What you describe as being a bad dog owner and "an idiot" is what others describe as fostering, which can involve taking car of a pet for months at a time before they are adopted out to another family. It depends a lot on the animal, but some benefit from exposure to more people and homes instead of fewer.

And return policies with shelters is always been a important thing to discuss when adopting, because it can sometimes take quite a while to figure out how the pet will behave. I've seen animals that take a couple months to settle in enough to show their normal behavior, at which point it can take a couple more months to see how trainable/malleable that behavior is. Outside of more definitive cases, it is very easy to spend 6 or more months before finding out that your newest pet is not going to be compatible with kids or other pets. It is also easy for the shelter to not be able to foresee this without taking care of the animal in an actual home environment for some time (... e.g. fostering it for a couple months).

I don't think there is enough info in the story to say what type of pet owners they were. You can't tell if they neglected and ignored the dog or spent that time unsuccessfully trying to socialize and train it.

The Mormons used a beehive symbol for the proposed state of Deseret (bigger version of Utah) in 1849, and it looks like a beehive ended up on the coat of arms from the start of the Utah territory in 1850.

The map just skips over nicknames for most of the territories (except Idaho and New Mexico).

I'm guessing you're making a stab at plastic magnifying glasses, as they typically have lower magnification and/or more abberation. But they still work fine at burning things and will start fires. It is a lot easier to get a large Fresnel lens than it used to be.

The problem with magnifying glasses, as in all of them, old or new, small or big, can't ever make a spot hotter than the surface of the Sun using just sunlight.

Daphnis is tidally locked to Saturn, so the "wavelength" you propose would be the size of the orbit.

The moon pulls stuff in the ring toward it, but the material in the ring is orbiting slightly slower or faster, so eventually one moves past the other. The wave structure comes from the material being pulled back to the plane of the ring by the gravity of the ring, and its wavelength would depend upon the strength of that force.

I am sorry, but I don't understand as I think that video has zero relevance to what I am talking about. Equipment sanitization for brewing is rather different than sanitizing your hands. You're cleaning an inorganic material that can take pretty harsh treatment vs. trying to kill stuff at the same time as protecting your hands and immune system. With brewing you're trying to stop stuff that can out compete the yeast vs. trying to stop stuff that can make you sick.

The video talks a lot about triclosan, but the sanitizers I've seen for food and brewing equipment don't use this. Food and brewing santizers, at least ones I've seen, iodine, phosphoric acid, chlorine, or ammonia based. Bacteria don't seem to develop much, if any resistance to simple inorganic agents like these, especially when you can use them concentrations way beyond survivable because we're not talking about something that has to be compatible with the human body (it does have to disappear/break down before filling with wort though).

Equipment santization is also not a substitute for washing the equipment. Plastic can have a lot of surface structure, cracks, and crannies that can be difficult to remove all biological materials from and end up potentially being reservoirs of bacteria that thorough scrubbing will not reach. But you still need to scrub to remove as much bulk contamination as possible.

Having both a cleaning and a santizing process is standard in food industries. Some of these processes are similar to what is done in medical and biological research (especially for things that can't be autoclaved). Brewing doesn't need perfect sanitization, as once the yeast gets going it can often out compete bacteria, but the threshold of "good enough" can sometimes be further than people expect. I've been involved in more than one brewing club, so I've watched other's learning curves in addition to my own.

If you want to stick to just soap, that is your choice. But for people new to brewing, using an easy to use, off the shelf sanitizer can go a long ways fixing beginner mistakes or slacking. Otherwise it is very discouraging to some people to wait a month or two and create something undrinkable.

The fact that triclosan based sanitizers can cause problems with bacteria resistance, mess with the human immune system and is not a substitute for hand washing or otherwise ineffective is irrelevant to brewing sanitation.

This is one of the sickest and perverse abuse of children you've seen in a long time? Either you've avoided reading news for a long time, or you're hiding behind some pretty big hyperbole. I'm not trying to make a case that this is good or bad, but even with the worst interpretation for this, there are far worse things happening to kids quite all too frequently.

In my experience, dish soap certainly is not good enough, especially on plastic. Bleach dilute is pretty effective, but takes a lot of effort to use it without affecting the flavor or messing up the sanitation getting rid of the bleach. Other air dry sanitizes aren't that expensive per batch and are much more fool proof.

Bad sanitation in brewing is a gamble: sometimes you get good results, other times you get bad results (especially if you make other mistakes) and it can discourage a lot of people from trying again if they don't know what they did wrong. It also depends on where you live, as some places have flora that are much worse than other places.

And you'll potentially spend as much on sensitization supplies or failed batches. I think about half the people I know who attempted brewing gave up because they didn't sanitize properly and the results were undrinkable. It isn't difficult to do properly, but the required attention to details is a bit of a learning curve to some people.

Usually takes about $100-300 to get into beer brewing, depending on what stuff you have on hand already in terms of heat source, large pot, and bottling supplies. But a lot of that is for the cooking and carbonation. Yet I know people who keep buying the disposable kits because they don't care if they could save a little money with more effort.

1 tsp across 40+ cups is about twice what you would just get from softened water or half of what you would get from milk.

In this case it actually is archaic, used in rather canonical past English works, e.g. in the King James Bible and by Shakespeare. There is a rather big difference between incorrect and archaic.