crazietalk.net

As the Bunsen Burns...

Today is one of those days when I want to strangle BarMinion. We're working on a huge experiment in which we are quantifying protein differences between 37 samples. They are being analyzed in sets of 3 samples plus a control, and they're analyzed in triplicate and block randomized within each set. In other words, you have 3 blocks in each set containing one of each sample in the set, and the run order for the samples is randomized within each block. It's an important thing to do so you can show that any changes are not due to instrument drift. If you do the math, that gives 12 sets of 3 samples with 1 remainder. It takes a HUGE amount of instrument time to run all the samples.

Today I had occasion to look at the set with the extra sample. Rather than re-randomizing to add one replicate of the new sample to each block, BarMinion added all 3 replicates for the additional sample to the end of the set. Yes, the entire set will have to be re-analyzed. BM doesn't understand how to randomize the samples, therefore she insists that it's not important.

As furious as I am, I would not want to be in BarMinion's shoes tomorrow. I cannot even begin to imagine how angry Road Runner will be with her. BarMinion wasted at least a week's worth of instrument time, setting us even farther behind, just due to sheer stubbornness. Of course, I will have to be extra vigilant, because BarMinion will now be on the lookout for some way to make me look bad.

ArkieDukie wrote:As the Bunsen Burns...

Today is one of those days when I want to strangle BarMinion. We're working on a huge experiment in which we are quantifying protein differences between 37 samples. They are being analyzed in sets of 3 samples plus a control, and they're analyzed in triplicate and block randomized within each set. In other words, you have 3 blocks in each set containing one of each sample in the set, and the run order for the samples is randomized within each block. It's an important thing to do so you can show that any changes are not due to instrument drift. If you do the math, that gives 12 sets of 3 samples with 1 remainder. It takes a HUGE amount of instrument time to run all the samples.

Today I had occasion to look at the set with the extra sample. Rather than re-randomizing to add one replicate of the new sample to each block, BarMinion added all 3 replicates for the additional sample to the end of the set. Yes, the entire set will have to be re-analyzed. BM doesn't understand how to randomize the samples, therefore she insists that it's not important.

As furious as I am, I would not want to be in BarMinion's shoes tomorrow. I cannot even begin to imagine how angry Road Runner will be with her. BarMinion wasted at least a week's worth of instrument time, setting us even farther behind, just due to sheer stubbornness. Of course, I will have to be extra vigilant, because BarMinion will now be on the lookout for some way to make me look bad.

She will have a long and frustrating wait if she wants to make you look bad. I'm not sure BM has the brains to do it.

OK now I feel loved - I have acquired that "no-message message" in my inbox!

ArkieDukie wrote:As the Bunsen Burns...

Today is one of those days when I want to strangle BarMinion. We're working on a huge experiment in which we are quantifying protein differences between 37 samples. They are being analyzed in sets of 3 samples plus a control, and they're analyzed in triplicate and block randomized within each set. In other words, you have 3 blocks in each set containing one of each sample in the set, and the run order for the samples is randomized within each block. It's an important thing to do so you can show that any changes are not due to instrument drift. If you do the math, that gives 12 sets of 3 samples with 1 remainder. It takes a HUGE amount of instrument time to run all the samples.

Today I had occasion to look at the set with the extra sample. Rather than re-randomizing to add one replicate of the new sample to each block, BarMinion added all 3 replicates for the additional sample to the end of the set. Yes, the entire set will have to be re-analyzed. BM doesn't understand how to randomize the samples, therefore she insists that it's not important.

As furious as I am, I would not want to be in BarMinion's shoes tomorrow. I cannot even begin to imagine how angry Road Runner will be with her. BarMinion wasted at least a week's worth of instrument time, setting us even farther behind, just due to sheer stubbornness. Of course, I will have to be extra vigilant, because BarMinion will now be on the lookout for some way to make me look bad.

So did RR blow up at BM?

Both of the children got a clean bill of health at the V-E-T this morning. They both got their shots updated. I need to take a home equity line of credit to pay the bill.

Oh, well. They are a whole lot cheaper than my stepdaughter.

lawgrad91 wrote:Both of the children got a clean bill of health at the V-E-T this morning. They both got their shots updated. I need to take a home equity line of credit to pay the bill.

Oh, well. They are a whole lot cheaper than my stepdaughter.

Good to hear all is well with the dogs. The Vet visits can mount up that is for sure.

Wizard just got his last ever rabbies shot (he is 10, and FL allows the 5 year ) Dylan gets no vacinations (he is 15) and Jes. got rabbies because I have to and titers for everything else...all good to go. It saves a bundle.

I get my heartworm meds etc from canada (canandavet.com) much much cheaper. - and blow everything i save on ultra premium dog food and raw food

lawgrad91 wrote:Both of the children got a clean bill of health at the V-E-T this morning. They both got their shots updated. I need to take a home equity line of credit to pay the bill.

Oh, well. They are a whole lot cheaper than my stepdaughter.

Hip hip hurrah - they are healthy kids!

Max, Dawn and Mark are coming today. Max is going to Duke Elite Baseball Camp today. He checks in at 5:00. He is so excited, as we are. Baseball is his best sport. The camp ends Wednesday. They will play 4 games. Bud and I will be there for all of them.

I have a pork butt on the grill. It's looking good. I slit it through the fat down to the meat and put garlic cloves in last night, then did a rub. I am doing bake potatoes, then cut them in half, bast with olive oil oregano, sea salt, red peppers and garlic. I will then put them on the grill to brown some. I have done this before and liked them. I have made a salad and will have corn on the cob and garlic bread. I love to cook. I keep the kitchen cleaned up. After dinner, I do not like to clean up I don't have to very ofter. I love Bud.

Hey car buffs:

I was getting gas at Sheetz on Friday and I noticed a sign over the pump that read "Sheetz. 100% gas guaranteed." There's a sticker on the pump that says, "10% ethanol."

Um, those two things are incongruous, right? Forgive my ignorance, but I don't think Sheetz gives 110%.

lawgrad91 wrote:Hey car buffs:

I was getting gas at Sheetz on Friday and I noticed a sign over the pump that read "Sheetz. 100% gas guaranteed." There's a sticker on the pump that says, "10% ethanol."

Um, those two things are incongruous, right? Forgive my ignorance, but I don't think Sheetz gives 110%.

I'm not a big fan of ethanol in my gasoline either, mainly because it decreases fuel economy. It has also been a large amount of $$ for the farmers, too (IIRC), as subsidies for corn production at the expense of production of other food grains that could be used by the consumers at the dinner table, therefore leading to significant price increases for breads, cereal, etc. But that might be a PP discussion .

Resurrecting LTE. It's been 6 days since the last post.

devildeac wrote:

lawgrad91 wrote:Hey car buffs:

I was getting gas at Sheetz on Friday and I noticed a sign over the pump that read "Sheetz. 100% gas guaranteed." There's a sticker on the pump that says, "10% ethanol."

Um, those two things are incongruous, right? Forgive my ignorance, but I don't think Sheetz gives 110%.

I'm not a big fan of ethanol in my gasoline either, mainly because it decreases fuel economy. It has also been a large amount of $$ for the farmers, too (IIRC), as subsidies for corn production at the expense of production of other food grains that could be used by the consumers at the dinner table, therefore leading to significant price increases for breads, cereal, etc. But that might be a PP discussion .

Hey, I could go PBB with you on this one, too. In a lot of ways, ethanol as fuel sounds like a great idea. I'm not sure that certain people though about the implications of such a move - exactly the one that you mentioned above. Here's another one: for those farmers who raise animals, land that was formerly used to produce grain for animal feed has now been converted over to raise fuel for ethanol. Feed costs have gone through the roof. So, if you have noticed an increase in the cost of eggs, for instance, there's the reason. This isn't something that most people would think of.

Sorry if I crossed the PP line.

Post 7000.

Very Duke Blue wrote:Post 7000.

Congratulations!

I am so tired!

Very Duke Blue wrote:Post 7000.

ArkieDukie wrote:

devildeac wrote:

lawgrad91 wrote:Hey car buffs:

I was getting gas at Sheetz on Friday and I noticed a sign over the pump that read "Sheetz. 100% gas guaranteed." There's a sticker on the pump that says, "10% ethanol."

Um, those two things are incongruous, right? Forgive my ignorance, but I don't think Sheetz gives 110%.

I'm not a big fan of ethanol in my gasoline either, mainly because it decreases fuel economy. It has also been a large amount of $$ for the farmers, too (IIRC), as subsidies for corn production at the expense of production of other food grains that could be used by the consumers at the dinner table, therefore leading to significant price increases for breads, cereal, etc. But that might be a PP discussion .

Hey, I could go PBB with you on this one, too. In a lot of ways, ethanol as fuel sounds like a great idea. I'm not sure that certain people though about the implications of such a move - exactly the one that you mentioned above. Here's another one: for those farmers who raise animals, land that was formerly used to produce grain for animal feed has now been converted over to raise fuel for ethanol. Feed costs have gone through the roof. So, if you have noticed an increase in the cost of eggs, for instance, there's the reason. This isn't something that most people would think of.

Sorry if I crossed the PP line.

Is the government not still paying farmers to keep millions of acres fallow? I always thought THAT was where they should go. Pay the farmers to grow ethanol corn there.

Lavabe wrote:I am so tired!

That's what the "good night" thread is for. ;)

Very Duke Blue wrote:

Lavabe wrote:I am so tired!

That's what the "good night" thread is for. ;)