well I guess one could argue that politics boils down to applied ethics, or lack thereof.
No!! There is no such molecule that is just a string of H's (hydrogen). Atleast not in biochemistry...Water is an oxygen atom bounded to two hydrogen atoms...hence H2O. surely you've heard that before?? In the video, it was portrayed as a bunch of H's. Which is fine for the sake of the video, he was just showing it as a hydrogen source for plants to synthesize their food (sugar- which was also drawn incorrectly as a hydrocarbon). When in reality, it should be a bunch of individual water molecules. And sugar has the form CxH2xOx- usually glucose where x = 6. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glucose- look at the second picture, gray is carbon, red is oxygen, white is hydrogen)
The energy from the sunlight causes the water to disassociate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photodissociation#Photolysis_in_photosynthesis). This is portrayed with two water molecules, thus 2 H2O molecules joined together via intermolecular forces is split into 4 hydrogen atoms (which is what I think the creator was trying to illustrate-but they do not bind together) and molecular oxygen (O2) that is released by the plant. Those 4 hydrogen atoms then bond with two molecules to form CH2O + H2O. There's acfually more convoluted chemical processes in this step (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photosynthesis#Light-independent_reactions) but geez I think I'm getting overly technical here... Note that CH2O is just a general formula for sugar...not the chemical formula itself...as CH2O is formaldehyde a highly carcinogenic compound LOL!! oh oops...getting a bit off tangent. I was supposed to just cover the structures of molecules in photosynthesis, not the actual process but I get carried away with anything biology or public health related...As long as you know a plant (even some microbes too!!) take in carbon dioxide (a metabolic waste product released by all organisms, including plants themselves...they aren't like AXECOP whose metabolic processes are always 100% efficient- he's never pooped in his life!!) and water, and use sunlight to ultimately produce sugar/carbohydrates for themselves, and release oxygen (and some water- but more water is absorbed by the plant in the process than released in healthy plants) for other organisms to breathe...ergo the cycle of life continues.
S3C
I see you have found a new member to educational grounds: http://normchipmunkiii.newgrounds.com/
it's for a middle school audience, and I consider this more of a late teens-adult site, but it's encouraging nonetheless, but tbh I didn't know sh*t about chemistry and biology or science in general as teen and young adult, I was more invested in music, politics, and women (to a larger degree) at the time LOL
re: your review on matter and atoms- hmm, there should always be some type of disclaimer when trying to simplify scientific events...but for the sake of communicating to a young or novice audience, I don't see anything wrong with a planetary model that shows electrons orbiting the nucleus...while orbiting is the fundamentally incorrect action, electrons do exist outside and around the nucleus. To explain the more accurate motion of subatomic particles would require quantum physics...which can be demonstrated by non mathematical Mickey Mouse terms at a high school level, but perhaps not a more fundamental level at middle school.
Doomroar
Oh when you are young chemistry is a pain in the everything, specially counting electrons, valance, configuration, man i swear, it was only until recently that i remember how cool chemistry actually was and i got to open back to it, but my teacher got me traumatized with those ugly ass tables, well as a teen i was interested in music, art, and i avoided politics like hell, people were getting killed over shit back in the day from 2005 to 2010, the state labeled everyone who disagreed as a guerrilla sympathizer, luckily things calmed down, but still is not like we are far from that day, maybe that is why i am more interested on ethics than politics themselves.
Yeah, i agree but this is also a good time to start debunking wrong notions, actually your review on the newer vid covered more critical things, didn't knew that water was a string of H without O at all, man i have to actualize myself!