I can do better. Run to the library and take out a copy of Michael Crichton's latest technocrap thriller, 'State of Fear.' Throughout the novel he makes extensive reference to papers that purport to refute various aspects of global warming theory, from the temperature and CO2 measurement techniques used, to the possible implications of warming, to various potential natural explanations. Most of them, as I recall, were from peer-reviewed journals, though there were also some from popular science magazines and newspapers. I'm not trying to argue that any of these are correct, or even scientifically reliable; I haven't read them. All I'm saying is that if you can point out peer-reviewed articles that make claim X, , it's almost certain you can also find some that claim 'not X.'
Most of the papers that are critical of global warming are also published by SCIENTISTS in PEER REVIEWED journals; aren't they also subject to the most rigorous scientific scrutiny? And do you really think there's no pressure for climatologists to 'toe the party line,' so to speak, when it comes to global warming? In fact, I'll go one further, and say that maybe it's because dissenters have trouble securing funding elsewhere that they have to rely on petrochemical companies, who, of course, are only too happy to spend some money muddying the waters of public consensus. Personally, I do believe human behavior is influencing the climate, but let's not pretend that the pro-warming camp doesn't have an agenda of its own.
Amen to that. Hard work and academic achievement are fine and laudable, but you will never again in your life have a chance to party and screw like you will in college, especially if you become a lawyer. Hopefully he'll ease up a bit while he does his master's and still get a chance to experience some of the extracurricular education.
How many other Mercury astronauts do you think the average person can name, besides Neil and Buzz? Would Grissom be so well known if he, too, hadn't died in a tragedy? Since the end of the Apollo program most of the work done by astronauts has been less 'grand' (if no less important for that) and so it's no surprising that the only time most people think about them at all is when they die in the line of duty.
More to the point, I worked at a Shack when I was in high school, and their idea of what constitutes a 'robotics kit' is usually a few precut pieces of wood that you glue together and attach a motor to. I'm sure you can find something more worthwhile online.
At this point, is it really that big an achievement to find another way to compromise a Diebold voting machine? How many ways are there to say "this system sucks?"
"A recent Reuters article mentions that Facebook user Igor Hiller, 17, a freshman at University of California, Santa Barbara is organizing a real-world demonstration next Monday at Facebook's downtown Palo Alto headquarters."
In other news, people have way, way too much free time.
Maybe I wasn't sufficiently clear. No doubt there are people pushing the idea that all's well, and that nothing humans do has any effect on the climate. But I wouldn't say that they bear the main responsibility for the world-at-large's failure to act.
"So congratulations, guys: you won. You kept us from doing something about the problem until it was too late, and now we're going to be stuck with it."
I call shenanigans all over that. It's not some vast conspiracy of SUV-loving, gas guzzling eco-terrorists that keeps things as they are: it's the human nature to pursue luxury and convenience now at the expense of consequences down the road. I would say the message of human-driven climate change greatly dominates opposing viewpoints, and yet I still see people driving Hummers.
If you like a less polarized example, think about antibiotic resistance. Despite years of hard evidence that overuse of antibiotics increases resistance (to our long-term detriment) every parent with a sniffling kid demands a pill even when the doctor tells them it's completely unnecessary. We want what we want now, and damned be the future--it has nothing to do with the neocons (or whoever) leading us astray.
I haven't read the paper, but it seems like they were only trying to produce a cell-mediated (i.e., T-cell based) immune response, whereas generally, a strong immune response is both T- and B-cell based. There was a paper in Nature Medicine a few years ago where, similar to this, they removed antigen-presenting cells from patients and engineered them to display HIV proteins, resulting in a strong immune response when they were returned to the patient's bodies. I wonder if something like that could be used here to get both arms of the immune system into the fight.
There was a paper in Nature Medicine in 2004 (Lu et al.) where scientists removed dendritic cells (another type of immune system cell) and engineered them to display HIV antigens on their surface. Since T-cells and B-cells are both stimulated by dendritic cells, this kicked off a more robust immune response, resulting in pretty impressive long term viral suppression. It's not a cure, but if it can delay the use of antiretroviral drugs (with their attendant, debilitating side effects) then it's probably worth looking into more closely.
"Wiping out the immune system is invasive. It is probably impossible to know when you have avanced melanoma, but how many of the 15 died of a cold?"
In an early phase trial like this, you can believe the study doctors were taking every possible precaution with the subjects once they were immunocompromised. It doesn't help you get grants when your treatment works perfectly, but your sloppy procedures kill the patients anyway.
According to TFA, this capsule is also supposed to replace the shuttle once it starts flying. Does it really make sense design a spacecraft that can land on the moon, (maybe) Mars, and do the kind of workhorse activity the shuttle has traditionally handled? Jack of all trades and master of none, maybe?
"Admittedly, simulated images weren't enough for this guy, but he would have been killing much sooner if the internet hadn't sated his needs." Or maybe the ready availibility of violent porn caused it to lose its fascination for him, driving him to more extreme acts and eventually murder. We can only speculate about how the porn affected him, though I agree wholeheartedly with former FBI profiler John Douglas: (paraphrase) "Do I believe that, but for pornography, he would never have committed this crime? Absolutely not."
My bacteriology professor back in college liked to point out how humans are along a line of creatures that developed increasingly complex physiology--muscles, skin, nervous systems and sensory organs, etc., while at the same time maintaining fairly limited ways of getting and using cellular energy. Bacteria, on the other hand, haven't developed as much physiological complexity, but they have astonishing metabolic diversity--if it exists in the natural world, odds are pretty good that somewhere there's a bacterium that can metabolize it.
And those Wikipedia pages prove my point exactly. Venera 4 never reached the surface. Veneras 13 and 14 did, and they survived for a grand total of 3 hours--not bad considering their reported design life was 32 minutes each.
Venus is great, if you want to land a probe on the surface to do some quick soil sampling, or take some pictures, but the environment is just too harsh to spend much time in. Landers on Mars have a much greater life expectancy, so it's no surprise that's where most of the attention gets focused.
But it would be tough to keep a vehicle on the surface of Venus long enough to do much good science...Mercury isn't too terribly interesting...and you can't really 'land' on any of the gas giants.
Mars is fairly hospitable to our machines (as proven by the long lives of Spirit and Opportunity) and fairly interesting from a scientific standpoint.
IANARSPD
"I wish media companies such as cnet had to help pay the medical insurance costs for all the millions of obese kids who have become that way because their parents were too terrified to let them outside for fear of all these boogeymen. It's digusting that when the biggest killer in our country is heart disease, the best cure for this disease (exercise) is discouraged due to risks that statistically non-existant."
Riiiiight...because the main reason kids don't get enough exercise is because their parents are afraid to let them out of the house. Not because they'd rather sit around on the computer, or because they drink and eat junk food. Nope, it's the fearmongers.
Damn...you know, for the longest time I thought I was the only one expressing any Jitt-love. It's nice to know the whole thing wasn't some crazy fever dream.
Have you ever tried calling him? He used to have his phone number posted online, not sure if he still does.
Slashdot Mirror
I can do better. Run to the library and take out a copy of Michael Crichton's latest technocrap thriller, 'State of Fear.' Throughout the novel he makes extensive reference to papers that purport to refute various aspects of global warming theory, from the temperature and CO2 measurement techniques used, to the possible implications of warming, to various potential natural explanations. Most of them, as I recall, were from peer-reviewed journals, though there were also some from popular science magazines and newspapers. I'm not trying to argue that any of these are correct, or even scientifically reliable; I haven't read them. All I'm saying is that if you can point out peer-reviewed articles that make claim X, , it's almost certain you can also find some that claim 'not X.'
"...Yau will have 'no choice but to consider other options'..." Clearly he has the mathematician's flair for nontechnical communication.
Most of the papers that are critical of global warming are also published by SCIENTISTS in PEER REVIEWED journals; aren't they also subject to the most rigorous scientific scrutiny? And do you really think there's no pressure for climatologists to 'toe the party line,' so to speak, when it comes to global warming? In fact, I'll go one further, and say that maybe it's because dissenters have trouble securing funding elsewhere that they have to rely on petrochemical companies, who, of course, are only too happy to spend some money muddying the waters of public consensus. Personally, I do believe human behavior is influencing the climate, but let's not pretend that the pro-warming camp doesn't have an agenda of its own.
Amen to that. Hard work and academic achievement are fine and laudable, but you will never again in your life have a chance to party and screw like you will in college, especially if you become a lawyer. Hopefully he'll ease up a bit while he does his master's and still get a chance to experience some of the extracurricular education.
I think in the first season Leela also mentioned how the effect of nuclear winter canceled out all the global warming of the 20th century.
...a teeny, tiny seagull flies into the turbine?
How many other Mercury astronauts do you think the average person can name, besides Neil and Buzz? Would Grissom be so well known if he, too, hadn't died in a tragedy? Since the end of the Apollo program most of the work done by astronauts has been less 'grand' (if no less important for that) and so it's no surprising that the only time most people think about them at all is when they die in the line of duty.
More to the point, I worked at a Shack when I was in high school, and their idea of what constitutes a 'robotics kit' is usually a few precut pieces of wood that you glue together and attach a motor to. I'm sure you can find something more worthwhile online.
At this point, is it really that big an achievement to find another way to compromise a Diebold voting machine? How many ways are there to say "this system sucks?"
"A recent Reuters article mentions that Facebook user Igor Hiller, 17, a freshman at University of California, Santa Barbara is organizing a real-world demonstration next Monday at Facebook's downtown Palo Alto headquarters." In other news, people have way, way too much free time.
Maybe I wasn't sufficiently clear. No doubt there are people pushing the idea that all's well, and that nothing humans do has any effect on the climate. But I wouldn't say that they bear the main responsibility for the world-at-large's failure to act.
"So congratulations, guys: you won. You kept us from doing something about the problem until it was too late, and now we're going to be stuck with it." I call shenanigans all over that. It's not some vast conspiracy of SUV-loving, gas guzzling eco-terrorists that keeps things as they are: it's the human nature to pursue luxury and convenience now at the expense of consequences down the road. I would say the message of human-driven climate change greatly dominates opposing viewpoints, and yet I still see people driving Hummers. If you like a less polarized example, think about antibiotic resistance. Despite years of hard evidence that overuse of antibiotics increases resistance (to our long-term detriment) every parent with a sniffling kid demands a pill even when the doctor tells them it's completely unnecessary. We want what we want now, and damned be the future--it has nothing to do with the neocons (or whoever) leading us astray.
Oh yeah, no argument with you there. I'd be willing to bet most of these folks spent the next couple of weeks after their chemo in clean rooms.
I haven't read the paper, but it seems like they were only trying to produce a cell-mediated (i.e., T-cell based) immune response, whereas generally, a strong immune response is both T- and B-cell based. There was a paper in Nature Medicine a few years ago where, similar to this, they removed antigen-presenting cells from patients and engineered them to display HIV proteins, resulting in a strong immune response when they were returned to the patient's bodies. I wonder if something like that could be used here to get both arms of the immune system into the fight.
There was a paper in Nature Medicine in 2004 (Lu et al.) where scientists removed dendritic cells (another type of immune system cell) and engineered them to display HIV antigens on their surface. Since T-cells and B-cells are both stimulated by dendritic cells, this kicked off a more robust immune response, resulting in pretty impressive long term viral suppression. It's not a cure, but if it can delay the use of antiretroviral drugs (with their attendant, debilitating side effects) then it's probably worth looking into more closely.
"Wiping out the immune system is invasive. It is probably impossible to know when you have avanced melanoma, but how many of the 15 died of a cold?" In an early phase trial like this, you can believe the study doctors were taking every possible precaution with the subjects once they were immunocompromised. It doesn't help you get grants when your treatment works perfectly, but your sloppy procedures kill the patients anyway.
According to TFA, this capsule is also supposed to replace the shuttle once it starts flying. Does it really make sense design a spacecraft that can land on the moon, (maybe) Mars, and do the kind of workhorse activity the shuttle has traditionally handled? Jack of all trades and master of none, maybe?
for someone to put his foot down. And that foot is me."
"Admittedly, simulated images weren't enough for this guy, but he would have been killing much sooner if the internet hadn't sated his needs." Or maybe the ready availibility of violent porn caused it to lose its fascination for him, driving him to more extreme acts and eventually murder. We can only speculate about how the porn affected him, though I agree wholeheartedly with former FBI profiler John Douglas: (paraphrase) "Do I believe that, but for pornography, he would never have committed this crime? Absolutely not."
My bacteriology professor back in college liked to point out how humans are along a line of creatures that developed increasingly complex physiology--muscles, skin, nervous systems and sensory organs, etc., while at the same time maintaining fairly limited ways of getting and using cellular energy. Bacteria, on the other hand, haven't developed as much physiological complexity, but they have astonishing metabolic diversity--if it exists in the natural world, odds are pretty good that somewhere there's a bacterium that can metabolize it.
And those Wikipedia pages prove my point exactly. Venera 4 never reached the surface. Veneras 13 and 14 did, and they survived for a grand total of 3 hours--not bad considering their reported design life was 32 minutes each. Venus is great, if you want to land a probe on the surface to do some quick soil sampling, or take some pictures, but the environment is just too harsh to spend much time in. Landers on Mars have a much greater life expectancy, so it's no surprise that's where most of the attention gets focused.
But it would be tough to keep a vehicle on the surface of Venus long enough to do much good science...Mercury isn't too terribly interesting...and you can't really 'land' on any of the gas giants. Mars is fairly hospitable to our machines (as proven by the long lives of Spirit and Opportunity) and fairly interesting from a scientific standpoint. IANARSPD
...you can put a stop to all this. Just walk away, and we will spare your lives."
"I wish media companies such as cnet had to help pay the medical insurance costs for all the millions of obese kids who have become that way because their parents were too terrified to let them outside for fear of all these boogeymen. It's digusting that when the biggest killer in our country is heart disease, the best cure for this disease (exercise) is discouraged due to risks that statistically non-existant." Riiiiight...because the main reason kids don't get enough exercise is because their parents are afraid to let them out of the house. Not because they'd rather sit around on the computer, or because they drink and eat junk food. Nope, it's the fearmongers.
Damn...you know, for the longest time I thought I was the only one expressing any Jitt-love. It's nice to know the whole thing wasn't some crazy fever dream. Have you ever tried calling him? He used to have his phone number posted online, not sure if he still does.