as opposed to all the bacteria that are likely to break out of control atm?
Then again, worldwide population reduction will oppose global warming.
Then again, shouldn't we try, in contained vats (bring in regulation if needs be), to at the very LEAST keep our population stable and C02 neutral (environmentaly neutral is another dilemma enitrely)?
Well we can only work with what we know and mostly understand at this point in time. If we effectively reduce CO2 emissions by 2050 and bring them down to near zero by 2080 AND human generated CO2 emissions do not cause global warming then the worst outcome is a predicted 1-2% reduction in worldwide GDP GROWTH. If we don't AND human generated CO2 emissions do cause global warming then we're in for a literal world of hurt.
Anyway, it's an interesting find, but I wonder, why did they not wait until they finished their investigation of the event? It says that they're still figuring out if the change was a random, incredibly rare mutation, or the result of many small changes. Why not wait until you get the whole story to announce your discovery?
Because it is an important observation that deserves attention. Also, publications are required for funding, and more funding is probably required for proper analysis of this event.
I get podcasts of many of my favourite music radio shows, some science radio shows, some academic lectures, oh and of course the 'traditional' random podcasts from the net (music blogs for the most part).
I often see this argument on slashdot. However, have you ever tried moving embeded (let alone linked, egad!) pictures or objects in Office 97? How about editing the text around them?
When working on my thesis I would have to save several versions because moving images/objects deleted text, or deleting/adding text would remove the images/objects!
Office 2000 removed this problem for me. Now Office 2003 was a superfluous upgrade, but sticking with Office 97 is a nightmare.
It finally connectes to the web interface of Exchange at least as well as firefox. However it still doesn't do the public folders bit (IE does though).
I refuse to use IE, and now that Opera works with the websites that I have had some problems with (youtube.com for some reason also) I'm giving firefox the flick.
"I veery very very much doubt it. Even at 31km you still have 1% of the sea-level air-pressure, and at 9km healthy people can still breathe unaided. (as witnessed by the fact that people have climbed Mt. Everest without oxygen)"
Show me anyone that can do ANYTHING without oxygen.
Asking a less stupid question:
Almost anyone can climb Everest without oxygen aids.
The real question:
Who got to the top of Mount Everest without oxygen aids?
Peer review for journal articles does not mean that the methods published can be reproduced. I have read many articles that barely skim what is actually needed to reproduce the experiments. Scientists need money for research and are scared that others will overtake them if they tell them how. This is a really bad excuse, and flawed as most techniques need optimising which journals (with page limits) will not want to publish. Unfotunately also, some (very few) papers have lies about methods and/or results.
Slashdot Mirror
take your CRT from the southern to northen hemisphere.
Titanium can be allergenic. Lots of people have very large problems with hip replacements, screws, etc.
as opposed to all the bacteria that are likely to break out of control atm?
Then again, worldwide population reduction will oppose global warming.
Then again, shouldn't we try, in contained vats (bring in regulation if needs be), to at the very LEAST keep our population stable and C02 neutral (environmentaly neutral is another dilemma enitrely)?
anywhere except the Sahara?
Well we can only work with what we know and mostly understand at this point in time. If we effectively reduce CO2 emissions by 2050 and bring them down to near zero by 2080 AND human generated CO2 emissions do not cause global warming then the worst outcome is a predicted 1-2% reduction in worldwide GDP GROWTH. If we don't AND human generated CO2 emissions do cause global warming then we're in for a literal world of hurt.
The choice seems pretty clear to me.
Because it is an important observation that deserves attention. Also, publications are required for funding, and more funding is probably required for proper analysis of this event.
/signed.
I get podcasts of many of my favourite music radio shows, some science radio shows, some academic lectures, oh and of course the 'traditional' random podcasts from the net (music blogs for the most part).
How are podcasts sidelined again?
Except that mitochondrial DNA is separate to our own DNA.
Yes, because prolonging an already long and no doubt agonising death by using outdated technology is the answer.
Most of the criticism of current whaling practices is that it is inhumane to make an animal suffer for so long.
I've received a 419 by snailmail before.
The Government pays for it. Medical research is by far and large paid for by taxpayers funds. For the common good and all that.
or perhaps our brains have developed under evolutionary pressure to use tools to overcome natural causes of death?
OK, and you get to pick those that aren't saved.
guilty as charged :)
agreed, but this is a milestone.
True prevention only occurs when we know the complete reasons underlying the disease.
Most preventative measures these days counteract the effects of foetal environment and genetic effects.
welcome to the first week of genetics 101
No and no.
I often see this argument on slashdot. However, have you ever tried moving embeded (let alone linked, egad!) pictures or objects in Office 97? How about editing the text around them?
When working on my thesis I would have to save several versions because moving images/objects deleted text, or deleting/adding text would remove the images/objects!
Office 2000 removed this problem for me. Now Office 2003 was a superfluous upgrade, but sticking with Office 97 is a nightmare.
Well I still find Opera gives me the most useable screen real estate in a browser out of any of the top 3 (IE, Ff, Opera) 'out of the box'.
The only thing I really miss in Opera is the level of plugin developers that firefox has.
Riiiight. So keeping with the German theme, if you had visited Nazi Germany would that have pushed you to the left?
Can you not keep yourself in the dark? Why are you complaining about new knowledge?
oops, apparently public folders is there, just not as elegantly displayed as if you were using IE
It finally connectes to the web interface of Exchange at least as well as firefox. However it still doesn't do the public folders bit (IE does though).
I refuse to use IE, and now that Opera works with the websites that I have had some problems with (youtube.com for some reason also) I'm giving firefox the flick.
OK, being completely asinine:
"I veery very very much doubt it. Even at 31km you still have 1% of the sea-level air-pressure, and at 9km healthy people can still breathe unaided. (as witnessed by the fact that people have climbed Mt. Everest without oxygen)"
Show me anyone that can do ANYTHING without oxygen.
Asking a less stupid question:
Almost anyone can climb Everest without oxygen aids.
The real question:
Who got to the top of Mount Everest without oxygen aids?
Peer review for journal articles does not mean that the methods published can be reproduced. I have read many articles that barely skim what is actually needed to reproduce the experiments. Scientists need money for research and are scared that others will overtake them if they tell them how. This is a really bad excuse, and flawed as most techniques need optimising which journals (with page limits) will not want to publish. Unfotunately also, some (very few) papers have lies about methods and/or results.
Scientists are people too.