This situation is a little more complicated than cry wolf because it is a communication to both the townspeople and the wolves. I imagine it reaches some kind of equilibrium where newcomers on both sides heed it, but since it drones on 24/7 eventually they'll start ignoring it.
I would agree with the "cry wolf" assessment. Having worked in pest control in my experience pheromones don't work well and/or very long; about the only good use I've found is for monitoring. I once talked to a Chemistry professor working with an Entomologist to synthesize fire ant trail pheromones (how they make paths to food) to see if it could be used to confuse workers. He told me it worked for all of a few minutes before they "figured it out" and started trailing through it like nothing happened. Smell is the primary sense for most insects and can be extremely acute (some moths can sense a few MOLECULES per square foot), so I think it will be relatively difficult to find a way to trick them in that way.
I'm glad they're trying new things, we're ganna need it along with intelligent usage so we don't end up needlessly wasting away their effective life-spans like we've done with previous pesticides and anti-biotics. Shelf what doesn't work but continue encouraging innovation (which I think the current gene patent situation is probably stifling)
While pesticides, disease and other stresses are certainly "causing" the collapses, more genetic diversity should have solved most of it.
Honeybee breeding has typically been less rigorous than other livestock. Combined with the genetic bottlenecks they've been through with their domestication and spread around the globe, problems were bound to arise eventually.
If enough genetic diversity was present, all of the individual possible problems (even pesticides) causing colony collapse should have been sorted out relatively quickly (especially given that queens mate with multiple males).
Yes, it is a cultural thing, but in a way you're proving his point. In Western society, we are more free to do what WE (the individual) want, we're even encouraged to find a job that we enjoy, not worry so much about what it pays. It goes to show that if people are left to their own devices/feelings/interests, instead of worrying about what will put food on the table (or what papa wants), they will choose to do what they NATURALLY gravitate to. So if there is a natural difference of interest in the sexes, career choice will become MORE pronounced in a wealthy free society, not less
Of course we aren't perfect, but I hope you aren't suggesting that people in Iran or other less than first world countries are somehow better at women's equality
He must have known his tweet was going to offend many people, as well as the many people who retweeted it. Shame on anyone who unnecessarily offends others, but even more shame on people so easily offended. Many stopped following Jesus because they were ''offended,'' and he asked his disciples if they would do the same, so it's pretty clear what his thoughts on the matter were
While I know this is an unfortunate event, I have to say that the comments on this thread are the funniest I've read all week.
My opinion is, any good man probably wouldn't have a problem with others finding some amusement about his death, and any bad man does a great service to mankind with post-mortem amusement . Personally I'd want everyone who knew or cared about my death, including my family, to find something funny about it. Or laugh at all the stupid and or funny things I did in life.
He is talking about in this life, as am I. Sure, I hope that God will help me along and I think he is, but it isn't something one can just expect right when you follow a commandment. There's no promise in the bible that if you're a good christian God will make life easy for you, in fact it is mostly the opposite.
Following a religion just because you want reward or fear punishment is silly, and not what God wants.
I don't know if it is ''troll'' in the literal sense, but Man on Pink is either ignorant about religions or a bigot.
It really is saddening to see how so many people here think they're on the scientific high ground of knowledge and criticize religions so broadly. All they show is blatant ignorance (which is what they are accusing religion of strangely enough)
Some sects believe that ''the universe owes them something,'' don't get me wrong, but not all by a long shot. Maybe those are the most vocal because it's what people like to hear, personally I don't care for them either
In any case my personal christian belief almost exactly matches what he said about science:
''starts from the premise that whatever secrets Mother Nature holds will have to be earned through hard work. There are no promises of results and no guarantees that understanding will ever be reached.''
That is a valid point, and where things probably get hazy in the study. While I don't really believe using a computer actually burns many calories, it sure as hell burns more than watching TV.
The brain can account for about 20% of daily energy usage, so if the child in question just sits around all day and doesn't exercise, it is plausible to guess that doing something that requires more ''thinking'' than TV will have some difference as far as calorie burning goes.
I don't think food has anything to do with it, more of how ''active'' someone is. Even just websurfing you have to be thinking about something and making cognitive decisions. The brain is a energy intensive organ, and studies have shown that ''thinking'' increases energy needs. Like you said, watching TV turns you into a vegetable.
What I would like to see is a comparison of watching TV and using something like youtube or hulu. One would hypothesize that they would begin to show similar results.
That is one reason it has been so difficult to be officially approved, but now that it is at least starting, this information will begin to come out. New procedures always involve risk. It is unfortunate when 1 in a 1000 treatments kill or adversely affect a patient, but if you want to walk again and are faced with those odds, I think the choice is clear.
Regardless, these kinds of procedures are routine or nearly so already in other animals, I see no reason why it would be much different in people.
Wrong. The control of the cottony cushion scale was a complete success, with the introduction of a beetle and a fly. They were virtually gone within a few years, and no one has found any bad side effects to date.
Not to say that we should start throwing species all over the place, but it can work incredibly well in certain cases.
First off, to the Australian solution, fire ants here have multiple queen colonies, sometimes dozens. Makes treatment a little more complex.
Also, the phorid flies are great, but one thing a doctoral student (my boss) found in his research was that fire ants can detect the fly, hide from it in the day, then overcompensate at night (because the flies rest and won't move at night). So the ants won't forage in the day, but they go on a frenzy at night and forage more than they would have otherwise.
So anyways it is arguable they they only aggravate the problem.
Slashdot Mirror
I think the US media is already exposing everything about Trump. Wikileaks is only leveling the playing field
This situation is a little more complicated than cry wolf because it is a communication to both the townspeople and the wolves. I imagine it reaches some kind of equilibrium where newcomers on both sides heed it, but since it drones on 24/7 eventually they'll start ignoring it.
I would agree with the "cry wolf" assessment. Having worked in pest control in my experience pheromones don't work well and/or very long; about the only good use I've found is for monitoring. I once talked to a Chemistry professor working with an Entomologist to synthesize fire ant trail pheromones (how they make paths to food) to see if it could be used to confuse workers. He told me it worked for all of a few minutes before they "figured it out" and started trailing through it like nothing happened. Smell is the primary sense for most insects and can be extremely acute (some moths can sense a few MOLECULES per square foot), so I think it will be relatively difficult to find a way to trick them in that way.
I'm glad they're trying new things, we're ganna need it along with intelligent usage so we don't end up needlessly wasting away their effective life-spans like we've done with previous pesticides and anti-biotics. Shelf what doesn't work but continue encouraging innovation (which I think the current gene patent situation is probably stifling)
I've got my standard keys, flint, and also has a the same utili-key. I'm pretty sure I've gone through airport security with that thing too
While pesticides, disease and other stresses are certainly "causing" the collapses, more genetic diversity should have solved most of it.
Honeybee breeding has typically been less rigorous than other livestock. Combined with the genetic bottlenecks they've been through with their domestication and spread around the globe, problems were bound to arise eventually.
If enough genetic diversity was present, all of the individual possible problems (even pesticides) causing colony collapse should have been sorted out relatively quickly (especially given that queens mate with multiple males).
Yes, it is a cultural thing, but in a way you're proving his point. In Western society, we are more free to do what WE (the individual) want, we're even encouraged to find a job that we enjoy, not worry so much about what it pays. It goes to show that if people are left to their own devices/feelings/interests, instead of worrying about what will put food on the table (or what papa wants), they will choose to do what they NATURALLY gravitate to. So if there is a natural difference of interest in the sexes, career choice will become MORE pronounced in a wealthy free society, not less
Of course we aren't perfect, but I hope you aren't suggesting that people in Iran or other less than first world countries are somehow better at women's equality
He must have known his tweet was going to offend many people, as well as the many people who retweeted it. Shame on anyone who unnecessarily offends others, but even more shame on people so easily offended. Many stopped following Jesus because they were ''offended,'' and he asked his disciples if they would do the same, so it's pretty clear what his thoughts on the matter were
That is true, they are generally intolerant of anyone who doesn't know what they're doing, and even sometimes when they do.
Parent was modded Insightful. I can't handle firepower of that magnitude.
While I know this is an unfortunate event, I have to say that the comments on this thread are the funniest I've read all week.
My opinion is, any good man probably wouldn't have a problem with others finding some amusement about his death, and any bad man does a great service to mankind with post-mortem amusement . Personally I'd want everyone who knew or cared about my death, including my family, to find something funny about it. Or laugh at all the stupid and or funny things I did in life.
He is talking about in this life, as am I. Sure, I hope that God will help me along and I think he is, but it isn't something one can just expect right when you follow a commandment. There's no promise in the bible that if you're a good christian God will make life easy for you, in fact it is mostly the opposite.
Following a religion just because you want reward or fear punishment is silly, and not what God wants.
I don't know if it is ''troll'' in the literal sense, but Man on Pink is either ignorant about religions or a bigot.
It really is saddening to see how so many people here think they're on the scientific high ground of knowledge and criticize religions so broadly. All they show is blatant ignorance (which is what they are accusing religion of strangely enough)
Some sects believe that ''the universe owes them something,'' don't get me wrong, but not all by a long shot. Maybe those are the most vocal because it's what people like to hear, personally I don't care for them either
In any case my personal christian belief almost exactly matches what he said about science:
''starts from the premise that whatever secrets Mother Nature holds will have to be earned through hard work. There are no promises of results and no guarantees that understanding will ever be reached.''
Entomology students often have to make insect collections. Pubic lice are a tough thing to catch with a net in the park you know......
These aren't the moons you're looking for.
This is true, the only reason this technique was so successful with screwworm is because the females only mate once. So all they got were duds from
By the same principle, sterilizing females would have no effect if the males mate with more than one female.
That is a valid point, and where things probably get hazy in the study. While I don't really believe using a computer actually burns many calories, it sure as hell burns more than watching TV.
The brain can account for about 20% of daily energy usage, so if the child in question just sits around all day and doesn't exercise, it is plausible to guess that doing something that requires more ''thinking'' than TV will have some difference as far as calorie burning goes.
I doubt it is the only factor though
Thanks for not giving me the benefit of the doubt.
We're comparing two gas tanks here genius. The point is that both are probably filled equally.
I don't think food has anything to do with it, more of how ''active'' someone is. Even just websurfing you have to be thinking about something and making cognitive decisions. The brain is a energy intensive organ, and studies have shown that ''thinking'' increases energy needs. Like you said, watching TV turns you into a vegetable.
What I would like to see is a comparison of watching TV and using something like youtube or hulu. One would hypothesize that they would begin to show similar results.
That is one reason it has been so difficult to be officially approved, but now that it is at least starting, this information will begin to come out. New procedures always involve risk. It is unfortunate when 1 in a 1000 treatments kill or adversely affect a patient, but if you want to walk again and are faced with those odds, I think the choice is clear.
Regardless, these kinds of procedures are routine or nearly so already in other animals, I see no reason why it would be much different in people.
Have you ever seen what happens when cat's mate? I haven't, but I've heard it. Sure sounds like death to me.
Another bigger/meaner cat will still take care of that one too :p
Wrong. The control of the cottony cushion scale was a complete success, with the introduction of a beetle and a fly. They were virtually gone within a few years, and no one has found any bad side effects to date.
Not to say that we should start throwing species all over the place, but it can work incredibly well in certain cases.
First off, to the Australian solution, fire ants here have multiple queen colonies, sometimes dozens. Makes treatment a little more complex.
Also, the phorid flies are great, but one thing a doctoral student (my boss) found in his research was that fire ants can detect the fly, hide from it in the day, then overcompensate at night (because the flies rest and won't move at night). So the ants won't forage in the day, but they go on a frenzy at night and forage more than they would have otherwise.
So anyways it is arguable they they only aggravate the problem.