No, what causes disputes is a woman who sleeps with so many men that she cannot identify the father, or who sleeps with someone else and tries to trick a man into marrying her to take care of the child that the real father won't. Paternity tests only uncover the original unethical acts, it is not an unethical act in and of itself. It is those unethical acts that cause the disputes.
1. There is nothing specifically unethical in having multiple partners, as long as one discloses disease risks and there is not a presumption of monogamy. 2. Either biological parent may be interested in the results of a paternity test:
a) A man and woman may both know that there was more than one man with the woman, and all three (woman and at least 2 men) would have an interest in the outcome.
b) The female may wish to prove a man is involved when he denies a sexual relationship or claims contraceptive methods were adequate ("Can't be me, I wore a condom."). Also, a woman who bears a child from rape is still entitled to support even if the man is not convicted. This requires a paternity test.
c) A man may accuse a woman of having multiple partners and thus request a paternity test to attempt to show that he is not the father, proving her involvement with another man. Alternatively, a man may wish to prove that he is the father in a case when another man was involved with the woman near the time of conception, so as to prevent his child being raised by someone else.
This doesn't sequence the genome or expand it. It just collects the DNA from the sample. Real-time sequencing is what you are talking about, and that's still a long way off.
The gizmo is very cool, it takes a step that is the better part of an hour in the lab (depending on how many samples at a time you are running, and what the samples are) to something that is minutes, but it doesn't make the sequencing faster.
The most useful thing about it is that it is automated and potentially point-of-care. This means that instead of shipping bio-hazardous fluids or tissues all over the place, you can ship the extracted DNA (probably frozen or freeze dried).
I imagine that they started with a Brassica because it's one of the most common experimental plants, and there's more genetic information available on it vs. most houseplants. Proof of concept work is best done in a thoroughly understood system, and if you're adding a gene from another phylum, knowing a lot about the organism you are working with helps to control for some variables.
However, I love the idea of a hardier plant with high leaf area! (I admit to fanciful imaginings of a calm voice announcing, "In the event of a blackout, low level emergency lighting will be noticeable in street-side shrubbery.")
The de facto segregation via private schools still happens in Louisiana, and likely other southern states. Tuition has gone up and actively racist criteria have been diminished, so there are usually a few non-white kids... primarily from successful families that have moved to town rather than local families. Poor people of all colors are excluded, and African Americans in Louisiana are disproportionately impoverished, so it ends up being nearly as "effective" as the original system, but now churches profit (most of the private schools in LA are Catholic or some other Christian denomination).
Structurally, the liver is not that complex, and -- as previously mentioned -- has amazing regenerative capacity. Physiologically and biochemically, yes, individual hepatocytes have a phenomenal array of activities and functions. However, once you get hepatocytes developing in the liver scaffold, the fact that each of them is a marvel of biology is a moot point.
The liver's function is currently not something we can reproduce, but developing tech to regrow compatible livers en toto would solve the problem without having to address the 500+ functions you mention. I imagine it's progressing nicely.
The kidney is the opposite. We can artificially accomplish most of the function of a kidney (though it's horribly expensive an inconvenient), but the structure is a bit more complex than the liver (more varieties of specialized epithelium, for example, and the glomerulus is currently impossible to build) with very poor regenerative properties. Losing some liver usually means the organ grows some extra to replace the lost bit, losing some kidney generally does not.
Conveniently, by using scaffolding already built and seeding with cells that can differentiate into the appropriate types, we can sort of short-cut the necessity of trying to build either organ whole.
I've read notes on me that said the same, but I'm also in a health profession, so I read the importance a little differently.
"Pleasant" indicates that the patient is not showing undue signs of stress, depression, altered mentation, or hostility. A "pleasant" person is more likely to follow medical advice (i.e. comply), and therefor more likely to actually get the treatment as prescribed by the doctor. Depression, altered mentation, or hostility indicate more care needs to be taken, or might indicate pain, injury, or drug effects.
"Young female". Age is already given, this just reiterates the doctor confirmed via their own impression what the signalment (age, sex, and often race) indicates. The patient should match the chart, and this is confirmed in the doctor's note.
IAAV. If you take your dog to the vet for a checkup, chances are your pet's record will have the letters "BAR" in the notes. This stands for "bright, alert, and responsive" which is an attitude assessment for animals for similar reasons. You might also see "immature", "adult", or "geriatric" as age descriptors despite the fact that records will have exact age written in them multiple times.
They could do the more specific test, but testing for germs may be the quickest and easiest way to distinguish the twins. Chances are high that the twins have at least one distinct critter in their respective childspore-slurry (all that raping, someone probably picked up something fun). If they can find evidence of, say, a herpes virus that one twin has but the other does not (or has a different strain), they could crack the case for a fraction of the cost for the massive DNA run.
On the higher tech side, metagenomics might be a good solution. This would look at the genetic material of the viral and bacterial flora in the samples. It's a pretty common technique and could be done for less than a million. They'd have to run all the samples and see if there were a common non-human genome. It would have to be compared against each individual victim's flora as well.
Either way, letting a rapist (or pair of them) who has already raped 6 women (that they know of) go because it would cost too much to differentiate between the two suspects... seems like bad math at best and gross injustice at worst.
I wonder if an fMRI could distinguish conclusively between recognizing victims and a string of random faces. Another option of uncertain legal precedent.
The potentially cheapest solution is to charge them both with 6 counts of conspiracy to commit rape and 6 counts of obstructing justice. Or whatever the French equivalent would be.
Actually, what these data say is that Chinese students are just as good at scientific reasoning as Americans are, but they are significantly better at actually solving physics problems. Considering that the Chinese system is intended to teach students how to do problems, it seems like they are successful. On the other hand, considering that the American system is supposed to to emphasize scientific reasoning over being able to do the work, the question becomes "Why can't you do that better than the Chinese?"
Trying to spin this into China being bad at one thing and America at another is missing the fundamental point that they are both equal at one metric, but American students still perform poorer on the actual task of solving problems.
One could argue that being just similarly skilled in reasoning but stronger on solving the problems could be an advantage. It's just a hunch I have.
There is no gender division in equestrian events, and therefore no point in testing any of the competitors. Men, women, intersex, it doesn't matter: equestrian events are the only current Olympic sports where men and women compete against each other directly.
By the way, the reference in Wikipedia that you refer to has this in the citation: "This has often been reported as fact as early as 1977, but never verified by the Olympics authorities."
You have a/. account created today, comment history only on this thread, and no way to verify your rather outlandish claims. Very similar to the "other" person claiming to be a victim. Troll harder, dear, no one is buying what you are selling.
I read the reddit post before I posted the first time, and it did not have a link to primary material. Therefor, it's a post on reddit not actual evidence.
Could she be a self-aggrandizing drama queen? Sure. Likely she is. She might also be lying about how things are going down with Kickstarter. We'd need some more data to figure that out.
Do we have a reason to believe that she posted the material quoted on reddit? Nope.
I'm pretty curious to know if Kickstarter will block projects that get spammed/stalked. Aren't you?
There is a difference between being mean to a public figure (especially a politician) and harassing just-some-kid. Rick "man-on-dog" Santorum deserves some ridicule for his absurd, and offensive, speech.
Yes, that is the definition of "satire".
Bullying, by definition, targets someone of less power or status. Satire is the mockery of a political or social figure with the intent to portray them as ridiculous.
Umm, Massachusetts Bay Colony executed Quakers for their religious beliefs. Feel free to read up on the Boston Martyrs Boston Martyrs.
The Salem witch trials were no picnic either, but those were pretty much hysterical purges where no one was being punished for their actual beliefs: they were being killed for having the bad luck to be accused of witchcraft, a crime which is only relevant from a religious perspective.
On average, black defendants are assigned more severe punishments than whites for the same crimes. This includes capital crimes, where black defendants are much more likely to be sentenced to death.
There is plenty of research available on this topic, and I encourage you to look into it. It's something worth knowing as a citizen, as the justice system is - in a way - representing you, a member of The People.
Tweet said: "I have loved things about you and I have hated things about you and there is a lot I don't understand about you. I will not pray for you"
The tweets were put out on Mohammed's birthday (a BIG holy day) and were assumed to reference the prophet. I'm guessing that both the hate and the not praying are considered no-nos.
He is reported to have apologized, which may have confirmed his guilt for those in Saudi Arabia looking to convict him of blasphemy/apostasy, which is a capital offense in Saudi Arabia.
Not jumping in to the semantics pool, but this device is attached to the endoscope and has pincers and cautery. It doesn't go wandering off on its own. Doc directs endoscope with camera, sees tumor, and - with the joystick - extends a go-go-gadget cancer-clipper which snips and cauterizes the site and (ideally) retrieves the excised portion for biopsy.
Sounds like it's most consistent with what you are describing as telemanipulation. This thing has no ability to react to input other than what the driver gives it in real time.
IAAV. Very sorry to hear about your cat. I can try to offer you some information, but I encourage you to discuss options with your vet.
Lymphoma, one of the most common forms of cancer in cats, cannot generally be cured by excision. By the time of diagnosis it is frequently in multiple organs, and it spreads easily by lymphatic ducts and blood vessels. Lymphoma has many different forms, and these vary in prognosis, so it may be worth your while to pursue further diagnostics to determine which type is being faced (B-cell, T-cell, acute, chronic, large cell, small cell, granular cell, virus associated, etc.).
Chemotherapy is available for cats, and many vets have access to basic protocols for lymphoma or can refer you to a veterinary oncologist (cancer specialist).
Please understand that the goals for veterinary chemotherapy are generally much different than in human medicine. Human medicine usually aims for a complete cure, and that can mean putting the patient through a very stressful - sometimes debilitating - regimen of potent drugs. By contrast, veterinary medicine considers "good time" to be a worthy goal if cure is unlikely. For example: if the highest doses of treatment return a 5% survival rate but a poor quality of life under treatment, this is unlikely to be recommended by your vet. (S)he will more likely recommend a regimen that prolongs your pet's life without severely decreasing its quality. We try to keep pets as happy/comfortable as we can for as long as we can.
Also, even in cases where cancer-killing chemotherapy is likely to be unrewarding, anti-inflammatory and steroid drugs can provide relief from discomfort and sometimes slow progression. They also tend to be inexpensive compared to the more aggressive protocols.
I wish you the best of luck.
The original question of whether or not this would work on cats: a small enough version could work on cats, but a veterinarian would have to have access to it. It will be a while before this is widespread in the human market, let alone in the veterinary world. It is essentially an (immense!) improvement on the non-robotic biopsy tools already in use in endoscopy, with a lovely cautery feature built in.
Many causes of epilepsy are not genetic or even congenital. For example, physical trauma can cause disruption to the neural tissue that allows for disorganized electrical activity. While seizures acutely associated with trauma often don't result in a diagnosis of epilepsy (e.g. severe head injury--> patient has seizures on the way to hospital), individuals with repeated or severe damage may end up epileptic (i.e. the healed tissue isn't quite right and can induce seizures).
Similarly, toxins, liver failure, tumors, infections, and hypoglycemia can cause seizures too.
Migraines are thought to be related to seizures and, interestingly, can also be post-traumatic.
According to other sources, this girl died due to bleeding associated with an endotracheal tube, not the seizure itself.
I appreciate the article and data. Even the corrected figures demonstrate an attempt by the government to minimize the numbers of people counted as officially "poor". I have been to India and seen a small portion of the poverty that is so widespread. It enrages me to know that officials who know that the people they are supposed to represent are fighting starvation and preventable diseases for lack access to basic necessities can calmly insist that it isn't such a big problem.
On the subject of the tablets, I hope that the innovation can help some people change their lot, but I fear that the tool may not be enough to overcome the institutionalized callousness.
Other than John Huntsman, the GOP candidates have serious issue with basic science. As in, they all claim to believe at least part of this list:
- Creationism is a valid theory. (Nevermind fossils or the definition of scientific "theory".)
- Global warming is a hoax or not something that should be addressed. (Nevermind the data and the >98% concurrence among climatologists.)
- Vaccines cause retardation (Nevermind... facts)
- Abstinence education is effective. (Nevermind the data that show how high pregnancy rates are when it's all that's available.)
- Abortion is pretty much never a medical necessity. (That's from the ACTUAL PHYSICIAN candidate, too.)
- Being gay is a mental disease/lifestyle choice/bad decision/horrible influence on children (Nevermind that the AMA and American Psychiatric association recognize it as normal variation, and studies show gay parents are fine.)
- Sex is only for man-woman-marriage-baby-making. (Nevermind reality. And Newt Gingrich.)
It's quite evocative of that famous Asimov quote: Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'
So yeah, I'd say Huntsman at least doesn't try to play "who is the most sincere anti-intellectual for their Deity" by denying science. As a geek, that's something I like in a candidate. I wish sanity were something that was a little easier to parlay into support, but the Primaries are the Crazy Olympics, and it's all about who can out-God and out-blue-collar the next.
I want to like a party that espouses fiscal and personal responsibility. I want to embrace the idea of less intrusive government. I just don't think it should come at the cost of science.
Slashdot Mirror
Thank you for clarifying, it's even less generally useful than I'd thought. Niche research indeed!
No, what causes disputes is a woman who sleeps with so many men that she cannot identify the father, or who sleeps with someone else and tries to trick a man into marrying her to take care of the child that the real father won't. Paternity tests only uncover the original unethical acts, it is not an unethical act in and of itself. It is those unethical acts that cause the disputes.
1. There is nothing specifically unethical in having multiple partners, as long as one discloses disease risks and there is not a presumption of monogamy.
2. Either biological parent may be interested in the results of a paternity test:
a) A man and woman may both know that there was more than one man with the woman, and all three (woman and at least 2 men) would have an interest in the outcome.
b) The female may wish to prove a man is involved when he denies a sexual relationship or claims contraceptive methods were adequate ("Can't be me, I wore a condom."). Also, a woman who bears a child from rape is still entitled to support even if the man is not convicted. This requires a paternity test.
c) A man may accuse a woman of having multiple partners and thus request a paternity test to attempt to show that he is not the father, proving her involvement with another man. Alternatively, a man may wish to prove that he is the father in a case when another man was involved with the woman near the time of conception, so as to prevent his child being raised by someone else.
This doesn't sequence the genome or expand it. It just collects the DNA from the sample.
Real-time sequencing is what you are talking about, and that's still a long way off.
The gizmo is very cool, it takes a step that is the better part of an hour in the lab (depending on how many samples at a time you are running, and what the samples are) to something that is minutes, but it doesn't make the sequencing faster.
The most useful thing about it is that it is automated and potentially point-of-care. This means that instead of shipping bio-hazardous fluids or tissues all over the place, you can ship the extracted DNA (probably frozen or freeze dried).
I imagine that they started with a Brassica because it's one of the most common experimental plants, and there's more genetic information available on it vs. most houseplants. Proof of concept work is best done in a thoroughly understood system, and if you're adding a gene from another phylum, knowing a lot about the organism you are working with helps to control for some variables.
However, I love the idea of a hardier plant with high leaf area!
(I admit to fanciful imaginings of a calm voice announcing, "In the event of a blackout, low level emergency lighting will be noticeable in street-side shrubbery.")
The de facto segregation via private schools still happens in Louisiana, and likely other southern states. Tuition has gone up and actively racist criteria have been diminished, so there are usually a few non-white kids... primarily from successful families that have moved to town rather than local families. Poor people of all colors are excluded, and African Americans in Louisiana are disproportionately impoverished, so it ends up being nearly as "effective" as the original system, but now churches profit (most of the private schools in LA are Catholic or some other Christian denomination).
Structurally, the liver is not that complex, and -- as previously mentioned -- has amazing regenerative capacity.
Physiologically and biochemically, yes, individual hepatocytes have a phenomenal array of activities and functions. However, once you get hepatocytes developing in the liver scaffold, the fact that each of them is a marvel of biology is a moot point.
The liver's function is currently not something we can reproduce, but developing tech to regrow compatible livers en toto would solve the problem without having to address the 500+ functions you mention. I imagine it's progressing nicely.
The kidney is the opposite. We can artificially accomplish most of the function of a kidney (though it's horribly expensive an inconvenient), but the structure is a bit more complex than the liver (more varieties of specialized epithelium, for example, and the glomerulus is currently impossible to build) with very poor regenerative properties. Losing some liver usually means the organ grows some extra to replace the lost bit, losing some kidney generally does not.
Conveniently, by using scaffolding already built and seeding with cells that can differentiate into the appropriate types, we can sort of short-cut the necessity of trying to build either organ whole.
Go science!
I've read notes on me that said the same, but I'm also in a health profession, so I read the importance a little differently.
"Pleasant" indicates that the patient is not showing undue signs of stress, depression, altered mentation, or hostility. A "pleasant" person is more likely to follow medical advice (i.e. comply), and therefor more likely to actually get the treatment as prescribed by the doctor. Depression, altered mentation, or hostility indicate more care needs to be taken, or might indicate pain, injury, or drug effects.
"Young female". Age is already given, this just reiterates the doctor confirmed via their own impression what the signalment (age, sex, and often race) indicates. The patient should match the chart, and this is confirmed in the doctor's note.
IAAV. If you take your dog to the vet for a checkup, chances are your pet's record will have the letters "BAR" in the notes. This stands for "bright, alert, and responsive" which is an attitude assessment for animals for similar reasons. You might also see "immature", "adult", or "geriatric" as age descriptors despite the fact that records will have exact age written in them multiple times.
They could do the more specific test, but testing for germs may be the quickest and easiest way to distinguish the twins. Chances are high that the twins have at least one distinct critter in their respective childspore-slurry (all that raping, someone probably picked up something fun).
If they can find evidence of, say, a herpes virus that one twin has but the other does not (or has a different strain), they could crack the case for a fraction of the cost for the massive DNA run.
On the higher tech side, metagenomics might be a good solution. This would look at the genetic material of the viral and bacterial flora in the samples. It's a pretty common technique and could be done for less than a million. They'd have to run all the samples and see if there were a common non-human genome. It would have to be compared against each individual victim's flora as well.
Either way, letting a rapist (or pair of them) who has already raped 6 women (that they know of) go because it would cost too much to differentiate between the two suspects... seems like bad math at best and gross injustice at worst.
I wonder if an fMRI could distinguish conclusively between recognizing victims and a string of random faces. Another option of uncertain legal precedent.
The potentially cheapest solution is to charge them both with 6 counts of conspiracy to commit rape and 6 counts of obstructing justice. Or whatever the French equivalent would be.
Actually, what these data say is that Chinese students are just as good at scientific reasoning as Americans are, but they are significantly better at actually solving physics problems. Considering that the Chinese system is intended to teach students how to do problems, it seems like they are successful. On the other hand, considering that the American system is supposed to to emphasize scientific reasoning over being able to do the work, the question becomes "Why can't you do that better than the Chinese?"
Trying to spin this into China being bad at one thing and America at another is missing the fundamental point that they are both equal at one metric, but American students still perform poorer on the actual task of solving problems.
One could argue that being just similarly skilled in reasoning but stronger on solving the problems could be an advantage. It's just a hunch I have.
There is no gender division in equestrian events, and therefore no point in testing any of the competitors. Men, women, intersex, it doesn't matter: equestrian events are the only current Olympic sports where men and women compete against each other directly.
By the way, the reference in Wikipedia that you refer to has this in the citation: "This has often been reported as fact as early as 1977, but never verified by the Olympics authorities."
I'm going to consider it dubious at best.
I have no mod points, but I loled, and I thank you.
You have a /. account created today, comment history only on this thread, and no way to verify your rather outlandish claims. Very similar to the "other" person claiming to be a victim. Troll harder, dear, no one is buying what you are selling.
Interesting, thank you for the links. Sounds like she's a scammer.
I read the reddit post before I posted the first time, and it did not have a link to primary material. Therefor, it's a post on reddit not actual evidence.
Could she be a self-aggrandizing drama queen? Sure. Likely she is. She might also be lying about how things are going down with Kickstarter. We'd need some more data to figure that out.
Do we have a reason to believe that she posted the material quoted on reddit? Nope.
I'm pretty curious to know if Kickstarter will block projects that get spammed/stalked. Aren't you?
There is no proof that the comment was written by Malone. But we should attribute it to her anyway! Because!
There is a difference between being mean to a public figure (especially a politician) and harassing just-some-kid. Rick "man-on-dog" Santorum deserves some ridicule for his absurd, and offensive, speech.
Yes, that is the definition of "satire".
Bullying, by definition, targets someone of less power or status. Satire is the mockery of a political or social figure with the intent to portray them as ridiculous.
Umm, Massachusetts Bay Colony executed Quakers for their religious beliefs. Feel free to read up on the Boston Martyrs Boston Martyrs.
The Salem witch trials were no picnic either, but those were pretty much hysterical purges where no one was being punished for their actual beliefs: they were being killed for having the bad luck to be accused of witchcraft, a crime which is only relevant from a religious perspective.
On average, black defendants are assigned more severe punishments than whites for the same crimes. This includes capital crimes, where black defendants are much more likely to be sentenced to death.
There is plenty of research available on this topic, and I encourage you to look into it. It's something worth knowing as a citizen, as the justice system is - in a way - representing you, a member of The People.
Tweet said: "I have loved things about you and I have hated things about you and there is a lot I don't understand about you. I will not pray for you"
The tweets were put out on Mohammed's birthday (a BIG holy day) and were assumed to reference the prophet. I'm guessing that both the hate and the not praying are considered no-nos.
He is reported to have apologized, which may have confirmed his guilt for those in Saudi Arabia looking to convict him of blasphemy/apostasy, which is a capital offense in Saudi Arabia.
I'm really glad to hear that. Sounds like he will be getting some of that "good time" with you. Best of luck.
Not jumping in to the semantics pool, but this device is attached to the endoscope and has pincers and cautery. It doesn't go wandering off on its own. Doc directs endoscope with camera, sees tumor, and - with the joystick - extends a go-go-gadget cancer-clipper which snips and cauterizes the site and (ideally) retrieves the excised portion for biopsy.
Sounds like it's most consistent with what you are describing as telemanipulation. This thing has no ability to react to input other than what the driver gives it in real time.
IAAV. Very sorry to hear about your cat. I can try to offer you some information, but I encourage you to discuss options with your vet.
Lymphoma, one of the most common forms of cancer in cats, cannot generally be cured by excision. By the time of diagnosis it is frequently in multiple organs, and it spreads easily by lymphatic ducts and blood vessels. Lymphoma has many different forms, and these vary in prognosis, so it may be worth your while to pursue further diagnostics to determine which type is being faced (B-cell, T-cell, acute, chronic, large cell, small cell, granular cell, virus associated, etc.).
Chemotherapy is available for cats, and many vets have access to basic protocols for lymphoma or can refer you to a veterinary oncologist (cancer specialist).
Please understand that the goals for veterinary chemotherapy are generally much different than in human medicine. Human medicine usually aims for a complete cure, and that can mean putting the patient through a very stressful - sometimes debilitating - regimen of potent drugs. By contrast, veterinary medicine considers "good time" to be a worthy goal if cure is unlikely. For example: if the highest doses of treatment return a 5% survival rate but a poor quality of life under treatment, this is unlikely to be recommended by your vet. (S)he will more likely recommend a regimen that prolongs your pet's life without severely decreasing its quality. We try to keep pets as happy/comfortable as we can for as long as we can.
Also, even in cases where cancer-killing chemotherapy is likely to be unrewarding, anti-inflammatory and steroid drugs can provide relief from discomfort and sometimes slow progression. They also tend to be inexpensive compared to the more aggressive protocols.
I wish you the best of luck.
The original question of whether or not this would work on cats: a small enough version could work on cats, but a veterinarian would have to have access to it. It will be a while before this is widespread in the human market, let alone in the veterinary world. It is essentially an (immense!) improvement on the non-robotic biopsy tools already in use in endoscopy, with a lovely cautery feature built in.
Many causes of epilepsy are not genetic or even congenital. For example, physical trauma can cause disruption to the neural tissue that allows for disorganized electrical activity. While seizures acutely associated with trauma often don't result in a diagnosis of epilepsy (e.g. severe head injury--> patient has seizures on the way to hospital), individuals with repeated or severe damage may end up epileptic (i.e. the healed tissue isn't quite right and can induce seizures).
Similarly, toxins, liver failure, tumors, infections, and hypoglycemia can cause seizures too.
Migraines are thought to be related to seizures and, interestingly, can also be post-traumatic.
According to other sources, this girl died due to bleeding associated with an endotracheal tube, not the seizure itself.
I appreciate the article and data. Even the corrected figures demonstrate an attempt by the government to minimize the numbers of people counted as officially "poor". I have been to India and seen a small portion of the poverty that is so widespread. It enrages me to know that officials who know that the people they are supposed to represent are fighting starvation and preventable diseases for lack access to basic necessities can calmly insist that it isn't such a big problem.
On the subject of the tablets, I hope that the innovation can help some people change their lot, but I fear that the tool may not be enough to overcome the institutionalized callousness.
Other than John Huntsman, the GOP candidates have serious issue with basic science.
As in, they all claim to believe at least part of this list:
- Creationism is a valid theory. (Nevermind fossils or the definition of scientific "theory".)
- Global warming is a hoax or not something that should be addressed. (Nevermind the data and the >98% concurrence among climatologists.)
- Vaccines cause retardation (Nevermind... facts)
- Abstinence education is effective. (Nevermind the data that show how high pregnancy rates are when it's all that's available.)
- Abortion is pretty much never a medical necessity. (That's from the ACTUAL PHYSICIAN candidate, too.)
- Being gay is a mental disease/lifestyle choice/bad decision/horrible influence on children (Nevermind that the AMA and American Psychiatric association recognize it as normal variation, and studies show gay parents are fine.)
- Sex is only for man-woman-marriage-baby-making. (Nevermind reality. And Newt Gingrich.)
It's quite evocative of that famous Asimov quote: Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'
So yeah, I'd say Huntsman at least doesn't try to play "who is the most sincere anti-intellectual for their Deity" by denying science. As a geek, that's something I like in a candidate.
I wish sanity were something that was a little easier to parlay into support, but the Primaries are the Crazy Olympics, and it's all about who can out-God and out-blue-collar the next.
I want to like a party that espouses fiscal and personal responsibility. I want to embrace the idea of less intrusive government. I just don't think it should come at the cost of science.