While the kids may be getting smarter (I don't consider SAT scores to be a measure of intelligence, but that's a topic for another discussion), the adults seem to be getting dumber. I'd consider your post to be evidence, but you're most likely some 14 year old kid that doesn't know what he's talking about.
I think you're far too optimistic when you say the foreign nationals will leave the US to go home or elsewhere. I predict the home-grown talent will also leave if something isn't done. In the future, no amount of NIH money will change the fact that talented scientists don't exist anymore.
I, for one, am looking forward to becoming an Oxford Don.;)
You don't have to reproduce things for science to become believeable. I think astronomers would tell you to pull your head out of your ass if you told them astronomy was bunk because they couldn't reproduce planets, black holes, stars, pulsars, etc etc. There is also a difference between hypothesis-driven research and discovery-based research. Evolution has an incredible amount of evidence behind it regardless of the scale you'd like to measure it against. Observations in fossil records and DNA sequencing make evolution very appealing despite the amount of time it covers.
Evolution is like gravity and e-mag: they are all theories as well as laws.
I used to think like you, until I started studying history and reading the news. Scientists needs to be advocates for science! By ignoring the naysaying idiots, not only do we (scientists) produce an air of smugness but we allow "the opposition" as it were to get stronger. It's the new millenium and we're STILL having debates on evolution and burning "controversial" books. That's incredibly dumb and the evidence of national ignorance is apalling. While I don't think scientists will be burned at the stake again (God, I hope not -- pun intended), we may be facing a future America where scientists have as much credibility as crackpots while the religious whackos have unquestionable credibility. The NIH requires all gradaute students supported by their training grants to take an ethics course. I think a rhetoric of science course should be added as a requirement so that scientists will be more effective communicators in the general sense and not be afraid to squash idiocy. In the seventies, some professor from Yale or Princeton was invited to debate evolution/creationism with some fundamentalist. You'd think a tenured professor at a prestigious university would demolish a religious fundamentalist with a high school education, but the professor got his ass handed to him. That debate is probably the most important incident that makes modern scientists want to avoid debating with the creationists. I know this sounds bad, but it's time to fight back! We scientists need to take a more active role in educating the public. After all what good is research if you can't tell anyone about it?
Note: I am NOT anti-religious and on the whole I think religion is an important and necessary part of our lives. I AM however anti-idiocy.
If I hadn't already posted, I'd have modded you up. Someone else do it for me!
Intelligent Design was created by creationist for creationist purposes. To teach this in any class other than a religion class is stupid. You wouldn't teach biophysics in a religion class, why are people so deadset on putting ID in science classes? It's not a science, people!
From TFA: Gary L. Bauer, a Christian conservative leader who ran for president against Bush in the 2000 Republican primaries:
"It's not some backwater view. It's a view held by the majority of Americans."
This is what I hate about majority rule. Just because 51% of people believe in something, the other 49% is represented to have those same beliefs. I can't stand the fact I can't travel safely abroad because I'm American. I pretty much despise our current goverment policies, but it's hard to explain that fact to the rest of the world. [sarcasm] Hooray! "Intelligen" Design is held by the majority of Americans! As a junior scientist, that's exactly how I want my European and Asian colleagues to view me.[/sarcasm] It's bad enough the age of American dominance in science and technology is in decline, and now this. How much more credibility is the U.S. government willing sacrifice?
Mod me down if you must, but this is a fight worth fighting. I'm just more disappointed more scientists aren't doing anything to curtail the outbreak of ignorance.
Yes, I did RTFA's. However, neither you nor TFA's had any indication of how easy or cost-effective their proposals were. I didn't read every paper the lab had ever published, but nothing in the links indicated where they decided that $30/kg was attainable. Also, the articles seem to indicate (although I admit I could be wrong) that O2 is produced in the anaerobic phase, although in smaller amounts than during the photosynthetic phase. It's on page 7 of the first PDF listed. O2 seems to present in the sulfur tank. I don't know how much is present, but it's there.
So again, does anyone know how easy and cheap it is to separate O2 from H2? Is it necessary to separate them for actual use in something like H2-fueled cars, as opposed to inhibiting the algae? I know something about molecular biology, but I'll be the first to admit I don't know anything about engineering...are you always this condescending?
I realize that one problem is creating microbes that are more tolerant of their excretions (ie oxygen and hydrogen). My question is how to separate the oxygen from the hydrogen. Is it easy? Is it cheap? Is it necessary? Does that kind of process totally negate any energy/materials savings microbes would generate?
I don't think today's typical applications would run too well on 8-year-old hardware. It may be possible, but I think it would be generally more cost-efficient to just upgrade just a little bit. It would be more efficient in time and power consumption, not to mention better at preserving your sanity.
What I don't understand is why Northrop's case was a stalemate (according TFA). I thought "stealth" had been around for much longer than 1985 (when this asshat applied for trademarks). Isn't this prior something or other? Is that how fcuked up USPTO is? IANAL, so these questions are for real!
"Again, safety was always a concern from the start. We did not compensate anyone's health, reputation, or employment during our creation of the Juicer."
Safety? What was their test drink? The Pan-Galactic Gargle Blaster?
Is this related to NAFTA at all? Could the USA claim the Canadian rejection of the DMCA violates NAFTA somehow? Or could Canada use NAFTA to uphold their policy on DMCA?
Just some random (and probably irrelevant!) thoughts...
Mod me as troll if you must, but we Americans have already been given several chances. There's really no (good) reason to not just broadcast the original brit versions. Personally, I love the britcoms but I know I'm in the minority. Otherwise there would be widespread demand for either the original or at least non-watered-down versions (ie Coupling and The Office).
Would the average American get the Brit jokes? Probably not enough to make it profitable. Don't forget that in addition to your average American, you have many many immigrants where English is not their first language. A lot of British humour (yes, that was on purpose) require a better command of the English language than a lot of Americans (includin immigrants) do not possess. Hence the sentencing of britcoms to the backwaters of PBS.
I looked for Area 51 (aka Groom Lake) since Soviet sats had taken pictures of it some time ago. Alas, it is still just the grey area indicating military installation.
I realize your comment was toungue-in-cheek, but on a serious note: if only it were that simple. Data extraceted from DNA only represents potential outcomes in many instances. The genome is often called a blueprint but as any architecht knows, there's a huge potential for the finished product to have alterations. It's the same way with DNA. The emerging fields (maybe it's already emerged?) of proteomics seems more likely to predict actual outcomes, like in this study. Sorry, but I think most you will have to pay to read the entire article.
The tetanus shot (or vaccine to be more accurate) contains something called an adjuvant that actually irritates the area where you receive the injection. This is to promote immunological activity to increase the effiacy of the shot. I took part in an experimental trial where they gave tetanus shots without the adjuvant and my arm didn't hurt at all.
I wasn't aware that PEG was safe. Don't you use that stuff punch holes in cellular membranes? Like when making hybridomas (antibody-producing cells used in research).
In Ga you have to request them, but you can get TWO reports each year from each credit reporting agency. Will this new law actually decrease the amount of free reports I get?
Does anyone know how the trip time compared other expeditions? I realize that the longer the flight, the more efficient and speedy this method would be, but I was just trying to get an idea of how fast this thing moves. Could cryogenics and this propulsion technology together land humans on other planets?
Slashdot Mirror
While the kids may be getting smarter (I don't consider SAT scores to be a measure of intelligence, but that's a topic for another discussion), the adults seem to be getting dumber. I'd consider your post to be evidence, but you're most likely some 14 year old kid that doesn't know what he's talking about.
I think you're far too optimistic when you say the foreign nationals will leave the US to go home or elsewhere. I predict the home-grown talent will also leave if something isn't done. In the future, no amount of NIH money will change the fact that talented scientists don't exist anymore.
I, for one, am looking forward to becoming an Oxford Don. ;)
Evolution is like gravity and e-mag: they are all theories as well as laws.
Note: I am NOT anti-religious and on the whole I think religion is an important and necessary part of our lives. I AM however anti-idiocy.
Intelligent Design was created by creationist for creationist purposes. To teach this in any class other than a religion class is stupid. You wouldn't teach biophysics in a religion class, why are people so deadset on putting ID in science classes? It's not a science, people!
Let's all say it together:
IT'S NOT A SCIENCE!
From TFA: Gary L. Bauer, a Christian conservative leader who ran for president against Bush in the 2000 Republican primaries:
"It's not some backwater view. It's a view held by the majority of Americans."
This is what I hate about majority rule. Just because 51% of people believe in something, the other 49% is represented to have those same beliefs. I can't stand the fact I can't travel safely abroad because I'm American. I pretty much despise our current goverment policies, but it's hard to explain that fact to the rest of the world. [sarcasm] Hooray! "Intelligen" Design is held by the majority of Americans! As a junior scientist, that's exactly how I want my European and Asian colleagues to view me.[/sarcasm] It's bad enough the age of American dominance in science and technology is in decline, and now this. How much more credibility is the U.S. government willing sacrifice?
Mod me down if you must, but this is a fight worth fighting. I'm just more disappointed more scientists aren't doing anything to curtail the outbreak of ignorance.
So again, does anyone know how easy and cheap it is to separate O2 from H2? Is it necessary to separate them for actual use in something like H2-fueled cars, as opposed to inhibiting the algae? I know something about molecular biology, but I'll be the first to admit I don't know anything about engineering...are you always this condescending?
I realize that one problem is creating microbes that are more tolerant of their excretions (ie oxygen and hydrogen). My question is how to separate the oxygen from the hydrogen. Is it easy? Is it cheap? Is it necessary? Does that kind of process totally negate any energy/materials savings microbes would generate?
I don't think today's typical applications would run too well on 8-year-old hardware. It may be possible, but I think it would be generally more cost-efficient to just upgrade just a little bit. It would be more efficient in time and power consumption, not to mention better at preserving your sanity.
What I don't understand is why Northrop's case was a stalemate (according TFA). I thought "stealth" had been around for much longer than 1985 (when this asshat applied for trademarks). Isn't this prior something or other? Is that how fcuked up USPTO is? IANAL, so these questions are for real!
Seems kinda pricey given the number of laptops available on eBay. -X
Do YOU read any of the links before posting smart-ass comments?
"Again, safety was always a concern from the start. We did not compensate anyone's health, reputation, or employment during our creation of the Juicer."
Safety? What was their test drink? The Pan-Galactic Gargle Blaster?
Sorry, couldn't resist. Just saw the movie!
Just some random (and probably irrelevant!) thoughts...
Would the average American get the Brit jokes? Probably not enough to make it profitable. Don't forget that in addition to your average American, you have many many immigrants where English is not their first language. A lot of British humour (yes, that was on purpose) require a better command of the English language than a lot of Americans (includin immigrants) do not possess. Hence the sentencing of britcoms to the backwaters of PBS.
Oh, wait...
I looked for Area 51 (aka Groom Lake) since Soviet sats had taken pictures of it some time ago. Alas, it is still just the grey area indicating military installation.
I realize your comment was toungue-in-cheek, but on a serious note: if only it were that simple. Data extraceted from DNA only represents potential outcomes in many instances. The genome is often called a blueprint but as any architecht knows, there's a huge potential for the finished product to have alterations. It's the same way with DNA. The emerging fields (maybe it's already emerged?) of proteomics seems more likely to predict actual outcomes, like in this study. Sorry, but I think most you will have to pay to read the entire article.
The tetanus shot (or vaccine to be more accurate) contains something called an adjuvant that actually irritates the area where you receive the injection. This is to promote immunological activity to increase the effiacy of the shot. I took part in an experimental trial where they gave tetanus shots without the adjuvant and my arm didn't hurt at all.
So if the food were say... a piece of fairy cake, would it show you your place in the universe?
For those that want a link.
I wasn't aware that PEG was safe. Don't you use that stuff punch holes in cellular membranes? Like when making hybridomas (antibody-producing cells used in research).
In Ga you have to request them, but you can get TWO reports each year from each credit reporting agency. Will this new law actually decrease the amount of free reports I get?
This thing blows?
Does anyone know how the trip time compared other expeditions? I realize that the longer the flight, the more efficient and speedy this method would be, but I was just trying to get an idea of how fast this thing moves. Could cryogenics and this propulsion technology together land humans on other planets?