Slashdot Mirror

I heard about this on NPR yesterday. The researcher said we smelled in stereo. They proved it by plugging up one nostril at a time and then attaching a device so that both nostrils could smell in mono. The test subjects took far longer to find stuff. He also said one people got attuned to smelling a trail they were limited to the speed at which they could crawl.

Richard Feynman did a number of smell experiments with his first wife, Arlene. He would leave the room and she would handle bottles and books then he'd return and see if he could determine which ones she'd touched. He was able to find them. It's detailed in Surely Your Joking, Mr. Feynman .

There! And I didn't make any smelling cracks about misunderestimating or Uranus or "once you get past the smell it tastes all right".

My realization on this came a few weeks ago when listening to some random news in the morning (NPR), and hearing a report reffer to Bush as "Mr. Bush" repeatedly. It sorta stuck in my head, it was the only time I can remember a reporter calling a sitting prez "Mr. *****" instead of "President *****", even when they were from the opposite side of the political fence (Fox to a dem, NPR to a Repub, etc).

When the Constitution was drafted, the president was specifically not meant to be a monarch or figurehead of extreme distinction. My understanding is that the honorific "Mister" has always been acceptable for a president, sitting or otherwise.

But here is what NPR has to say on the matter:

The title, such as "President," "Mr." or "Ms.", in front of a name is called an honorific. NPR uses the honorific "President" on first reference and then "Mr." for all subsequent mentions. This has been NPR's style going back at least to the Ford administration. Most other broadcasters have the same policy. It also makes for better writing to vary the honorific.

Newspapers seem to have a different standard. For some reason, the president is usually referred to as "President Bush" or "the president," on first reference. But the honorific is rarely used on second reference. And in newspaper headlines particularly, the solitary "Bush" is often seen.

The president is the only person who -- by decree and tradition at NPR -- gets the honorific. All others who are mentioned in news reports are usually referred to by their title or occupation on first reference ("Jane Doe is a reporter for The New York Times..."). After that, it's surnames only.

Kasparov was on NPR's All Things Considered a while ago, and spoke about his move into politics. Here is a link to the interview.

Very interesting. Just a couple weeks ago NPR had an interview with three doctors about how the body's inflammation response is turning out to play a much larger role in diseases then previously thought. link

Sometimes stuff dies.
Marginalizing an important issue like biodiversity is fun isn't it?

This is /. where software monoculture is almost universally agreed is a Bad Thing(r).

It stands to reason a biologic monoculture carries with it even more dire consequences than software. Our best interests are served to ensure there are as many species as possible walking/crawling/swimming around.

Let me give you an example. Bees. The American commercial bee population is a monoculture. In California the central valley bee population has been decimated by a disease that the bee keepers can no longer control. Guess what? No tree nut harvest. How about the other plants that bees pollinate? http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?story Id=6299480

Now, what happens when it's cows or corn? Rice? Wheat? Please re-examine this belief carefully and mod parent down.

Ummm...this guy wants to:
Build Your Own Universe

Well, in Jefferson Parish, you're tasered until you fall to the ground, then your beaten with the clubs until you need facial reconstruction surgery. Then the cops take your drugs and leave you convulsing softly and bleeding in the street. Say what you will, but it keeps the blacks out of our perfect shitpeople "city" (David Duke's former congressional district). If they had a new piece of technology that made people feel like they were on fire, but left no scars... they'd probably just set up a battery of them along the 17th street canal and fire them at New Orleans.

Hail King Lee, may the fat fucker be rotated slowly on a spit for all eternity. Or maybe he's just carrying on the legacy of Jefferson Parish Race Relations.

Offtopic, I realize. I just fucking hate cops, growing up where I did.

http://download.npr.org/anon.npr-mp3/atc/atc_teenb uzz.mp3

Interesting. In Quicktime it sounds different than in Winamp. Even in Winamp, it is different with the equalizer on and off (set to "laptop speaker/headphones" setting). Even then, it is different with and without the earphones on my laptop. Which settings should the test be at? Sometimes I can hear it and other times I can't. I'm only 25, BTW.

If it's a choice between a loudspeaker saying "you guys need to leave here" and this, well, then I'd rather have the loudspeaker.

There is a middle ground - you could always have the loudspeaker play this. (If you can't hear this, then you're probably over 30. I'm 36, and I can't hear it. It annoys the @$#! out of those who can hear it, though. I have it bookmarked. :D )

If it's a choice between a loudspeaker saying "you guys need to leave here" and this, well, then I'd rather have the loudspeaker.

Before people start saying this is obvious proof of Putin's guilt, stop and think about it. Why would anyone EVER use polonium to kill someone? Radioactive substances are probably the one of the most controlled substances in the world, with only a relatively small number of places they can even be produced. I can think of fewer weapons that would leave such an obvious trail.

If someone wanted only to kill this Litivinenko to silence him, or for revenge, or whatever, there are a million easier and more convert ways to do it. Poisons that are just as effective and less traceable, bullets, hell even a car bomb would have been better. The fact that someone went to all the trouble of using polonium to do the deed makes this either a well funded and stupid assassin, or a well funded assassin whose true ends are much more complicated than simply killing a retired KGB man.

Leland,

Looks to me like you are comparing heavily sourced material, to the delusional ramblings of a sick man.

Good Luck with your PhD!

Well, they gave you a few examples in the article, viz.:

(1) To let states jam cell-phone communications in state prisons, so that prisoners can't make unmonitored calls to the outside. Here is an NPR story on the surprising number of cell phones smuggled into prisons and their sometimes unfortunate uses. From the article:

In several criminal cases, inmates have used cell phones to run gangs operating outside of prison, to put hits out on people, to organize drug-smuggling operations and, in one case, trade gold bullion on international markets.

Er...speaking as a citizen juror, I don't much care about cons trading gold bullion from inside the pen, ha ha, but the idea that putting away a drug gang kingpin won't affect his ability to run his gang at all is a bit...disturbing.

(2) To let police jam cell phones during a raid, so that, for example, any lookouts posted won't be able to communicate back to headquarters and tip off the targest of the raid. This is elementary warfighting: you certainly jam the enemy's communications during an operation if you can, because surprise reduces casualties all around. I hope you agree that significant criminal enterprises qualify as an 'enemy' against whom we'd like the police to take action. (That is, I hope you don't think the police shouldn't be able to conduct effective raids at all. Whether they should conduct them more carefully, or only with greater justification is, of course, an unrelated separate question.)

The business about blocking bombs is a bit of a bogus red herring, agreed, but if you read the article you'll see it was the journalist that raised this point, and not the people who make the jamming equipment. They only talked about the use of the equipment in police raids and so forth. It was the (typically, sensation-seeking) newsman who decided to write about cell phones and bombs.

On the other hand, the point of the 1934 Communications Act is not as silly as the jamming equipment maker suggests: clearly the Commerce Act gives Congress the power to regulate radio communication, as very little is more interstate than radio. Furthermore, it makes sense (or at least made sense in 1934) to prohibit every state and dinky locality from making its own separate (and probably conflicting) rules about who can jam radio signals, and when and how. It would lead to a cacaphony, a completely unworkeable patchwork of regulation of the radio spectrum. (For similar reasons, the use of international-range radio is subject to several important international treaties.)

However, those were the days when "radio" typically only meant HF, long radio waves that could at least go a few hundred miles, if not several thousand. I doubt there was much thought given to the modern situation, where we have millions of low-powered radios (e.g. cell phones) operating at very high frequencies, with ranges of a mile or two at most, and networks of repeaters to help the signal get around. So there are, indeed, good arguments that this is a situation not anticipated by Congress in 1934, and some kind of review of the Communications Act makes sense. Maybe state and local jurisdictions should be allowed to deploy jamming equipment the way they see fit, if it's only going to have any effect within the jurisdiction. It's hard, after all, to see why Pittsburgh's City Council shouldn't be able to make the rules for jamming cell phones within the city limits -- and the Feds should.

Presumably this cell-jammer maker hopes to prod Congress into revisiting the Communications Act by this suit, which otherwise seems hopeless on the merits. (There's no way the Act can be unconstitutional merely because the Homeland Security Act can be interpreted as contradicting it. Courts are required to read legislation in such a way as to minimize conflicts. Hence if it's at all possible to read the Homeland Security Act in such a way that it doesn't conflict with the Communications Act -- and I'm sure it is -- then that's the way the Courts have to interpret it.)

NPR did a report on this today as well.

Care to post a link? Thanks.sure.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?story Id=6203264

My own portfolio is a bit simpler. UK index linked mutual fund, developing country mutual fund, government bonds, commodities (gold silver), housing stocks. Basically about 20% in each sector. Try to spread your portfolio over several sectors which don't all go in the same direction at the same time.

The strategy is simple but it's the important bit because it stops you buying at the top of the market. It's called rebalancing.

Every month add the £100 (or however much you want to invest) to one of the categories. You choose the category by taking an average of how much you've invested so far, divided over the categories. Say after a year you've invested £1200,the average which in my case should be in every category is about £240. But the market goes up and down so some sectors will be doing badly, they'll be below the average, some will be above the average. Well, the whole idea is to buy low, sell high, yeah? You invest your next £100 into the sector in your portfolio which is the furthest below the average, so topping it up. This way you're always buying into a sector when it's low, not high.

Sit down once a month with a spreadsheet (or calculator, it really isn't that hard) and work out where to put the money this month. You spread the risk over 5 or however many categories/stocks you want to take, when the markets change direction, as they inevitably do, your cheaply bought investments will go up most and you are not putting your money into expensive top of a peak stocks.

It's simple and it works, as mentioned in the link the pros do it on a minute by minute basis rather than on a month by month basis (and they sell as well as buy) but I'm really not that interested in finance, and I don't need to be interested or knowledgeable. I'm beating 10% per year for an hour a month.

Oh and always stick the monthly £100 into a single category, don't try to spread it because fees etc will be minimised.

Synopsis:

How does the very American activity of considering as many different choices as possible affect our satisfaction when we finally make a decision? Does more choice make us happier? Columbia University professor Sheena Iyengar is challenging the assumption that more is better; she argues that the more choices we have, the less happy we are.

Because standardized testing NEVER existed before the Bush administration. Seriously, though I don't disagree with you, I remember taking standardized tests years and years before Bush's reign of stupid began.

Nice strawman. Standardized testing certainly existed, but No Child Left Behind takes the idea to an absurd level, and goes to the extent of financially punishing schools that don't meet its requirements. Now, combine that with the fact that the act is only funded ~50% (which parent poster mentioned, btw) and you have an educational disaster.

It forces test score goals on schools, then doesn't give them the money to meet those goals. What the hell do you think is going to happen? Why do you think the state of Connecticut is suing the Federal government over it? Do some critical thinking, man.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?story Id=1216161

Article: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?story Id=6512617&ft=2&f=1095

Uh, better watch the smack talk, there are more Wii's on eBay than PS3s...

Yeah, but that's cause there were five times as many Wii consoles sold on release day.

Unlike the PS3 lines, where National Public Radio couldn't find more than 5 percent of people who had pre-ordered consoles that hadn't sold them or put them up for auction, most of the people in line to get the Wii consoles intended to play them.

And spent until today doing just that.

It was on the radio yesterday morning.

This I Believe: There is no God by Penn Jillette

He says it better than I've ever heard it before. And he's right.

Science Friday on NPR ran a segment on Bigfoot just a couple of weeks ago. Apparently, Bigfoot is plausible as a real creature. I'm not one of those "believers" either, and I was a bit upset when I looked at the title of the podcast, but Dr. Meldrum makes a compelling argument for the existence of Bigfoot.

There Is No God by Penn Jillette

what happened to all the stories of businesses dumping this type of waste in rural China?

Then we have massive problems such as this.
'Rural China' does not equal uninhabited. Someone is going to take that stuff apart for the valuable bits. And leave the rest to rot.

Go to it, boys and girls! http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?story Id=6466901

in a recent story on NPR where Pres. Carter is talking about the recent elections in Nicaragua (where they use paper ballots) he was asked if the US needed the same kind of election monitoring that his organization, the Carter Center, was conducting there. His reply is quite interesting:

"... there's no doubt in my mind that the United States electoral system is severely troubled and has many faults in it. It would not qualify at all for instance for participation by the Carter Center in observing. ..."

This is coming from a former US president (albeit one that is greatly vilified by the GOP--if only he was an actor or cheerleader we would think he was a good president).

see http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?story Id=6439233&sc=emaf&sc=emaf for transcript and link to the audio.

---
Oh yeah, I voted absentee since at least there is some paper trail (though not entirely unproblematic).

Maybe it's time for a little electoral reform. If our system existed anywhere else but the USofA, we would call it corrupt. It is just way to easy to abuse. Jimmy Carter just monitored the election in Nicaragua. As far as the election monitors could tell, it was pretty much honestly run. Those same election monitors would likely refuse to monitor our election. The main reason is that the election is not run nationally. It is run at the county level. There is no overall authority which has the responsibility for preventing abuse and making sure the results are honest.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?story Id=6439233
Here's a quote from the Carter interview:
"But there's no doubt in my mind that the United States electoral system is severely troubled and has many faults in it. It would not qualify at all for instance for participation by the Carter Center in observing. We require for instance that there be uniform voting procedures throughout an entire nation. In the United States you've got not only fragmented from one state to another but also from one county to another. There is no central election commission in the United States that can make final judgment. It's a cacophony of voices that come in after the election is over with, thousands or hundreds of lawyers contending with each other. There's no uniformity in the nation at all. There's no doubt that that there's severe discrimination against poor people because of the quality of voting procedures presented to them. Another thing in the United States that we wouldn't permit in a country other than the United States is that we require that every candidate in a country in which we monitor the elections have equal access to the major news media, regardless of how much money they have. In the United States, as you know, it's how much advertising you can by on television and radio. And so the richest candidates prevail, and unless a candidate can raise sometimes hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars, they can't even hope to mount a campaign, so the United States has a very inadequate election procedure."

This is worse than fighting random wars? I don't hear about this telescope killing a few dozen Americans per week.

Please. We must support the troops. If you don't stand with them, you stand against them.

The $14M spent on Arecibo could be spent to support the troops in Iraq. Sure, some of that spending doesn't actually go over to Iraq, but that ignores the way things get done in our system. Without proper motivation, our national leadership is unable to focus on getting the job done.

It is cut and runners like you who are sap our legislative will to fight. Democrats know how sensitive Republicans are to criticism. Congress would have done better, if it weren't for unpatriotic people who don't support our troops.

But we shall stay the course: freedom is on the march.

All eight were tried on charges stemming from a massacre of Shiites from the town of Dujail. When Saddam visited there in 1982 gunmen attempted to assassinate him. In response thousands of men, women, and children were sent to detention camps, huge swathes of farms and groves were destroyed, and 148 men and boys were sentenced to death by Bandar's Revolutionary Court. 46 of those sentenced were tortured to death before they ever reached a courtroom. Some of those sentenced were as young as 11, they were held until they turned 18 and then killed.

Saddam Hussein personally signed documents ordering the killing of 148 Shia villagers in Dujail, handwriting experts have concluded.....

At earlier hearings, Saddam Hussein acknowledged signing execution orders, saying it was his duty as president of Iraq. But he later appeared to dispute their authenticity.

Saddam is due to appear for a routine hearing on Tuesday of his second trial, for genocide against ethnic Kurds in 1988. In the meantime, he is held by the U.S. military at Camp Cropper, part of the U.S. base at Baghdad airport. The five judges in the Dujail case are expected also to publish the detailed, unanimous ruling, running to some 200 to 300 pages. It is eagerly awaited by international jurists keen to judge how the court performed.

The GOP is losing ground because they deserve to lose.

Historically, the ruling party loses seats in the 6th year of a presidency. A loss of 40 seats is average. The projected loss of 15 is no big switch. America likes divided government. It is really only imperative that the GOP keep the Senate so that it can continue to stock the supreme court with conservative justices.

It starts at the top, and all the way down they are rotten. The sheer number of scandals is a very good inidcator that they need to gut the party and remove the cancers from within.

Yes, scandals like this, and this turn my stomach.

Yes, I can't wait to see who

With vaudvillians like Kerry, Dean, and Hillary loose in the land I expect YouTube to stay well stocked!

I had to laugh at an NPR interview yesterday with Howard Dean's campaign manager, who's also the author of a book on how the web is changing everything blah blah blah. He went on about how YouTube, MySpace, etc. have changed everything since 2004 blah blah blah, without once mentioning that his client in 2004 was taken out by a video of him bloviating after the Iowa caucuses, but that the video of Dean's war dance was instantly available on-line (which is where I first saw it), even though YouTube was still a glimmer in some PayPal programmer's eye at the time. Everything changed? Not really, Dean was removed from contention in 2004 in much the same way Allen was removed in 2006, by shooting his mouth off in front of a video camera.

I was listening to NPR this morning and they had a story about Tickle-Me Elmo Extreme dolls selling out in Texas before the store opened because they handed out makeshift place coupons to the people that camped out. Some people purchased them for resale on e-bay. One woman had driven 300 miles from Mexico to find out that they were all sold out when she arrived at opening - had she known they would be camping out she would have done so too.

So, Mr. Samuel, it's not strictly a game console phenomenon.

The following interview with Ralph Girkins, the owner of Universal Tubes, was broadcast on Marketplace - a segment in National Public Radio http://www.npr.org/. A transcript is available at http://marketplace.publicradio.org/shows/2006/10/1 3/PM200610134.html. Makes for interesting readin and definitely changes many of the assumptions that people are making regarding the kind of business he is trying to run. And you can definitely glean his frustration from his comments, at the lack of cooperation from Google/Youtube. So, why not go the American way? Sue sue sue!

I can't find mention of it anywhere, but has NPR acknowledged that they have a stake in the XM vs Sirius race? The national NPR feed is only available on Sirius.

You are wrong. Ads are distinctly louder than the content you are trying to watch.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?story Id=5632678

"Effective government depends on accurate, honest and timely advice from scientists and engineers. Science demands an open, transparent process of review and access to the best scholars from around the nation and the world. Mistakes dangerous to the nation's welfare and security have been made when governments prevent scientists from presenting the best evidence and analysis. Americans should demand that all candidates support the following Bill of Rights [...]"

That wasn't Powell, it was supposedly Richard Armitage, Deputy Secretary of State, and he denies saying it.

From the NPR Story"

Instead, Armitage says, he told Pakistan's top intelligence official on Sept. 12, 2001, that Pakistan would have to decide if it were "with us or against us" in the American effort to confront al-Qaida and the Taliban.

"It would be completely out of character for me to threaten the use of military force when I was not authorized to do so," Armitage says. "I don't command aircraft and could not make good on such a threat."

I heard a story on NPR perhaps a couple of years ago about a group of people who were creating brand new 78 rpm records of current music. The reason was for preservaton because a 78 RPM records is apparently extrememly easy to play even without much technology.

Here is one article. And another article from a right wing perspective, and yet another article from the left side of the aisle. Then there's this and this and this, too.

Any more objections?

Oh and about their prisoner harvesting?
http://www.american.edu/TED/prisonorgans.htm
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?story Id=1125056
http://educate-yourself.org/cn/harvestingorgansinc hina30mar06.shtml
http://www.guardian.co.uk/china/story/0,,1756808,0 0.html
http://www.rense.com/general10/org.htm

Thank you very much and have a nice day.

Many conspiracy theorists point to FEMA's preliminary report, which said there was relatively light damage to WTC 7 prior to its collapse. With the benefit of more time and resources, NIST researchers now support the working hypothesis that WTC 7 was far more compromised by falling debris than the FEMA report indicated. "The most important thing we found was that there was, in fact, physical damage to the south face of building 7," NIST's Sunder tells PM. "On about a third of the face to the center and to the bottom--approximately 10 stories--about 25 percent of the depth of the building was scooped out." NIST also discovered previously undocumented damage to WTC 7's upper stories and its southwest corner.

NIST investigators believe a combination of intense fire and severe structural damage contributed to the collapse, though assigning the exact proportion requires more research. But NIST's analysis suggests the fall of WTC 7 was an example of "progressive collapse," a process in which the failure of parts of a structure ultimately creates strains that cause the entire building to come down. Videos of the fall of WTC 7 show cracks, or "kinks," in the building's facade just before the two penthouses disappeared into the structure, one after the other. The entire building fell in on itself, with the slumping east side of the structure pulling down the west side in a diagonal collapse.

According to NIST, there was one primary reason for the building's failure: In an unusual design, the columns near the visible kinks were carrying exceptionally large loads, roughly 2000 sq. ft. of floor area for each floor. "What our preliminary analysis has shown is that if you take out just one column on one of the lower floors," Sunder notes, "it could cause a vertical progression of collapse so that the entire section comes down."

I highly recommend the rest of the web article, or the book Debunking 9/11 Myths - Why conspiracy theories can't stand up to the facts, by Popular Mechanics.

The 9/11 attacks were a conspiracy, one planned and executed by Al Qaeda, an Islamist extremist group, international in scope, that has been attacking the United States, and many other countries*, repeatedly since the early 1990s. They took credit for the 9/11 attacks. Video has found in Afghanistan showing Bin Laden had prior knowledge of the 9/11 attacks. Muhammad Atta's "martyrdom video" has just surfaced.

Al Qaeda's goal is to reestablish the Islamic super-state combining government and religion, the Caliphate, over the entire region, and to spread Islam to control the entire world. They understand that it will take hundreds of years, but are willing to do their part. You can see this in Bin Laden's letter to America where his first two demands are to convert to Islam, and implement Sharia... if we don't, they will keep killing us.

(Q2) As for the second question that we want to answer: What are we calling you to, and what do we want from you?

(1) The first thing that we are calling you to is Islam.....
(2) The second thing we call you to, is to stop your oppression, lies, immorality and debauchery that has spread among you......

(i) You are the nation who, rather than ruling by the Shariah of Allah in its Constitution and Laws, choose to invent your own laws as you will and desire. You separate religion from your pol

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?story Id=6160709

...why couldn't a weather man host a kids show now?

A typical academic library spends at least six figures to get the (free) Google News equivalent for peer-reviewed journals -- which usually charge to have their contents indexed -- in the form of subscription research databases... many of which don't even provide the full text of articles.

With the advent of Google Scholar and Microsoft Live Academic this may be changing (hopefully), but cases like this show its a constant tug of war between the profiteers and those that support the free distribution of information -- an old idea that would never get off the gound today.

What we need is mass media to be on our side, but until there is more of a profit incentive in that, I don't see it happening in the immediate (or distant for that matter) future.

That's why I listen to NPR and give regularly to my local station.

Also, obligatory to this story are the standard links, so people who are lazy don't have to type them in (note, you can open the link in a new window and not interrupt your slashdotting). If you got paid today, why not send $10 to:

Electronic Frontier Foundation
American Civil Liberties Union
Idealist.org - Other non-profits

Remember that as long as you only care about yourself and your recreation, the rest of the world is going to walk over you. You are here to do a job, so..do it.

Um... Notice how very few Israelis are actually disagreeing with that assesment? Victory isn't making piles of rubble. If you look at the larger picture, this was a victory for Hezbollah without a doubt.

There was no way Hezbollah, some rag-tag little militia, was supposed to be able to stand up the IDF.

What happened is that Israel got hit very hard. They lost a lot of soldiers, and worse a lot of tanks.

Hezbollah was able to fight the ground forces of Israel to a standstill,

Sure, Israel destroyed a lot of infrastructure with a little "shock and awe" air power. Doesn't really do much other than harm the citizenry and piss them off. In the end, Israel couldn't do what mattered, and that's occupy the land that was and still is controlled by Hezbollah.

Make no bones about it. Hezbollah lured Israel into a fight at the time and place of their choosing,

...handed Israel an unexpected spanking, and sent them packing without giving up much of anything.

At the strategic level, this was a stunning victory for Hezbollah and all the nations/groups that oppose Israel. It would be very foolish to view it otherwise.

gotta wonder if we'll see these street vendors at the next Body Worlds exhibit ;( http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?story Id=5553329

Real books don't go out of style with the newest version of the hardware and/or software.

Sure they do, they just have a much longer development cycle. This might be considered like 50s era tech.

At the end of the paper, Crick and Watson state "We are most indebted to Dr M.H.F. Wilkins both for informing us of unpublished experimental observations and for the benefit of numerous discussions."

Does that include Rosalyn Franklin's picture that Wilkins showed them without her permission?

Minutes was most likely an exaggeration. I'm still repeating what I've heard from scientific reports. The basic premise is:

http://exploreourpla.net/2006-08-16/greenlands-gla ciers-are-melting-faster.html
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=267
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?story Id=5298864

And if a large enough piece cracks off and falls into the ocean, we're all gonna die. Well, me, because I live in Florida. The problem with the ice in Greenland is that since the ice is on top of land, as it falls into the ocean, it drastically increases the ocean levels, whereas glacial mass already floating in the ocean only increases it slightly.

Anyway, regardless of who's smoking crack, search for greenland on this page:
http://www.climatecrisiscoalition.org/blog/?cat=2

if gay marriage was legalized how could you not then legalize 2 sisters getting married.

For the same reason you wouldn't have a brother and sister having sex and getting married - that is called incest. Incest is always wrong.

Although, siblings living together (in an non-incestuous manner) should be afforded the same rights and privileges as married couples and homosexual couples.