I see, to be honest I have not checked how clean it actually is. It is visually transparent, as opposed to the used one, but you are probably correct.

What I do is just expose the dirty isopropanol to sun or UV in general - the resin will precipitate. Then just filter it out and you have clean isopropanol.

Ja używam albo mapy.cz albo ViewRanger

It’s absolutely not. Median is a value in the middle of a sorted set and average is, well, average. In the set of 1, 7, 10: 7 is median and 6 is average.

That is only sort of true - this image is not made of electrons reflected by the nuclei. These are results from TEM imaging, so Transmission Electron Microscopy. The electron detector is placed behind the sample.

What you are describing is SEM - Scanning Electron Microscopy - in that case, the detector can be placed above the sample, for example (but not limited to) circularly around the beam to measure the backscattered electrons

In TEM the samples are cut into very thin slices (in the picture you posted it is said to be between 0.8nm - 30nm) and the crystal lattice acts as a diffraction grating for the electron beam. The diffraction pattern can be then used to reconstruct the crystal lattice structure.

My point was that if they would be trying to forge the results, they would likely write a better paper. Like, I have never seen nor would I use a phrase like:

Humankind has long learned that the properties of matter stem from its structure.

or

It is the superconductor with the same color as typical superconductors.

in the results section. It just reads like a student report.

So while it does not prove whether it is correct or not, it, at least in my understanding, indicates that it is genuine. The explanation might be off, the important step of the synthesis might include adding a teaspoon of luck, but the observations/measurements part I believe. Which is what I meant by the comment.

Climate Town tackled carbon capture very well in this video. In short, hardcore greenwashing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BwP2mSZpe0Q

Considering the two studies which claim that no effect was observed, I believe the original authors observed the effect but they don’t fully understand the origin.

The original paper is so naively unprofessional in some places that it is really hard for me to think it is not genuine.

say whaaaat. I wanna see it reproduced, but if true this is huge.

As always depends where you live. I live in Frankfurt am Main and travel to my parents in Poland who live in a 3k village with a train. One change in Berlin, one in Poland in a smaller city to a very local train which takes me to 4km from their home, where they finally do pick me up with a car.

With a car it would take at least 12h (been there, done that when I moved), similar amount of money for gas and I would have to take a day off from work, which I don’t have to do on the train, because I work remotely on the way. I can also shit without stopping or eat on the train if I have a fancy. How is this inconvenient?

I made trips to Italy, France, Austria, Romania and ofc Poland with trains. And at least half of them were to not urbanized areas at all (for example France was to Port-en-Royans, population 817 people, when I got off around 5km from destination) and the only inconvenience is that you need some effort with planning.