Here's an interesting factoid: In the U.S. alone, pollution from coal power plants kills over 30,000 people each year. Of course, this is just a fraction of the worldwide number, and a fraction of those suffering health ailments from coal pollution. If you look at air pollution in general, the WHO estimates 2.4 million annual deaths worldwide.
This means that every few years (or less), more people die from coal than have died in the entire history of nuclear weapons and accidents, including Hiroshima (140,000), Nagasaki (80,000), and Chernobyl (4,000, although this has been argued about).
When locusts swarm, are they ALWAYS chasing one another? Does the idea of there being several leaders in the swarm and the swarm moving due to a bias still play a part in the swarm's movement?
I'm not sure if he's shown this for locusts, but in his talk he was talking about schools of fish who have the now-standard "attract when far away, repel when close" swarming behavior. When such schools are large enough, you only need a relatively few members applying an additional bias to cause the entire swarm to move. He also showed how this neat oscillation behavior occurs when members of the group have different goal points, causing the swarm to oscillate between the multiple destinations, which is something that occurs in real swarms sometimes.
I'm sure a similar mechanism would probably work for locusts as well.
Cool to see Couzin on slashdot... I coincidentally saw a talk of his last week and gave him a brief lab tour. His own research is somewhat outside my area, but one of the most surprising things I recall from his talk is that marching locust swarms are apparently propelled by cannibalistic behavior. If I'm remembering correctly, baby locusts (before they've grown wings) in a region will feed in a pretty disorderly fashion. However, once salt and protein supplies start running low, they get hungry and start trying to eat each other. The researchers realized this when the locusts in their enclosure seemed to be mysteriously disappearing at a steady rate, due to being consumed by their peers.;)
In any case, once they start eating each other, the locusts start trying to chase the locusts in front of them, while simultaneously avoiding the locusts behind them trying to eat them. The emergent behavior is that the entire swarm moves as a mass until a new area is found where salt and protein supplies are plentiful enough to cause them to switch out of cannibalism-mode. This presumably has a number of ramification on how to control migration of locust swarms, which are an immense destroyer of food resources in the developing world.
Some social conservatives also criticize the foundation for its support of organizations that promote abortion rights and contraception, including the International Planned Parenthood Federation, Guttmacher Institute, the United Nations Population Fund and the World Health Organization.[citation needed]
Investment in oil companies and drug companies
According to a January 7 2007 Los Angeles Times article, the foundation invests large amounts of money in companies whose behavior counters the foundation's charitable goals.[31] Examples include oil companies such as Eni and drug companies who withhold medications from the developing world. According to the article, many other foundations behave similarly. In response, the foundation first announced a systematic review of all of its investments to determine whether it should consider divestment from some companies.[32] Later, it revoked this pledge[33] and said it would continue its current practices.[34]
In a May 4 story, the Los Angeles Times again reported a conflict between the foundation investment policies and charitable goals. [15] In this case the issue was Darfur and PetroChina, an oil company in which Gates trustee Warren Buffett owns a large stake via his Berkshire Hathaway company. PetroChina's parent companies is heavily invested in oil extraction in the Sudan.
Diversion of health care resources
In a January/February 2007 Foreign Affairs article, Laurie Garrett claims that many charitable organizations, among whom the Gates Foundation is prominent, harm global health by diverting resources from other important local health care services.[35] For example, by paying relatively high salaries at AIDS clinics, the foundation diverts medical professionals from other parts of developing nations' health care systems; the health care systems' ability to provide care diminishes (except in the area the foundation funds) and the charities may do more harm than good.
I had asked for them to use one of those types of scanners on me but the surgeon said he would not accept the scans because the resolution was too poor and that he would not operate on me until he got the scans HE wanted.
Yeah, I imagine the low resolution would be ok for certain types of diagnosis, but for a surgery they'd probably want something more detailed.
I had to have several MRI & CT scans and that friggin tunnel is more than I can handle.
I haven't seen one in person yet, but there's apparently a company which produces something called the Fonar 360, which instead of having a tunnel basically turns the entire room is a magnet. This is useful not just for reducing claustrophobia, but also hypothetically allows for surgery to occur while somebody is inside of an MRI. I think the spatial resolution however is quite a bit weaker than typical scanners.
The same company also has an Upright MRI product, where the patient sits down with open space in front of them.
Is there some kind of long-running inside joke about this fictional "solanum" virus?
It might be kind of obscure, but "solanum" is a reference to the fictional Solanum virus in the Zombie Survival Guide by Max Brooks. It's also alluded to, but I don't think is explicitly named, in the quasi-sequel World War Z. Both are awesome books, btw, and I highly recommend reading them.
Re:Foie Gras is some nasty shit...
on
Chefs As Chemists
·
· Score: 1
Here's a quick primer on how birds regurgitate food to feed their young:
Re:Foie Gras is some nasty shit...
on
Chefs As Chemists
·
· Score: 5, Informative
What a despicable thing to do to an animal just to make it tastier to eat.
The photos of tubes being put down the throats of ducks certainly look horrific, but animal rights activists have a tendency to over-dramatize things. From an article in Time magazine:
The debate is centered on the practice of gavage, in which corn is force-fed to farm-raised ducks through a funnel down their throats. Some argue that gavage is inhumane, while others counter that the physiology of a duck is not the same as a human. "It seems terrible if you don't know that a duck's esophagus is lined with a very thick cuticle, if you don't realize that baby ducks are fed by their mother pushing her beak down the baby's throat," says Ariane Daguin, owner of D'Artagnan, the largest foie gras purveyor in the U.S. Recent studies by Dr. Daniel Guémené, a leading expert on the physiological effects of gavage, have shown that ducks with young in the wild were under more stress than the ducks being fed through gavage. And both The American Veterinary Medical Association's House of Delegates and the American Association of Avian Pathologists have concluded that foie is not a product of animal cruelty.
The debate on welfare issues related to the force feeding of ducks and geese involves understanding the reactions of the animals to the force feeding process. Two types of experiment were performed. Ducks and geese were trained to be fed in a pen 8 metres away from their rearing pen and were then force fed in the feeding pen. The hypothesis was that if force feeding caused aversion, the animals would not spontaneously go to the test pen. There were some signs of aversion in ducks, but not full avoidance, and there were no signs of aversion in geese. In another experiment, the flight distances of ducks from the person who performed the force feeding and from an unknown observer were measured. Ducks avoided the unknown person more than the force feeder. Their avoidance of the force feeder decreased during the force feeding period. There was no development of aversion to the force feeder during the force feeding process.
for instance at this place, where we have, as only one example of a high ranking AI-researcher, Dr. Feiyue Wang, Chinese Academy of Sciences (also advisor to the government), who does interesting research like, e.g. "Pedestrian Detection from a Moving Vehicle" (translate for yourself). I had this person on the radar earlier.
Could you be a little bit more explicit about what you're implying? I'm not sure I see why you're so paranoid about a Chinese person doing computer vision research. Of course, I might be a little biased because I used to do research in computer vision myself and I'm pretty used to seeing dozens of papers on pedestrian tracking and its variations at conferences.
Apparently many researchers who do muscle augmentation research have to turn down eager calls from athletes and their coaches who want to be human test subjects, looking for any way to boost their abilities.
A normal signature is a picture drawn in a certain fashion with a specific flow and strokes. We have had signature recognition for a while. Whats new?
Usually a person only has a single signature that they keep throughout their lives, whereas in this scheme it seems that a person can have several drawings. That signature can be found on any of the countless documents you've signed throughout your life. Also, if you see what a person's signature looks like it's somewhat straightforward to determine how to forge it, whereas with the proposed system there are many possible ways in which a particular picture could be drawn, so that you'd likely need to have a video recording to be able to perform a forgery.
I doubt this will really work, most people when they draw and write so it slightly diffrent each time.
If I were implementing it, I would have a person actually draw several copies of the same thing in a row, so that it can learn the likely sources of variability in that person's drawing. It could maybe even learn this a little bit each time the person logs in, so it would be able to adapt as that person's drawing style slowly changes. Any overly abrupt change would be a failed login, and trigger the need for another form of authentication.
> Modern war is impersonal, and it makes the dehumanization of our enemies that much worse, since we tend to be able to do far more damage, far more easily, than we ever have before.
And yet, casualty rates (on all sides) have decreased over the past century. Why is that?
Especially since we just learned that Facebook considers it a "perk" to allow their employees to surf people's profiles, read their email (which they're pushing HARD to get people to use as a sort of bastardized webmail) and see their "private" photos and such.
Oh yeah, and get your password, log in to your account, and upload explicit photos.
Do you have anything to back up any of those claims, presumably articles which don't have the subtitle "rumormonger"?
Just fine. I am, in fact. Facebook is supremely unimportant to me, and to most everyone I know. In fact, even the people I know who think they are 'active' on Facebook will admit that it's annoying, intrusive, and they use it less and less.
This is at least a decade old, was published in 2000 (I like the breathless "unearthed today", like it was some sort of secret -- the original Hancock paper is listed as having 29 cites) and has rather obvious applications for marketing, billing and security.
Yup. For anybody curious, here's the (slightly garbled) research abstract for the paper published in 2000:
Massive transaction streams present a number of opportu nities for data mining techniques Transactions might rep resent calls on a telephone network commercial credit card purchases stock market trades or HTTP requests to a web server While historically such data have been collected for billing or security purposes they are now being used to dis cover how customers or their intermediaries called transac tors use the underlying services For several years we have computed evolving proles called signatures of the transactors in large data streams using handwritten C code The signature for each transactor cap tures the salient features of his transactions through time Programs for processing signatures must be highly opti mized because of the size of the data stream several gi gabytes per day and the number of signatures to maintain hundreds of millions C programs to compute signatures often sacriced readability for performance Consequently they are dicult to verify and maintain Hancock is a domainspecic language created to express computationally ecient signature programs cleanly In this paper we describe the obstacles to computing signatures from massive streams and explain how Hancock addresses these problems For expository purposes we present Han cock using a running example from the telecommunications industry however the language itself is general and applies equally well to other data sources
I honestly hope Colbert wins in SC. The only better guy for president would be Jon Stewart!. Either of them would spank those Dem/Rep around in a debate until they cried.
Heh, I'd love to watch this as well. I was curious about what the requirements were to get into the debates, so I did a little googling. I can't find the criteria for the 2008 Presidential election (which are presumably pretty different, considering a number of the candidates in the debate don't meet the criteria below), but for curiosity's sake here's the criteria used in the the 2004 election debates:
* Evidence of Constitutional Eligibility: yup, Colbert's >35 years old and is a natural born citizen (born in DC, actually)
* Evidence of Ballot Access: he needs to get on enough state ballots to be able to theoretically win the election (270 electoral votes). I'm not familiar with the requirements for each state, but I imagine this could be tricky.
Not sure if you modifying the original text is a joke, but for the curious, here's what it actually says (in the definitions section):
`(4) IDEOLOGICALLY BASED VIOLENCE- The term `ideologically based violence' means the use, planned use, or threatened use of force or violence by a group or individual to promote the group or individual's political, religious, or social beliefs.
Abigail A. Baird,* Jerome Kagan,* Thomas Gaudette, Kathryn A. Walz,* Natalie Hershlag,* and David A. Boas *Laboratory of Infant Study, Department of Psychology, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138; and NMR Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts 02134
The ability to create and hold a mental schema of an object is one of the milestones in cognitive development. Developmental scientists have named the behavioral manifestation of this competence object permanence. Convergent evidence indicates that frontal lobe maturation plays a critical role in the display of object permanence, but methodological and ethical constrains have made it difficult to collect neurophysiological evidence from awake, behaving infants. Near-infrared spectroscopy provides a noninvasive assessment of changes in oxy- and deoxyhemoglobin and total hemoglobin concentration within a prescribed region. The evidence described in this report reveals that the emergence of object permanence is related to an increase in hemoglobin concentration in frontal cortex
Slashdot Mirror
Coal plants don't give Chernobyl style disasters. the fact that its been a long time since a Chernobyl disaster does not mean it can never happen.
The thing is though, even if you had several Chernobyl-style disasters every year, it'd still kill fewer people than coal.
That's all well and good, but I wouldn't trust the Sierra Club for stats like that any more than I would trust BP.
Good point. The following MSNBC article mentions a figure of 24,000 deaths per year in the U.S.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5174391/
Here's an interesting factoid: In the U.S. alone, pollution from coal power plants kills over 30,000 people each year. Of course, this is just a fraction of the worldwide number, and a fraction of those suffering health ailments from coal pollution. If you look at air pollution in general, the WHO estimates 2.4 million annual deaths worldwide.
This means that every few years (or less), more people die from coal than have died in the entire history of nuclear weapons and accidents, including Hiroshima (140,000), Nagasaki (80,000), and Chernobyl (4,000, although this has been argued about).
When locusts swarm, are they ALWAYS chasing one another? Does the idea of there being several leaders in the swarm and the swarm moving due to a bias still play a part in the swarm's movement?
I'm not sure if he's shown this for locusts, but in his talk he was talking about schools of fish who have the now-standard "attract when far away, repel when close" swarming behavior. When such schools are large enough, you only need a relatively few members applying an additional bias to cause the entire swarm to move. He also showed how this neat oscillation behavior occurs when members of the group have different goal points, causing the swarm to oscillate between the multiple destinations, which is something that occurs in real swarms sometimes.
I'm sure a similar mechanism would probably work for locusts as well.
Cool to see Couzin on slashdot... I coincidentally saw a talk of his last week and gave him a brief lab tour. His own research is somewhat outside my area, but one of the most surprising things I recall from his talk is that marching locust swarms are apparently propelled by cannibalistic behavior. If I'm remembering correctly, baby locusts (before they've grown wings) in a region will feed in a pretty disorderly fashion. However, once salt and protein supplies start running low, they get hungry and start trying to eat each other. The researchers realized this when the locusts in their enclosure seemed to be mysteriously disappearing at a steady rate, due to being consumed by their peers. ;)
In any case, once they start eating each other, the locusts start trying to chase the locusts in front of them, while simultaneously avoiding the locusts behind them trying to eat them. The emergent behavior is that the entire swarm moves as a mass until a new area is found where salt and protein supplies are plentiful enough to cause them to switch out of cannibalism-mode. This presumably has a number of ramification on how to control migration of locust swarms, which are an immense destroyer of food resources in the developing world.
Via Wikipedia, here's some of the various criticisms people have raised about the Gates Foundation:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_and_Melinda_Gates_Foundation#Criticisms Promotion of abortion rights and contraception
Some social conservatives also criticize the foundation for its support of organizations that promote abortion rights and contraception, including the International Planned Parenthood Federation, Guttmacher Institute, the United Nations Population Fund and the World Health Organization.[citation needed]
Investment in oil companies and drug companies
According to a January 7 2007 Los Angeles Times article, the foundation invests large amounts of money in companies whose behavior counters the foundation's charitable goals.[31] Examples include oil companies such as Eni and drug companies who withhold medications from the developing world. According to the article, many other foundations behave similarly. In response, the foundation first announced a systematic review of all of its investments to determine whether it should consider divestment from some companies.[32] Later, it revoked this pledge[33] and said it would continue its current practices.[34]
In a May 4 story, the Los Angeles Times again reported a conflict between the foundation investment policies and charitable goals. [15] In this case the issue was Darfur and PetroChina, an oil company in which Gates trustee Warren Buffett owns a large stake via his Berkshire Hathaway company. PetroChina's parent companies is heavily invested in oil extraction in the Sudan.
Diversion of health care resources
In a January/February 2007 Foreign Affairs article, Laurie Garrett claims that many charitable organizations, among whom the Gates Foundation is prominent, harm global health by diverting resources from other important local health care services.[35] For example, by paying relatively high salaries at AIDS clinics, the foundation diverts medical professionals from other parts of developing nations' health care systems; the health care systems' ability to provide care diminishes (except in the area the foundation funds) and the charities may do more harm than good.
I had asked for them to use one of those types of scanners on me but the surgeon said he would not accept the scans because the resolution was too poor and that he would not operate on me until he got the scans HE wanted.
:(
Yeah, I imagine the low resolution would be ok for certain types of diagnosis, but for a surgery they'd probably want something more detailed.
Even so, it still didn't turn out very well.
I'm really sorry to hear that.
I had to have several MRI & CT scans and that friggin tunnel is more than I can handle.
I haven't seen one in person yet, but there's apparently a company which produces something called the Fonar 360, which instead of having a tunnel basically turns the entire room is a magnet. This is useful not just for reducing claustrophobia, but also hypothetically allows for surgery to occur while somebody is inside of an MRI. I think the spatial resolution however is quite a bit weaker than typical scanners.
The same company also has an Upright MRI product, where the patient sits down with open space in front of them.
Is there some kind of long-running inside joke about this fictional "solanum" virus?
It might be kind of obscure, but "solanum" is a reference to the fictional Solanum virus in the Zombie Survival Guide by Max Brooks. It's also alluded to, but I don't think is explicitly named, in the quasi-sequel World War Z. Both are awesome books, btw, and I highly recommend reading them.
Here's a quick primer on how birds regurgitate food to feed their young:
http://www.rspb.org.uk/advice/expert/previous/regurgitate.asp
What a despicable thing to do to an animal just to make it tastier to eat.
The photos of tubes being put down the throats of ducks certainly look horrific, but animal rights activists have a tendency to over-dramatize things. From an article in Time magazine:
http://www.time.com/time/arts/article/0,8599,1669732,00.html
The debate is centered on the practice of gavage, in which corn is force-fed to farm-raised ducks through a funnel down their throats. Some argue that gavage is inhumane, while others counter that the physiology of a duck is not the same as a human. "It seems terrible if you don't know that a duck's esophagus is lined with a very thick cuticle, if you don't realize that baby ducks are fed by their mother pushing her beak down the baby's throat," says Ariane Daguin, owner of D'Artagnan, the largest foie gras purveyor in the U.S. Recent studies by Dr. Daniel Guémené, a leading expert on the physiological effects of gavage, have shown that ducks with young in the wild were under more stress than the ducks being fed through gavage. And both The American Veterinary Medical Association's House of Delegates and the American Association of Avian Pathologists have concluded that foie is not a product of animal cruelty.
Also, here's an abstract of research by Guémené:
http://www.edpsciences.org/articles/animres/pdf/2001/02/faure.pdf
The debate on welfare issues related to the force feeding of ducks and geese involves understanding the reactions of the animals to the force feeding process. Two types of experiment were performed. Ducks and geese were trained to be fed in a pen 8 metres away from their rearing pen and were then force fed in the feeding pen. The hypothesis was that if force feeding caused aversion, the animals would not spontaneously go to the test pen. There were some signs of aversion in ducks, but not full avoidance, and there were no signs of aversion in geese. In another experiment, the flight distances of ducks from the person who performed the force feeding and from an unknown observer were measured. Ducks avoided the unknown person more than the force feeder. Their avoidance of the force feeder decreased during the force feeding period. There was no development of aversion to the force feeder during the force feeding process.
for instance at this place, where we have, as only one example of a high ranking AI-researcher, Dr. Feiyue Wang, Chinese Academy of Sciences (also advisor to the government), who does interesting research like, e.g. "Pedestrian Detection from a Moving Vehicle" (translate for yourself). I had this person on the radar earlier.
Could you be a little bit more explicit about what you're implying? I'm not sure I see why you're so paranoid about a Chinese person doing computer vision research. Of course, I might be a little biased because I used to do research in computer vision myself and I'm pretty used to seeing dozens of papers on pedestrian tracking and its variations at conferences.
You first.
Apparently many researchers who do muscle augmentation research have to turn down eager calls from athletes and their coaches who want to be human test subjects, looking for any way to boost their abilities.
A normal signature is a picture drawn in a certain fashion with a specific flow and strokes.
We have had signature recognition for a while.
Whats new?
Usually a person only has a single signature that they keep throughout their lives, whereas in this scheme it seems that a person can have several drawings. That signature can be found on any of the countless documents you've signed throughout your life. Also, if you see what a person's signature looks like it's somewhat straightforward to determine how to forge it, whereas with the proposed system there are many possible ways in which a particular picture could be drawn, so that you'd likely need to have a video recording to be able to perform a forgery.
I doubt this will really work, most people when they draw and write so it slightly diffrent each time.
If I were implementing it, I would have a person actually draw several copies of the same thing in a row, so that it can learn the likely sources of variability in that person's drawing. It could maybe even learn this a little bit each time the person logs in, so it would be able to adapt as that person's drawing style slowly changes. Any overly abrupt change would be a failed login, and trigger the need for another form of authentication.
> Modern war is impersonal, and it makes the dehumanization of our enemies that much worse, since we tend to be able to do far more damage, far more easily, than we ever have before.
And yet, casualty rates (on all sides) have decreased over the past century. Why is that?
Especially since we just learned that Facebook considers it a "perk" to allow their employees to surf people's profiles, read their email (which they're pushing HARD to get people to use as a sort of bastardized webmail) and see their "private" photos and such.
Oh yeah, and get your password, log in to your account, and upload explicit photos.
Do you have anything to back up any of those claims, presumably articles which don't have the subtitle "rumormonger"?
Just fine. I am, in fact. Facebook is supremely unimportant to me, and to most everyone I know. In fact, even the people I know who think they are 'active' on Facebook will admit that it's annoying, intrusive, and they use it less and less.
I'm guess you're not a college student, eh?
Additionally, one can easily download the Hancock source code (for non-commercial use), manuals, and various research papers here:
http://www.research.att.com/~kfisher/hancock/
Conspiracy!
This is at least a decade old, was published in 2000 (I like the breathless "unearthed today", like it was some sort of secret -- the original Hancock paper is listed as having 29 cites) and has rather obvious applications for marketing, billing and security.
Yup. For anybody curious, here's the (slightly garbled) research abstract for the paper published in 2000:
Hancock: a language for extracting signatures from data streams
Massive transaction streams present a number of opportu
nities for data mining techniques Transactions might rep
resent calls on a telephone network commercial credit card
purchases stock market trades or HTTP requests to a web
server While historically such data have been collected for
billing or security purposes they are now being used to dis
cover how customers or their intermediaries called transac
tors use the underlying services
For several years we have computed evolving proles called
signatures of the transactors in large data streams using
handwritten C code The signature for each transactor cap
tures the salient features of his transactions through time
Programs for processing signatures must be highly opti
mized because of the size of the data stream several gi
gabytes per day and the number of signatures to maintain
hundreds of millions C programs to compute signatures
often sacriced readability for performance Consequently
they are dicult to verify and maintain
Hancock is a domainspecic language created to express
computationally ecient signature programs cleanly In this
paper we describe the obstacles to computing signatures
from massive streams and explain how Hancock addresses
these problems For expository purposes we present Han
cock using a running example from the telecommunications
industry however the language itself is general and applies
equally well to other data sources
I honestly hope Colbert wins in SC. The only better guy for president would be Jon Stewart!. Either of them would spank those Dem/Rep around in a debate until they cried.
Heh, I'd love to watch this as well. I was curious about what the requirements were to get into the debates, so I did a little googling. I can't find the criteria for the 2008 Presidential election (which are presumably pretty different, considering a number of the candidates in the debate don't meet the criteria below), but for curiosity's sake here's the criteria used in the the 2004 election debates:
http://debates.org/pages/candsel2004.html
* Evidence of Constitutional Eligibility: yup, Colbert's >35 years old and is a natural born citizen (born in DC, actually)
* Evidence of Ballot Access: he needs to get on enough state ballots to be able to theoretically win the election (270 electoral votes). I'm not familiar with the requirements for each state, but I imagine this could be tricky.
* Indicators of Electoral Support: He needs to poll at least 15% nationally. He's already polling ahead of Bill Richardson and Dennis Kucinich. He also got 13% in polls which pitted him against Hillary Clinton and Rudy Giuliani.
psychiatry != cognitive psychology
I've pasted the abstract for the paper Natalie Portman is co-author on below. You can decide for yourself whether or not it's "pseudoscience." Frontal Lobe Activation during Object Permanence: Data from Near-Infrared Spectroscopy
Abigail A. Baird,* Jerome Kagan,* Thomas Gaudette, Kathryn A. Walz,*
Natalie Hershlag,* and David A. Boas
*Laboratory of Infant Study, Department of Psychology, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138;
and NMR Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts 02134
The ability to create and hold a mental schema of an
object is one of the milestones in cognitive development.
Developmental scientists have named the behavioral
manifestation of this competence object permanence.
Convergent evidence indicates that frontal
lobe maturation plays a critical role in the display of
object permanence, but methodological and ethical
constrains have made it difficult to collect neurophysiological
evidence from awake, behaving infants.
Near-infrared spectroscopy provides a noninvasive assessment
of changes in oxy- and deoxyhemoglobin and
total hemoglobin concentration within a prescribed
region. The evidence described in this report reveals
that the emergence of object permanence is related to
an increase in hemoglobin concentration in frontal
cortex
> Conservatives will always say "Man, nothing stimulates the economy like a war."
Do you have a single example of a prominent conservative saying that in recent history?
Could you cite the relevant portion of the bill regarding thought crime? I can't seem to find it.