National Labs thinks it knows why .
They say that although the forces that terahertz waves exert on double-stranded DNA are tiny , in certain circumstances resonant effects can unzip the DNA strands , tearing them apart .
This creates bubbles in the strands that can significantly interfere with processes such as gene expression and DNA replication .
With terahertz scanners already appearing in airports and hospitals , the question that now urgently needs answering is what level of exposure is safe .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>KentuckyFC writes "Great things are expected of terahertz waves, the radiation in the electromagnetic spectrum between microwaves and the infrared.
Terahertz waves pass through non-conducting materials such as clothes, paper, wood and brick and so cameras sensitive to them can peer inside envelopes, into living rooms and 'frisk' people at distance.
That's not to mention the great potential they have in medical imaging.
Because terahertz photons are not energetic enough to break chemical bonds or ionize electrons, it's easy to dismiss fears over their health effects.
And yet the evidence is mixed: some studies have reported significant genetic damage while others, although similar, have reported none.
Now a team led by Los Alamos National Labs thinks it knows why.
They say that although the forces that terahertz waves exert on double-stranded DNA are tiny, in certain circumstances resonant effects can unzip the DNA strands, tearing them apart.
This creates bubbles in the strands that can significantly interfere with processes such as gene expression and DNA replication.
With terahertz scanners already appearing in airports and hospitals, the question that now urgently needs answering is what level of exposure is safe.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29925491</id>
	<title>Re:Incident at LAX</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256924280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can't recall the source, but I heard of an interview of someone from airport security in Israel.  When asked why there weren't more incidents when they are certainly targets, he said, "In America, they look for bombs.   Here we look for bombers."</p><p>So they let the 9/11 hijackers on the plane with mace and box cutters, but they harass my 67 year old mother every time she flies.  Anything else wouldn't be Politically Correct.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't recall the source , but I heard of an interview of someone from airport security in Israel .
When asked why there were n't more incidents when they are certainly targets , he said , " In America , they look for bombs .
Here we look for bombers .
" So they let the 9/11 hijackers on the plane with mace and box cutters , but they harass my 67 year old mother every time she flies .
Anything else would n't be Politically Correct .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't recall the source, but I heard of an interview of someone from airport security in Israel.
When asked why there weren't more incidents when they are certainly targets, he said, "In America, they look for bombs.
Here we look for bombers.
"So they let the 9/11 hijackers on the plane with mace and box cutters, but they harass my 67 year old mother every time she flies.
Anything else wouldn't be Politically Correct.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922663</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29926551</id>
	<title>FREEDOM ISN'T FREE!!!!!1!!1!oneone</title>
	<author>Benfea</author>
	<datestamp>1256929260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Freedom isn't free, you damned America-hating, terrorist-loving hippie! If you don't like it, GET OUT OF MY COUNTRY! [/conservolibertarian]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Freedom is n't free , you damned America-hating , terrorist-loving hippie !
If you do n't like it , GET OUT OF MY COUNTRY !
[ /conservolibertarian ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Freedom isn't free, you damned America-hating, terrorist-loving hippie!
If you don't like it, GET OUT OF MY COUNTRY!
[/conservolibertarian]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922621</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29925709</id>
	<title>Re:Incident at LAX</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256925360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>In my case, the "profile" was that I'd bought a one-way ticket only one hour before the flight. Apparently the profile of terrorists is that they buy tickets at the last moment. True? Probably not.</p></div><p>When you buy tickets last minute you get the "SSSS" treatment because they don't have enough time to run your name through all their databases.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In my case , the " profile " was that I 'd bought a one-way ticket only one hour before the flight .
Apparently the profile of terrorists is that they buy tickets at the last moment .
True ? Probably not.When you buy tickets last minute you get the " SSSS " treatment because they do n't have enough time to run your name through all their databases .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In my case, the "profile" was that I'd bought a one-way ticket only one hour before the flight.
Apparently the profile of terrorists is that they buy tickets at the last moment.
True? Probably not.When you buy tickets last minute you get the "SSSS" treatment because they don't have enough time to run your name through all their databases.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922777</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923919</id>
	<title>Re:Incident at LAX</title>
	<author>gad\_zuki!</author>
	<datestamp>1256918220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;Needless to say, everyone in line was a bit pissed that the TSA was giving extra screening to the old lady when they just waved the Arab guys through without a second glance.</p><p>Err, racial and religious profiling has serious drawbacks. Random testing along with metal detectors, milimeter scan, etc is a better way. Not to mention terrorists arent stupid. Theyre not going to dress up in full garb.  The 9/11 hijackers wore street clothes and business casual clothes.</p><p>Terrorists and drug smugglers also prey upon the weak and stupid. I can remember how many times Ive been asked to "hold my bag please, it is a package for my son" in line to get on a plane or a train.</p><p>&gt;"What the fuck are you morons searching her for? The towelheads are the ones flying shit into buildings!"</p><p>Stay classy.</p><p>&gt;Maybe scanned him a few extra times to make sure his DNA was totally fucked up.</p><p>With what exactly? The passive metal detector and passive millimeter wave device? Perhaps it would behoove us all in air travel if didnt point at funny looking people and scream "terrorist" like the moron in your story.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Needless to say , everyone in line was a bit pissed that the TSA was giving extra screening to the old lady when they just waved the Arab guys through without a second glance.Err , racial and religious profiling has serious drawbacks .
Random testing along with metal detectors , milimeter scan , etc is a better way .
Not to mention terrorists arent stupid .
Theyre not going to dress up in full garb .
The 9/11 hijackers wore street clothes and business casual clothes.Terrorists and drug smugglers also prey upon the weak and stupid .
I can remember how many times Ive been asked to " hold my bag please , it is a package for my son " in line to get on a plane or a train. &gt; " What the fuck are you morons searching her for ?
The towelheads are the ones flying shit into buildings !
" Stay classy. &gt; Maybe scanned him a few extra times to make sure his DNA was totally fucked up.With what exactly ?
The passive metal detector and passive millimeter wave device ?
Perhaps it would behoove us all in air travel if didnt point at funny looking people and scream " terrorist " like the moron in your story .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;Needless to say, everyone in line was a bit pissed that the TSA was giving extra screening to the old lady when they just waved the Arab guys through without a second glance.Err, racial and religious profiling has serious drawbacks.
Random testing along with metal detectors, milimeter scan, etc is a better way.
Not to mention terrorists arent stupid.
Theyre not going to dress up in full garb.
The 9/11 hijackers wore street clothes and business casual clothes.Terrorists and drug smugglers also prey upon the weak and stupid.
I can remember how many times Ive been asked to "hold my bag please, it is a package for my son" in line to get on a plane or a train.&gt;"What the fuck are you morons searching her for?
The towelheads are the ones flying shit into buildings!
"Stay classy.&gt;Maybe scanned him a few extra times to make sure his DNA was totally fucked up.With what exactly?
The passive metal detector and passive millimeter wave device?
Perhaps it would behoove us all in air travel if didnt point at funny looking people and scream "terrorist" like the moron in your story.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922663</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923137</id>
	<title>Re:Ethical use of panic...</title>
	<author>Evil Shabazz</author>
	<datestamp>1256914560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>We're sorry - "OMGCancer panic" (c) is copyrighted and owned by FOXNews, along with "OMG panic" for any other noun you can think of.</htmltext>
<tokenext>We 're sorry - " OMGCancer panic " ( c ) is copyrighted and owned by FOXNews , along with " OMG panic " for any other noun you can think of .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We're sorry - "OMGCancer panic" (c) is copyrighted and owned by FOXNews, along with "OMG panic" for any other noun you can think of.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922655</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29924077</id>
	<title>Re:Shoe-Fitting Flouroscope</title>
	<author>Mister Whirly</author>
	<datestamp>1256918880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Reminds me of the time I was at the Science Museum in Minnesota and they had an exhibit from the Museum of Bad Science (or something like that).</p></div><p>
It is the <a href="http://www.museumofquackery.com/" title="museumofquackery.com">Museum of Questionable Medical Devices</a> [museumofquackery.com]. (It used to be housed in St. Anthony Main, but when that clsoed they moved it to the Science Museum.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Reminds me of the time I was at the Science Museum in Minnesota and they had an exhibit from the Museum of Bad Science ( or something like that ) .
It is the Museum of Questionable Medical Devices [ museumofquackery.com ] .
( It used to be housed in St. Anthony Main , but when that clsoed they moved it to the Science Museum .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Reminds me of the time I was at the Science Museum in Minnesota and they had an exhibit from the Museum of Bad Science (or something like that).
It is the Museum of Questionable Medical Devices [museumofquackery.com].
(It used to be housed in St. Anthony Main, but when that clsoed they moved it to the Science Museum.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922645</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29927581</id>
	<title>Re:Sunlight</title>
	<author>ars</author>
	<datestamp>1256933940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The transmittance in air is pretty low at this frequency.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The transmittance in air is pretty low at this frequency .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The transmittance in air is pretty low at this frequency.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29924769</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922661</id>
	<title>oh no, this means</title>
	<author>StripedCow</author>
	<datestamp>1256911500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>that besides my geiger muller counter, my gas spectroscopy meter, and my decibel meter, I have to carry a terahertz microwave detector with me all the time?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>that besides my geiger muller counter , my gas spectroscopy meter , and my decibel meter , I have to carry a terahertz microwave detector with me all the time ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that besides my geiger muller counter, my gas spectroscopy meter, and my decibel meter, I have to carry a terahertz microwave detector with me all the time?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29924993</id>
	<title>Re:Remember it's resonance</title>
	<author>Sockatume</author>
	<datestamp>1256922420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're limited by energy loss by coupling to the non-resonant modes, though. That's why amplitude is important, and resonant effects will not "build up" from an arbitrarily small amplitude. The resonance gets the energy into the mode with great efficiency, it doesn't keep it there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're limited by energy loss by coupling to the non-resonant modes , though .
That 's why amplitude is important , and resonant effects will not " build up " from an arbitrarily small amplitude .
The resonance gets the energy into the mode with great efficiency , it does n't keep it there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're limited by energy loss by coupling to the non-resonant modes, though.
That's why amplitude is important, and resonant effects will not "build up" from an arbitrarily small amplitude.
The resonance gets the energy into the mode with great efficiency, it doesn't keep it there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29924049</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29926711</id>
	<title>Re:Shoe-Fitting Flouroscope</title>
	<author>painandgreed</author>
	<datestamp>1256929920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>The exposure rate is thought to have been approximately 0.005 Gy to 0.058 Gy per second. If children tried on several pairs of shoes per visit it was posited that they could be exposed to as much as 0.1 Gy to 1.16 Gy. In fact, experiments indicated that radiation could exceed 1 microGy per hour as far as 10 feet away from the machine.</i> </p><p>
To put this into context,  the Gy (gray), is the amount of absorbed radiation. One gray is typically the point where physical effects are felt, usually in a burn to the skin. 5 Gy over the entire body is considered a lethal dose.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The exposure rate is thought to have been approximately 0.005 Gy to 0.058 Gy per second .
If children tried on several pairs of shoes per visit it was posited that they could be exposed to as much as 0.1 Gy to 1.16 Gy .
In fact , experiments indicated that radiation could exceed 1 microGy per hour as far as 10 feet away from the machine .
To put this into context , the Gy ( gray ) , is the amount of absorbed radiation .
One gray is typically the point where physical effects are felt , usually in a burn to the skin .
5 Gy over the entire body is considered a lethal dose .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> The exposure rate is thought to have been approximately 0.005 Gy to 0.058 Gy per second.
If children tried on several pairs of shoes per visit it was posited that they could be exposed to as much as 0.1 Gy to 1.16 Gy.
In fact, experiments indicated that radiation could exceed 1 microGy per hour as far as 10 feet away from the machine.
To put this into context,  the Gy (gray), is the amount of absorbed radiation.
One gray is typically the point where physical effects are felt, usually in a burn to the skin.
5 Gy over the entire body is considered a lethal dose.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922645</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29924107</id>
	<title>Re:Who cares...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256919060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both." - Benjamin Franklin</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both .
" - Benjamin Franklin</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both.
" - Benjamin Franklin</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922621</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923093</id>
	<title>Re:Doesn't worry me</title>
	<author>Sockatume</author>
	<datestamp>1256914260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, it's a theoretical explanation for some difficult experimental results. The issue was that some studies suggested that THz radiation would be harmful at any frequency/power range, while others pegged it as only being significant at particular resonant amplitudes or frequencies. It transpires that in the presence of thermal perturbations, you do indeed get some non-specific disruption of the base pairing, which would only be an issue if you had a long enough exposure to actually get a significant thermal perturbation and thus cause a very significant disruption. However there is also a resonant mechanism, at a particular frequency with a critical minimum amplitude, that can immediately cause a significant disruption, without the need to wait for a particularly big thermal perturbation. That's my reading, anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , it 's a theoretical explanation for some difficult experimental results .
The issue was that some studies suggested that THz radiation would be harmful at any frequency/power range , while others pegged it as only being significant at particular resonant amplitudes or frequencies .
It transpires that in the presence of thermal perturbations , you do indeed get some non-specific disruption of the base pairing , which would only be an issue if you had a long enough exposure to actually get a significant thermal perturbation and thus cause a very significant disruption .
However there is also a resonant mechanism , at a particular frequency with a critical minimum amplitude , that can immediately cause a significant disruption , without the need to wait for a particularly big thermal perturbation .
That 's my reading , anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, it's a theoretical explanation for some difficult experimental results.
The issue was that some studies suggested that THz radiation would be harmful at any frequency/power range, while others pegged it as only being significant at particular resonant amplitudes or frequencies.
It transpires that in the presence of thermal perturbations, you do indeed get some non-specific disruption of the base pairing, which would only be an issue if you had a long enough exposure to actually get a significant thermal perturbation and thus cause a very significant disruption.
However there is also a resonant mechanism, at a particular frequency with a critical minimum amplitude, that can immediately cause a significant disruption, without the need to wait for a particularly big thermal perturbation.
That's my reading, anyway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922875</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29943230</id>
	<title>Re:Shoe-Fitting Flouroscope</title>
	<author>Nivag064</author>
	<datestamp>1257106440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I fremember, as a child in England, deliberately going into a shoe shop to have a look at the bones in my feet.</p><p>It appeared that no-one suspected any possible health problems with these devices.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I fremember , as a child in England , deliberately going into a shoe shop to have a look at the bones in my feet.It appeared that no-one suspected any possible health problems with these devices .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I fremember, as a child in England, deliberately going into a shoe shop to have a look at the bones in my feet.It appeared that no-one suspected any possible health problems with these devices.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922645</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923793</id>
	<title>Re:Shoe-Fitting Flouroscope</title>
	<author>gad\_zuki!</author>
	<datestamp>1256917740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;Hopefully my sperm aren't being fried when I walk through a scanner in an airport--at least the parents of the 30s were using X-rays for their convenience and not the invasion of their privacy!</p><p>Airports use metal detectors for humans, not xrays.  The new millimeter wave machines arent xrays. As far as safety, have is been demonstrated that these machines damage organisms in regular usage? It seems to me that a lot of this is reactionary nonsense like "I'm allergic to wifi!!" nonsense.I am concered about safety, but jumping on the naturalist/homeopathy/conspiracy theory bandwagon doesnt do us any good.</p><p>Not to mention just flying on a plane gives you a nice dose of cosmic rays, sans superpowers.</p><p>&gt;not the invasion of their privacy!</p><p>Yes, lets give up on airport security. That will end well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Hopefully my sperm are n't being fried when I walk through a scanner in an airport--at least the parents of the 30s were using X-rays for their convenience and not the invasion of their privacy ! Airports use metal detectors for humans , not xrays .
The new millimeter wave machines arent xrays .
As far as safety , have is been demonstrated that these machines damage organisms in regular usage ?
It seems to me that a lot of this is reactionary nonsense like " I 'm allergic to wifi ! !
" nonsense.I am concered about safety , but jumping on the naturalist/homeopathy/conspiracy theory bandwagon doesnt do us any good.Not to mention just flying on a plane gives you a nice dose of cosmic rays , sans superpowers. &gt; not the invasion of their privacy ! Yes , lets give up on airport security .
That will end well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;Hopefully my sperm aren't being fried when I walk through a scanner in an airport--at least the parents of the 30s were using X-rays for their convenience and not the invasion of their privacy!Airports use metal detectors for humans, not xrays.
The new millimeter wave machines arent xrays.
As far as safety, have is been demonstrated that these machines damage organisms in regular usage?
It seems to me that a lot of this is reactionary nonsense like "I'm allergic to wifi!!
" nonsense.I am concered about safety, but jumping on the naturalist/homeopathy/conspiracy theory bandwagon doesnt do us any good.Not to mention just flying on a plane gives you a nice dose of cosmic rays, sans superpowers.&gt;not the invasion of their privacy!Yes, lets give up on airport security.
That will end well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922645</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29924545</id>
	<title>Re:The airport scanners are passive</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256920680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I replied to the parent as AC also, just so you get an idea of who this is.
<br> <br>
I wanted to clarify again: the microwave systems are NOT passive.  If it looks like <a href="http://www.dsxray.com/products/mmwave.htm" title="dsxray.com" rel="nofollow">this</a> [dsxray.com], it is an active microwave system, basically a radar.  (I have to question their sanity in that the URL contains "xray"... real smart guys, real smart.) These systems produce images like <a href="http://media.canada.com/eec3adc1-7c27-4a80-ab19-a08ab095007b/naked.jpg" title="canada.com" rel="nofollow">this</a> [canada.com].
<br> <br>
Passive narrowband terahertz systems produce images like <a href="http://akademon.cz/source/obr/n290907.jpg" title="akademon.cz" rel="nofollow">this</a> [akademon.cz].  (this is actually one of ThruVision's... it's in an SPIE conference paper from a few years back.)  Passive broadband terahertz systems produce images like <a href="http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/bigphotos/images/070327-security-scanner\_big.jpg" title="nationalgeographic.com" rel="nofollow">this</a> [nationalgeographic.com]. As the parent said, passive terahertz is the way to go, but IMHO, only broadband actually works very well.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I replied to the parent as AC also , just so you get an idea of who this is .
I wanted to clarify again : the microwave systems are NOT passive .
If it looks like this [ dsxray.com ] , it is an active microwave system , basically a radar .
( I have to question their sanity in that the URL contains " xray " ... real smart guys , real smart .
) These systems produce images like this [ canada.com ] .
Passive narrowband terahertz systems produce images like this [ akademon.cz ] .
( this is actually one of ThruVision 's... it 's in an SPIE conference paper from a few years back .
) Passive broadband terahertz systems produce images like this [ nationalgeographic.com ] .
As the parent said , passive terahertz is the way to go , but IMHO , only broadband actually works very well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I replied to the parent as AC also, just so you get an idea of who this is.
I wanted to clarify again: the microwave systems are NOT passive.
If it looks like this [dsxray.com], it is an active microwave system, basically a radar.
(I have to question their sanity in that the URL contains "xray"... real smart guys, real smart.
) These systems produce images like this [canada.com].
Passive narrowband terahertz systems produce images like this [akademon.cz].
(this is actually one of ThruVision's... it's in an SPIE conference paper from a few years back.
)  Passive broadband terahertz systems produce images like this [nationalgeographic.com].
As the parent said, passive terahertz is the way to go, but IMHO, only broadband actually works very well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922745</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29925135</id>
	<title>Re:Remember it's resonance</title>
	<author>Sockatume</author>
	<datestamp>1256922960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And, to conclude the thought, the resonant mode in this paper is not one (like that which can break a bridge, or a wine glass) for which there are few modes to couple to and thus lose the energy. That's why there's a critical amplitude below which the frequency does not cause "bubbles".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And , to conclude the thought , the resonant mode in this paper is not one ( like that which can break a bridge , or a wine glass ) for which there are few modes to couple to and thus lose the energy .
That 's why there 's a critical amplitude below which the frequency does not cause " bubbles " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And, to conclude the thought, the resonant mode in this paper is not one (like that which can break a bridge, or a wine glass) for which there are few modes to couple to and thus lose the energy.
That's why there's a critical amplitude below which the frequency does not cause "bubbles".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29924049</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29924327</id>
	<title>Superman</title>
	<author>kiehlster</author>
	<datestamp>1256919900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So can Superman see X-rays or Tera-waves? or both?  He could see through walls, but couldn't see through certain heavy metals like lead.  Are X-rays known to pass through bricks as easily as Terahertz radiation?  My guess would be that his eyes would have to emit X-rays in order to see through things that way, but perhaps he could use freely available terahertz radiation to naturally see through the same materials.  However, he could shoot beams of intense red light (the better to melt things) from his eyes which would suggest he could emit nanometer wavelengths from his eyes, so perhaps 1-100nm x-rays aren't as hard for his eyes to adjust to.  Now, if he had the ability to emit terahertz radiation, then it would make him all the more dangerous to mess with.  Mess with superman and he'll split your DNA.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So can Superman see X-rays or Tera-waves ?
or both ?
He could see through walls , but could n't see through certain heavy metals like lead .
Are X-rays known to pass through bricks as easily as Terahertz radiation ?
My guess would be that his eyes would have to emit X-rays in order to see through things that way , but perhaps he could use freely available terahertz radiation to naturally see through the same materials .
However , he could shoot beams of intense red light ( the better to melt things ) from his eyes which would suggest he could emit nanometer wavelengths from his eyes , so perhaps 1-100nm x-rays are n't as hard for his eyes to adjust to .
Now , if he had the ability to emit terahertz radiation , then it would make him all the more dangerous to mess with .
Mess with superman and he 'll split your DNA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So can Superman see X-rays or Tera-waves?
or both?
He could see through walls, but couldn't see through certain heavy metals like lead.
Are X-rays known to pass through bricks as easily as Terahertz radiation?
My guess would be that his eyes would have to emit X-rays in order to see through things that way, but perhaps he could use freely available terahertz radiation to naturally see through the same materials.
However, he could shoot beams of intense red light (the better to melt things) from his eyes which would suggest he could emit nanometer wavelengths from his eyes, so perhaps 1-100nm x-rays aren't as hard for his eyes to adjust to.
Now, if he had the ability to emit terahertz radiation, then it would make him all the more dangerous to mess with.
Mess with superman and he'll split your DNA.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29924049</id>
	<title>Re:Remember it's resonance</title>
	<author>mea37</author>
	<datestamp>1256918760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Uh... resonance doesn't "boost" energy, but it does allow it to pile up in one place (which can effectively boost power).  GP's characterization may be a little sloppy, but if I had to pick his statement vs. your claim that his statement is science fiction, I'd go with him.</p><p>For a somewhat dramatic example: There was a MythBusters episode talking about the supposed "earthquake machine" that Tesla is sometimes said to have created.  They built a machine that would tap at whatever frequency they set, attached it to a bridge, and started tuning.  Of course they did not reproduce the supposed Tesla results - which are absurd; if they thought it were possible they wouldn't be standing on the bridge - but they did (to Jamie's surprise) find a frequency at which the vibration of the bridge increased over time, to a point well beyond what a light tap from their machine would produce.  Of course it would not have increased without bound - there are physical limits and complexities in the structure.</p><p>But: what was happening?  The enrgy of each tap was being held in the structure of the bridge, each subsequent tap was adding to it faster than it could naturally dissipate, and it was "building up" to create motion waves they could feel at considerable distances.</p><p>This is why it takes a <i>sustained<i> note at a particular frequency to shatter glass.</i></i></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Uh... resonance does n't " boost " energy , but it does allow it to pile up in one place ( which can effectively boost power ) .
GP 's characterization may be a little sloppy , but if I had to pick his statement vs. your claim that his statement is science fiction , I 'd go with him.For a somewhat dramatic example : There was a MythBusters episode talking about the supposed " earthquake machine " that Tesla is sometimes said to have created .
They built a machine that would tap at whatever frequency they set , attached it to a bridge , and started tuning .
Of course they did not reproduce the supposed Tesla results - which are absurd ; if they thought it were possible they would n't be standing on the bridge - but they did ( to Jamie 's surprise ) find a frequency at which the vibration of the bridge increased over time , to a point well beyond what a light tap from their machine would produce .
Of course it would not have increased without bound - there are physical limits and complexities in the structure.But : what was happening ?
The enrgy of each tap was being held in the structure of the bridge , each subsequent tap was adding to it faster than it could naturally dissipate , and it was " building up " to create motion waves they could feel at considerable distances.This is why it takes a sustained note at a particular frequency to shatter glass .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Uh... resonance doesn't "boost" energy, but it does allow it to pile up in one place (which can effectively boost power).
GP's characterization may be a little sloppy, but if I had to pick his statement vs. your claim that his statement is science fiction, I'd go with him.For a somewhat dramatic example: There was a MythBusters episode talking about the supposed "earthquake machine" that Tesla is sometimes said to have created.
They built a machine that would tap at whatever frequency they set, attached it to a bridge, and started tuning.
Of course they did not reproduce the supposed Tesla results - which are absurd; if they thought it were possible they wouldn't be standing on the bridge - but they did (to Jamie's surprise) find a frequency at which the vibration of the bridge increased over time, to a point well beyond what a light tap from their machine would produce.
Of course it would not have increased without bound - there are physical limits and complexities in the structure.But: what was happening?
The enrgy of each tap was being held in the structure of the bridge, each subsequent tap was adding to it faster than it could naturally dissipate, and it was "building up" to create motion waves they could feel at considerable distances.This is why it takes a sustained note at a particular frequency to shatter glass.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922931</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29932129</id>
	<title>Re:Doesn't worry me</title>
	<author>rcw-home</author>
	<datestamp>1256923140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>some studies suggested that THz radiation would be harmful at any frequency/power range</p></div></blockquote><p>We better start cooling our surroundings to absolute zero immediately!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>some studies suggested that THz radiation would be harmful at any frequency/power rangeWe better start cooling our surroundings to absolute zero immediately !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>some studies suggested that THz radiation would be harmful at any frequency/power rangeWe better start cooling our surroundings to absolute zero immediately!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923093</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29925979</id>
	<title>Sterilize Your Nation?</title>
	<author>handy\_vandal</author>
	<datestamp>1256926740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Finally, the technology to sterilize an entire continent full of people: space-based terahertz beam satellites. Without destroying buildings and other valuable stuff!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Finally , the technology to sterilize an entire continent full of people : space-based terahertz beam satellites .
Without destroying buildings and other valuable stuff !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Finally, the technology to sterilize an entire continent full of people: space-based terahertz beam satellites.
Without destroying buildings and other valuable stuff!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29928883</id>
	<title>Impact on Pseudosciences</title>
	<author>rwa2</author>
	<datestamp>1256896980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hmm, I do find this interesting... perhaps this kind of effect can be how some saunas attribute "health benefits" to the "natural oscillations" emitted by rooms covered in different colored rocks?</p><p>I pretty much dismissed it before, but it's interesting if there might be some way for your environment to affect those kinds of operations inside of your cells.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hmm , I do find this interesting... perhaps this kind of effect can be how some saunas attribute " health benefits " to the " natural oscillations " emitted by rooms covered in different colored rocks ? I pretty much dismissed it before , but it 's interesting if there might be some way for your environment to affect those kinds of operations inside of your cells .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hmm, I do find this interesting... perhaps this kind of effect can be how some saunas attribute "health benefits" to the "natural oscillations" emitted by rooms covered in different colored rocks?I pretty much dismissed it before, but it's interesting if there might be some way for your environment to affect those kinds of operations inside of your cells.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923453</id>
	<title>Re:Shoe-Fitting Flouroscope</title>
	<author>Mikkeles</author>
	<datestamp>1256916180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They were common through the '50s anyway; I remember them in the shoe stores and, boy, were they cool!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They were common through the '50s anyway ; I remember them in the shoe stores and , boy , were they cool !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They were common through the '50s anyway; I remember them in the shoe stores and, boy, were they cool!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922645</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29926171</id>
	<title>I guess it's time...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256927700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>to start wrapping my gonads in tinfoil...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>to start wrapping my gonads in tinfoil.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>to start wrapping my gonads in tinfoil...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923143</id>
	<title>Re:Shoe-Fitting Flouroscope</title>
	<author>Sockatume</author>
	<datestamp>1256914560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It wasn't any better than just measuring the kid's feet, to boot. Shoe-curity theatre.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It was n't any better than just measuring the kid 's feet , to boot .
Shoe-curity theatre .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It wasn't any better than just measuring the kid's feet, to boot.
Shoe-curity theatre.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922645</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923279</id>
	<title>No problem</title>
	<author>Carlitros</author>
	<datestamp>1256915280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No problem at all. Just use 528 Hz afterwards. Google it!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No problem at all .
Just use 528 Hz afterwards .
Google it !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No problem at all.
Just use 528 Hz afterwards.
Google it!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29924769</id>
	<title>Sunlight</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256921700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Doesn't sunlight contain this radiation as well? I'd assume so since the sun emits radiation over a wide range of wavelengths and this is close to infrared. So what level is in sunlight?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does n't sunlight contain this radiation as well ?
I 'd assume so since the sun emits radiation over a wide range of wavelengths and this is close to infrared .
So what level is in sunlight ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Doesn't sunlight contain this radiation as well?
I'd assume so since the sun emits radiation over a wide range of wavelengths and this is close to infrared.
So what level is in sunlight?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922645</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922797</id>
	<title>there was a little old lady in the UK who turned</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256912280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>out to be one of the biggest spies for the soviet union during the cold war.</p><p>dont mess with little old ladies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>out to be one of the biggest spies for the soviet union during the cold war.dont mess with little old ladies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>out to be one of the biggest spies for the soviet union during the cold war.dont mess with little old ladies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922663</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29926011</id>
	<title>Goodbye TSA, Hello X-Men!</title>
	<author>fortapocalypse</author>
	<datestamp>1256926860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This scan brought to you by Stan Lee</htmltext>
<tokenext>This scan brought to you by Stan Lee</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This scan brought to you by Stan Lee</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922815</id>
	<title>Re:Ethical use of panic...</title>
	<author>Yvanhoe</author>
	<datestamp>1256912460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>What is this ethics thing you are talking about and since when was it relevant to fight in a political arena ?</htmltext>
<tokenext>What is this ethics thing you are talking about and since when was it relevant to fight in a political arena ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What is this ethics thing you are talking about and since when was it relevant to fight in a political arena ?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922655</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29925531</id>
	<title>Re:Who cares...</title>
	<author>kpainter</author>
	<datestamp>1256924520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...turn into an entire country of genetically deformed freaks...</p></div><p>Sounds like this could be weaponized.  Such a weapon could give the phrase "Tear you a new asshole" a sense of literalism.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...turn into an entire country of genetically deformed freaks...Sounds like this could be weaponized .
Such a weapon could give the phrase " Tear you a new asshole " a sense of literalism .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...turn into an entire country of genetically deformed freaks...Sounds like this could be weaponized.
Such a weapon could give the phrase "Tear you a new asshole" a sense of literalism.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922621</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29929421</id>
	<title>Re:Shoe-Fitting Flouroscope</title>
	<author>sjames</author>
	<datestamp>1256900640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The more important question where human health and safety is concerned is has it been demonstrated that THz scanners do NOT harm people?</p><p>Arguments about different exposures to different classes of EM radiation are like saying blueberries have never harmed me so these belladonna berries must be perfectly safe!</p><p>We've had air travel for more than half a century now without THz scanners and it has proven very safe. There's a wide gulf between not using THz scanners until we're sure they're both harmless and necessary and giving up on airport security.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The more important question where human health and safety is concerned is has it been demonstrated that THz scanners do NOT harm people ? Arguments about different exposures to different classes of EM radiation are like saying blueberries have never harmed me so these belladonna berries must be perfectly safe ! We 've had air travel for more than half a century now without THz scanners and it has proven very safe .
There 's a wide gulf between not using THz scanners until we 're sure they 're both harmless and necessary and giving up on airport security .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The more important question where human health and safety is concerned is has it been demonstrated that THz scanners do NOT harm people?Arguments about different exposures to different classes of EM radiation are like saying blueberries have never harmed me so these belladonna berries must be perfectly safe!We've had air travel for more than half a century now without THz scanners and it has proven very safe.
There's a wide gulf between not using THz scanners until we're sure they're both harmless and necessary and giving up on airport security.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923793</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922663</id>
	<title>Incident at LAX</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256911500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was at LAX with my family several months ago and there was a huge line to go through the metal detectors. Tempers were up, to say the least.</p><p>Ahead of me there was a group of Arabs, kaffiyeh, long beard, the works. Behind them was a little white haired lady apparently on her way back to "Mizzurah" after seeing her grandkids in LA. Sweet as can be old lady, the kind that talks to much to strangers on the airplane. Single serving friend, you know.</p><p>Guess who gets stopped by the TSA.</p><p>Needless to say, everyone in line was a bit pissed that the TSA was giving extra screening to the old lady when they just waved the Arab guys through without a second glance. That's when the guy behind me yelled out, "What the fuck are you morons searching her for? The towelheads are the ones flying shit into buildings!"</p><p>Turns out we were all on the same flight to Chicago. Real American guy boarded last, about 15 minutes late. TSA had a word with him, I suppose. Maybe scanned him a few extra times to make sure his DNA was totally fucked up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was at LAX with my family several months ago and there was a huge line to go through the metal detectors .
Tempers were up , to say the least.Ahead of me there was a group of Arabs , kaffiyeh , long beard , the works .
Behind them was a little white haired lady apparently on her way back to " Mizzurah " after seeing her grandkids in LA .
Sweet as can be old lady , the kind that talks to much to strangers on the airplane .
Single serving friend , you know.Guess who gets stopped by the TSA.Needless to say , everyone in line was a bit pissed that the TSA was giving extra screening to the old lady when they just waved the Arab guys through without a second glance .
That 's when the guy behind me yelled out , " What the fuck are you morons searching her for ?
The towelheads are the ones flying shit into buildings !
" Turns out we were all on the same flight to Chicago .
Real American guy boarded last , about 15 minutes late .
TSA had a word with him , I suppose .
Maybe scanned him a few extra times to make sure his DNA was totally fucked up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was at LAX with my family several months ago and there was a huge line to go through the metal detectors.
Tempers were up, to say the least.Ahead of me there was a group of Arabs, kaffiyeh, long beard, the works.
Behind them was a little white haired lady apparently on her way back to "Mizzurah" after seeing her grandkids in LA.
Sweet as can be old lady, the kind that talks to much to strangers on the airplane.
Single serving friend, you know.Guess who gets stopped by the TSA.Needless to say, everyone in line was a bit pissed that the TSA was giving extra screening to the old lady when they just waved the Arab guys through without a second glance.
That's when the guy behind me yelled out, "What the fuck are you morons searching her for?
The towelheads are the ones flying shit into buildings!
"Turns out we were all on the same flight to Chicago.
Real American guy boarded last, about 15 minutes late.
TSA had a word with him, I suppose.
Maybe scanned him a few extra times to make sure his DNA was totally fucked up.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922695</id>
	<title>Re:Ethical use of panic...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256911620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is no such thing as an ethical use of panic.</p><p>Pushing any idea without the full understanding of the people "for their own good" is the worst kind of tyranny.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is no such thing as an ethical use of panic.Pushing any idea without the full understanding of the people " for their own good " is the worst kind of tyranny .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is no such thing as an ethical use of panic.Pushing any idea without the full understanding of the people "for their own good" is the worst kind of tyranny.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922655</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29924135</id>
	<title>Reminds me of</title>
	<author>jeddak</author>
	<datestamp>1256919120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...this science show I watched recently....</p><p>http://www.bbc.co.uk/doctorwho/episodes/2007/306.shtml</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...this science show I watched recently....http : //www.bbc.co.uk/doctorwho/episodes/2007/306.shtml</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...this science show I watched recently....http://www.bbc.co.uk/doctorwho/episodes/2007/306.shtml</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923791</id>
	<title>Re:Shoe-Fitting Flouroscope</title>
	<author>nitehawk214</author>
	<datestamp>1256917740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is exactly what I thought of when I read the summary. In fact I just saw the episode of Modern Marvels: Engineering Disasters that covers this topic last night.</p><p>My favorite: the <a href="http://www.periodictable.com/Items/088.6/index.html" title="periodictable.com">Revigator</a> [periodictable.com]!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is exactly what I thought of when I read the summary .
In fact I just saw the episode of Modern Marvels : Engineering Disasters that covers this topic last night.My favorite : the Revigator [ periodictable.com ] !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is exactly what I thought of when I read the summary.
In fact I just saw the episode of Modern Marvels: Engineering Disasters that covers this topic last night.My favorite: the Revigator [periodictable.com]!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922645</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922913</id>
	<title>Do they pass through EVERYTHING?</title>
	<author>visualight</author>
	<datestamp>1256913060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.google.com/#hl=en&amp;q=\%22blocks+terahertz+waves\%22" title="google.com">http://www.google.com/#hl=en&amp;q=\%22blocks+terahertz+waves\%22</a> [google.com]</p><p>No results found for "blocks terahertz waves"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.google.com/ # hl = en&amp;q = \ % 22blocks + terahertz + waves \ % 22 [ google.com ] No results found for " blocks terahertz waves "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.google.com/#hl=en&amp;q=\%22blocks+terahertz+waves\%22 [google.com]No results found for "blocks terahertz waves"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29934069</id>
	<title>Re:Incident at LAX</title>
	<author>commodore64\_love</author>
	<datestamp>1257000240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You have been unfairly modded into invisibility as a "troll", which is completely ridiculous, so I'm reposting your message so people can see it. It's a good story about the Stupidity of the TSA.   </p><p><div class="quote"><p>  I was at LAX..... Ahead of me there was a group of Arabs, kaffiyeh, long beard, the works. Behind them was a little white haired lady apparently on her way back to "Mizzurah" after seeing her grandkids in LA. Sweet as can be old lady.....</p><p>Guess who gets stopped by the TSA.</p><p>Needless to say, everyone in line was a bit pissed that the TSA was giving extra screening to the old lady when they just waved the Arab guys through without a second glance. That's when the guy behind me yelled out, "What the fuck are you morons searching her for? The towelheads are the ones flying shit into buildings!" Real American guy boarded last, about 15 minutes late. TSA had a word with him, I suppose.</p>  </div><p>I guess that little old lady was a real danger, as if she was about to yell out "Death to Americans" and blow up the terminal. (rolls eyes). They also stopped this guy who looks like an adult version of Harry Potter!   With guy's photo - <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMB6L487LHM" title="youtube.com">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMB6L487LHM</a> [youtube.com] [youtube.com]<br>unedited - <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEJpzVPmih0" title="youtube.com">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEJpzVPmih0</a> [youtube.com] [youtube.com]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You have been unfairly modded into invisibility as a " troll " , which is completely ridiculous , so I 'm reposting your message so people can see it .
It 's a good story about the Stupidity of the TSA .
I was at LAX..... Ahead of me there was a group of Arabs , kaffiyeh , long beard , the works .
Behind them was a little white haired lady apparently on her way back to " Mizzurah " after seeing her grandkids in LA .
Sweet as can be old lady.....Guess who gets stopped by the TSA.Needless to say , everyone in line was a bit pissed that the TSA was giving extra screening to the old lady when they just waved the Arab guys through without a second glance .
That 's when the guy behind me yelled out , " What the fuck are you morons searching her for ?
The towelheads are the ones flying shit into buildings !
" Real American guy boarded last , about 15 minutes late .
TSA had a word with him , I suppose .
I guess that little old lady was a real danger , as if she was about to yell out " Death to Americans " and blow up the terminal .
( rolls eyes ) .
They also stopped this guy who looks like an adult version of Harry Potter !
With guy 's photo - http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = XMB6L487LHM [ youtube.com ] [ youtube.com ] unedited - http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = tEJpzVPmih0 [ youtube.com ] [ youtube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You have been unfairly modded into invisibility as a "troll", which is completely ridiculous, so I'm reposting your message so people can see it.
It's a good story about the Stupidity of the TSA.
I was at LAX..... Ahead of me there was a group of Arabs, kaffiyeh, long beard, the works.
Behind them was a little white haired lady apparently on her way back to "Mizzurah" after seeing her grandkids in LA.
Sweet as can be old lady.....Guess who gets stopped by the TSA.Needless to say, everyone in line was a bit pissed that the TSA was giving extra screening to the old lady when they just waved the Arab guys through without a second glance.
That's when the guy behind me yelled out, "What the fuck are you morons searching her for?
The towelheads are the ones flying shit into buildings!
" Real American guy boarded last, about 15 minutes late.
TSA had a word with him, I suppose.
I guess that little old lady was a real danger, as if she was about to yell out "Death to Americans" and blow up the terminal.
(rolls eyes).
They also stopped this guy who looks like an adult version of Harry Potter!
With guy's photo - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMB6L487LHM [youtube.com] [youtube.com]unedited - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEJpzVPmih0 [youtube.com] [youtube.com]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922663</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922927</id>
	<title>Structural explanation</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256913240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>The summary mentions that the terahertz waves "tear apart" strands of DNA.  For those who might not remember their undergraduate biology, DNA strands are held together by hydrogen bonds - not covalent bonds.  So the total amount of force to "tear apart" two strands is not as great as you might imagine.  For that matter, strands have to be "torn apart" in order to be replicated for cell division.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The summary mentions that the terahertz waves " tear apart " strands of DNA .
For those who might not remember their undergraduate biology , DNA strands are held together by hydrogen bonds - not covalent bonds .
So the total amount of force to " tear apart " two strands is not as great as you might imagine .
For that matter , strands have to be " torn apart " in order to be replicated for cell division .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The summary mentions that the terahertz waves "tear apart" strands of DNA.
For those who might not remember their undergraduate biology, DNA strands are held together by hydrogen bonds - not covalent bonds.
So the total amount of force to "tear apart" two strands is not as great as you might imagine.
For that matter, strands have to be "torn apart" in order to be replicated for cell division.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29926725</id>
	<title>Why are they being used in public?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256929980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why are these things being used in public if they haven't been tested?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why are these things being used in public if they have n't been tested ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why are these things being used in public if they haven't been tested?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923635</id>
	<title>Re:Who cares...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256917020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is something I would more expect of Britain, Germany, Spain, or any of the other "progressive" states rather than the US.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is something I would more expect of Britain , Germany , Spain , or any of the other " progressive " states rather than the US .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is something I would more expect of Britain, Germany, Spain, or any of the other "progressive" states rather than the US.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922621</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29924839</id>
	<title>what have we done</title>
	<author>thehostiles</author>
	<datestamp>1256921940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>oh god, somehow we got all the cell phone health nuts and the privacy rights nuts (not quite as crazy) both arguing at the same time... what has science done?</htmltext>
<tokenext>oh god , somehow we got all the cell phone health nuts and the privacy rights nuts ( not quite as crazy ) both arguing at the same time... what has science done ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>oh god, somehow we got all the cell phone health nuts and the privacy rights nuts (not quite as crazy) both arguing at the same time... what has science done?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29925035</id>
	<title>Re:Do they pass through EVERYTHING?</title>
	<author>blueg3</author>
	<datestamp>1256922540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If they passed through everything, they wouldn't be very useful for scanning, would they?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If they passed through everything , they would n't be very useful for scanning , would they ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they passed through everything, they wouldn't be very useful for scanning, would they?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922913</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29931495</id>
	<title>Re:Incident at LAX</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1256916300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> I can remember how many times Ive been asked to "hold my bag please, it is a package for my son" in line to get on a plane or a train.</p></div></blockquote><p>Really?  Thats never happened to me, ever.  I guess you appear weak and stupid?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I can remember how many times Ive been asked to " hold my bag please , it is a package for my son " in line to get on a plane or a train.Really ?
Thats never happened to me , ever .
I guess you appear weak and stupid ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> I can remember how many times Ive been asked to "hold my bag please, it is a package for my son" in line to get on a plane or a train.Really?
Thats never happened to me, ever.
I guess you appear weak and stupid?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923919</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923019</id>
	<title>Re:Shoe-Fitting Flouroscope</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256913780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Except this is an example of us already learning from the past.<br>The body scanners in use now are passive. You got it they use the natural background radiation to scan so they do not irradiate at all. New scanners that are now in testing are starting to use emitters.  They are in testing and some testing have shown that under rare instances that this radiation could be damaging.<br>So the scientists didn't ignore the issue but tracked it down and found the cause before they active scanners went in to service.<br>In other words we have learned from the past and in this case the system has worked very well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Except this is an example of us already learning from the past.The body scanners in use now are passive .
You got it they use the natural background radiation to scan so they do not irradiate at all .
New scanners that are now in testing are starting to use emitters .
They are in testing and some testing have shown that under rare instances that this radiation could be damaging.So the scientists did n't ignore the issue but tracked it down and found the cause before they active scanners went in to service.In other words we have learned from the past and in this case the system has worked very well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except this is an example of us already learning from the past.The body scanners in use now are passive.
You got it they use the natural background radiation to scan so they do not irradiate at all.
New scanners that are now in testing are starting to use emitters.
They are in testing and some testing have shown that under rare instances that this radiation could be damaging.So the scientists didn't ignore the issue but tracked it down and found the cause before they active scanners went in to service.In other words we have learned from the past and in this case the system has worked very well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922645</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923855</id>
	<title>NOT BEING CRYOGENICALLY FROZEN TEARS APART DNA!!!!</title>
	<author>cosmicaug</author>
	<datestamp>1256917980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd also like to point out that the title of the post is sensationalistic and very highly misleading. Reading such a post, I would surmise that I'm about to read an article regarding the breaking of DNA strands which, though we have repair mechanisms to deal with such eventualities (which can have some curious effects in some non coding regions of our DNA, by the way), is a rather serious effect. I would not suspect from such a title that the article is talking about temporary strand separation of small stretches of DNA.

You might just as well write the headline <b> <i>How not being cryogenically frozen tears apart DNA!!!!!</i> </b> because, as long as you have DNA replication, and RNA transcription (to express protein and for other functions) occurring, you are "tearing apart DNA" in the sense of this article.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd also like to point out that the title of the post is sensationalistic and very highly misleading .
Reading such a post , I would surmise that I 'm about to read an article regarding the breaking of DNA strands which , though we have repair mechanisms to deal with such eventualities ( which can have some curious effects in some non coding regions of our DNA , by the way ) , is a rather serious effect .
I would not suspect from such a title that the article is talking about temporary strand separation of small stretches of DNA .
You might just as well write the headline How not being cryogenically frozen tears apart DNA ! ! ! ! !
because , as long as you have DNA replication , and RNA transcription ( to express protein and for other functions ) occurring , you are " tearing apart DNA " in the sense of this article .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd also like to point out that the title of the post is sensationalistic and very highly misleading.
Reading such a post, I would surmise that I'm about to read an article regarding the breaking of DNA strands which, though we have repair mechanisms to deal with such eventualities (which can have some curious effects in some non coding regions of our DNA, by the way), is a rather serious effect.
I would not suspect from such a title that the article is talking about temporary strand separation of small stretches of DNA.
You might just as well write the headline  How not being cryogenically frozen tears apart DNA!!!!!
because, as long as you have DNA replication, and RNA transcription (to express protein and for other functions) occurring, you are "tearing apart DNA" in the sense of this article.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922823</id>
	<title>EM radation affects matter? What?!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256912460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Who could've guessed?! I myself became a strong believer in this after the microwave oven. You all know about the microwave oven, right? You do believe in it, right? You know how it works?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who could 've guessed ? !
I myself became a strong believer in this after the microwave oven .
You all know about the microwave oven , right ?
You do believe in it , right ?
You know how it works ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who could've guessed?!
I myself became a strong believer in this after the microwave oven.
You all know about the microwave oven, right?
You do believe in it, right?
You know how it works?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29927881</id>
	<title>EH...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256935260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>you're just another idiot trying to knock liberty. It's not ivory tower dwelling libertarians developing this zapping shit.<br>Regardless, this has to be STOPPED.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>you 're just another idiot trying to knock liberty .
It 's not ivory tower dwelling libertarians developing this zapping shit.Regardless , this has to be STOPPED .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you're just another idiot trying to knock liberty.
It's not ivory tower dwelling libertarians developing this zapping shit.Regardless, this has to be STOPPED.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922621</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29927099</id>
	<title>Re:Incident at LAX</title>
	<author>rockNme2349</author>
	<datestamp>1256931600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Makes sense to me. If I was going to hi-jack a plane I wouldn't dress up like a stereotypical terrorist. Its going to be the seemingly innocent ones who are going to sneak things on.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Makes sense to me .
If I was going to hi-jack a plane I would n't dress up like a stereotypical terrorist .
Its going to be the seemingly innocent ones who are going to sneak things on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Makes sense to me.
If I was going to hi-jack a plane I wouldn't dress up like a stereotypical terrorist.
Its going to be the seemingly innocent ones who are going to sneak things on.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922663</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29924353</id>
	<title>Re:Do they pass through EVERYTHING?</title>
	<author>malakai</author>
	<datestamp>1256920020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.google.com/#hl=en&amp;q=\%22blocks+terahertz+radiation\%22" title="google.com">http://www.google.com/#hl=en&amp;q=\%22blocks+terahertz+radiation\%22</a> [google.com]<br>Fixed that for you</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.google.com/ # hl = en&amp;q = \ % 22blocks + terahertz + radiation \ % 22 [ google.com ] Fixed that for you</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.google.com/#hl=en&amp;q=\%22blocks+terahertz+radiation\%22 [google.com]Fixed that for you</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922913</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29926281</id>
	<title>Related News</title>
	<author>digitalPhant0m</author>
	<datestamp>1256928240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>With terahertz scanners already appearing in airports and hospitals...</p></div><p>In other related news, several major airlines are installing extra arm-rests on every seat, for that added bit of comfort for your new mutant arm.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>With terahertz scanners already appearing in airports and hospitals...In other related news , several major airlines are installing extra arm-rests on every seat , for that added bit of comfort for your new mutant arm .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With terahertz scanners already appearing in airports and hospitals...In other related news, several major airlines are installing extra arm-rests on every seat, for that added bit of comfort for your new mutant arm.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29928975</id>
	<title>Sound like it would be good for cancer treatment.</title>
	<author>John Sokol</author>
	<datestamp>1256897520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It sounds like this is probably far safer and more controllable then X-Rays or Gamma Rays for the treatment of Cancer.</p><p>A big part of the idea with radiation treatments for cancer is to break the DNA of the cells such that they do not die instantly leaving a big hole, but instead are just prevented from successful reproduction. So as these cancer cells try to reproduce they die off instead. This happens slowly over time so that normal cells from healthy surrounding tissue can migrate over and fill in the treated cells as they die off.</p><p>These THz waves could target just the DNA, killing those cells in a region and unlike X-Rays may have a lower chance of creating a new cancer from the radiation itself or damaging surrounding tissues.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It sounds like this is probably far safer and more controllable then X-Rays or Gamma Rays for the treatment of Cancer.A big part of the idea with radiation treatments for cancer is to break the DNA of the cells such that they do not die instantly leaving a big hole , but instead are just prevented from successful reproduction .
So as these cancer cells try to reproduce they die off instead .
This happens slowly over time so that normal cells from healthy surrounding tissue can migrate over and fill in the treated cells as they die off.These THz waves could target just the DNA , killing those cells in a region and unlike X-Rays may have a lower chance of creating a new cancer from the radiation itself or damaging surrounding tissues .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It sounds like this is probably far safer and more controllable then X-Rays or Gamma Rays for the treatment of Cancer.A big part of the idea with radiation treatments for cancer is to break the DNA of the cells such that they do not die instantly leaving a big hole, but instead are just prevented from successful reproduction.
So as these cancer cells try to reproduce they die off instead.
This happens slowly over time so that normal cells from healthy surrounding tissue can migrate over and fill in the treated cells as they die off.These THz waves could target just the DNA, killing those cells in a region and unlike X-Rays may have a lower chance of creating a new cancer from the radiation itself or damaging surrounding tissues.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29925001</id>
	<title>Genetically Modified Citizens Are Loyal Citizens..</title>
	<author>Xin Jing</author>
	<datestamp>1256922480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While they are busy going about their business of damaging our DNA, why not target specific DNA bases?  In one fell swoop the government can defend the state against enemies foreign and domestic, and at the same time ensure that future generations of taxpayers and residents comply with government standards of genetic expression and behavior.</p><p>How long will it take before a specific ethnic group claims that their DNA is bombarded with higher doses of more damaging radiation?</p><p>On the upside, the tin-foil hat brigade may finally have cause to bring to market a line of clothing and accessories that seeks to protect people from the prying eyes of their government.</p><p>"Travel wear in this modern age of government suspicion and distrust contains the latest advancements in anti-invasive technology."</p><p>It could present some interesting cross-marketing opportunities, say a remake of Rage Against the Machine's "Killing [DNA] In The Name Of".</p><p>Uncle Sam can modify our DNA, take our genetic rights away and bombard our genes with harmful radiation.  Generations from now when humans have been turned into the perfect willing slaves, they will still find a way to resist opression - it's the human way.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While they are busy going about their business of damaging our DNA , why not target specific DNA bases ?
In one fell swoop the government can defend the state against enemies foreign and domestic , and at the same time ensure that future generations of taxpayers and residents comply with government standards of genetic expression and behavior.How long will it take before a specific ethnic group claims that their DNA is bombarded with higher doses of more damaging radiation ? On the upside , the tin-foil hat brigade may finally have cause to bring to market a line of clothing and accessories that seeks to protect people from the prying eyes of their government .
" Travel wear in this modern age of government suspicion and distrust contains the latest advancements in anti-invasive technology .
" It could present some interesting cross-marketing opportunities , say a remake of Rage Against the Machine 's " Killing [ DNA ] In The Name Of " .Uncle Sam can modify our DNA , take our genetic rights away and bombard our genes with harmful radiation .
Generations from now when humans have been turned into the perfect willing slaves , they will still find a way to resist opression - it 's the human way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While they are busy going about their business of damaging our DNA, why not target specific DNA bases?
In one fell swoop the government can defend the state against enemies foreign and domestic, and at the same time ensure that future generations of taxpayers and residents comply with government standards of genetic expression and behavior.How long will it take before a specific ethnic group claims that their DNA is bombarded with higher doses of more damaging radiation?On the upside, the tin-foil hat brigade may finally have cause to bring to market a line of clothing and accessories that seeks to protect people from the prying eyes of their government.
"Travel wear in this modern age of government suspicion and distrust contains the latest advancements in anti-invasive technology.
"It could present some interesting cross-marketing opportunities, say a remake of Rage Against the Machine's "Killing [DNA] In The Name Of".Uncle Sam can modify our DNA, take our genetic rights away and bombard our genes with harmful radiation.
Generations from now when humans have been turned into the perfect willing slaves, they will still find a way to resist opression - it's the human way.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29925711</id>
	<title>Re:Doesn't worry me</title>
	<author>MightyYar</author>
	<datestamp>1256925360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Further, these waves can't pass through water... so unless we're worried about skin cancer I'm pretty sure any health claims are going to be overblown.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Further , these waves ca n't pass through water... so unless we 're worried about skin cancer I 'm pretty sure any health claims are going to be overblown .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Further, these waves can't pass through water... so unless we're worried about skin cancer I'm pretty sure any health claims are going to be overblown.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922875</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29925651</id>
	<title>It's called a "false dilemma"</title>
	<author>sean.peters</author>
	<datestamp>1256925060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Yes, lets give up on airport security. That will end well.</p></div></blockquote><p>So if I understand you correctly, "replacing devices that may dangerously irradiate passengers" == "giving up on airport security"? Good to know.</p><p>Yes, I understand and am onboard with the idea that there's probably no real harm being done with the devices in use here. But the point is that we shouldn't assume they're not harmful until it's proven that they are - we should assume that they may be harmful unless it's been shown that they're not. It doesn't sound to me as if sufficient testing has been done.</p><p>As a side point, we should also admit that much of the what goes on in the name of airport security is no more than "security theater" - inconveniencing passengers by forcing them through a bunch of procedures that do little or nothing to actually improve security, but make it look like you're "doing something". I'm not sure if that's the case with the machines we're talking about here, but certainly some aspects of the screening process are a total waste of time - for example, limiting quantities of shampoo brought onboard, for example.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , lets give up on airport security .
That will end well.So if I understand you correctly , " replacing devices that may dangerously irradiate passengers " = = " giving up on airport security " ?
Good to know.Yes , I understand and am onboard with the idea that there 's probably no real harm being done with the devices in use here .
But the point is that we should n't assume they 're not harmful until it 's proven that they are - we should assume that they may be harmful unless it 's been shown that they 're not .
It does n't sound to me as if sufficient testing has been done.As a side point , we should also admit that much of the what goes on in the name of airport security is no more than " security theater " - inconveniencing passengers by forcing them through a bunch of procedures that do little or nothing to actually improve security , but make it look like you 're " doing something " .
I 'm not sure if that 's the case with the machines we 're talking about here , but certainly some aspects of the screening process are a total waste of time - for example , limiting quantities of shampoo brought onboard , for example .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, lets give up on airport security.
That will end well.So if I understand you correctly, "replacing devices that may dangerously irradiate passengers" == "giving up on airport security"?
Good to know.Yes, I understand and am onboard with the idea that there's probably no real harm being done with the devices in use here.
But the point is that we shouldn't assume they're not harmful until it's proven that they are - we should assume that they may be harmful unless it's been shown that they're not.
It doesn't sound to me as if sufficient testing has been done.As a side point, we should also admit that much of the what goes on in the name of airport security is no more than "security theater" - inconveniencing passengers by forcing them through a bunch of procedures that do little or nothing to actually improve security, but make it look like you're "doing something".
I'm not sure if that's the case with the machines we're talking about here, but certainly some aspects of the screening process are a total waste of time - for example, limiting quantities of shampoo brought onboard, for example.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923793</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923239</id>
	<title>Re:Ethical use of panic...</title>
	<author>TheCarp</author>
	<datestamp>1256915100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of course, I agree with you. However, what if your opinion is that this is EXACTLY what the other side is doing. If it wasn't for fearmongers fanning the flames of irrational panic, we wouldn't have a TSA, "mm wave" scanners, or anything like that. In fact, airport security wouldn't have hardly changed at all since the mid 1980s.</p><p>How do you fight that sort of tyranny, if its the "worst kind"?</p><p>-Steve</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course , I agree with you .
However , what if your opinion is that this is EXACTLY what the other side is doing .
If it was n't for fearmongers fanning the flames of irrational panic , we would n't have a TSA , " mm wave " scanners , or anything like that .
In fact , airport security would n't have hardly changed at all since the mid 1980s.How do you fight that sort of tyranny , if its the " worst kind " ? -Steve</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course, I agree with you.
However, what if your opinion is that this is EXACTLY what the other side is doing.
If it wasn't for fearmongers fanning the flames of irrational panic, we wouldn't have a TSA, "mm wave" scanners, or anything like that.
In fact, airport security wouldn't have hardly changed at all since the mid 1980s.How do you fight that sort of tyranny, if its the "worst kind"?-Steve</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922695</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29934977</id>
	<title>Re:Who cares...</title>
	<author>Mutso</author>
	<datestamp>1257007980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Who cares if we turn into an entire country of genetically deformed freaks, at least we'll be a country of SAFE and FREE genetically deformed freaks, right? Just as envisioned by our Founding Fathers. God Bless America.</p></div><p>We are all inbred to the point of insanity anyway....perhaps this is how we all turn into brain eating zombies.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who cares if we turn into an entire country of genetically deformed freaks , at least we 'll be a country of SAFE and FREE genetically deformed freaks , right ?
Just as envisioned by our Founding Fathers .
God Bless America.We are all inbred to the point of insanity anyway....perhaps this is how we all turn into brain eating zombies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who cares if we turn into an entire country of genetically deformed freaks, at least we'll be a country of SAFE and FREE genetically deformed freaks, right?
Just as envisioned by our Founding Fathers.
God Bless America.We are all inbred to the point of insanity anyway....perhaps this is how we all turn into brain eating zombies.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922621</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922935</id>
	<title>Side Effects</title>
	<author>allknowingfrog</author>
	<datestamp>1256913300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I was amused by the summary's mundane description of the horrible side effects.<br> <br>
"We're sure it's perfectly safe, but in certain circumstances it might <i>unzip your DNA</i>."<br> <br>
That sounds like a bad thing...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I was amused by the summary 's mundane description of the horrible side effects .
" We 're sure it 's perfectly safe , but in certain circumstances it might unzip your DNA .
" That sounds like a bad thing.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was amused by the summary's mundane description of the horrible side effects.
"We're sure it's perfectly safe, but in certain circumstances it might unzip your DNA.
" 
That sounds like a bad thing...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923215</id>
	<title>Re:Structural explanation</title>
	<author>Sockatume</author>
	<datestamp>1256914980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The authors aren't concerned about it unzipping the entire DNA strand like string cheese. The process creates local regions of unzipping, which your DNA gains and loses as a matter of course. These unexpectedly-open regions interfere with replication and translation, but your DNA can cope with the the "normal amount", so the question is whether these additional regions are enough to be a problem.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The authors are n't concerned about it unzipping the entire DNA strand like string cheese .
The process creates local regions of unzipping , which your DNA gains and loses as a matter of course .
These unexpectedly-open regions interfere with replication and translation , but your DNA can cope with the the " normal amount " , so the question is whether these additional regions are enough to be a problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The authors aren't concerned about it unzipping the entire DNA strand like string cheese.
The process creates local regions of unzipping, which your DNA gains and loses as a matter of course.
These unexpectedly-open regions interfere with replication and translation, but your DNA can cope with the the "normal amount", so the question is whether these additional regions are enough to be a problem.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922927</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29927951</id>
	<title>Safe exposure?</title>
	<author>prometx42</author>
	<datestamp>1256935620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>How about no exposure?</htmltext>
<tokenext>How about no exposure ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about no exposure?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29926029</id>
	<title>Re:Shoe-Fitting Flouroscope</title>
	<author>Eivind Eklund</author>
	<datestamp>1256926980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>&gt;not the invasion of their privacy!</p><p>Yes, lets give up on airport security. That will end well.</p></div><p>What in particular makes you think that these things increase security?  The penetration testing reports I've seen (18 out of 20 guns pass through) doesn't really seem to indicate much help.  Security theater.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; not the invasion of their privacy ! Yes , lets give up on airport security .
That will end well.What in particular makes you think that these things increase security ?
The penetration testing reports I 've seen ( 18 out of 20 guns pass through ) does n't really seem to indicate much help .
Security theater .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;not the invasion of their privacy!Yes, lets give up on airport security.
That will end well.What in particular makes you think that these things increase security?
The penetration testing reports I've seen (18 out of 20 guns pass through) doesn't really seem to indicate much help.
Security theater.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923793</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923633</id>
	<title>All your mutants are belong to us --DON'T PANIC!</title>
	<author>cosmicaug</author>
	<datestamp>1256917020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wait a moment, folk! We are talking about temporary separation of already uncoiled DNA (meaning, that it's probably under the process of being expressed, anyway) under very specific conditions as predicted by a computer model.</p><p>This is not even an empirical observation: we don't know that any of this happens in a cell free <i>in vitro</i> system and how significant the effect is (if any), we don't know if it happens in a cell culture <i>in vitro</i> system and how significant the effect is (if any) and we certainly don't know that anything like this happens <i>in vivo</i>.</p><p>Even assuming that you can create these precise conditions by an airport scanner (which seems rather doubtful), you certainly would not, in any way, be facilitating mutation in any appreciable sense*. All that you would be doing, theoretically, is to subtly alter patterns of gene expression for the few seconds it would take to walk through the scanner (basically, a very subtle regulatory effect). While you certainly can facilitate the development of cancer through such a mechanism (in fact, I'd argue that dysregulation of gene expression** at some points is simply <b>required</b> for carcinogenesis --yes, it can be caused by mutating proteins but these mutated proteins are almost invariably going to have direct or indirect regulatory functions***), such a dysregulation of gene expression would have be the prolonged, normal state of affairs of a cell for a cancer to actually happen. For this to be happening (in a worse case scenario) for as much as a few mere seconds can hardly even be called a dysregulation in any meaningful sense and much, much less have any effect, whatsoever, on carcinogenesis.</p><p>If, on the other hand, some government agency is monitoring you 24/7 with these scanners, then you might have reason to worry****.</p><p>* I would speculate that there's an infinitesimal chance that DNA might be more susceptible to mutations from not being as protected as it would be when paired but you have to realize that active regions of DNA get unzipped like this all the time so this effect, if it might be real, would be a drop in the bucket and utterly swamped by the background.<br>** For purposes of this discussion, what I mean by dysregulation of gene expression is the production of various protein products at inappropriate times or in the wrong amounts (either too much or too little of a protein).<br>*** Whether the function is to induce cell division or stop cell division, or to induce cell death (apoptosis) or to evade cell death (and whether it is a direct or indirect effect on the preceding --such as mechanisms sensing DNA damage, loss of contact inhibition, etc.). While other factors which may not always be strictly regulatory do exist such as invasiveness, angiogenesis, telomerase function, etc (which often will also be regulatory by involving over or under expression); these factors need to happen together with a regulatory dysfunction for an actual cancer to happen because, basically, cancer happens when a lot of different sorts of things get screwed up at the same time.<br>**** About adjusting your medication dose, that is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wait a moment , folk !
We are talking about temporary separation of already uncoiled DNA ( meaning , that it 's probably under the process of being expressed , anyway ) under very specific conditions as predicted by a computer model.This is not even an empirical observation : we do n't know that any of this happens in a cell free in vitro system and how significant the effect is ( if any ) , we do n't know if it happens in a cell culture in vitro system and how significant the effect is ( if any ) and we certainly do n't know that anything like this happens in vivo.Even assuming that you can create these precise conditions by an airport scanner ( which seems rather doubtful ) , you certainly would not , in any way , be facilitating mutation in any appreciable sense * .
All that you would be doing , theoretically , is to subtly alter patterns of gene expression for the few seconds it would take to walk through the scanner ( basically , a very subtle regulatory effect ) .
While you certainly can facilitate the development of cancer through such a mechanism ( in fact , I 'd argue that dysregulation of gene expression * * at some points is simply required for carcinogenesis --yes , it can be caused by mutating proteins but these mutated proteins are almost invariably going to have direct or indirect regulatory functions * * * ) , such a dysregulation of gene expression would have be the prolonged , normal state of affairs of a cell for a cancer to actually happen .
For this to be happening ( in a worse case scenario ) for as much as a few mere seconds can hardly even be called a dysregulation in any meaningful sense and much , much less have any effect , whatsoever , on carcinogenesis.If , on the other hand , some government agency is monitoring you 24/7 with these scanners , then you might have reason to worry * * * * .
* I would speculate that there 's an infinitesimal chance that DNA might be more susceptible to mutations from not being as protected as it would be when paired but you have to realize that active regions of DNA get unzipped like this all the time so this effect , if it might be real , would be a drop in the bucket and utterly swamped by the background .
* * For purposes of this discussion , what I mean by dysregulation of gene expression is the production of various protein products at inappropriate times or in the wrong amounts ( either too much or too little of a protein ) .
* * * Whether the function is to induce cell division or stop cell division , or to induce cell death ( apoptosis ) or to evade cell death ( and whether it is a direct or indirect effect on the preceding --such as mechanisms sensing DNA damage , loss of contact inhibition , etc. ) .
While other factors which may not always be strictly regulatory do exist such as invasiveness , angiogenesis , telomerase function , etc ( which often will also be regulatory by involving over or under expression ) ; these factors need to happen together with a regulatory dysfunction for an actual cancer to happen because , basically , cancer happens when a lot of different sorts of things get screwed up at the same time .
* * * * About adjusting your medication dose , that is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wait a moment, folk!
We are talking about temporary separation of already uncoiled DNA (meaning, that it's probably under the process of being expressed, anyway) under very specific conditions as predicted by a computer model.This is not even an empirical observation: we don't know that any of this happens in a cell free in vitro system and how significant the effect is (if any), we don't know if it happens in a cell culture in vitro system and how significant the effect is (if any) and we certainly don't know that anything like this happens in vivo.Even assuming that you can create these precise conditions by an airport scanner (which seems rather doubtful), you certainly would not, in any way, be facilitating mutation in any appreciable sense*.
All that you would be doing, theoretically, is to subtly alter patterns of gene expression for the few seconds it would take to walk through the scanner (basically, a very subtle regulatory effect).
While you certainly can facilitate the development of cancer through such a mechanism (in fact, I'd argue that dysregulation of gene expression** at some points is simply required for carcinogenesis --yes, it can be caused by mutating proteins but these mutated proteins are almost invariably going to have direct or indirect regulatory functions***), such a dysregulation of gene expression would have be the prolonged, normal state of affairs of a cell for a cancer to actually happen.
For this to be happening (in a worse case scenario) for as much as a few mere seconds can hardly even be called a dysregulation in any meaningful sense and much, much less have any effect, whatsoever, on carcinogenesis.If, on the other hand, some government agency is monitoring you 24/7 with these scanners, then you might have reason to worry****.
* I would speculate that there's an infinitesimal chance that DNA might be more susceptible to mutations from not being as protected as it would be when paired but you have to realize that active regions of DNA get unzipped like this all the time so this effect, if it might be real, would be a drop in the bucket and utterly swamped by the background.
** For purposes of this discussion, what I mean by dysregulation of gene expression is the production of various protein products at inappropriate times or in the wrong amounts (either too much or too little of a protein).
*** Whether the function is to induce cell division or stop cell division, or to induce cell death (apoptosis) or to evade cell death (and whether it is a direct or indirect effect on the preceding --such as mechanisms sensing DNA damage, loss of contact inhibition, etc.).
While other factors which may not always be strictly regulatory do exist such as invasiveness, angiogenesis, telomerase function, etc (which often will also be regulatory by involving over or under expression); these factors need to happen together with a regulatory dysfunction for an actual cancer to happen because, basically, cancer happens when a lot of different sorts of things get screwed up at the same time.
**** About adjusting your medication dose, that is.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29930429</id>
	<title>Yeah... So here's how I think it will REALLY go...</title>
	<author>Fantastic Lad</author>
	<datestamp>1256906820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>After some initial buzz, this theory will be found highly debatable, the DNA damaged in some tests will be discovered to have been the result of poor testing, the damage will be considered within the normal range of every day life beneath a solar object like our Sun, and generally the whole issue will be relegated to the FUD desk and there forgotten except by the reactionary fringe which seems incapable of doing its homework.</p><p>All while the real issue remains tidily ignored.  And why?  Because wave forms are the key to everything, so the black hats are going to do their utmost to retain control over the control, as it were.</p><p><b>(Side note; I recently worked out how those giant megalithic blocks of stone might have been moved using, as is claimed, simply sound.  It's so blindingly obvious that I actually smacked my forehead when I realized the basic principal behind it.</b>  --You know how when your cell phone is set to 'vibrate' rather than ring, and it sort of slides across the table?  Same thing.  Just broadcast a sound on the same resonant frequency as the big object you want to move, set it vibrating and then just push.  Big blocks of stone remain heavy, but I imagine once you remove friction from the equation, building one of the thousands of megaliths dotting the planet becomes a somewhat more reasonable task.)</p><p>Anyway, the real issue, in case anybody cares, has little to do with the high frequency carrier signal itself in a cell phone handset, (other than that it makes the whole game possible), <b>but rather the modulated frequencies in the 10Hz to around 500Hz range where cells start doing peculiar things when exposed.</b>  --Odd things like opening and closing cell-wall permeability to particles in the blood, (this is of particular moment with regard to the Blood Brain Barrier).  Keeping in mind that this occurs well below the power levels at which ionization is observed.</p><p>But so what?  Cell phones move data in the kilobytes per second range, well above the 10 - 500 Hz where cells start doing the funky chicken when excited.  Thing is, and here's the rub, with every model of cell phone right from their introduction onto the market, the technology has found some fundamental excuse for broadcasting modulated pulses within that exact range.  For example, GSM phones use a system called, Time Division Multiple Access or TDMA for short.</p><p>It is described thusly. .<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.</p><blockquote><div><p>To increase the number of users that can communicate with a base station at the same time, a technique called Time Division Multiple Access (TDMA) is employed that allows each channel to be used by eight phones. This is achieved by compressing each 4.6 ms chunk of information to be transmitted into a burst or pulse 0.58 ms long (1 ms or millisecond is a thousandth of a second). So the phones and base stations transmit for 0.58 ms, every 4.6 ms, which results in a 217 Hz pulse modulation* or variation in their output (217 Hz = 1/4.6 ms). For technical reasons, there is, in fact, additional data compression which leads to the phones and base stations transmitting 25 pulses but omitting every 26th , and so on. <b>This produces further pulse modulation of the power output at the lower frequency of 8.34 Hz</b> (= 217 Hz/26).</p><p><a href="http://www.teiser.gr/icd/SAR/IEGMP.pdf" title="teiser.gr">Page 31 section 4.13 - Independent Expert Group on Mobile Phones</a> [teiser.gr]</p></div></blockquote><p>This puts the common GSM cell phone directly in the 10 - 500 Hz range with several regular signals which nerve cells, and brain cells specifically respond to.  Each of the other cell phone systems finds a similar excuse to pulse in this range.</p><p>And, I suspect, the same will be true of the newer systems, but as per usual, this will not be explored in favor of alarmist and for the most part, (as far as I have been able to determine after reading this stuff for years), misleading stories about cancer.  --While it is probably not a good idea for one's blood brain barrier to open up when toxins are coursing through the blood, I still think that this is a side issue.  --Because also from the acres of reading I've done on this subject, it is quite clear that moods, thoughts and emotions can be readily sculpted simply by pulsing a subject with specific resonant frequencies in the ELF range.  Cell phones seem to serve as a means to keep the mind consistently numbed, while also, I suspect, providing an easy means of individual by individual targeted delivery of specific resonant frequencies by simply broadcasting a basic signal modulated to suit whatever ELF waveform might be considered necessary in a given situation.  (But that last part, while entirely feasible given the technology already in place, remains purely speculative on my part.  Though, if I were a black hat control freak I'd certainly take advantage of such an opportunity.  Particularly since I would have created that opportunity in the first place.  But that's just me.  Maybe my creative muscle is just more tuned to coming up with evil thoughts than those of the bad guys.  Doubt it, though.  For me it's just a part time mental exercise rather than a full-time position with shareholder's benefits).</p><p>Just some thoughts to crunch on.  Have a good day!</p><p>-FL</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>After some initial buzz , this theory will be found highly debatable , the DNA damaged in some tests will be discovered to have been the result of poor testing , the damage will be considered within the normal range of every day life beneath a solar object like our Sun , and generally the whole issue will be relegated to the FUD desk and there forgotten except by the reactionary fringe which seems incapable of doing its homework.All while the real issue remains tidily ignored .
And why ?
Because wave forms are the key to everything , so the black hats are going to do their utmost to retain control over the control , as it were .
( Side note ; I recently worked out how those giant megalithic blocks of stone might have been moved using , as is claimed , simply sound .
It 's so blindingly obvious that I actually smacked my forehead when I realized the basic principal behind it .
--You know how when your cell phone is set to 'vibrate ' rather than ring , and it sort of slides across the table ?
Same thing .
Just broadcast a sound on the same resonant frequency as the big object you want to move , set it vibrating and then just push .
Big blocks of stone remain heavy , but I imagine once you remove friction from the equation , building one of the thousands of megaliths dotting the planet becomes a somewhat more reasonable task .
) Anyway , the real issue , in case anybody cares , has little to do with the high frequency carrier signal itself in a cell phone handset , ( other than that it makes the whole game possible ) , but rather the modulated frequencies in the 10Hz to around 500Hz range where cells start doing peculiar things when exposed .
--Odd things like opening and closing cell-wall permeability to particles in the blood , ( this is of particular moment with regard to the Blood Brain Barrier ) .
Keeping in mind that this occurs well below the power levels at which ionization is observed.But so what ?
Cell phones move data in the kilobytes per second range , well above the 10 - 500 Hz where cells start doing the funky chicken when excited .
Thing is , and here 's the rub , with every model of cell phone right from their introduction onto the market , the technology has found some fundamental excuse for broadcasting modulated pulses within that exact range .
For example , GSM phones use a system called , Time Division Multiple Access or TDMA for short.It is described thusly .
. .To increase the number of users that can communicate with a base station at the same time , a technique called Time Division Multiple Access ( TDMA ) is employed that allows each channel to be used by eight phones .
This is achieved by compressing each 4.6 ms chunk of information to be transmitted into a burst or pulse 0.58 ms long ( 1 ms or millisecond is a thousandth of a second ) .
So the phones and base stations transmit for 0.58 ms , every 4.6 ms , which results in a 217 Hz pulse modulation * or variation in their output ( 217 Hz = 1/4.6 ms ) .
For technical reasons , there is , in fact , additional data compression which leads to the phones and base stations transmitting 25 pulses but omitting every 26th , and so on .
This produces further pulse modulation of the power output at the lower frequency of 8.34 Hz ( = 217 Hz/26 ) .Page 31 section 4.13 - Independent Expert Group on Mobile Phones [ teiser.gr ] This puts the common GSM cell phone directly in the 10 - 500 Hz range with several regular signals which nerve cells , and brain cells specifically respond to .
Each of the other cell phone systems finds a similar excuse to pulse in this range.And , I suspect , the same will be true of the newer systems , but as per usual , this will not be explored in favor of alarmist and for the most part , ( as far as I have been able to determine after reading this stuff for years ) , misleading stories about cancer .
--While it is probably not a good idea for one 's blood brain barrier to open up when toxins are coursing through the blood , I still think that this is a side issue .
--Because also from the acres of reading I 've done on this subject , it is quite clear that moods , thoughts and emotions can be readily sculpted simply by pulsing a subject with specific resonant frequencies in the ELF range .
Cell phones seem to serve as a means to keep the mind consistently numbed , while also , I suspect , providing an easy means of individual by individual targeted delivery of specific resonant frequencies by simply broadcasting a basic signal modulated to suit whatever ELF waveform might be considered necessary in a given situation .
( But that last part , while entirely feasible given the technology already in place , remains purely speculative on my part .
Though , if I were a black hat control freak I 'd certainly take advantage of such an opportunity .
Particularly since I would have created that opportunity in the first place .
But that 's just me .
Maybe my creative muscle is just more tuned to coming up with evil thoughts than those of the bad guys .
Doubt it , though .
For me it 's just a part time mental exercise rather than a full-time position with shareholder 's benefits ) .Just some thoughts to crunch on .
Have a good day ! -FL</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After some initial buzz, this theory will be found highly debatable, the DNA damaged in some tests will be discovered to have been the result of poor testing, the damage will be considered within the normal range of every day life beneath a solar object like our Sun, and generally the whole issue will be relegated to the FUD desk and there forgotten except by the reactionary fringe which seems incapable of doing its homework.All while the real issue remains tidily ignored.
And why?
Because wave forms are the key to everything, so the black hats are going to do their utmost to retain control over the control, as it were.
(Side note; I recently worked out how those giant megalithic blocks of stone might have been moved using, as is claimed, simply sound.
It's so blindingly obvious that I actually smacked my forehead when I realized the basic principal behind it.
--You know how when your cell phone is set to 'vibrate' rather than ring, and it sort of slides across the table?
Same thing.
Just broadcast a sound on the same resonant frequency as the big object you want to move, set it vibrating and then just push.
Big blocks of stone remain heavy, but I imagine once you remove friction from the equation, building one of the thousands of megaliths dotting the planet becomes a somewhat more reasonable task.
)Anyway, the real issue, in case anybody cares, has little to do with the high frequency carrier signal itself in a cell phone handset, (other than that it makes the whole game possible), but rather the modulated frequencies in the 10Hz to around 500Hz range where cells start doing peculiar things when exposed.
--Odd things like opening and closing cell-wall permeability to particles in the blood, (this is of particular moment with regard to the Blood Brain Barrier).
Keeping in mind that this occurs well below the power levels at which ionization is observed.But so what?
Cell phones move data in the kilobytes per second range, well above the 10 - 500 Hz where cells start doing the funky chicken when excited.
Thing is, and here's the rub, with every model of cell phone right from their introduction onto the market, the technology has found some fundamental excuse for broadcasting modulated pulses within that exact range.
For example, GSM phones use a system called, Time Division Multiple Access or TDMA for short.It is described thusly.
. .To increase the number of users that can communicate with a base station at the same time, a technique called Time Division Multiple Access (TDMA) is employed that allows each channel to be used by eight phones.
This is achieved by compressing each 4.6 ms chunk of information to be transmitted into a burst or pulse 0.58 ms long (1 ms or millisecond is a thousandth of a second).
So the phones and base stations transmit for 0.58 ms, every 4.6 ms, which results in a 217 Hz pulse modulation* or variation in their output (217 Hz = 1/4.6 ms).
For technical reasons, there is, in fact, additional data compression which leads to the phones and base stations transmitting 25 pulses but omitting every 26th , and so on.
This produces further pulse modulation of the power output at the lower frequency of 8.34 Hz (= 217 Hz/26).Page 31 section 4.13 - Independent Expert Group on Mobile Phones [teiser.gr]This puts the common GSM cell phone directly in the 10 - 500 Hz range with several regular signals which nerve cells, and brain cells specifically respond to.
Each of the other cell phone systems finds a similar excuse to pulse in this range.And, I suspect, the same will be true of the newer systems, but as per usual, this will not be explored in favor of alarmist and for the most part, (as far as I have been able to determine after reading this stuff for years), misleading stories about cancer.
--While it is probably not a good idea for one's blood brain barrier to open up when toxins are coursing through the blood, I still think that this is a side issue.
--Because also from the acres of reading I've done on this subject, it is quite clear that moods, thoughts and emotions can be readily sculpted simply by pulsing a subject with specific resonant frequencies in the ELF range.
Cell phones seem to serve as a means to keep the mind consistently numbed, while also, I suspect, providing an easy means of individual by individual targeted delivery of specific resonant frequencies by simply broadcasting a basic signal modulated to suit whatever ELF waveform might be considered necessary in a given situation.
(But that last part, while entirely feasible given the technology already in place, remains purely speculative on my part.
Though, if I were a black hat control freak I'd certainly take advantage of such an opportunity.
Particularly since I would have created that opportunity in the first place.
But that's just me.
Maybe my creative muscle is just more tuned to coming up with evil thoughts than those of the bad guys.
Doubt it, though.
For me it's just a part time mental exercise rather than a full-time position with shareholder's benefits).Just some thoughts to crunch on.
Have a good day!-FL
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922645</id>
	<title>Shoe-Fitting Flouroscope</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256911320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Reminds me of the time I was at the Science Museum in Minnesota and they had an exhibit from the Museum of Bad Science (or something like that).  Anyway they had a <a href="http://www.hemonctoday.com/article.aspx?rid=28218" title="hemonctoday.com">shoe-fitting flouroscope</a> [hemonctoday.com] which was a device that shoe stores bought.  Basically you would put shoes on your child's feet but to see how well they fit you would jam their leg in this thing and see the bones of the toes up to the tip of the shoe and see how well it fit.  See the problem yet?<p><div class="quote"><p>Although store clerks were frequently exposed to the radiation from the machines, the radiation was more dangerous to children who placed their feet directly into the radiation. The exposure rate is thought to have been approximately 0.005 Gy to 0.058 Gy per second. If children tried on several pairs of shoes per visit it was posited that they could be exposed to as much as 0.1 Gy to 1.16 Gy. In fact, experiments indicated that radiation could exceed 1 microGy per hour as far as 10 feet away from the machine.</p></div><p>This device should be a warning (and I think it has been if you look at how cautious people are of new technologies like cell phones).  Hopefully my sperm aren't being fried when I walk through a scanner in an airport--at least the parents of the 30s were using X-rays for their convenience and not the invasion of their privacy!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Reminds me of the time I was at the Science Museum in Minnesota and they had an exhibit from the Museum of Bad Science ( or something like that ) .
Anyway they had a shoe-fitting flouroscope [ hemonctoday.com ] which was a device that shoe stores bought .
Basically you would put shoes on your child 's feet but to see how well they fit you would jam their leg in this thing and see the bones of the toes up to the tip of the shoe and see how well it fit .
See the problem yet ? Although store clerks were frequently exposed to the radiation from the machines , the radiation was more dangerous to children who placed their feet directly into the radiation .
The exposure rate is thought to have been approximately 0.005 Gy to 0.058 Gy per second .
If children tried on several pairs of shoes per visit it was posited that they could be exposed to as much as 0.1 Gy to 1.16 Gy .
In fact , experiments indicated that radiation could exceed 1 microGy per hour as far as 10 feet away from the machine.This device should be a warning ( and I think it has been if you look at how cautious people are of new technologies like cell phones ) .
Hopefully my sperm are n't being fried when I walk through a scanner in an airport--at least the parents of the 30s were using X-rays for their convenience and not the invasion of their privacy !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Reminds me of the time I was at the Science Museum in Minnesota and they had an exhibit from the Museum of Bad Science (or something like that).
Anyway they had a shoe-fitting flouroscope [hemonctoday.com] which was a device that shoe stores bought.
Basically you would put shoes on your child's feet but to see how well they fit you would jam their leg in this thing and see the bones of the toes up to the tip of the shoe and see how well it fit.
See the problem yet?Although store clerks were frequently exposed to the radiation from the machines, the radiation was more dangerous to children who placed their feet directly into the radiation.
The exposure rate is thought to have been approximately 0.005 Gy to 0.058 Gy per second.
If children tried on several pairs of shoes per visit it was posited that they could be exposed to as much as 0.1 Gy to 1.16 Gy.
In fact, experiments indicated that radiation could exceed 1 microGy per hour as far as 10 feet away from the machine.This device should be a warning (and I think it has been if you look at how cautious people are of new technologies like cell phones).
Hopefully my sperm aren't being fried when I walk through a scanner in an airport--at least the parents of the 30s were using X-rays for their convenience and not the invasion of their privacy!
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923099</id>
	<title>Re:Shoe-Fitting Flouroscope</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256914320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>to me that new discovery should be used to find a way to repair genes, or even fight cancer.</p><p>many times some discovery in one field leads to a major advance in another<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>to me that new discovery should be used to find a way to repair genes , or even fight cancer.many times some discovery in one field leads to a major advance in another .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>to me that new discovery should be used to find a way to repair genes, or even fight cancer.many times some discovery in one field leads to a major advance in another ...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922645</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923177</id>
	<title>Re:Shoe-Fitting Flouroscope</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256914740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If some of your Little Johns get a bit frazzled, you could theroetically make more so long as the rest of you stays intact.  A woman, however, never makes more eggs.  If those get fried, that's the end of the line.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If some of your Little Johns get a bit frazzled , you could theroetically make more so long as the rest of you stays intact .
A woman , however , never makes more eggs .
If those get fried , that 's the end of the line .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If some of your Little Johns get a bit frazzled, you could theroetically make more so long as the rest of you stays intact.
A woman, however, never makes more eggs.
If those get fried, that's the end of the line.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922645</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922659</id>
	<title>The airport scanners are passive</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256911440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you follow the link provided about the airport scanners you find that they are passive devices meaning they don't emit terahertz waves they only recieve the waves coming off of everything around us.<br>There are some devices out there that using terahertz radiation to inspect packages much like x-ray today.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you follow the link provided about the airport scanners you find that they are passive devices meaning they do n't emit terahertz waves they only recieve the waves coming off of everything around us.There are some devices out there that using terahertz radiation to inspect packages much like x-ray today .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you follow the link provided about the airport scanners you find that they are passive devices meaning they don't emit terahertz waves they only recieve the waves coming off of everything around us.There are some devices out there that using terahertz radiation to inspect packages much like x-ray today.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29925443</id>
	<title>Re:Shoe-Fitting Flouroscope</title>
	<author>pilgrim23</author>
	<datestamp>1256923980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I know that I am not fashionably new but:  can you convert that to roentgens so it agrees with my Civil Defense doseometer?  Apples and Oranges seem to be all the rage in comparisons these days</htmltext>
<tokenext>I know that I am not fashionably new but : can you convert that to roentgens so it agrees with my Civil Defense doseometer ?
Apples and Oranges seem to be all the rage in comparisons these days</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know that I am not fashionably new but:  can you convert that to roentgens so it agrees with my Civil Defense doseometer?
Apples and Oranges seem to be all the rage in comparisons these days</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922645</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922621</id>
	<title>Who cares...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256911140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Who cares if we turn into an entire country of genetically deformed freaks, at least we'll be a country of SAFE and FREE genetically deformed freaks, right? Just as envisioned by our Founding Fathers. God Bless America.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who cares if we turn into an entire country of genetically deformed freaks , at least we 'll be a country of SAFE and FREE genetically deformed freaks , right ?
Just as envisioned by our Founding Fathers .
God Bless America .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who cares if we turn into an entire country of genetically deformed freaks, at least we'll be a country of SAFE and FREE genetically deformed freaks, right?
Just as envisioned by our Founding Fathers.
God Bless America.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923549</id>
	<title>Khm...</title>
	<author>zrbyte</author>
	<datestamp>1256916660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"break chemical bonds or ionize electrons"</p><p>Don't know about breaking apart DNA, but I'm pretty sure they can't ionize electrons.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" break chemical bonds or ionize electrons " Do n't know about breaking apart DNA , but I 'm pretty sure they ca n't ionize electrons .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"break chemical bonds or ionize electrons"Don't know about breaking apart DNA, but I'm pretty sure they can't ionize electrons.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29924731</id>
	<title>Re:Incident at LAX</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256921460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have to say, it is usually the old lady sitting next to me, who just can't shut up, who makes me really wanna cut my veins on those long coast to coast flights. But I've never been seated next to a "towelhead", so I have no data for comparison</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have to say , it is usually the old lady sitting next to me , who just ca n't shut up , who makes me really wan na cut my veins on those long coast to coast flights .
But I 've never been seated next to a " towelhead " , so I have no data for comparison</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have to say, it is usually the old lady sitting next to me, who just can't shut up, who makes me really wanna cut my veins on those long coast to coast flights.
But I've never been seated next to a "towelhead", so I have no data for comparison</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922663</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29926345</id>
	<title>Re:Double Stranded?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256928480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Single-stranded DNA is commonly found in cells undergoing mitosis (division) and in sperm and egg cells.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Single-stranded DNA is commonly found in cells undergoing mitosis ( division ) and in sperm and egg cells .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Single-stranded DNA is commonly found in cells undergoing mitosis (division) and in sperm and egg cells.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923075</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922667</id>
	<title>Remember it's resonance</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256911560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Resonant effects build up from very small amplitudes; the 'safe' level of exposure from a CW machine is none.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Resonant effects build up from very small amplitudes ; the 'safe ' level of exposure from a CW machine is none .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Resonant effects build up from very small amplitudes; the 'safe' level of exposure from a CW machine is none.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923039</id>
	<title>just another resonance problem?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256913960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sweet they answered how to avoid it as well then. If it is because of resonance you treat it like any other resonance problem and vary the frequency a bit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sweet they answered how to avoid it as well then .
If it is because of resonance you treat it like any other resonance problem and vary the frequency a bit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sweet they answered how to avoid it as well then.
If it is because of resonance you treat it like any other resonance problem and vary the frequency a bit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923339</id>
	<title>Can you insultate yourself?</title>
	<author>mastahYee</author>
	<datestamp>1256915580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you line your clothes with something conductive, would it disperse the waves before reaching skin?  What about your house?  What about tinfoil?

I know little about this stuff, but I'm genuinely concerned about being groped internally.  Talk about spooky action from a distance.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you line your clothes with something conductive , would it disperse the waves before reaching skin ?
What about your house ?
What about tinfoil ?
I know little about this stuff , but I 'm genuinely concerned about being groped internally .
Talk about spooky action from a distance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you line your clothes with something conductive, would it disperse the waves before reaching skin?
What about your house?
What about tinfoil?
I know little about this stuff, but I'm genuinely concerned about being groped internally.
Talk about spooky action from a distance.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923199</id>
	<title>Re:Ethical use of panic...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256914860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Tell that to FOXNews, please.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Tell that to FOXNews , please .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tell that to FOXNews, please.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922695</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29927141</id>
	<title>Re:there was a little old lady in the UK who turne</title>
	<author>coolsnowmen</author>
	<datestamp>1256931840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>True, but TSA doesn't give a damn if you are a spy, only if you are packing heat, or too much shampoo.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>True , but TSA does n't give a damn if you are a spy , only if you are packing heat , or too much shampoo .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>True, but TSA doesn't give a damn if you are a spy, only if you are packing heat, or too much shampoo.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922797</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29925053</id>
	<title>"Terror Hurts,</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256922600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So We Use Terahertz"</p><p>i'm sorry, but for the sake of just beautifully rhyming government supported advertising jingles, we just can't stop using these waves</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So We Use Terahertz " i 'm sorry , but for the sake of just beautifully rhyming government supported advertising jingles , we just ca n't stop using these waves</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So We Use Terahertz"i'm sorry, but for the sake of just beautifully rhyming government supported advertising jingles, we just can't stop using these waves</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923865</id>
	<title>Sensationalism</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256917980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>After reading the original work and several of the references contained within, I am not convinced of the validity of the results. The real problem here is that the model used in this research is based on an overly simplified model (Peyrard-Bishop-Dauxois) for double-stranded DNA.  There are many gross approximations in this model, with a few being: only hydrogen-bonds are accounted for between base pairs using a simple one-dimensional potential energy surface, there are no explicit base-pair stacking interactions in the model at all, and more problematic...there is NO solvent (water) in the model.  There is no way this model can be numerically accurate enough to warrant any concern about the use of THz radiation.  At best, this study will spur other researchers to use more sophisticated models to investigate the interaction of THz radiation and DNA.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>After reading the original work and several of the references contained within , I am not convinced of the validity of the results .
The real problem here is that the model used in this research is based on an overly simplified model ( Peyrard-Bishop-Dauxois ) for double-stranded DNA .
There are many gross approximations in this model , with a few being : only hydrogen-bonds are accounted for between base pairs using a simple one-dimensional potential energy surface , there are no explicit base-pair stacking interactions in the model at all , and more problematic...there is NO solvent ( water ) in the model .
There is no way this model can be numerically accurate enough to warrant any concern about the use of THz radiation .
At best , this study will spur other researchers to use more sophisticated models to investigate the interaction of THz radiation and DNA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After reading the original work and several of the references contained within, I am not convinced of the validity of the results.
The real problem here is that the model used in this research is based on an overly simplified model (Peyrard-Bishop-Dauxois) for double-stranded DNA.
There are many gross approximations in this model, with a few being: only hydrogen-bonds are accounted for between base pairs using a simple one-dimensional potential energy surface, there are no explicit base-pair stacking interactions in the model at all, and more problematic...there is NO solvent (water) in the model.
There is no way this model can be numerically accurate enough to warrant any concern about the use of THz radiation.
At best, this study will spur other researchers to use more sophisticated models to investigate the interaction of THz radiation and DNA.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922833</id>
	<title>Re:Incident at LAX</title>
	<author>commodore64\_love</author>
	<datestamp>1256912520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You have been unfairly modded into invisibility as a "troll", which is completely ridiculous, so I'm reposting your message so people can see it.  It's a good story about the Stupidity of the TSA.  </p><p><div class="quote"><p>I was at LAX..... Ahead of me there was a group of Arabs, kaffiyeh, long beard, the works. Behind them was a little white haired lady apparently on her way back to "Mizzurah" after seeing her grandkids in LA. Sweet as can be old lady.....</p><p>Guess who gets stopped by the TSA.</p><p>Needless to say, everyone in line was a bit pissed that the TSA was giving extra screening to the old lady when they just waved the Arab guys through without a second glance. That's when the guy behind me yelled out, "What the fuck are you morons searching her for? The towelheads are the ones flying shit into buildings!"  Real American guy boarded last, about 15 minutes late. TSA had a word with him, I suppose.</p> </div><p>    <b>   I guess that little old lady was a real danger, as if she was about to yell out "Death to Americans" and blow up the terminal.  (rolls eyes).    </b>      They also stopped this guy who looks like an adult version of Harry Potter!<br>With photo -  <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMB6L487LHM" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMB6L487LHM</a> [youtube.com]<br>unedited - <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEJpzVPmih0" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEJpzVPmih0</a> [youtube.com]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You have been unfairly modded into invisibility as a " troll " , which is completely ridiculous , so I 'm reposting your message so people can see it .
It 's a good story about the Stupidity of the TSA .
I was at LAX..... Ahead of me there was a group of Arabs , kaffiyeh , long beard , the works .
Behind them was a little white haired lady apparently on her way back to " Mizzurah " after seeing her grandkids in LA .
Sweet as can be old lady.....Guess who gets stopped by the TSA.Needless to say , everyone in line was a bit pissed that the TSA was giving extra screening to the old lady when they just waved the Arab guys through without a second glance .
That 's when the guy behind me yelled out , " What the fuck are you morons searching her for ?
The towelheads are the ones flying shit into buildings !
" Real American guy boarded last , about 15 minutes late .
TSA had a word with him , I suppose .
I guess that little old lady was a real danger , as if she was about to yell out " Death to Americans " and blow up the terminal .
( rolls eyes ) .
They also stopped this guy who looks like an adult version of Harry Potter ! With photo - http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = XMB6L487LHM [ youtube.com ] unedited - http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = tEJpzVPmih0 [ youtube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You have been unfairly modded into invisibility as a "troll", which is completely ridiculous, so I'm reposting your message so people can see it.
It's a good story about the Stupidity of the TSA.
I was at LAX..... Ahead of me there was a group of Arabs, kaffiyeh, long beard, the works.
Behind them was a little white haired lady apparently on her way back to "Mizzurah" after seeing her grandkids in LA.
Sweet as can be old lady.....Guess who gets stopped by the TSA.Needless to say, everyone in line was a bit pissed that the TSA was giving extra screening to the old lady when they just waved the Arab guys through without a second glance.
That's when the guy behind me yelled out, "What the fuck are you morons searching her for?
The towelheads are the ones flying shit into buildings!
"  Real American guy boarded last, about 15 minutes late.
TSA had a word with him, I suppose.
I guess that little old lady was a real danger, as if she was about to yell out "Death to Americans" and blow up the terminal.
(rolls eyes).
They also stopped this guy who looks like an adult version of Harry Potter!With photo -  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMB6L487LHM [youtube.com]unedited - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEJpzVPmih0 [youtube.com]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922663</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29926787</id>
	<title>Re:Can you insultate yourself?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256930220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why, yes, you can.  Step 1: Steel yourself.  Take a deep breath if you need.  Step 2: Look in the mirror.  Step 3: Call yourself bad names.<br>Congratulations!  You've just insultated yourself!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why , yes , you can .
Step 1 : Steel yourself .
Take a deep breath if you need .
Step 2 : Look in the mirror .
Step 3 : Call yourself bad names.Congratulations !
You 've just insultated yourself !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why, yes, you can.
Step 1: Steel yourself.
Take a deep breath if you need.
Step 2: Look in the mirror.
Step 3: Call yourself bad names.Congratulations!
You've just insultated yourself!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923339</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29931183</id>
	<title>crazy thing called freedom</title>
	<author>Plugh</author>
	<datestamp>1256913000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I got a crazy idea.<br>What if the government WASN'T in control of security at airports, and indeed, was no more in control of air travel than it is of, say, skateboard travel?</p><p>What if different airlines and airports could compete on the basis of various kinds of safety measures, price, speed thru the process, and so forth?</p><p>In short, what if we had the amazing diversity that results from a FREE MARKET, with millions of people making individual choices, rather than a one-size-fits-all centrally-planned government-run society?</p><p>Yeah, I know. Crazy talk.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I got a crazy idea.What if the government WAS N'T in control of security at airports , and indeed , was no more in control of air travel than it is of , say , skateboard travel ? What if different airlines and airports could compete on the basis of various kinds of safety measures , price , speed thru the process , and so forth ? In short , what if we had the amazing diversity that results from a FREE MARKET , with millions of people making individual choices , rather than a one-size-fits-all centrally-planned government-run society ? Yeah , I know .
Crazy talk .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I got a crazy idea.What if the government WASN'T in control of security at airports, and indeed, was no more in control of air travel than it is of, say, skateboard travel?What if different airlines and airports could compete on the basis of various kinds of safety measures, price, speed thru the process, and so forth?In short, what if we had the amazing diversity that results from a FREE MARKET, with millions of people making individual choices, rather than a one-size-fits-all centrally-planned government-run society?Yeah, I know.
Crazy talk.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29926291</id>
	<title>Re:Shoe-Fitting Flouroscope</title>
	<author>codegen</author>
	<datestamp>1256928300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know this is slashdot, but did you read <i>anything</i> before replying? The article
in discussion (at the top of the page fyi) discusses the discovery that millimeter wave radio waves
appear to be resonant with DNA, resulting in significant DNA damage. Yes the new
millimeter wave machines are not Xrays. But this is new research that shows that
the effects may be greater than anticipated. It certainly bears looking into to determine if
there is a problem.
</p><p>
The parent poster was drawing a similarity in the use to that of the
use of XRays for fitting shoes. He certainly wasn't talking about giving up on airport
security. The metal detectors work quite well. I haven't seen much evidence that spending
a lot of money to allow some barney fife to look at my privates is going to significantly increase the security
of flying. And to those who modded you insightful, get a clue!
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know this is slashdot , but did you read anything before replying ?
The article in discussion ( at the top of the page fyi ) discusses the discovery that millimeter wave radio waves appear to be resonant with DNA , resulting in significant DNA damage .
Yes the new millimeter wave machines are not Xrays .
But this is new research that shows that the effects may be greater than anticipated .
It certainly bears looking into to determine if there is a problem .
The parent poster was drawing a similarity in the use to that of the use of XRays for fitting shoes .
He certainly was n't talking about giving up on airport security .
The metal detectors work quite well .
I have n't seen much evidence that spending a lot of money to allow some barney fife to look at my privates is going to significantly increase the security of flying .
And to those who modded you insightful , get a clue !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know this is slashdot, but did you read anything before replying?
The article
in discussion (at the top of the page fyi) discusses the discovery that millimeter wave radio waves
appear to be resonant with DNA, resulting in significant DNA damage.
Yes the new
millimeter wave machines are not Xrays.
But this is new research that shows that
the effects may be greater than anticipated.
It certainly bears looking into to determine if
there is a problem.
The parent poster was drawing a similarity in the use to that of the
use of XRays for fitting shoes.
He certainly wasn't talking about giving up on airport
security.
The metal detectors work quite well.
I haven't seen much evidence that spending
a lot of money to allow some barney fife to look at my privates is going to significantly increase the security
of flying.
And to those who modded you insightful, get a clue!
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923793</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922955</id>
	<title>Slashdotted already?</title>
	<author>Skapare</author>
	<datestamp>1256913420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe they're using the DSL those turtles like slow much.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe they 're using the DSL those turtles like slow much .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe they're using the DSL those turtles like slow much.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29926763</id>
	<title>Tera-hertz radiation</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256930160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not that a name proves anything, but in this particular case it really does not help either with the case for a non-harmful EM radiation.</p><p>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teratology#Teratogenic\_agents<br>http://www.wordinfo.info/words/index/info/view\_unit/2114</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not that a name proves anything , but in this particular case it really does not help either with the case for a non-harmful EM radiation.http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teratology # Teratogenic \ _agentshttp : //www.wordinfo.info/words/index/info/view \ _unit/2114</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not that a name proves anything, but in this particular case it really does not help either with the case for a non-harmful EM radiation.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teratology#Teratogenic\_agentshttp://www.wordinfo.info/words/index/info/view\_unit/2114</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922745</id>
	<title>Re:The airport scanners are passive</title>
	<author>Shrike82</author>
	<datestamp>1256911920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you follow the link provided about the airport scanners you find that they are passive devices meaning they don't emit terahertz waves they only recieve the waves coming off of everything around us.
There are some devices out there that using terahertz radiation to inspect packages much like x-ray today.</p></div><p>Thankyou. The summary implies that scanning using T-waves in airports might cause you to have your DNA scrambled, which is just plain wrong. Passive scanning (which we are told is what the airport scanners are) don't expose you to any more radiation than you get in a normal day.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you follow the link provided about the airport scanners you find that they are passive devices meaning they do n't emit terahertz waves they only recieve the waves coming off of everything around us .
There are some devices out there that using terahertz radiation to inspect packages much like x-ray today.Thankyou .
The summary implies that scanning using T-waves in airports might cause you to have your DNA scrambled , which is just plain wrong .
Passive scanning ( which we are told is what the airport scanners are ) do n't expose you to any more radiation than you get in a normal day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you follow the link provided about the airport scanners you find that they are passive devices meaning they don't emit terahertz waves they only recieve the waves coming off of everything around us.
There are some devices out there that using terahertz radiation to inspect packages much like x-ray today.Thankyou.
The summary implies that scanning using T-waves in airports might cause you to have your DNA scrambled, which is just plain wrong.
Passive scanning (which we are told is what the airport scanners are) don't expose you to any more radiation than you get in a normal day.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922659</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922931</id>
	<title>Re:Remember it's resonance</title>
	<author>Sockatume</author>
	<datestamp>1256913300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, the article states that "THz-radiation can affect biological function, but only under specific conditions, viz. high power, or/and extended exposure, or/and specific THz frequency". At any rate resonant absorbance does not, as a common property, "build up from very small amplitudes" outside of Star Trek. It's a way of getting energy into particular modes of the system, which can ensure you put the energy in the place where it'll do the most good (or bad), not a way of boosting that energy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , the article states that " THz-radiation can affect biological function , but only under specific conditions , viz .
high power , or/and extended exposure , or/and specific THz frequency " .
At any rate resonant absorbance does not , as a common property , " build up from very small amplitudes " outside of Star Trek .
It 's a way of getting energy into particular modes of the system , which can ensure you put the energy in the place where it 'll do the most good ( or bad ) , not a way of boosting that energy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, the article states that "THz-radiation can affect biological function, but only under specific conditions, viz.
high power, or/and extended exposure, or/and specific THz frequency".
At any rate resonant absorbance does not, as a common property, "build up from very small amplitudes" outside of Star Trek.
It's a way of getting energy into particular modes of the system, which can ensure you put the energy in the place where it'll do the most good (or bad), not a way of boosting that energy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922667</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29926885</id>
	<title>I Implemented A Terahertz Scanner</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256930700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hi,</p><p>I was hired by a PhD in physics to implement a Terahertz radiation scanning system for use in an industrial site. I don't believe the claims of the article (which may or may not reflect the study). For one thing, Terahertz radiation is not nearly as useful in medicine as the article makes it out to be. The reason being that Terahertz radiation cannot penetrate WATER. While my job was mainly to implement the software routines that guided data acquisition, I spent a lot of quality time with our Terahertz radiation machine. Terahertz radiation cannot penetrate the human body, which can be proven by placing one's hand between the device's emitter and detector. The detector will receive zero information from the emitter (both the detector and emitter operate at an extremely low power, btw).</p><p>I know this because the water problem was a major theoretical problem for our group. Many of the experiments consisted of material samples that were wet to some degree. It was eventually decided that while some water was OK, the amount in the sample had to be quite small. Orders of magnitude smaller than the amount of water in your hand for example.</p><p>My supervisor has been researching terahertz radiation for the past ten years. He says that researchers expecting to use terahertz radiation in the field of medicine are barking up the wrong tree. He also says that Terahertz radiation is safe. I guess if I get skin cancer on my hand, he was wrong. But I doubt that will happen.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hi,I was hired by a PhD in physics to implement a Terahertz radiation scanning system for use in an industrial site .
I do n't believe the claims of the article ( which may or may not reflect the study ) .
For one thing , Terahertz radiation is not nearly as useful in medicine as the article makes it out to be .
The reason being that Terahertz radiation can not penetrate WATER .
While my job was mainly to implement the software routines that guided data acquisition , I spent a lot of quality time with our Terahertz radiation machine .
Terahertz radiation can not penetrate the human body , which can be proven by placing one 's hand between the device 's emitter and detector .
The detector will receive zero information from the emitter ( both the detector and emitter operate at an extremely low power , btw ) .I know this because the water problem was a major theoretical problem for our group .
Many of the experiments consisted of material samples that were wet to some degree .
It was eventually decided that while some water was OK , the amount in the sample had to be quite small .
Orders of magnitude smaller than the amount of water in your hand for example.My supervisor has been researching terahertz radiation for the past ten years .
He says that researchers expecting to use terahertz radiation in the field of medicine are barking up the wrong tree .
He also says that Terahertz radiation is safe .
I guess if I get skin cancer on my hand , he was wrong .
But I doubt that will happen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hi,I was hired by a PhD in physics to implement a Terahertz radiation scanning system for use in an industrial site.
I don't believe the claims of the article (which may or may not reflect the study).
For one thing, Terahertz radiation is not nearly as useful in medicine as the article makes it out to be.
The reason being that Terahertz radiation cannot penetrate WATER.
While my job was mainly to implement the software routines that guided data acquisition, I spent a lot of quality time with our Terahertz radiation machine.
Terahertz radiation cannot penetrate the human body, which can be proven by placing one's hand between the device's emitter and detector.
The detector will receive zero information from the emitter (both the detector and emitter operate at an extremely low power, btw).I know this because the water problem was a major theoretical problem for our group.
Many of the experiments consisted of material samples that were wet to some degree.
It was eventually decided that while some water was OK, the amount in the sample had to be quite small.
Orders of magnitude smaller than the amount of water in your hand for example.My supervisor has been researching terahertz radiation for the past ten years.
He says that researchers expecting to use terahertz radiation in the field of medicine are barking up the wrong tree.
He also says that Terahertz radiation is safe.
I guess if I get skin cancer on my hand, he was wrong.
But I doubt that will happen.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923577</id>
	<title>Re:Double Stranded?</title>
	<author>Nadaka</author>
	<datestamp>1256916720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From a recent article I read right here on slashdot, the telomer section of a strand of DNA is supposed to zip itself up as a 4 stranded section to keep the end from getting unzipped. Though I have no idea how accurate that actually is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From a recent article I read right here on slashdot , the telomer section of a strand of DNA is supposed to zip itself up as a 4 stranded section to keep the end from getting unzipped .
Though I have no idea how accurate that actually is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From a recent article I read right here on slashdot, the telomer section of a strand of DNA is supposed to zip itself up as a 4 stranded section to keep the end from getting unzipped.
Though I have no idea how accurate that actually is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923075</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923125</id>
	<title>Re:Who cares...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256914440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah exactly, so what if I have to have my arm amputated because of an agressive cancer caused by these scanners, at least it means I wont have to lose my arm to a terrorist!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah exactly , so what if I have to have my arm amputated because of an agressive cancer caused by these scanners , at least it means I wont have to lose my arm to a terrorist !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah exactly, so what if I have to have my arm amputated because of an agressive cancer caused by these scanners, at least it means I wont have to lose my arm to a terrorist!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922621</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29995104</id>
	<title>Re:Incident at LAX</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257438000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>These scanners usually measure the Thz radiation emitted from the human body (thats how they see through your clothes). They are passive. About 1 watt for anyone who is alive and warm. There are Thz waves everywere and certainly you will be subjected to more when you fly and sit next to someone then any scanner will give you. There are active scanners too but they emmit microwats and due to the way they measure the radiation is far less than in the background and they cant be used to scan a body because it takes to long to measure point by point. These waves are not new its just we can now measure them. The DNA issue is like compairing damage from a laser beam to a light bulb. Its all about the power.  The sun is by far the greatest emmiter of all types of radiation. At the moment the gvmt doesnt control the emission from that!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>These scanners usually measure the Thz radiation emitted from the human body ( thats how they see through your clothes ) .
They are passive .
About 1 watt for anyone who is alive and warm .
There are Thz waves everywere and certainly you will be subjected to more when you fly and sit next to someone then any scanner will give you .
There are active scanners too but they emmit microwats and due to the way they measure the radiation is far less than in the background and they cant be used to scan a body because it takes to long to measure point by point .
These waves are not new its just we can now measure them .
The DNA issue is like compairing damage from a laser beam to a light bulb .
Its all about the power .
The sun is by far the greatest emmiter of all types of radiation .
At the moment the gvmt doesnt control the emission from that !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These scanners usually measure the Thz radiation emitted from the human body (thats how they see through your clothes).
They are passive.
About 1 watt for anyone who is alive and warm.
There are Thz waves everywere and certainly you will be subjected to more when you fly and sit next to someone then any scanner will give you.
There are active scanners too but they emmit microwats and due to the way they measure the radiation is far less than in the background and they cant be used to scan a body because it takes to long to measure point by point.
These waves are not new its just we can now measure them.
The DNA issue is like compairing damage from a laser beam to a light bulb.
Its all about the power.
The sun is by far the greatest emmiter of all types of radiation.
At the moment the gvmt doesnt control the emission from that!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923919</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923789</id>
	<title>Re:Shoe-Fitting Flouroscope</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256917680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Who cares if your sperm are fried?  You're making like a trillion of them a day...unless ur a grrl...in which case you're probably not making any.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who cares if your sperm are fried ?
You 're making like a trillion of them a day...unless ur a grrl...in which case you 're probably not making any .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who cares if your sperm are fried?
You're making like a trillion of them a day...unless ur a grrl...in which case you're probably not making any.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922645</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923493</id>
	<title>Re:Who cares...</title>
	<author>timias1</author>
	<datestamp>1256916420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well it is a win-win situation for the airlines since they will be able to charge you a baggage fee for your new prosthetic arm. They could also remove one of your arm rests to save weight since you won't need it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well it is a win-win situation for the airlines since they will be able to charge you a baggage fee for your new prosthetic arm .
They could also remove one of your arm rests to save weight since you wo n't need it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well it is a win-win situation for the airlines since they will be able to charge you a baggage fee for your new prosthetic arm.
They could also remove one of your arm rests to save weight since you won't need it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923125</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923779</id>
	<title>Mutant sing-along</title>
	<author>SEWilco</author>
	<datestamp>1256917620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>All mutants sing along...<blockquote><div><p>Tiny bubbles [tiny bubbles]
Make me warm all over
With a feeling that I'm gonna
Love you till the end of time</p></div>
</blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>All mutants sing along...Tiny bubbles [ tiny bubbles ] Make me warm all over With a feeling that I 'm gon na Love you till the end of time</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All mutants sing along...Tiny bubbles [tiny bubbles]
Make me warm all over
With a feeling that I'm gonna
Love you till the end of time

	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922875</id>
	<title>Doesn't worry me</title>
	<author>Dolphinzilla</author>
	<datestamp>1256912760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you read the story this conjecture is the results of a computer model<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...NOT real measurements of actual damage to DNA - since no previous actual experiments have turned up any damage then I'd say the model is not quite right - at any rate its all theoretical and not proven with experiment</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you read the story this conjecture is the results of a computer model ...NOT real measurements of actual damage to DNA - since no previous actual experiments have turned up any damage then I 'd say the model is not quite right - at any rate its all theoretical and not proven with experiment</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you read the story this conjecture is the results of a computer model ...NOT real measurements of actual damage to DNA - since no previous actual experiments have turned up any damage then I'd say the model is not quite right - at any rate its all theoretical and not proven with experiment</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922777</id>
	<title>Re:Incident at LAX</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256912220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have to say that the only time I was set aside to be in the special search category, <i>everybody</i> else in the group was from the middle-East or India.  It was quite clearly obvious that they were profiling based on ethnic origin.
<p>
(*In my case, the "profile" was that I'd bought a one-way ticket only one hour before the flight.  Apparently the profile of terrorists is that they buy tickets at the last moment.  True?  Probably not.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have to say that the only time I was set aside to be in the special search category , everybody else in the group was from the middle-East or India .
It was quite clearly obvious that they were profiling based on ethnic origin .
( * In my case , the " profile " was that I 'd bought a one-way ticket only one hour before the flight .
Apparently the profile of terrorists is that they buy tickets at the last moment .
True ? Probably not .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have to say that the only time I was set aside to be in the special search category, everybody else in the group was from the middle-East or India.
It was quite clearly obvious that they were profiling based on ethnic origin.
(*In my case, the "profile" was that I'd bought a one-way ticket only one hour before the flight.
Apparently the profile of terrorists is that they buy tickets at the last moment.
True?  Probably not.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922663</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29997594</id>
	<title>Re:Incident at LAX</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257450000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Not to mention terrorists arent stupid. Theyre not going to dress up in full garb. The 9/11 hijackers wore street clothes and business casual clothes.</p></div><p>Ah, but now the terrorists know that the TSA know that, so they will dress up in full garb to fool the TSA into letting them through.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not to mention terrorists arent stupid .
Theyre not going to dress up in full garb .
The 9/11 hijackers wore street clothes and business casual clothes.Ah , but now the terrorists know that the TSA know that , so they will dress up in full garb to fool the TSA into letting them through .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not to mention terrorists arent stupid.
Theyre not going to dress up in full garb.
The 9/11 hijackers wore street clothes and business casual clothes.Ah, but now the terrorists know that the TSA know that, so they will dress up in full garb to fool the TSA into letting them through.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923919</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922655</id>
	<title>Ethical use of panic...</title>
	<author>h4rm0ny</author>
	<datestamp>1256911440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><br>
So if there's a hysterical OMGCancer panic amongst the scientific illiterate, is it ethical to take advantage of that to protect ourselves against the privacy abuses of these things at train stations and airports and on the street?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So if there 's a hysterical OMGCancer panic amongst the scientific illiterate , is it ethical to take advantage of that to protect ourselves against the privacy abuses of these things at train stations and airports and on the street ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
So if there's a hysterical OMGCancer panic amongst the scientific illiterate, is it ethical to take advantage of that to protect ourselves against the privacy abuses of these things at train stations and airports and on the street?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29924171</id>
	<title>subject</title>
	<author>WiFiBro</author>
	<datestamp>1256919360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Huray!<br>If people won't limit their flying for the climate, then let them do it for their DNA!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Huray ! If people wo n't limit their flying for the climate , then let them do it for their DNA !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Huray!If people won't limit their flying for the climate, then let them do it for their DNA!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923367</id>
	<title>WWDD - what would Dorthy do</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256915760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dorthy, I'll get you and your little dog too.<br>Walk thru this airport scanner before I board my broom. Ok.</p><p>Oh NO... I'm Melting...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dorthy , I 'll get you and your little dog too.Walk thru this airport scanner before I board my broom .
Ok.Oh NO... I 'm Melting.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dorthy, I'll get you and your little dog too.Walk thru this airport scanner before I board my broom.
Ok.Oh NO... I'm Melting...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29925065</id>
	<title>I love it....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256922660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Terahertz radiation is harmless, but a 1.8GHz cell phone causes brain cancer...</p><p>Idiots...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Terahertz radiation is harmless , but a 1.8GHz cell phone causes brain cancer...Idiots.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Terahertz radiation is harmless, but a 1.8GHz cell phone causes brain cancer...Idiots...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922831</id>
	<title>Re:Incident at LAX</title>
	<author>swarsron</author>
	<datestamp>1256912520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>so you suggest we profile people by their religion *and* create an easy to circumvent security protocol? Genius</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>so you suggest we profile people by their religion * and * create an easy to circumvent security protocol ?
Genius</tokentext>
<sentencetext>so you suggest we profile people by their religion *and* create an easy to circumvent security protocol?
Genius</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922663</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29926095</id>
	<title>Re:Shoe-Fitting Flouroscope</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256927340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Those x-ray shoe fit machines were still around in the late 40's or early 50's in Canada. I remember watching my toe bones move in the shoes. Much more interesting than how well the shoes fit. The machines were a sales scam (as someone mentioned here the same thing can be done with foot measurements) but none of us knew any better than to allow ourselves to be exposed. We were just kids with unknowing adult parents.</p><p>Although on a good note, I've been pretty healthy except for bad knees and I had two healthy sons. Guess my Mom must have got tied of it and got me out of there before I overdosed. I think I would have watched those foot bones a bit longer if she hadn't been in a hurry.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Those x-ray shoe fit machines were still around in the late 40 's or early 50 's in Canada .
I remember watching my toe bones move in the shoes .
Much more interesting than how well the shoes fit .
The machines were a sales scam ( as someone mentioned here the same thing can be done with foot measurements ) but none of us knew any better than to allow ourselves to be exposed .
We were just kids with unknowing adult parents.Although on a good note , I 've been pretty healthy except for bad knees and I had two healthy sons .
Guess my Mom must have got tied of it and got me out of there before I overdosed .
I think I would have watched those foot bones a bit longer if she had n't been in a hurry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Those x-ray shoe fit machines were still around in the late 40's or early 50's in Canada.
I remember watching my toe bones move in the shoes.
Much more interesting than how well the shoes fit.
The machines were a sales scam (as someone mentioned here the same thing can be done with foot measurements) but none of us knew any better than to allow ourselves to be exposed.
We were just kids with unknowing adult parents.Although on a good note, I've been pretty healthy except for bad knees and I had two healthy sons.
Guess my Mom must have got tied of it and got me out of there before I overdosed.
I think I would have watched those foot bones a bit longer if she hadn't been in a hurry.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922645</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923075</id>
	<title>Double Stranded?</title>
	<author>AP31R0N</author>
	<datestamp>1256914140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>i thought all DNA was double stranded.  Is there single or triple stranded DNA?  If all DNA is double stranded, why mention strandedness at all?</p><p>i'm not trolling, i'm asking a question.  Yesterday some jerks with more mod points than sense labeled me as a troll for asking questions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>i thought all DNA was double stranded .
Is there single or triple stranded DNA ?
If all DNA is double stranded , why mention strandedness at all ? i 'm not trolling , i 'm asking a question .
Yesterday some jerks with more mod points than sense labeled me as a troll for asking questions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i thought all DNA was double stranded.
Is there single or triple stranded DNA?
If all DNA is double stranded, why mention strandedness at all?i'm not trolling, i'm asking a question.
Yesterday some jerks with more mod points than sense labeled me as a troll for asking questions.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922621
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29925531
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922745
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29924545
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922927
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923215
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922663
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923919
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29931495
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922645
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923793
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29925651
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922621
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29926551
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923075
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29926345
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922645
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29924077
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922645
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29924769
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29927581
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922645
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923177
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922645
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923789
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922655
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922695
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923199
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923339
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29926787
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922655
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923137
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922663
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29934069
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922621
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923635
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922663
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922831
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922875
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923093
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29932129
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922663
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29927099
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922645
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29925443
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922645
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923019
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922621
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29934977
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922875
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29925711
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922667
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922931
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29924049
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29924993
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922645
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923143
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922621
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923125
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923493
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922645
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923453
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922655
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922695
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923239
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922645
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29943230
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922645
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923793
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29926029
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922913
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29924353
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922645
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29926095
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922645
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923791
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922645
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923793
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29926291
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922655
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922815
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922663
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922777
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29925709
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922663
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29925491
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922667
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922931
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29924049
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29925135
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922663
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922833
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923075
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923577
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922913
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29925035
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922645
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923793
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29929421
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922621
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29927881
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922621
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29924107
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922663
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922797
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29927141
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922663
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29924731
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922663
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923919
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29997594
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922645
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29926711
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922663
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923919
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29995104
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1216230_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922645
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923099
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_30_1216230.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922661
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_30_1216230.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922645
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923793
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29926291
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29926029
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29925651
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29929421
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29943230
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29925443
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29924077
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29926095
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29924769
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29927581
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923099
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923791
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923177
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923143
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923789
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923453
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923019
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29926711
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_30_1216230.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29925053
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_30_1216230.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923339
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29926787
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_30_1216230.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29931183
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_30_1216230.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29926281
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_30_1216230.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922913
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29924353
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29925035
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_30_1216230.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922927
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923215
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_30_1216230.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922663
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29924731
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922833
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29925491
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922831
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29934069
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29927099
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922797
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29927141
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922777
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29925709
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923919
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29931495
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29995104
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29997594
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_30_1216230.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923855
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_30_1216230.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923865
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_30_1216230.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29930429
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_30_1216230.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922621
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29934977
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923125
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923493
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29927881
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29925531
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29924107
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29926551
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923635
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_30_1216230.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923075
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923577
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29926345
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_30_1216230.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922823
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_30_1216230.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922655
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923137
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922695
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923239
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923199
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922815
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_30_1216230.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922875
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29925711
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923093
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29932129
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_30_1216230.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29923279
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_30_1216230.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922659
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922745
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29924545
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_30_1216230.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922667
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29922931
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29924049
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29925135
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29924993
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_30_1216230.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29928975
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_30_1216230.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29924327
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_30_1216230.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1216230.29926885
</commentlist>
</conversation>
