Category Archives: Science

Deactivated
May 20 2013

News Mash: Caffeine deactivated in gum, but not in human cloning?

Huh.

Ooohhhh…

OK.

Using caffeine to clone H U M A N stem cells?

Totally AWESOME!

[via RawStory]Breakthrough: Scientists use caffeine to clone stem cells from human skin ~by Stephen C. Webster

Human stem cells have for the first time been cloned from adult skin cells through the use of hollowed-out embryos as a type of organic petri dish, scientists at Oregon Health & Science University (OHSU) announced Wednesday in a study published by the scientific journal Cell. And in a surprising twist, the discovery was made possible thanks to everybody’s favorite stimulant: caffeine.

Scientists led by Dr. Shoukhrat Mitalipov took donated egg cells and ripped out their DNA using a technique called somatic cell nuclear transfer, replacing it with DNA pulled from an adult’s skin cells.

The idea behind this technique is that the stem cells which might grow in the cloned embryo would be a perfect match for the skin cell donor, who then could benefit from the adaptive reconstruction therapies that stem cells offer. Scientists have tried for years to make this work with human cells, but to no avail. However, once OHSU researchers figured out how to make it work with monkeys and mice, it was only a matter of time before human stem cell cloning became reality.

Dr. Mitalipov explained in an advisory that the stem cells his team produced were able to convert themselves “into several different cell types, including nerve cells, liver cells and heart cells,” just like normal stem cells.

The trick to getting the cells growing, they discovered, was a little bit of electricity and a dab of caffeine. “The Starbucks experiment,” Mitalipov quipped to NPR.

…[Read More]

But chewing caffeine gum?

Apparently…

Science (via the FDA) thinks is a really BAD idea.

[via NYDailyNews] Wrigley pulls caffeinated Alert Energy gum amid FDA concerns ~By Tracy MillerDeactivated

Wrigley has put its caffeinated chewing gum to rest, at least for now.

The company announced Wednesday it has “paused” sales of its new Alert Energy, which boasted 40 mg of caffeine per piece, the same buzz as a half-cup of coffee.

The decision follows last week’s announcement by the Food and Drug Administration that it is taking a “fresh look” at the effects of added caffeine in foods.

“After discussions with the FDA, we have a greater appreciation for its concern about the proliferation of caffeine in the nation’s food supply,” Casey Keller, Wrigley’s president for North America, said in a statement, adding that the company had marketed Alert Energy “in a safe and responsible manner to consumers 25 years and older.”

Amid the exploding sales of highly caffeinated energy drinks, the stimulant is also popping up in kid-friendly foods like potato chips and candy.

The FDA hasn’t reexamined the use of caffeine in food or drink since the 1950s, when it was approved for colas, the agency’s deputy commissioner of foods, Michael Taylor, told the Associated Press.

The new trend in caffeinated food products is “disturbing” and “beyond anything FDA envisioned,” Taylor said.

…[Read More]

Yeah, Science…

You make so much sense, with your consistencies?

Sometimes it’s scary!

But, hey…

It’s why I love you.

No, really…

I do.

A whole lots!

*wink*

Made in china
May 18 2013

News Mash: Check out these gas masks…No, seriously, thanks to Science? DO!

Today?

Yup…

I find THIS (below) S U P E R interesting:

[via io9] An Illustrated History Of Gas Masks ~Vincze Miklós

The gas mask has a history that dates back thousands of years, though it wasn’t until World War I that it became nightmare fodder for Doctor Who and countless other stories. Here is a sometimes terrifying history of the gas mask, from its beginnings through the present day.

Playing leapfrog, 1934

Above. Able seamen at the Royal Navy Anti-Gas School at Tipnor, Portsmouth play leapfrog wearing gas masks, to accustom them to carrying out strenuous tasks in respirators, on January 22 1934.

(Photo by William Vanderson/Fox Photos/Getty Images)

 

The common sponge, ancient Greece

According to the Popular Mechanics (January 1984):

“The common sponge was used in ancient Greece as a gas mask, a compress, a contraceptive – and, of course, for bathing.”

(via Wikimedia Commons/Tom Oates)

Banū Mūsā Gas Mask, c. 850 A.D

This gas mask was designed by the Banu Musa brothers in Baghdad, Iraq to protect workers working in polluted wells. The device was mentioned in the brothers book “Book of Ingenious Devices” that describes 100 inventions.

(Illustrations are from the brothers’ book, but not about the gas mask, via Wikimedia Commons 1 – 2)

Plague Doctor’s Mask

The bird-like beak mask was often filled with sweet or strong smelling herbs or spices – lavender, mint, camphor or dried roses. They’ve believed it would banish the evil smells.

(via Wikimedia Commons/Traité de la peste, 1721 and etsy/Tom Banwell)

Alexander von Humboldt’s mask, 1799

It was the first device with respirator, invented for miners by a Prussian mining official Alexander von Humboldt.

(via Asher Rare Books)

A smoke protecting apparatus for firemen by John and Charles Deane, 1823

In the early 1820s John Deane have seen a burning stable with trapped horses in it. To get through the smoke and rescue all the horses he put on an old knight-in-armor helmet air-pumped by a hose from a fire brigade water pump. The saving was successful, and in 1823 John and Charles Deane have invented the Smoke Helmet:

“An apparatus or machine to be worn by persons entering rooms or other places filled with smoke or other vapour, for the purpose of extinguishing fire or extricating persons or property therein.”

The device was a single copper helmet with a long leather hose attached to the rear. A long leather hose was attached to the rear. Five years later it was converted for underwater use.

(via Submerged)

Lewis Haslett: “Inhaler or Lung Protector”, 1847, patented in 1849

It allowed breathing through a nose or mouthpiece fitted with two one-way clapper walves. The filter was made of wool or other porous substances with water could keeping out dust.

(via Google Patent Search)

The charcoal air-filter of John Stenhouse, 1854 (patented in 1860 and 1867)

 

In the copper-framed mask there was powdered wood charcoal between the two hemispheres. The charcoal could be replaced through a small door in the wire gauze.

(via Wikimedia Commons)

John Tyndall’s respirator, 1871

The Irish physicist took Stenhouse’s mask and added a filter of cotton wool saturated with charcoal, lime and glycerin. The new device has filtered smoke and some noxious gases from air.

(via Wikimedia Commons and steampunksp)

Samuel Barton’s respirators, 1874

This respirator had rubber-and-metal face cover, glass eyepieces, rubber-coated hood and a metal canister on the front of the mask contained lime, glycerin-soaked cotton wool and charcoal.

(via Google Patent Search/148868)

Smoke-Excluding Mask, George Neally, 1877 and 1879

The first version had a filter carried on the chest, but two years later he patented another version with the filter mounted directly on the facepiece.

(via Google Patent Search – 1 and 2)

Fleuss Apparatus, 1878

The rubberized mask covered the whole face was connected via tubes to a breathing bag.

(via History of Diving Museum)

…[Read More - See All HERE!]

And why?

Simply this…

Given the news of late, of the viruses (Thanks, Science–You guys SUCK!!!!) that could spark a Global Outbreak?

I’m getting far more that just a tad bit concerned:

[via Independent.Uk.co] ‘Appalling irresponsibility’: Senior scientists attack Chinese researchers for creating new strains Made in chinaof influenza virus in veterinary laboratory ~by Steve Connor

Experts warn of danger that the new viral strains created by mixing bird-flu virus with human influenza could escape from the laboratory to cause a global pandemic killing millions of people.

Senior scientists have criticised the “appalling irresponsibility” of researchers in China who have deliberately created new strains of influenza virus in a veterinary laboratory.

They warned there is a danger that the new viral strains created by mixing bird-flu virus with human influenza could escape from the laboratory to cause a global pandemic killing millions of people.

Lord May of Oxford, a former government chief scientist and past president of the Royal Society, denounced the study published today in the journal Science as doing nothing to further the understanding and prevention of flu pandemics.

“They claim they are doing this to help develop vaccines and such like. In fact the real reason is that they are driven by blind ambition with no common sense whatsoever,” Lord May told The Independent.

…[Read More]

So?

I might start looking into the whole gas mask deal.

And what can I say…

But I like to know all the makeups of my options.

All of which?

Freak terrifying!

Ugh.

LONDON (AP) — 2 new viruses could both spark global outbreaks ~By MARIA CHENG

Two respiratory viruses in different parts of the world have captured the attention of global health officials – a novel coronavirus in the Middle East and a new bird flu spreading in China.

Last week, the coronavirus related to SARS spread to France, where one patient who probably caught the disease in Dubai infected his hospital roommate. Officials are now trying to track down everyone who went on a tour group holiday to Dubai with the first patient as well as all contacts of the second patient. Since it was first spotted last year, the new coronavirus has infected 34 people, killing 18 of them. Nearly all had some connection to the Middle East.

The World Health Organization, however, says there is no reason to think the virus is restricted to the Middle East and has advised health officials worldwide to closely monitor any unusual respiratory cases.

At the same time, a new bird flu strain, H7N9, has been infecting people in China since at least March, causing 32 deaths out of 131 known cases.

WHO, which is closely monitoring the viruses, says both have the potential to cause a pandemic – a global epidemic – if they evolve into a form easily spread between people. Here’s a crash course in what we know so far about them:

Q: How are humans getting infected by the new coronavirus?

A: Scientists don’t exactly know. There is some suggestion the disease is jumping directly from animals like camels or goats to humans, but officials are also considering other sources, like a common environmental exposure. The new coronavirus is most closely related to a bat virus, but it’s possible that bats are transmitting the disease via another source before humans catch it.

Q: Can the new coronavirus be spread from human to human?

A: In some circumstances, yes. There have been clusters of the disease in Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Britain and now France, where the virus has spread from person-to-person. Most of those infected were in very close contact, such as people taking care of a sick family member or health workers treating patients. There is no evidence the virus is spreading easily between people and all cases of human-to-human transmission have been limited so far.

Q: How are people catching the bird flu H7N9?

A: Some studies suggest the new bird flu is jumping directly to people from poultry at live bird markets. Cases have slowed down since Chinese authorities began shutting down such markets. But it’s unclear exactly what kind of exposure is needed for humans to catch the virus and very few animals have tested positive for it. Unlike the last bird flu strain to cause global concern, H5N1, the new strain doesn’t appear to make birds sick and may be spreading silently in poultry populations.

Q: What precautions can people take against these new viruses?

A: WHO is not advising people to avoid traveling to the Middle East or China but is urging people to practice good personal hygiene like regular hand-washing. “Until we know how and where humans are contracting these two diseases, we cannot control them,” said Gregory Hartl, WHO spokesman.

…[Read More]

And seemingly?

Just getting worse as the days go on.

Hmmm.

I wonder…

can I order ANY of these (see top article above) in bulk?

cause, I have a feeling…

We are all gonna be needing them.

Jeez.

Bottoms up
May 18 2013

News Mash: Scientific research has a money problem, and humanity? Has a scientific research problem!

Vicious circle.

The biggest problem with Science today?

Money.

And by “money” we are not talking a lack of funding…

As much as we are talking an overriding motivation behind search and discovery:

 [via Gizmodo]Why Is Science Behind a Paywall? ~by Alex Mayyasi – Priceonomi

Scientists’ work follows a consistent pattern. They apply for grants, perform their research, and publish the results in a journal. The process is so routine it almost seems inevitable. But what if it’s not the best way to do science?

Although the act of publishing seems to entail sharing your research with the world, most published papers sit behind paywalls. The journals that publish them charge thousands of dollars per subscription, putting access out of reach to all but the most minted universities. Subscription costs have risen dramatically over the past generation. According to critics of the publishers, those increases are the result of the consolidation of journals by private companies who unduly profit off their market share of scientific knowledge.

When we investigated these alleged scrooges of the science world, we discovered that, for their opponents, the battle against this parasitic profiting is only one part of the scientific process that needs to be fixed.

Advocates of “open science” argue that the current model of science, developed in the 1600s, needs to change and take full advantage of the Internet to share research and collaborate in the discovery making process. When the entire scientific community can connect instantly online, they argue, there is simply no reason for research teams to work in silos and share their findings according to the publishing schedules of journals.

Subscriptions limit access to scientific knowledge. And when careers are made and tenures earned by publishing in prestigious journals, then sharing datasets, collaborating with other scientists, and crowdsourcing difficult problems are all disincentivized. Following 17th century practices, open science advocates insist, limits the progress of science in the 21st.

…[Read More]

Unfortunately…

Not only does this hinder research?

But it dangerously contaminates the potential consequences of the Scientific findings…

Which directly affects us all!

(NaturalNews) Science will destroy humanity, says team of scientists ~by J. D. HeyesBottoms up

One of the primary goals of science is to advance knowledge and understanding to improve the human condition, but all too often this noble field of study has devolved into a profit-seeking quest for power, at the expense of mankind.

Indeed, the science of technology is perhaps the worst culprit, a team of mathematicians, philosophers and scientists at Oxford University’s Future of Humanity Institute is warning.

The team, in a forthcoming paper titled, Existential Risk Prevention as Global Priority, says humankind’s over-reliance on technology could lead to its demise, and that human beings are facing a risk to our own existence.

What’s more, the team says humankind’s demise is not far off; it could come as soon as the next century.

‘Threats we have no track record of surviving…

“There is a great race on between humanity’s technological powers and our wisdom to use those powers well,” institute director Nick Bostrom told MSN. “I’m worried that the former will pull too far ahead.”

Since our existence on this planet there have been those who have predicted the end of world as we know it, the latest “fad” in this realm being the hoopla surrounding the now-disproven 2012 Mayan prophesies. Still, folks can’t seem to let go of the notion that, at some point in our future, life on Earth will cease to exist.

From Bostrom’s paper:

Humanity has survived what we might call natural existential risks for hundreds of thousands of years; thus it is prima facie unlikely that any of them will do us in within the next hundred. This conclusion is buttressed when we analyze specific risks from nature, such as asteroid impacts, supervolcanic eruptions, earthquakes, gamma-ray bursts, and so forth: Empirical impact distributions and scientific models suggest that the likelihood of extinction because of these kinds of risk is extremely small on a time scale of a century or so.

In contrast, our species is introducing entirely new kinds of existential risk – threats we have no track record of surviving. Our longevity as a species therefore offers no strong prior grounds for confident optimism. Consideration of specific existential – risk scenarios bears out the suspicion that the great bulk of existential risk in the foreseeable future consists of anthropogenic existential risks – that is, those arising from human activity.

Continuing, Bostrom predicts that future technological breakthroughs “may radically expand our ability to manipulate the external world or our own biology.”

“As our powers expand, so will the scale of their potential consequences – intended and unintended, positive and negative.”

Bostrom goes onto say that well-known threats like an asteroid strike on the planet, supervolcanic eruptions and earthquakes likely won’t threaten humanity in the near future. Even a nuclear explosion won’t completely wipe out life; in that event, he says, enough people would survive to rebuild.

Rather, it is the unknowns that will wind up as a bane on the existence of humankind.

Science has an obligation to serve mankind

Not all of the news is bad, Bostrom says.

“The Earth will remain habitable for at least another billion years. Civilization began only a few thousand years ago. If we do not destroy mankind, these few thousand years may be only a tiny fraction of the whole of civilized human history,” he writes.

Mike Adams, The Health Ranger, notes in an Infographic posted here at NaturalNews that the onus for protecting humanity falls on those who are creating the technology.

“If an action or policy has a suspected risk of causing harm to the public or to the environment, the burden of proof that it is NOT harmful falls on those taking the action,” the graphic says.

Check out the rest of the graphic here.

…[Read More]

And…

Maybe even one day?

Sadly…

Will lead to our total destruction.

Lord, make me an instrument of thy peace.
May 16 2013

News Mash: Science and religion cannot be reconciled…But religion and relationships can!

When it comes to Religion?

Science is seldom willing to be very accommodating…

Especially when it comes to a reconciliation of the two:

[via io9] Can Science and Religion be Reconciled? ~Robert T. Gonzalez

Physicist Sean Carroll and @YourTitleSucks agree. The answer is “No.”

Slate has republished a thought-provoking essay by author, blogger and physicist Sean Carroll about why he won’t take money from the John Templeton Foundation, “a philanthropic organization that supports research into the ‘Big Questions of human purpose and ultimate reality,’ encourages ‘dialogue among scientists, philosophers, and theologians,’ and seeks to use science to acquire ‘new spiritual information.’” In other words: the JTF seeks to unify science and religion.

Carroll’s essay is ultimately about two brands of centrism: the first ontological, the second professional. The former, he asserts, is impossible. He refuses to work directly with or accept funding from the JTF, because he believes their mission undermines the role of scientists to be as “clear and direct and loud” about the nature of reality as possible, and that “collaborating with organizations like Templeton inevitably dilutes that message.”

The latter, however, is doable – at least in Carroll’s eyes. While he will not accept funding from JTP directly, he readily acknowledges that he will work with people who do take money from JTF, “money that is appropriately laundered, if you will,” if he believes them to be worth “collaborating with in their own right.” This places him in a bit of a situation:

This means that approximately nobody agrees with me; the Templeton-friendly folks think I’m too uptight and priggish, while the anti-Templeton faction finds me sadly lacking in conviction. So be it. These are issues without easy answers, and I don’t mind taking a judicious middle ground.

I worry that Carroll’s piece will strike some people as hypocritical, for at least two reasons that I can think of.

1. There’s the obvious one: Carroll’s “twice-removed” policy of handling JTF money and his “lack of conviction” to the naturalist/atheist cause. He mentions this himself in his piece, and it’s something he has effectively asked us to :: sunglasses:: Deal With, as is his right.

2. Carroll’s assertion that professional quandaries such as where do I get my funding? are “issues without easy answers,” whereas conundrums like is there a higher power? aren’t really conundrums at all.

…[Read More]

Which?

In the grand scheme of things…

How fair is that?

[via Faux FoxNews]Atheism is a religion, too ~By Johnnie Moore

For a theist there’s nothing quite like watching an atheist get an intellectual walloping from a preacher. There’s just something apocalyptic about it, and it most easily occurs when the atheist tries to chop up religion to irrelevancy without realizing that he is himself awfully religious.

It happened again recently at the Cambridge Union debating society when former Anglican Archbishop Rowan Williams took on the best known name in contemporary atheism, Richard Dawkins. They were debating whether religion has a role in the 21st century.

Dawkins said it didn’t.

Williams said it did.

In the end, Williams was handed a decidedly strong victory with more than two times as many votes from the audience as the infamous atheist, Dawkins. It was a triumphant day for the faithful and a shameful one for the irreligious.

But actually no one really is irreligious.

This world beats to the rhythm of religion in a thousand ways, and absolutely everyone is religious — including atheists.

Religion certainly includes an idea of a God under whom man is inherently subservient, but religion also governs the belief system undergirding the way people think about, and live, their lives.

It tells them who their authority is and it informs their values and behavior. It gives them their sense of morality and goodwill, and it guides them in the way they treat themselves and others. Religion does nothing less than construct one’s view of the world.

Atheists are, in fact, some of the most religious people.

First, they have a functioning God under whom they are subservient (normally it’s science or rationality, but mainly themselves), and that idea of God informs the way they live and interpret their lives. It informs their biases and determines their values, and governs any sense of morality or ethics they adhere too, or ignore.

Once that’s all settled all that’s left is the preaching.

And they preach all the time.

This new breed of atheists is obsessed with the idea of God. They write books, deliver speeches, comment-bomb the evangelical blogosphere and generally rant on ad nauseam about the ills of believing in God.

Honestly – comically – some atheists must type the word “God” on the Internet five times more often than most Christians I know and they do it with the fury of a fire-and-brimstone zealot!

Maybe no one invokes the name of “God” more than they, and they are doing so in more and more virulent ways such as the shocking moment when Dr. Dawkins recently told Al-Jazeera television that he believed being raised Catholic was in itself even more psychologically damaging than being abused by a priest!

Instead of just ignoring God, or the idea of God, atheist preachers feel somehow compelled to rid the Earth of him; so they argue endlessly that theists can’t prove God exists without confessing that they can’t prove he doesn’t either.

…[Read More]

Because?

Despite Science’s lack of belief that Religion does anything EXCEPT complicate the “discussion”…

Religion DOES indeed have direct benefits applicable for our day-to-day lives.

The big benefit being?

How the application thereof reflects in our relationships:

[via The Blaze]Prayer Can Allegedly Do This to Your Relationships With Significant Others and Friends~ by Billy Hallowell

A new study is giving a boost to the actions of many religious people, as it found that praying for partners and close friends may actually have some beneficial outcomes. Among them, people purportedly become more forgiving and cooperative, the Christian Post reports.

A report, recently released by Florida State University, provides intriguing details of the five studies that were conducted. Collectively, the information found that those who pray are essentially less vengeful and tend to cooperate more with others around them. WCTV-TV has more about the fascinating results:

The findings are significant because they are the first in which the partners who are the subject of the prayers reported a positive change in the behavior of the person who prayed, said Frank D. Fincham, eminent scholar and director of the Florida State University Family Institute.

“My previous research had shown that those who prayed for their partner reported more prosocial behavior toward their partner, but self-reports are subject to potential biased reporting,” Fincham said. “This set of studies is the very first to use objective indicators to show that prayer changed actual behavior, and that this behavior was apparent to the other partner, the subject of the prayer.”

In addition, objective observers found those who engaged in partner-focused prayer exhibited more positive behavior toward their partners compared to those who did not pray for their partner.

The results were published in a recent edition of the journal Personal Relationships in an article entitled, “Shifting Toward Cooperative Tendencies and Forgiveness: How Partner-Focused Prayer Transforms Motivation.” Increased prayer helped alleviate vengeance aimed at a partner, led to more forgiveness and it led to quicker action to fix an issue when prayer was used on the day a conflict emerged (versus when it was not).

…[Read More]

Just as with Science…

Though I am sure Scientists DESPAIR in understanding it?

Religion will ALWAYS have a place in our lives.

And because it will?

One would think a bunch of Science-smarties would figure out the benefits of ALL…

And the wonders even a little bit of reconciliation would do.

Lord, make me an instrument of thy peace. [Source]

'Sup
May 16 2013

News Mash: Science says that we all need a little “Awwwww!” from time to time. Listen to Science!

The next time your boss DARES to tell you?

That you have been decidedly LESS productive at work…

Show them THIS (below):

[via DailyMail]Cuddles with mother: Adorable endangered orangutan is the first to be born in Devon zoo for 18 years ~By Motherly love: The baby girl snoozes in her mother's arms at Paignton Zoo in DevonSam Webb

A newborn orangutan cuddles up and nestles in its mother’s arms as it enjoys a nice snooze in the sunshine.

The little ape, less than a month old, appears to content in its mothers strong arms.

The 18-year-old mother, Mali, poses for the camera with her baby at her home at Devon’s Paignton Zoo.

It was the first birth at the zoo for 18 years and workers are confident that the baby ape is a girl.

Phil Knowling, a spokesperson for the zoo, said that the pair are doing well after the birth. He said: ‘We are pretty sure it’s a girl. Keepers are 99.9 per cent sure that the baby, now a month old, is female.

‘Mali and the baby are doing well. They have the largest of the orangutan islands and even have an off show den to themselves.

…[Read More]

No…

Seriously!

The newest scientific research is IN:

Looking at pictures of cute, gotta-have-em, baby animals can increase work performance:

[via Live Science]I Can Haz Productivity? Why You Should Look at Cute Animals at Work ~by Megan Gannon

Here’s a defense for when your boss catches you watching kitten videos on the job: New research shows looking at cute images of baby animals may actually improve your work performance, inspiring more fine-tuned attention and careful behavior.

Perhaps unsurprisingly this new study comes from researchers in Japan, where kawaii (Japanese for “cute”) reigns. From the characters of “Hello Kitty” and “Pokémon’s” Pikachu, cute creatures stir positive feelings, researchers say, because they resemble babies with their big eyes and large heads.

Seeing baby faces is known to trigger care-giving impulses in humans, and some research has even suggested cute images may encourage friendliness. In the new study out of Hiroshima University, published online this week in the journal PLoS ONE, researchers show that these impulses can transfer outside of baby care and social situations to tasks that require narrow focus and concentration.

…[Read More]

Take THAT, mean & grumpy boss-man.

Looking at baby animals?

Very therapeutic…

And given the crappy world we live in, and often find ourselves faced with?

Yeah…

We all need a little “Awwwww!” from time to time.

'Sup

Much smarter
May 2 2013

News Mash: Fish are much smarter than we thought? Not good news, if you are a New Yorker!

Normally?

THIS (below) information wouldn’t freak me out…

As much as it is right now.

cause you see?

Fish are much smarter than we ever gave them credit for!

[via LiveScience]Fish Use ‘Sign Language’ to Help Out Hunting Buddies ~by Douglas Main

Two types of fish have been shown to use gestures, or sign language, to help one another hunt. This is the first time these types of gestures have been found to occur in animals other than primates and ravens.

Both types of fish, grouper and coral trout, are known for hunting cooperatively with other kinds of animals. Whereas the grouper hunts with giant moray eels and a fish called the Napoleon wrasse, coral trout partner up with octopuses to snag prey. A study published last week in the journal Nature Communications found that the fish are able to “point” their heads toward prey, to help out their hunting buddies.

After observing the fish in the wild for many hours, the researchers found that when a prey fish escaped its hunting party, a grouper occasionally moved over the place where the fugitive prey was hiding. The grouper would then rotate its body so that its head faced downward, and it would shake its head back and forth in the direction of the potential meal, in what researchers call a “headstand” signal. Coral trout make a similar sign, the researchers found. [Image Gallery: The Freakiest Fish]

Grouper partner with eel and wrasse, which live in the Red Sea and have complementary hunter-prey tactics: Grouper has “burst speed” in the open water, whereas giant moray eels can crawl into small holes, and wrasse have protracting jaws that can crush coral to get at prey, according to the study. Coral trout collaborate with octopuses, which are also better at fitting into tight spaces. This latter pair lives in Australia’s Great Barrier Reef.

In the study, researchers recorded grouper doing the headstand signal 34 separate times; afterward, one of the predators caught the hidden fish on five occasions.

It is, of course, difficult to determine for sure that an animal’s movement is truly this type of so-called “referential gesture” (or more loosely referred to as “sign language.”) The researchers wrote that the headstand qualified as such because it fulfilled all of the generally accepted components of referential gestures: It was directed toward an object, not useful for any immediate mechanical purpose, aimed at a recipient, seemingly intentional and followed by a voluntary response from the fish’s partner.

The results of the study suggest these fish may be smarter than previously thought.

…[Read More]

By itself?

That news not enough to cause me sever heart palpitations.

However contextually, when paired with THIS (below) info?

Yeah…

I am a tad bit more than a little disturbed:

[via iScienceTimes]Snakehead Fish Invades Central Park: How Did ‘Frankenfish’ Find Its Way Into NYC Lake? ~By Philip Much smarterRoss

A northern snakehead, an invasive predator fish native to China, Korea and Russia, was recently discovered in a Central Park lake.

The unsightly “Frankenfish,” which can seriously damage native fish and wildlife populations, was spotted in Harlem Meer lake in the northeastern-most corner of Central Park.

NBC News reports that the snakehead fish, which has razor-sharp teeth and eats frogs, crayfish, birds and even small pets, threatens to disrupt the ecosystem. The snakehead is so harmful to our environment that New York State prohibits the sale, possession and transport of the live fish and its eggs.

Environmental officials are reportedly planning to survey Harlem Meer lake this week and sketch out a plan to eradicate the intruder.

According to the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, or NYSDEC, snakeheads can grow up to 3 feet long and are very good predators. The fish are highly invasive and pose a grave threat to native fish and wildlife populations. Snakeheads can also breathe air and can survive for days out of the water in damp conditions.

Back in 2008, NYSDEC workers, using a pesticide called CFT Legumine, removed 220 snakeheads from a lake in Wawayanda, a town in Orange County, New York, in an effort to eradicate the snakehead population there. The largest fish they found was 31 inches long and weighed over 11 pounds.

…[Read More]

*runs in circles screaming…*

“Ohmahgawd, its going to kill us all!!!!!!!!”

See?

I would classify THAT (above quote) as a “tad bit more than disturbed”…

Wouldn’t you?

*shakes head sadly*

It is almost May & in Texas
Apr 30 2013

News Mash: Global Warming? Out. The new, upcoming political science fad? Global cooling!

Who didn’t see this one coming?

After all…

It’s a little hard to continue to scream that Man-Made Global Warming is going to destroy the Earth?

(Cause, heck, why not? It’s blamed for everything else!)

When temps are just not getting warmer.

In fact…

They are doing quite the opposite!

[via StevenGoddard]Second Coldest Start To Spring In US History

ScreenHunter_157 Apr. 26 06.02

…[Read More]

And to hear THIS (below) Russian Scientists, tell it?

It’s not actually “warming” we should be worried about.

Huh.

In a world which exists of climate scientists who depend on Man-Made Global Warming for their millions in grant money…

Any bets on these Scientists at Russia’s famous Pulkovo Observatory not being very popular today?

[via WUWT] Russian Scientists say period of global cooling ahead due to changes in the sun ~by Anthony Watts

Scientists at Russia’s famous Pulkovo Observatory are convinced that the world is in for a period of global cooling.

archibald_1749_2049_projected_solar_cycle

Graph by David Archibald

Global warming which has been the subject of so many discussions in recent years, may give way to global cooling. According to scientists from the Pulkovo Observatory in St.Petersburg, solar activity is waning, so the average yearly temperature will begin to decline as well. Scientists from Britain and the US chime in saying that forecasts for global cooling are far from groundless. Some experts warn that a change in the climate may affect the ambitious projects for the exploration of the Arctic that have been launched by many countries.

Just recently, experts said that the Arctic ice cover was becoming thinner while journalists warned that the oncoming global warming would make it possible to grow oranges in the north of Siberia. Now, they say a cold spell will set in. Apparently, this will not occur overnight, Yuri Nagovitsyn of the Pulkovo Observatory, says.

“Journalists say the entire process is very simple: once solar activity declines, the temperature drops. But besides solar activity, the climate is influenced by other factors, including the lithosphere, the atmosphere, the ocean, the glaciers. The share of solar activity in climate change is only 20%. This means that sun’s activity could trigger certain changes whereas the actual climate changing process takes place on the Earth”.

Solar activity follows different cycles, including an 11-year cycle, a 90-year cycle and a 200-year cycle. Yuri Nagovitsyn comments.

“Evidently, solar activity is on the decrease. The 11-year cycle doesn’t bring about considerable climate change – only 1-2%. The impact of the 200-year cycle is greater – up to 50%. In this respect, we could be in for a cooling period that lasts 200-250 years. The period of low solar activity could start in 2030-2040 but it won’t be as pervasive as in the late 17th century”.

…[Read More]

Now…

No pouting, Man-Made Global Warming believers!

You have been a scientific field which has benefited greatly from your now flailing theory…

Only fair?

That you give other scientists, with other theories, a go…

Don’t you think?

Especially considering…

How given the crazy temps in Texas are leading me to believe?

Global cooling…

Yeah, might be something to that!

It is almost May & in Texas

Witness the hand of humaity
Apr 28 2013

News Mash: The fate of humanity, in the hands of humanity? Well, this won’t end well!

This actually exists…

The Future of Humanity Institute.

And yes, they are just the barrel of laughs you would think they would be from their catchy, cheery name.

*shakes head sadly*

Guess what they recently figured out?

[Hint: Not good news]

Yeah…

We’re all DOOMED!!!!!!

And by our own hand:

[via PopSci]Oxford Institute Forecasts The Possible Doom Of Humanity

Most of us are content to just worry about the future of humanity in our spare time, but there’s an entire group of academics at Oxford University in England who make that their professional mission.

Each member of the Future of Humanity Institute has his own focus. Some are concerned with climate change and its impact on humanity; others with the future of human cognition. Department head Nick Bostrom, whose paper Existential Risk Prevention As Global Priority has just been published, has a long history of being worried about our future as a species. Bostrom posits that humanity is the greatest threat to humanity’s survival.

Bostrom’s paper is concerned with a particular time-scale: Can humanity survive the next century? This rules out some of the more unlikely natural scenarios that could snuff out humans in the more distant future: supervolcanoes, asteroid impacts, gamma-ray bursts and the like. The chances of one of those happening within the very narrow timeframe involved is, according to the paper, extremely small. Further, most other natural disasters, such as a pandemic, are unlikely to kill all humans; we as a species have survived many pandemics and will likely do so in the future.

The Personal

The Personal: The first row of a full scale of misery, on a scale of “hellish.” In the full version, the Y axis is on a scale of “cosmic-ness” Together, the extremes of these two scales form the conditions in which risk to the existence of the human race resides.  Nick Bostrom, http://www.existential-risk.org/concept.html

According to Bostrom, the types of civilization-ending disasters we may unleash upon ourselves include nuclear holocausts, badly programmed superintelligent entities and, my personal favorite, “we are living in a simulation and it gets shut down.” (As an aside, how the hell do you prepare for that eventuality?) Additionally, humans face four different categories of existential risk:

Extinction: we off ourselves before we reach technological maturity
Stagnation: we stay mired in our current technological and intellectual backwater
Flawed realization: we advance technologically…in a way that isn’t sustainable
Subsequent ruination: we reach sustainable technological maturity and then eff it all up anyway

More pointedly, Bostrom’s paper is a renewal of a call-to-arms he issued a decade ago imploring people to wake up to the possibility that we will kill ourselves with technology. These days, he’s not so much concerned with the how — existential death by grey goo vs existential death by sentient robots is still existential death. He’s most concerned that there’s nobody out there really doing anything about this problem. That’s understandable, of course. Existential threats are nebulous concepts, and even the threat of nuclear winter was not enough to terrify certain governments into, you know, not building thermonuclear weapons.

…[Read More]

Not really the thing I want to hear, coming up on my long work week.

But bright side?

At least our immanent will cut short my work week.

Which?

Entirely possibly considering  the growing number of possible, man-killing projectiles we keep surrounding  with, and are in fact just NOW figuring out, “Hey, we maybe, probably, oh I don’t know, should do something about that before it starts killing many people?’ situation we have going in outer space around us.

[via France24]Space debris problem now urgent – scientists

AFP – Governments must start working urgently to remove orbital debris, which could become a catastrophic problem for satellites a few decades from now, a space science conference heard on Thursday.

Since 1978, the total of junk items whizzing around the planet has tripled, said Heiner Klinkrad, head of the European Space Agency’s Space Debris Office.

“There is a wide and strong expert consensus on the pressing need to act now to begin debris removal activities,” he said in an ESA press release at the end of a four-day conference in Darmstadt, Germany.

“Our understanding of the growing space debris problem can be compared with our understanding of the need to address Earth’s changing climate some 20 years ago,” he said.

According to a count by ESA and NASA, there are more than 23,000 items in orbit that are bigger than 10 centimetres (four inches) across, and hundreds of thousands of items between one and 10 cms (0.4 to four inches) across.

Even though these items are relatively small and there is a lot of room in orbit, any collision could be calamitous because of the high level of kinetic energy.

Debris travels on average at 25,000 kilometres (15,600 miles) per hour, so even an object of small mass has the potential to cripple a satellite or punch a hole in the International Space Station (ISS).

The junk results mainly from disused rocket stages, failed launches and abandoned or broken-down satellites, the result of 55 years of space exploration.

These large objects eventually collide, creating more debris which in turn smashes together — a dangerous cascade cycle known as the Kessler Syndrome.

…[Read More]

A problem?

Yes…

Seems like we just keep “adding-to” on a daily basis, with no freakin’ end in sight:

[via Space]Private Asteroid-Mining Project Launching Tiny Satellites in 2014 ~by Mike Wall, SPACE.com Senior Writer

A billionaire-backed asteroid-mining company aims to start putting its big plans into action soon, launching its first hardware into space by this time next year.

Planetary Resources, which counts Google execs Larry Page and Eric Schmidt among its investors, plans to loft a set of tiny “cubesats” to Earth orbit in early 2014, to test out gear for its first line of asteroid-prospecting spacecraft.

“Our belief and our philosophy is that the best testbed is space itself,” Chris Voorhees, Planetary Resources’ vice president of spacecraft development, said Wednesday (April 24) during a Google+ Hangout event. [Planetary Resources' Asteroid-Mining Plans (Images)]

…[Read More]

So…

Is the fact that the FHI (The Future of Humanity Institute) is predicting humanities doom at our OWN hand…

Really much of a ridiculous stretch?

Pffft…

What do you think?

Witness the hand of humaity

As crzay as they sound from the outset?

*scratches chin*

Gotta wonder…

Do YOU think the FHI could have a point?

It does make one nervously wonder.

what of it
Apr 18 2013

News Mash: Science titilates your pleasure pathways with this device…And magnetic silly putty?

Science now seeks to control your most basic pleasures?

Via…

A wireless device.

Only got one thing to say that, Science…

…..

……

Cool.

[via io9] A device that controls your mind with pleasurable stimulation ~by George Dvorsky

What if you could control somebody’s desires using a wireless device? It’s not a Larry Niven novel — it’s today’s science. Researchers used a remote controller to stimulate neurons in mice that release the reward chemical dopamine. As a result, they changed the behavior of the mice, from a distance, in the absence of any tangible reward.

And they did it using optogenetics, an emerging field of research in which living, cortical neurons and other cells can be manipulated or controlled with optical technology (typically with fiber optic cables). It’s only been tested in nonhuman animals like rodents and monkeys, but it could eventually be used to treat such things as heart conditions, paralysis, and even diabetes.

But now, as new research from Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis and the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign has shown, optogenetics could also be used to stimulate the brain’s reward and pleasure pathways — all without unwieldy wires or cables stuck into the brain.

In the new study, which has now been published in Science, a research team co-led by Washington University’s Michael R. Bruchas demonstrates how optogenetic effects can be triggered over wireless.

…[Read More]

Just as cool?

The fact that science does NOT indeed need to create such a device…

To trigger my pleasure.

No.

In fact?

They just need four minutes with this silly putty.

Magnetic.

[via Gizmodo]Watching Four Minutes of Magnetic Putty Swallowing Things Is Oddly Erotic ~by Casey Chan

Sure, you’ve seen the master mutant powers of magnetic putty before and how its snake-like unhinging ability can completely engulf an object. It’s the work of magic! Or the closest thing we have to magical powers (magnets). PBS Digital Studios and Shanks FX teamed up to have a bit of fun with magnetic putty and shows it in all of its gory detail. Shot in macro and placed against a titillating soundtrack, seeing magnetic putty swallow things is, um, a lot of fun. [Joey Shanks]

…[Read More]

Wut?

So I’m easy…

As WELL as geeky.

Who didn’t know this?

Don’t see why you are surprised.

what of it

paper made better
Apr 18 2013

News Mash: I bow to you science and technology innovators of today & I bow deeply!

There is no way…

Given all of the amazing scientific and technological innovations coming out everyday?

That this blog could cover each and every one.

Nevertheless?

We try:

[via DiscoverMagazine]Watch This: Bioengineered Kidney Transplanted Into Rat

When a patient’s kidney stops functioning, the existing options are limited to transplant or continual dialysis. Now scientists at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston are a little closer to having a third option: transplanting kidneys that have been “upcycled” from previously unusable tissue.

To make these functioning and transplantable organs, the researchers begin with unusable donor organs. We’ll use the rat kidney in the film below as an example. Flushing the kidney of its natural cells leaves behind a structure of proteins, which the researchers repopulated with stem cells. In an oxygen- and nutrient-rich growth medium, these kidney and blood vessel cells multiplied and the regenerated rat organ eventually started to work like a normal organ.

“The tissue became functional,” said Harald Ott, one of the team’s researchers, in the film. “These kidneys began to make rudimentary urine.”

To further prove the effectiveness of the method, the researchers transplanted the bioengineered kidney into a live rat, where it continued to do its kidney job. The research paper, published in Nature Medicine yesterday, says the potential outcomes aren’t necessarily limited to animal test subjects.

“Ultimately this is a very translational kind of research,” Ott said. “It’s very much focused on driving this all the way down to the bedside, getting this to the patient.”

…[Read More]

A fully functional biologically engineered kidney…

Could there be anything cooler?

Hmmm.

How about software that turns basic paper into a touchscreen?

[via PopSci] Crazy Software Turns Paper Into A Touchscreen  ~By Colin Lecherpaper made better

With a webcam, a projector, and special software, researchers from Fujitsu Laboratories have made an awesome (and unexpected) mix of dead-tree and digital tech: a system that turns paper into touchscreens.

Put your documents under the machine while motion trackers determine where your finger is and, with a series of gestures, users can highlight images or text, then automatically digitize what they select. The machine can pick up on either a flat sheet of paper or adjust to the curve of a real book.

…[Read More]

Yeah…

That will do it!

I bow to you science and technology innovators…

Never doubt it.

And I bow DEEPLY!

Anxiety
Apr 14 2013

News Mash: Anxiety caused by Facebook and…Geese?

Wut?

You don’t say…

Facebook linked to anxiety?

Not to mention alcohol use:

[via Cnet]Study: Anxiety and alcohol use linked to Facebook ~by

In a quest to learn what leads some people to turn to Facebook to connect with others, doctoral student Russell Clayton of the Missouri School of Journalism found that anxiety and alcohol use seem to play a big role.

For his master’s thesis, which appears in the May issue of Computers in Human Behavior, Clayton surveyed more than 225 college freshman about two emotions, anxiety and loneliness, and two behaviors, alcohol and marijuana use. He found that the students who reported both higher levels of anxiety and greater alcohol use also appeared the most emotionally connected with Facebook. Those who reported higher levels of loneliness, on the other hand, said they used Facebook to connect with others but were not emotionally connected to it.

It probably isn’t terribly surprising that those who are anxious may feel more emotionally connected to a virtual social setting than a public one, which Clayton acknowledges in a school news release. “Also, when people who are emotionally connected to Facebook view pictures and statuses of their Facebook friends using alcohol, they are more motivated to engage in similar online behaviors in order to fit in socially.”

Marijuana use, on the other hand, predicted the opposite — the absence of emotional connectedness to the site. Clayton has a theory about this as well: “Marijuana use is less normative, meaning fewer people post on Facebook about using it. In turn, people who engage in marijuana use are less likely to be emotionally attached to Facebook.”

Whether Facebook is therapeutic for those feeling anxious is debatable. Last year one study found that people who use social networking sites regularly saw their behaviors change negatively, and that included having trouble disconnecting and relaxing.

…[Read More]

Huh.

People who use Facebook have trouble disconnecting and relaxing.

Funny.

THIS (below) ape has similar issues, and it doesn’t even USE Facebook.

Geese are its problem.

Geese & Facebook it seems…

Just won’t let a body get some peace.

No matter WHAT animal kingdom you live in…

Just remember?

We all have our little problems.

Anxiety

Texting
Apr 14 2013

News Mash:Text overtaking talk as cellphone habits shift & because they are? You’re racist & shallow

No…

Seriously.

As far as studies go?

Usually I am all for them.

THIS (below) one however…

Makes me question myself.

[via CBSLocalCleveland]Study: People Who Text Frequently Tend To Be More Racist, Shallow

WINNIPEG (CBS Cleveland) - A new study indicates that people who engage in text messaging tend to be more racist and shallow than their less technologically savvy counterparts.

Researchers at the University of Winnipeg found that young people are specifically susceptible to the trend, according to the Edmonton Journal.

The study was conducted by observing 2,300 psychology students for three years, with observations beginning during their first years of college. Participants were asked to fill out online surveys during the course of the several-year study.

…[Read More]

Cause yes…

I am one of those people who if you call me on my cell, I will ignore the call, then almost immediately text you back, “Did you need something?”

Yeah, one of THOSE people.

Look, the only thing I can say in my defense is that in my real-life job? I have to answer the phone and talk to people 12 hours a day, I don’t have a choice. So, when I am off work, and I DO have a choice? Nope, not answering the phone.

“You want me? You text me.” It’s what I always say.

And apparently?

I am not the only one.

[via SFGate]Text Overtaking Talk as Cell Phone Habits Shift

Americans are finding out what Carriers have known for years, consumers are using their Verizon, Sprint, AT&T and T-Mobile cell phones less and less for talking, but they’re not saying any less. A new study by the Pew Research Center found that people are using their cell phones for a lot more than making calls. The study found that 82 percent of cell phone users take pictures with their phone, 80 percent use it to send and receive text messages, 56 percent use it to access the Internet, and 50 percent use it for email correspondence.

Texting

The Pew study found that nearly all cell phone users ages 18-29 use cell phones for texting. Almost all other age demographics send text messages from their cell phones, except those 65 years old and over, who do not utilize texting as frequently. Furthermore, the amount of text messages that are sent every year is rapidly increasingly. The CTIA wireless industry association reports that the number of voice minutes used are falling. When people do use their cell phones for actual phone calls, the average amount of time they spend talking is also decreasing. Many Americans prefer communicating through the Internet or through text messages because it can be done at one’s convenience. Even though it may take longer to send a text message, people prefer this method because in general, it is less disruptive.

…[Read More]

But now thanks to the study in the first article in this post?

Yes, questioning myself big time.

Just because I prefer text, does that make me racist and shallow?

Or…

Does it just make me anti-social at times, and lazy.

Sorry Researchers at the University of Winnipeg…

Not buying your study at all.

It was cute and interesting and all, but I don’t think you can make the claims you are trying to make by observing 2,300 hundred college students (i.e. the very definition of racist and shallow, though, aren’t they?)…

Might need to broaden your pool just a little bit, if you wish to be truly accurate.

Just a suggestion.

James Hansen Quote
Apr 4 2013

News Mash: “Climate deniers” are apparently a new thing…They are not what you would think them to be!

Climate deniers…

Exist.

Just probably?

Not quite in the form you are thinking:

[via National Review]The New Climate Deniers
The world hasn’t warmed since 1998, and those obsessed with “climate change” are ignoring it. ~ By Rich Lowry

There are few things sadder than the “climate denier.” He ignores the data and neglects the latest science. His rhetoric and policy proposals are dangerously disconnected from reality. He can’t recalibrate to take account of the latest evidence because, well, he’s a denier.

The new climate deniers are the liberals who, despite their obsession with climate change, have managed to miss the biggest story in climate science, which is that there hasn’t been any global warming for about a decade and a half.

“Over the past 15 years air temperatures at the Earth’s surface have been flat while greenhouse-gas emissions have continued to soar,” The Economist writes. “The world added roughly 100 billion tons of carbon to the atmosphere between 2000 and 2010. That is about a quarter of all the CO2 put there by humanity since 1750.” Yet, no more warming.

The Economist has been decidedly alarmist on global warming through the years, so it deserves credit for pausing to consider why the warming trend it expected to continue has mysteriously stalled out.

The deniers feel no such compunction. They speak as if it is still the late 1990s, when measurements of global temperature had been rising for two decades. In his State of the Union address, President Barack Obama said that “we can choose to believe in the overwhelming judgment of science and act before it’s too late.” In a passage devoted to global warming, though, he didn’t mention the latest trend in global warming.

A denier feels the same righteous sense of certitude now, when warming has stopped, as he did a decade ago. Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson recently opined that “sensible people accept the fact of warming” — but apparently not the fact of no-warming. He scorned those “who manipulate the data in transparently bogus ways to claim that warming has halted or even reversed course.” Does he include James Hansen, the famous NASA scientist, among these dastardly manipulators? No one this side of Al Gore has warned as persistently about global warming as Hansen. He nonetheless admits that “the five-year mean global temperature has been flat for a decade.”

…[Read More]

Cause really…

Trying to explain how something happened, which HASN’T happened?

Though you keep screaming at everyone how it has?

Has honestly gotta be a little tough to pull off:

[via The Australian] Twenty-year hiatus in rising temperatures has climate scientists puzzle ~by: Graham Lloyd

DEBATE about the reality of a two-decade pause in global warming and what it means Climate changehas made its way from the sceptical fringe to the mainstream.

In a lengthy article this week, The Economist magazine said if climate scientists were credit-rating agencies, then climate sensitivity – the way climate reacts to changes in carbon-dioxide levels – would be on negative watch but not yet downgraded.

Another paper published by leading climate scientist James Hansen, the head of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, says the lower than expected temperature rise between 2000 and the present could be explained by increased emissions from burning coal.

For Hansen the pause is a fact, but it’s good news that probably won’t last.

International Panel on Climate Change chairman Rajendra Pachauri recently told The Weekend Australian the hiatus would have to last 30 to 40 years “at least” to break the long-term warming trend.

But the fact that global surface temperatures have not followed the expected global warming pattern is now widely accepted.

Research by Ed Hawkins of University of Reading shows surface temperatures since 2005 are already at the low end of the range projections derived from 20 climate models and if they remain flat, they will fall outside the models’ range within a few years.

“The global temperature standstill shows that climate models are diverging from observations,” says David Whitehouse of the Global Warming Policy Foundation.

“If we have not passed it already, we are on the threshold of global observations becoming incompatible with the consensus theory of climate change,” he says.

Whitehouse argues that whatever has happened to make temperatures remain constant requires an explanation because the pause in temperature rise has occurred despite a sharp increase in global carbon emissions.

The Economist says the world has added roughly 100 billion tonnes of carbon to the atmosphere between 2000 and 2010, about one-quarter of all the carbon dioxide put there by humans since 1750. This mismatch between rising greenhouse gas emissions and not-rising temperatures is among the biggest puzzles in climate science just now, The Economist article says.

“But it does not mean global warming is a delusion.”

…[Read More]

Yeah…

That last statement?

Kinda does.

But you have to hand it to Global Warming believers…

They keep trying.

Not a fan of their science, but I must say?

HUGE fan of their tenacity, despite the evidence to the contrary.

James Hansen Quote

And yet…

They keep it going, and going and going.

Just so needless too.

are we aspiring to this really
Apr 2 2013

News Mash: Some “leading scientists” understandable concerned about creating highly infectious deadly virus!

Yeah.

Must say?

Me too.

And if YOU’RE not?

Oh…

You should be:

And when I say “should be”?

I say that, cause well…

Its not like these deadly viruses, which scientists should be keeping up with?

Haven’t “disappeared” before.

Because oh, scary as it may seem?

They have indeed:

[via USAToday]Vial of deadly virus missing at Texas bioterror lab

Scott Weaver, the Galveston lab’s scientific director, said Monday that a routine check last week led to the discovery that one of five small plastic vials of an obscure virus called Guanarito was missing from a locked freezer. Checks of the lab’s security systems show no malfunctions and no unusual entries to the lab or the freezer since a previous inventory recorded the vial in November.

Galveston and other labs experiment with bioterror agents so they can develop vaccines and treatments.

Weaver said the incident, as required by law, was immediately reported to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

…[Read More]

And because they have…

Ask yourself this:

Do we really, REALLY, need another deadly virus being available to get out, get away from us and end up in nefarious hands?

[via Independent]Leading scientists urge President Obama’s advisers to investigate ethical issues raised by creating highly infectious strain of bird-flu ~by Steve Connor

A group of leading scientists has urged President Obama’s advisers to investigate the ethical issues raised by a decision to create a highly infectious strain of bird-flu virus that could be transmitted easily between people.

The scientists, who include a former UK Government chief scientist and a Nobel laureate, said that it is “morally and ethically wrong” to create a new type of influenza virus in the laboratory that is more lethal and transmissible than what actually exists in nature.

Two teams of flu researchers – led by Ron Fouchier of the Erasmus Medical Centre in Rotterdam and Yoshihiro Kawaoka of the University of Wisconsin-Madison – announced in 2011 that they had succeeded in mutating the H5N1 avian virus so that it could in theory be transmitted through the air between people.

They stopped the research last year as part of a wider voluntary moratorium following public outrage over the work. But they announced an end to the moratorium earlier this year, and even an expansion into new areas involving other viruses and diseases.

In a strongly-worded letter sent to the US Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues, opponents of the research warned that there has not been enough debate over the threats posed by lifting the moratorium on increasing the transmissibility of highly lethal viruses such as the H5N1 strain of bird-flu.

They said that the 60 per cent mortality rate of the H5N1 virus – on the relatively rare occasions that it has infected humans – puts it in a “class of its own” and that attempting to make it more transmissible through laboratory experiments is tantamount to risking a devastatingly deadly flu pandemic.

“The accidental release of an artificial, laboratory-generated, human-transmissible H5N1 virus into the community has the potential to cause a global pandemic of epic proportions that would dwarf the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic that killed over 50 million people,” the scientists said.

“A majority [of life scientists] considers the creation in the laboratory of a pathogen more lethal than exists in nature is morally and ethically wrong. Indeed, a majority are of the opinion that there is no scientific justification that outweighs the moral and ethical problems,” they said.

…[Read More]

Yeah, cause NOOOOOOOOOOO…

I don’t think we do.

How about you?

are we aspiring to this really

Do I really even need to ask
Mar 24 2013

News Mash: What’s worse for bats, white-nose syndrome or bat-eating spiders? What do you think?

If you’re a bat?

You know of the dangers of…

White-nose syndrome.

And?

You fear it for good reasons:

[via NJ.com]Speaker: Are Great Swamp bats disappearing due to ‘white-nose syndrome?’ ~By Justin Zaremba/NJ.com

White-nose syndrome, caused by a fungus and linked to the deaths of bat populations throughout the U.S., appears to be impacting New Jersey bats in unexpected ways, according to a researcher with the Great Swamp Watershed Association.

Jenny Borhman, lead biologist for bat research, education, and outreach at the Great Swamp National wildlife refuge, said Tuesday that last summer, far fewer “little brown bats” were tagged by researchers than in previous years. But far more “big brown bats” were found within the watershed.

Most of New Jersey’s nine native bat species, which includes Indiana bats, Eastern red bats and big brown bats, have been found in Great Swamp, but the number of smaller species recorded by researchers has decreased drastically, Bohrman told an audience at the Great Swamp Watershed Association’s Breakfast Briefing series.

Little brown bats and Indiana bats, which are endangered, are smaller, “cave-dwelling species,” meaning they often hibernate in caves, buildings or other warms enclosures during the winter months, she said.

White-nose syndrome doesn’t directly kill the bats, but impacts their physiology in ways that lead to their death — for instance, it causes lesions on their muscles and necrotic tissue on their wings, Bohrman said. Ultimately, the bats starve to death because they’re unable to feed themselves, she said.

…[Read More]

However maybe…

Bats are concentrating their fear in their wrong direction.

After all, bats face a more unscrupulous, deadly foe…

One that is wider spread, not to mention more freaky-deaky, than anyone could have thought.

Spiders!

[via Wired]Bat-Eating Spiders: The Most Terrifying Thing You’ll See Today ~By Nadia Drake

A bat’s enemies: owls, hawks, snakes, the Joker, spiders. Spiders? Yes.

The incidence of spiders eating bats could be more widespread than initially suspected, reports a study published March 13 in PLoS ONE. To reach this conclusion, the authors spoke with scientists, conducted an extensive scientific literature review, dug through the blogosphere, and looked for pictures of spiders eating bats on Flickr.

The search turned up 52 reports of bat-eating spiders, less than half of which had been published before.

The authors report that bat-munching spiders live on every continent except Antarctica. Most catch bats in webs, like the giant golden silk orb-weavers (Nephilidae). As adults, these spiders’ leg spans can be 10-15 centimeters across, and they weave webs more than a meter in diameter. Bats have also been observed in the webs of social spiders, such as Parawixia. But a minority of spiders, like huntsman and tarantulas, forage for prey without a web, and have been spotted munching on bats on forest floors.

Perhaps most surprisingly, “An attempt by a large fishing spider Dolomedes triton to kill a bat pup has been witnessed below a bridge in Indiana,” the authors report.

That spider’s plot was foiled after it became frightened by photographers.

…[Read More]

So…

On one bat-wing side? We got a deadly fungus.

On the OTHER bat-wing side? We got scary, hairy-legged spiders, with venom dripping fangs, who want to eat you alive, while you can do nothing but squirm in a sticky, claustrophobia-inducing web membrane.

Question is: If you were a bat…

What would YOU worry about more?

Seriously!?

Do I really even need to ask [Source]