My fiance used to live at the beach...she spotted a whole toilet washed up one day after a storm. Not quite as cool as a luxury car or bags of pot, but I guess you take what you get.
How would the fact that you were relying on directional light from the sun affect the directions in which you wanted to sail? In other words, thinking like a boat sailor, would you be limited to certain angles from the sun? Or would you simply be able to use other mirrors to redirect the light to the angle you wanted in order to get to the destination of choice (although it sounds as if this would not be possible, since if the solar sails provided force the reflecting mirrors probably would also)?
I'm a 25 year old Ph.D. student in immunology that is about to get married...I might as well just cut my balls of right now.
But seriously, I'm not really surprised at these results. All of the prolific scientists I know were "made" early in their career, OR they ignore their families so much they might as well be considered single.
It's actually an accepted part of the big-bang theory that it is mathematically impossible to know what came before the big-bang, therefore it isn't really correct to state that evolutionists believe everything came from nothing -- they just don't know what, if anything, they came from.
I would have to disagree with you about it being more of a leap of faith to believe in six-day creation than evolution, but regardless I think the Buddhists have got it straight -- it doesn't really make a bit of damn difference.
As for the Tree of Life project, more power to it. The construction of such trees is not easy though, and small variables can lead to the formation of dramatically different trees. It's too bad it relies on a lot of subjective information, but if we want to include extinct species we of course can't build a tree soley on genetic information, which would be the optimal method for such a thing.
Were you really trying to make a valid comment, or trying to show off your knowledge of freshmen biology?
Fact of the matter is, regardless of the safeguards we employ, we will never be able to "design" microbes for specific purposes that will be 100% safe, irregardless of the cushion within biological systems. Not to say I don't advocate the research into such things though...
This just contributes to the realization that we really don't know a whole hell of a lot about how the climate on earth functions. There is no way in hell we can say for sure what the cause of global warming is or if it even matters (in the grand scheme of things, since temperature cycles have been occuring for billions of years). This of course doesn't excuse civilization from being held accountable for our affects on the climate, but people and politicians (not sure they're really people) really should stop having such narrow points of view.
This is all about money. Not only could the researchers possibly benefit from this (though it's quite doubtful - the only way they could really profit from this would be if they left the institute they're at and started a private company. However, the institute could patent it and make some major cash), as well as the coffee companies because of the demand. But don't forget, this could significantly lower the cost of making decaffinated coffee, as less would have to be extracted from the coffee grounds.
On a scientific note, it is a nice demonstration of the growing potential for the use of RNA interference for knocking down the expression of specific genes. I'm not sure how much this has been done in plants, but it's really been taking off in mammalian cells in the last year or two.
I've wondered that mayself. The problem is that, as implied by your argument, we have no idea how the planet functions as a single ecosystem. Therefore it's possible that anything we do could really screw it up. Better to be safe than sorry. Rather than just take the attitude that it may not be a problem, which essentially gives carte blanche to anyone who wants to just run over the environment in order to give short term benefits to humans, we should try and minimize our impact here in order that we can remain here. Of course, it may all be useless and an asteroid may kill all life on earth any day now;~)
I suppose this could be educational for the few kids whose parents decide to drive them through Aroostook county during the summer...mooommmmm, when are we gonna get to the next planet???
evangelism indeed...I can practically see all the microsoft employees chanting and kneeling at bill's feet while Ballmer sacrifices a machine running WinXP...
I hardly think more useless things are invented these days than a hundred years ago. Hasn't everyone been to one of those museums or seen a TV show on all of the useless gadgets people have made in the past? This guy needs to get a clue and stop trying to occupy the "moral" high-ground when it comes to the things that are invented these days. Of course a lot of stuff is useless -- who f**king cares??? Just don't buy it if it's useless. That's the way invention works, there are always more bad ideas than good ones. There are no fewer people working on things that matter these days than there ever was. And he has the gall to mention inventing the wheel??? How is that even relevant in today's world? Has he ever thought about the possibility that as society evolves there are simply fewer "wheels" to invent? This guy's a f**king idiot.
The fish can probably sense the spinning of the blade (with whatever the hell those special scales along their sides are called that let them sense movement in the water), so they'll probably just swim around them.
I agree completely, but it may be that that there aren't any really good locations around the US coastline to use this technology, as the geography of the UK is significantly different (they have much larger tides than the US).
The big problem with the US and such technologies is that the oil industry and all it's related offspring (automotive, etc) have way too much influence on Washington, which is the reason we are so dependent on the middle east. Without washington to back the use of these technologies it won't happen. Look for heavy investing in this sort of stuff when the government realizes it has to do something or the country will tank because of lack of oil (because of increased destabilization of the middle east, particularly Saudi Arabia which produces more than 25% of the world's oil).
The sun does affect the tides, but not nearly as much as the moon. The largest tides do occur when the moon and the sun are both on the same side of the earth (earth > moon > sun)(I can't remember the term), and if you've heard of neap tides, those are when the moon and the sun are at a ninety degree angle to each other relative to the earth.
Does it come with a free pocket protector?
But seriously, I guess this would be nice if you were just after an easy way to carry addresses and appointments. But the real question is of course - does it support Bejeweled?
I know a guy who threw a ball of sodium (golfball size) into a traschcan full of water inside his schools greenhouse. The blast was so loud it shattered all of the windows and left him partially deaf for a number of days afterward...
Slashdot Mirror
My fiance used to live at the beach...she spotted a whole toilet washed up one day after a storm. Not quite as cool as a luxury car or bags of pot, but I guess you take what you get.
How would the fact that you were relying on directional light from the sun affect the directions in which you wanted to sail? In other words, thinking like a boat sailor, would you be limited to certain angles from the sun? Or would you simply be able to use other mirrors to redirect the light to the angle you wanted in order to get to the destination of choice (although it sounds as if this would not be possible, since if the solar sails provided force the reflecting mirrors probably would also)?
But seriously, I'm not really surprised at these results. All of the prolific scientists I know were "made" early in their career, OR they ignore their families so much they might as well be considered single.
I would have to disagree with you about it being more of a leap of faith to believe in six-day creation than evolution, but regardless I think the Buddhists have got it straight -- it doesn't really make a bit of damn difference.
As for the Tree of Life project, more power to it. The construction of such trees is not easy though, and small variables can lead to the formation of dramatically different trees. It's too bad it relies on a lot of subjective information, but if we want to include extinct species we of course can't build a tree soley on genetic information, which would be the optimal method for such a thing.
Fact of the matter is, regardless of the safeguards we employ, we will never be able to "design" microbes for specific purposes that will be 100% safe, irregardless of the cushion within biological systems. Not to say I don't advocate the research into such things though...
Can you imagine the possibility for website of collected peeping tom images?
This just contributes to the realization that we really don't know a whole hell of a lot about how the climate on earth functions. There is no way in hell we can say for sure what the cause of global warming is or if it even matters (in the grand scheme of things, since temperature cycles have been occuring for billions of years). This of course doesn't excuse civilization from being held accountable for our affects on the climate, but people and politicians (not sure they're really people) really should stop having such narrow points of view.
Does a search with no results give the blue screen of death?
you should read "The selfish gene" by Richard Dawkins. He has some interesting views on the "motivation" of genes...
On a scientific note, it is a nice demonstration of the growing potential for the use of RNA interference for knocking down the expression of specific genes. I'm not sure how much this has been done in plants, but it's really been taking off in mammalian cells in the last year or two.
All knowledge has the potential to benefit mankind. Just because we can't see an obvious use now doesn't mean there isn't one.
This seems destined to confuse everyone...
I've wondered that mayself. The problem is that, as implied by your argument, we have no idea how the planet functions as a single ecosystem. Therefore it's possible that anything we do could really screw it up. Better to be safe than sorry. Rather than just take the attitude that it may not be a problem, which essentially gives carte blanche to anyone who wants to just run over the environment in order to give short term benefits to humans, we should try and minimize our impact here in order that we can remain here. Of course, it may all be useless and an asteroid may kill all life on earth any day now ;~)
I suppose this could be educational for the few kids whose parents decide to drive them through Aroostook county during the summer...mooommmmm, when are we gonna get to the next planet???
evangelism indeed...I can practically see all the microsoft employees chanting and kneeling at bill's feet while Ballmer sacrifices a machine running WinXP...
I hardly think more useless things are invented these days than a hundred years ago. Hasn't everyone been to one of those museums or seen a TV show on all of the useless gadgets people have made in the past? This guy needs to get a clue and stop trying to occupy the "moral" high-ground when it comes to the things that are invented these days. Of course a lot of stuff is useless -- who f**king cares??? Just don't buy it if it's useless. That's the way invention works, there are always more bad ideas than good ones. There are no fewer people working on things that matter these days than there ever was. And he has the gall to mention inventing the wheel??? How is that even relevant in today's world? Has he ever thought about the possibility that as society evolves there are simply fewer "wheels" to invent? This guy's a f**king idiot.
The fish can probably sense the spinning of the blade (with whatever the hell those special scales along their sides are called that let them sense movement in the water), so they'll probably just swim around them.
The big problem with the US and such technologies is that the oil industry and all it's related offspring (automotive, etc) have way too much influence on Washington, which is the reason we are so dependent on the middle east. Without washington to back the use of these technologies it won't happen. Look for heavy investing in this sort of stuff when the government realizes it has to do something or the country will tank because of lack of oil (because of increased destabilization of the middle east, particularly Saudi Arabia which produces more than 25% of the world's oil).
The sun does affect the tides, but not nearly as much as the moon. The largest tides do occur when the moon and the sun are both on the same side of the earth (earth > moon > sun)(I can't remember the term), and if you've heard of neap tides, those are when the moon and the sun are at a ninety degree angle to each other relative to the earth.
Does it come with a free pocket protector? But seriously, I guess this would be nice if you were just after an easy way to carry addresses and appointments. But the real question is of course - does it support Bejeweled?
I know a guy who threw a ball of sodium (golfball size) into a traschcan full of water inside his schools greenhouse. The blast was so loud it shattered all of the windows and left him partially deaf for a number of days afterward...