Nanoparticles increasing benefits and risks.

This is inspired from an article that first appeared on the blog Innovation News entitled;

 The first is band aids that use silver nanoparticles in the adhesive which kill bacteria. So we looked up silver nanoparticles to see if they were candidates for toxicity. We discovered that science daily published an article titled; Are Silver Nanoparticles Harmful? According to a study by the Norwegian Institute of Public Health, silver nanoparticles cause damage to testicular cells in rats and mice. Further statistics and studies needed.
So we moved on to the next item concerning nanoparticles of hydroxyl apatite. Here the nanoparticle acquits itself very well. We discovered the results of a study on rabbits at this website, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16229282

CONCLUSION: Nano-hydroxyapatite has no accumulative toxicity to rabbits, it is suggested that it is safe when the hydroxyapatite-sol was applied intravenously as a drug carrier in small dosage more less than the medium lethal dose, even as a kind of anticancer drug. 

 The next one that jumped out were the phytosterol nanoparticles in the canola oil to reduce cholesterol. Toxicity is possible a study suggests. Lab rats once agian were called upon to test the effects of phytosterols, (not in nano particle form) and found it poisoned their little heart cells. Ouch!  That’s right. The levels of toxicity were at the level to raise concerns for humans.

Quantum POP asks; is it better to eliminate cholesterol by adding ingredients that do not exist in it naturally or simply choose other foods? Also; Can nanoparticles of phytosterols  be introduced in such low levels that they are not toxic?  Research is also showing that many rimes other nanoparticles can be introduced which eliminates the toxicity of the beneficial to the particular physical condition to be modified. For a scholarly study on nanoparticles and cholesterol please read. http://www.kipbiotech.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/micellar-phytosterols-effectively-reduce-cholesterol-absorption-at-low-doses.pdf

The last item in the article entitled 10 Ways You’re Using Nanotech Right Now (And Don’t Even Know It) that actually named the nanoparticle in question was condoms that used our old friend silver nanoparticles for bacteria and STD infection fighters. However there is the question of testicular cancer being linked to the silver. Condoms with silver nanoparticles may need to be avoided till further studies are done.

Their are other products and advancments listed in this article beut these are the only items in the article where the specific nanoparticles are named.

According to the web site Scribd http://www.scribd.com/doc/61507151/Introduction-and-Application-of-Nanotechnology-in-Food-Technology-2     there were 200 companies worth over 25 billion dollars.

 With the Olympics starting this week Quantum POP wonders if there are numerous performance enhancing nanoparticles, that will not be detectable by Olympic officials being ingested by our modern athletes. According to an article in Stuff.co.nz   Researchers are already experimenting with blood supplements based on oxygen-carrying nanoparticles for use in emergency situations. If an athlete get more oxygen in their system their performance could definitely be enhanced.

There was a lot of talk about the possibility of biologically infused nanodevices that could perpetually maintain certain thresholds of performance. Nanotechnology is used already in the Olympics widely, to alter the properties of sports equipment and, with it, improve athletic performance. Carbon nanotubes, for example, are used to make bicycle frames and tennis rackets lighter and more durable and give golf clubs and hockey sticks a more powerful and accurate drive, while a coating of nanomaterials makes kayaks faster and more stable and keeps tennis balls bouncy for longer.

No question that nano particles are increasingly entering the bloodstream of many people in the developed world. Many times without adequate testing. Even nano particles that are used for textures can when handled enter the bloodstream where in their larger form they would not.

In the short term proper labeling of nano as well as normal substances seems to be warranted.

 

Nanoparticle technology makes some particles toxic

How prevalent are nano particles in our daily lives? This picture is worth at least 1000 words.

In an article titled “Nanoparticle technology turns personal care products toxic

Tuesday, July 24, 2012 by: Danna Norek

We learn how some particles such as zinc oxide in skin care products formerly tested in a whole particle state and found to be safe, may become toxic in nano form.

Here is a part of that article.

(NaturalNews) Nanoparticle technology has been in popular use by skincare and cosmetics companies now for roughly a decade. The process takes normal sized, visibly detectable particles of materials like mica and other common ingredients and turns them so small they are invisible to the naked eye.What would be the purpose behind micronizing particles? This makes products a more desirable consistency and caters to a perceived consumer demand for particular consistencies and ease of application. A perfect example is the use of nanoparticles of zinc oxide in sunscreens to reduce the “chalk-white” effect that full-sized particles can cause when applied to the skin.

The problem with nanoparticles

Minerals like zinc oxide and titanium dioxide, commonly used in sunscreen lotions, foundation and other liquid types of lotions are harmless in their normal size. They simply sit on the skin rather than absorbing in to the skin since they are too large to penetrate its protective barrier.

However, when these are broken down into nanoparticles which are often smaller than the size of a red blood cell, they are easily absorbed into the skin. There is research showing that nanoparticles of zinc oxide and other ingredients like aluminum collect in parts of the brain and cause cell death.

These particles are so easily absorbed that they are detectable in all areas of the body, including vital organs. Animal studies have shown that when they are applied to the skin, they penetrate tissues and cells causing damage when they begin to build up. The tiny size gives these particles the ability to travel the body extensively and can enhance their toxicity.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/036564_nanoparticles_personal_care_products.html#ixzz21YPrRWOK

 
The article cites studies of the conversion of particles to nanoparticles and suggests that any benign particle that is reduced to a nanoparticle can become toxic when brought into contact with the human body.
To get a great overview of all of the application of nanoparticles in daily life check out Nanoparticle Blog 
 
To learn more about the more dangerous sources for organic products that contain nanoparticles check out this site, Exposure.
 
Hey I hear our curious Quantum POP readers say. What about the beneficial nanoparticles? Well here is one.Tiny particles designed to home in on cancer cells achieve tumor shrinkage at lower doses than traditional chemotherapy. Targeted therapeutic nanoparticles that accumulate in tumors while bypassing healthy cells have shown promising results in an ongoing clinical trial, according to a new paper.

 READ MORE…….Here is another one.Stanford scientists have used lab-made gold nanoparticles to highlight malignant tissue in the brain, making it easier for surgeons to cut out tumors while leaving healthy bits in tact. Measuring just five millionths of an inch in diameter, these tiny glistening orbs are injected into the patient and then left to bleed out through leaky blood vessels in parts of the brain that have been damaged by the disease. They then get stuck in the bad tissue itself, marking it out for the scalpel when viewed with the right type of imaging. It’s not totally new — we’ve actually seen gold nanotech deployed against the Big C in stem cells before, but better to be useful than avant-garde.

[Brain image via Shutterstock]

Obviously more research is and should be done on this subject. Quantum POP would hope that  the solution that could be as simple as finding or developing a nanoparticle that is not absorbed into the body and coating anything that is handled by humans with it, that contains nanoparticles that are toxic to the touch.

 

A New Climate Science Resource from the National Academies …

The National Academies, the nation’s preeminent independent scientific advisory body, has released a series of videos building on themes laid out in its America’s Climate Choices reports over the past couple of years. Above, you can watch the material as a single long video. Below you can find links to seven themed sections:

Chapter 1: What is Climate?

Chapter 2: Is Earth Warming?

Chapter 3: Greenhouse Gases

Chapter 4: Increased Emissions

Chapter 5: How Much Warming?

Chapter 6: Solar Influence

Chapter 7: Natural Cycles

There’s plenty more on Dot Earth related to these reports. And of course there’s plenty here on the basic science pointing to a rising human influence on the climate system.

| Full Disclosure | I’m working on a separate online project on climate change science for the Academies. I had no involvement with these videos or the underlying reports.

Original post: A New Climate Science Resource from the National Academies …

_________________________________________________________________________

                                            

green coffee beans weight loss

Behold The High-Tech Future Of Vending Machines – Business Insider

Vending machine revenue plunged  to a 10-year low coming out of the recession, but don’t worry, they’ve got a  plan.

The industry is investing in high-tech,  millenial-friendly machines to win new customers according to Automatic  Mercandiser.

Here’s what a futuristic vending machines looks like (from a press  release):

Redefining the customer vending experience, Kraft Foods and Intel have created  Diji-Taste, a new product distribution and marketing platform that delivers fun  and engaging vending, sampling and digital signage experiences. Diji-Taste is  powered by a modular software/hardware architecture framework that leverages  Intel’s powerful i5 processor. The new machine seamlessly transforms  between vending, sampling and digital signage experiences, rebrands  existing experiences easily, refreshes content quickly, and remotely monitors  and manages with full analytical reporting.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/behold-the-high-tech-future-of-vending-machines-2012-7#ixzz20KUv9BfC

 

The rest is here: Behold The High-Tech Future Of Vending Machines – Business Insider

                                             

car insurance youtube

Dr. David White, M.D.: The Mysterious Science of Sleep

Most of our bodily functions and daily processes are well-understood. We have a pretty good grasp of why the heart beats, why we need to breathe and the purpose of our kidneys. The same cannot be said for sleep. Despite spending nearly one-third of our lives asleep, the fundamental function of sleep remains a mystery.

We do understand what happens when we are not able to sleep. There is a decline in our cognitive ability, our mood deteriorates, and if the period of sleeplessness is long enough, psychotic behavior may emerge. Rats will actually die in about three weeks if not allowed to sleep. However, such studies tell us little about the real biological role of sleep.

There have been many proposed explanations for why virtually all creatures on this planet must sleep. Some believe sleep to be an evolutionary step born from the need to stay out of harm’s way when it grows dark outside.

Our understanding of sleep science has grown significantly more complex over time. Now, experts generally agree that sleep is all about the brain and serves to maximize brain function.

There are two hypotheses with the most scientific support:

  • The Adenosine Hypothesis: Sleep serves to control neural chemistry or regulate the level of certain substances in the brain that cannot be regulated during constant wakefulness.
  • The Synaptic Homeostasis Hypothesis: Sleep reduces the number or strength of synapses or connections between brain cells, which steadily increase during wakefulness and cannot be maintained. Thus, sleep serves to prune these neural connections.

The first hypothesis states one of the functions of sleep can be to regulate a molecule named adenosine (1,2). Adenosine bound to phosphorus is the primary source of energy, which allows cells to function normally. As cells are active and discharging over time, there is an accumulation of of the molecule adenosine.

Certain nerve cells in the brain (neurons) have been observed to be quite active (firing frequently) during wakefulness and become less active or completely silent during sleep. One example would be neurons in the basal forebrain. These neurons connect to many other nerve cells in the brain and are believed to at least partially dictate whether the organism (man or animal) is awake (basal forebrain neurons active) or asleep (neurons less active or silent).

Investigators promoting this hypothesis believe that as basal forebrain neurons are active over time (wakefulness), adenosine accumulates outside the cell and ultimately binds a receptor on the surface of the cell (called an A1 receptor), which inhibits activity of the cell (yielding sleep). After brain cells have been active for a long time over the course of the day, this accumulation of adenosine provides a mechanism to let the cells (and the organism) rest.

At least two lines of evidence support this hypothesis. First, if adenosine levels are continuously monitored in the basal forebrain, they steadily rise during wakefulness and fall during sleep, suggesting that sleep is important in the regulation of this molecule (1). Second, caffeine, the most widely used stimulant in the world, is an adenosine antagonist. This means that caffeine blocks the ability of adenosine to “turn off” these cells and promote sleep. As a result, you stay awake or receive a short energy burst.

 The second hypothesis is quite different and focuses on synapses — connections between nerve cells in the brain (3,4). According to this line of thinking, the net strength of these synapses accumulates steadily over the course of the day (wakefulness). While awake, your cells must learn new functions by strengthening connections between cells. For example, if we learn how to execute a task during the day, many synapses strengthen and some new ones may form in specific areas of the brain. This helps to establish memory. However, learning through strengthening synapses comes at a price; stronger synapses require energy to be maintained, occupy more space on the cell surface, consume supplies needed for cells to function, and eventually saturate the capacity to learn.

So, every day connections must be reduced and returned to a baseline level or vital cellular and brain processes could be compromised. Sleep serves as an ideal time when such synapses can be pruned since the brain is “offline” and new learning is not occurring. This is how new memories formed during the day are integrated with older ones, and the brain can figure out which synapses are more important, reducing or eliminating the others.

Ample evidence in support of this hypothesis shows synapses build up during the day and are reduced during sleep (3.4). Additionally, studies show that a unique kind of brain activity that occurs during sleep, called slow waves, becomes especially intense over very specific brain areas where learning has occurred, likely indicating synaptic pruning during sleep (4).

In all likelihood there may not be a single function for sleep, but multiple neural processes that can only occur when the brain is largely disconnected from the environment. While our understanding of sleep science continues to grow, there continues to be a strong consensus on the need for a good night’s rest.

References:

1) Porkka-Heiskanen T, Strecker RE, Thakkar M, Bjorkum AA, Greene RW, McCarley RW Adenosine: a mediator of the sleep-inducing effects of prolonged wakefulness. Science. 1997 May 23;276(5316):1265-8.

2) Basheer R, Strecker RE, Thakkar MM, McCarley RW. Adenosine and sleep-wake regulation. Prog Neurobiol. 2004 Aug;73(6):379-96.

3) Massimini M, Ferrarelli F, Huber R, Esser SK, Singh H, Tononi G. Breakdown of cortical effective connectivity during sleep. Science. 2005 Sep 30;309(5744):2228-32.

4) Huber R, Ghilardi MF, Massimini M, Tononi G. Local sleep and learning. Nature. 2004 Jul 1;430(6995):78-81.

For more by Dr. David White, M.D., click here.

For more on sleep, click here.

More: Dr. David White, M.D.: The Mysterious Science of Sleep

_________________________________________________________________

                                            

News Directory

Ohio Hospitals Reduce Bacteria Using Science Fiction High-Tech …

An Ohio hospital is the first to use a new technologythat utilizes ultraviolet light to eliminate harmful bacteria. Anderson Hospital located in Cincinnati, is the first in the state to use ultraviolet light technology to reduce and eliminate HAIs, healthcare-associated infections. Although first in the state to deploy the new IRiS™ system, it is only one of a handful of hospitals in the country to use the new disinfection weapon. IRiS stands for Intelligent Room Sterilization System. This high-tech disinfecting weapon is distributed Medline Industries, Inc.

IRSS

The hospital has reported success in reducing HAIs, especially Clostridium Difficile (C.diff), since using the IRiS system. Reports released from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reveals that one out of every 20 hospital patients contracts some kind of infection in America. There have been potential for contamination from viruses and bacteria from surfaces which can cause serious infections. Some bacteria are very hard to kill and can survive for weeks on surfaces located around hospital patients’ rooms, making security from infection difficult. Such surfaces include phones, handrails, counters and other small surface spaces that make it difficult to reach and disinfect.

Read the rest here: Ohio Hospitals Reduce Bacteria Using Science Fiction High-Tech …

                                             

Compare Automobile Insurance

High-Tech Talent Trade – Burgh Diaspora – Economic Development …

Northeastern University is ahead of the curve. Too far, in my estimation. A glimpse into the future of the Talent Economy:

Seattle imports high-tech talent, and Boston exports. So it makes sense that one of the big players in Boston’s competitive higher education market, Northeastern University, would see a new niche opening up across the country, where it can help feed a fast-growing high-tech cluster with more brainpower.

Read it all here: High-Tech Talent Trade – Burgh Diaspora – Economic Development …

                                            

brazilian green coffee

Canada: Entering a new Dark Age for science and environmental …

The Harper government is engaged in a broad assault on environmental protection and environmental science, gutting laws, programs, budgets, and research projects. “An Open Letter to the World on the Governmental Destruction of the Environment in Canada,” from a former employee at Environment Canada.  Censorship of science communication and the muzzling of Canadian government scientists. And pulling the plug on what has been called Canada’s greatest freshwater defender and scientific achievement. An authoritarian rampage in the north country.

Oh Canada: the government’s broad assault on the environment (Guardian, July 2):

Prime minister Stephen Harper’s government has been weakening Canada’s environmental regulations and slashing funds for oversight and research – while promoting aggressive resource development.

…Canada’s pristine image — and more importantly its environment — is not likely to recover from what critics across the political spectrum say is an unprecedented assault by the Conservative government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper on environmental regulation, oversight, and scientific research. Harper, who came to power in 2006 unapologetic for once describing the Kyoto climate accords as “essentially a socialist scheme to suck money out of wealth-producing nations,” has steadily been weakening environmental enforcement, monitoring, and research, while at the same time boosting controversial tar sands development, backing major pipeline construction, and increasing energy industry subsidies.

Critics say that assault reached a crescendo in recent weeks with the passage in Parliament of an omnibus budget bill known as C-38, which guts or significantly weakens rules relating to fisheries protection, environmental assessment, endangered species, and national parks. Under this bill, the criteria that currently trigger environmental assessments, for example, have been eliminated, leaving such reviews more to the discretion of the Minister of the Environment and other political appointees. The Fisheries Act will no longer be focused on habitat protection; instead, it will restrict itself largely to the commercial aspects of resource harvesting. Ocean dumping rules will also be changed to allow the Minister of the Environment to make decisions on permitting. And Parks Canada will no longer have to conduct environmental audits or review management plans every ten years. In addition, budgets cuts will eliminate the jobs of hundreds of scientists working for various government departments that focus on the environment and wildlife….

In addition to Bill C-38, the Harper government has ended funding for the Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences, which had doled out more than $100 million in research funding over the past decade. It has withdrawn support for the Experimental Lakes Program in northwestern Ontario, which has used 58 lakes to conduct groundbreaking studies on phosphate, mercury, and bacterial contamination, as well as research on how climate change affects freshwater systems. And it has killed funding for a program that helps keep more than a dozen Arctic science research stations operational.

The elimination or severe reduction of funds for research into climate change and the Arctic has especially serious implications, given that the Canadian Arctic is warming faster than almost any other region on earth. Scientists say that Harper’s sharp cutbacks will mean a drastic shortage of funds to monitor huge environmental changes in the Arctic, including melting sea ice, thawing permafrost, a rapidly changing tundra environment, and widespread impacts on fauna and flora….

An Open Letter to the World on the Governmental Destruction of the Environment in Canada

May 18, 2012

Dear Everyone,

My name is Naomi. I am Canadian. I worked for Environment Canada, our federal environmental department, for several years before our current Conservative leadership (under Stephen Harper) began decimating environmentalism in Canada. I, along with thousands and thousands of federal science employees lost any hope of future work. Their attitude towards the environment is ‘screw research that contradicts the economic growth, particularly of the oil sands’. They have openly and officially denigrated anyone that supports the environment and opposes big-money oil profit as ‘radicals’  (http://tinyurl.com/7wwf8dp).

Every day in Canada, new information about their vendetta on science and the environment becomes quietly public and keeps piling up. I have been privy to much first-hand information still because I retain friendships with my ex-colleagues (though my blood pressure hates me for it).

While I was working there, scientists were effectively muzzled from speaking to the media without prior confirmation with Harper’s media team (http://tinyurl.com/7bnsqp4) – usually denied, and when allowed, totally controlled. Scientists were threatened with job loss if they said anything in an interview that was not exactly what the media team had told them to say. This happened in 2008. The public didn’t find out for years.

During one of my contracts, I was manager of a large, public database set. Contact information for all database managers was available for anyone. I knew what was going on with the information and could answer questions immediately and personally. During this time, I noticed that the media team started asking me “What would I say” to certain questions. I answered unwittingly. After a certain period of time, I noticed that all contact information had been removed from the internet – eliminating the opportunity for a citizen to inquire directly about these public data sets without contacting the media team. The Conservatives effectively removed another board from the bridge between science and the public, and I had inadvertently helped.

Since then, the Conservative government has been laying off thousands and thousands of full-fledged scientific employees that have been performing research for decades at Environment Canada, Department of Fisheries and Oceans, and Parks Canada (e.g. http://tinyurl.com/8xtkaro , http://tinyurl.com/7gvzc7r, http://tinyurl.com/clgn97u ), shutting down entire divisions and radically decimating environmental protection and stewardship in a matter of a couple years.

I am afraid for my country. Canada is the second largest land mass in the world – though our population is small, you can be sure that when a country that encompasses 7% of the world’s land mass, and has the largest coastline in the world says “screw it” to environmental protection, there will be massive global repercussions.

The Conservative leadership have admitted to shutting down environmental research groups on climate change because “they didn’t like the results”  (http://tinyurl.com/7kpqk7d), are decimating the Species at Risk Act (our national equivalent of the IUCN Red list), are decimating habitat protection for fisheries, are getting rid of one of the most important water research facilities in the world (Experimental Lakes Area – has been operational since 1968, and allows for long-term ecosystem studies [http://tinyurl.com/cdygbdk] ), are getting rid of almost all scientists that study contaminants in the environment, have backed out of the Kyoto protocol – and the list goes on and on and on.

Entire divisions of scientific research are being eliminated. Our land, our animals, our plants, our environment are losing all the protection that has been building for decades – a contradictory stance to the rest of the world….

David Schindler, a professor from the University of Alberta (and founder of ELA) quoted. “I think we have a government that considers science an inconvenience.”…

This Conservative minority leadership was voted in on a thin string in the lowest voter election turnout in recent history, but thanks to our ridiculous voting laws, have 100% full power to do whatever they want. And in the name of short-term monetary oil profit, they have realized that progressive science and the environment are threats (obstacles) to their goals, and are doing so many things to eliminate both.

We are depressed, and frustrated, and mad, and need all the help we can get to protect the value of science and our environment. In the age of globalization, intentionally non-progressive leadership is going to affect everyone. We share our waters, air, and cycles with all of you. Science IS a candle in the dark, and we cannot let greed extinguish that flame. What happens in Canada– will happen everywhere.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

A Canadian that cares about science and the environment

**Update (May 22, 2012). There has been a huge overwhelming response to this letter. Over 40,000 people have viewed it, with hundreds of comments. There are a lot of different organizations that want to be part of a larger movement. There are also quite a few scientists who may want to speak out, but still cannot. I encourage anyone who wants to contribute and organize, and may desire to do it more discreetly (ie: anonymous and or/not as a public comment), to email me at deciphering.science@gmail.com. Please let your colleagues know as well. I will never publish your information unless you want me to, and will be organizing interested parties somehow, so that we can effect greater change – for ourselves, our freedom, and our beautiful planet.

**Update (May 25, 2012). An excellent opinion piece by a DFO scientist on the axing of the pollution programs at the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. http://www.environmentalhealthnews.org/ehs/news/2012/opinion-mass-firing-of-canada2019s-ocean-scientists

Canadian government is ‘muzzling its scientists’ (BBC News,Vancouver, February 17, 2012)

Speakers at a major science meeting being held in Canada said communication of vital research on health and environment issues is being suppressed….

The allegation of “muzzling” came up at a session of the AAAS meeting to discuss the impact of a media protocol introduced by the Conservative government shortly after it was elected in 2008….

Andrew Weaver, an environmental scientist at theUniversity of Victoria in British Columbia, described the protocol as “Orwellian”….

Professor Weaver said that information is so tightly controlled that the public is “left in the dark”.

“The only information they are given is that which the government wants, which will then allow a supporting of a particular agenda,” he said.

The media protocol was obtained and reported three years ago by Margaret Munro, who is a science writer for Postmedia News, based in Vancouver. Speaking at the AAAS meeting, she said its effect was to suppress scientific debate on issues of public interest.

“The more controversial the story, the less likely you are to talk to the scientists. They (government media relations staff) just stonewall. If they don’t like the question you don’t get an answer.”…

Professor Andrew Weaver believes that the media protocol is being used by the Canadian government to “instruct scientists to deliver a certain message, thereby taking the heat out of controversial topics”.

He added: “You can’t have an informed discussion if the science isn’t allowed to be communicated. Public relations message number one is that you have to set the conversation. You don’t want to have a conversation on someone else’s terms. And this is now being applied to science on discussions about oil sands, climate and salmon.”

The Gem of Canadian Science that Harper Killed  (Andrew Nikiforuk, May 23, The Tyee, British Columbia)

Over the Victoria Day weekend Canadians lost another vital national institution that quietly stood on guard for the nation’s 4 million lakes.

Just as citizens flocked to their cottages and launched their boats, the government of Stephen Harper pulled the plug on Canada’s greatest freshwater defender and scientific achievement: the Experimental Lakes Area.

And though its muzzled scientists haven’t been able to talk about the program’s impressive research in recent years without Ottawa’s approval, this uniquely Canadian endeavor both changed and educated the world. It also drove global public policy on watershed protection.

In a move that stunned and appalled scientists around the world the Harper government laid off as many as 40 scientists associated with the legendary program working out the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Winnipeg’s office.

According to Ottawa’s tiresome newspeak, the program no longer “aligned with the department’s mandate and is not responding to our research priorities.”

The killing of the program is the latest in a series of coordinated attacks on environmental science and the gutting of most of the nation’s environmental legislation. It not only trashes Canada’s international reputation but confirms the Harper government’s pathological hatred for science of any kind.

In fact the country has now officially entered a Dark Age for science. After spending $2.5 million renovating the Arctic Institute of North America’s Kluane Research Station, the Harper government just eliminated the funding for the global leader in climate change and boreal mammal research. It also provided federal Arctic researchers at a recentMontreal conference with Iraqi-like minders to control their comments. Nature, one of the world’s foremost science magazines, has written editorials about the muzzling of Canadian scientists.

In this new political order of attacks on science and environmentalists, the closure of the ELA program takes on special significance. The irrational decision strikes most scientists as a feat of colossal stupidity, economic folly and ideological backwardness….

The future of proposed studies on nanoparticles and oil sands contaminants such as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) may now be dead. “There were some troubling signs that toxic nanoparticles of silver could go through biological membranes,” says Schindler.

But the Harper government apparently doesn’t want you to know that truth. Nor does it want Canadians to learn about what role oil sands pollutants such as PAHs might play in fish deformities in Lake Athabasca or cancers in Fort Chip. “Politicians have never understood what the ELA does or why it’s important,” says Schindler from his cottage nearBrisco,British Columbia. “We are losing an opportunity to improve the public’s scientific literacy on water.” He adds that “democracy, to be effective, needs to have an informed electorate.”

In this regard the full scale assault on science funding and scientific freedom in Canada makes the country look increasing like another sorry Arab oil exporter. The sheiks, a group as fundamentalist in their orientation as Harper’s Tories, don’t like science either.

As molecular biologist Rana Dajani explains in a 2011 Nature editorial, the political and religious environment in most Arab states currently “fails to sustain creativity, curiosity and striking out into the unknown — all of which are essential for science to flourish.”

And that’s where Harper is taking Canada: back to an Arab winter.

Earlier posts:

The state of politics and climate change – A Northern update

Canada’s ‘creeping authoritarianism’ in political pre-screening of scientists’ media contact

Leaked document says Canadian federal climate scientists being blocked from media contact

Originally posted here: Canada: Entering a new Dark Age for science and environmental …

_____________________________________________________________________

                                           

Green coffee

GMO ban: Risks for science-based assessments | JunkScience.com

French President François Hollande will face judicial problems over the ban on the cultivation of genetically modified plants, and this has widespread implications for science-based risk assessment in the EU, argue Marcel Kuntz, John Davison and Agnès E. Ricroch.

Marcel Kuntz is director of research at CNRS in Grenoble, France, John Davison is retired director of research at INRA, and Agnès E. Ricroch is lecturer at AgroParisTech in Paris.

“French President François Hollande has announced that the ban on the cultivation of “genetically-modified” plants, initiated by his predecessor Nicolas Sarkozy, will remain in place. Thus, the new government will face the same judicial problem as the former one and this has widespread implications for science-based risk assessment in the EU.

In February 2012, Nicolas Sarkozy’s government sent a document called ‘emergency measures’ (EM) to the European Commission (EC), allegedly providing new information on environmental risks of maize varieties carrying the MON810 insect-resistance trait.

It was followed by the publication in March 2012 of a national ruling banning its cultivation. Already in February 2008, this government suspended the cultivation of these MON810 varieties on the basis of their potential negative environmental impacts but its allegations have been consistently rejected by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA).

Actually the French position was a green-washing political move. The German government also suspended MON810 cultivation in April 2009 and also justified it by alleged new data on negative environmental impacts. A scientific publication 3 and the German Central Committee on Biological Safety (ZKBS) rejected these allegations.

To understand the implication of these events it is important to keep in mind that, in Europe, “genetically modified” organisms (GMOs) are regulated by EU law and that a moratorium on GMO cultivation must have justifiable reasons with a scientific basis.

However, the bans on the commercial cultivation of EFSA-approved MON810 maize (now implemented by 8 Member States: Austria, Hungary, France, Greece, Luxembourg, Germany Bulgaria and Ireland) had actually only political or economical motives.

Genetically modified maize MON810

Consequently, the French MON810 maize cultivation ban was declared illegal in November 2011 by France’s highest judicial authority “Conseil d’Etat”, following the similar conclusions of the European Court of Justice released in September 2011.

Despite failure under European and French laws, the former French Minister of Ecology, Nathalie Kosciusko-Morizet, immediately stated that the ban will continue and in February 2012 her Ministry produced a document called ‘emergency measures’, which was submitted to the EC.

This EM document purportedly contains new and vital information regarding environmental risks, not previously considered by the EFSA.

EurActiv

View original post here: GMO ban: Risks for science-based assessments | JunkScience.com

_____________________________________________________________________________

                                              

Auto Insurance Comparison

Weasel Zippers » Blog Archive » Bill Nye “The Science Guy” “The …

Via Newsbusters:

Of course, because everyone knows it’s only conservatives politicizing so-called “global warming.”

CNN’s Carol Costello told guest Bill Nye “The Science Guy” on Monday that climate change skeptics are “politicizing this issue” and “winning.” Of course, the two did not admit to the possibility of man-made climate change believers doing the exact same thing.

“But the people who are politicizing this issue, they seem to be winning because not much is being done on the issue of climate change even though President Obama promised that, you know, back in the day, 2008,” Costello said.

Keep reading…

Read the original post: Weasel Zippers » Blog Archive » Bill Nye “The Science Guy” “The …

Raspberry Ketones

All Dinosaurs May Have Had Feathers – Science News

Well-preserved fossil sports long, fine plumage and a bushy tail

Web edition : Monday, July 2nd, 2012

Sciurumimus

Early dinosaurs probably looked a lot more like Big Bird than scientists once suspected. A newly discovered, nearly complete fossilized skeleton hints that all dinosaurs may have sported feathers.

“It suggests that the ancestor of all dinosaurs might have been a feathered animal,” says study author Mark Norell, a paleontologist at the American Museum of Natural History in New York.

Researchers have found feathered dinosaurs before, but this one is more distantly related to birds than any previously discovered. Called Sciurumimus albersdoerferi, it belongs to a group of massive dinosaurs called megalosaurs that had sharp teeth, claws and a heavy-duty frame. The specimen — a youngster that lived about 150 million years ago — is only 70 centimeters long, but it could have grown up to 10 meters, about the length of a school bus.

The fossil’s feathers aren’t the only things getting paleontologists all aflutter. The skeleton’s condition is exciting, too.

“It’s a gorgeous specimen,” says Luis Chiappe, a paleontologist at the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County. “Probably one of the best meat-eating dinosaurs ever preserved.”

The skeleton rests in a bed of limestone, back arched, mouth gaping, tail curled behind its head. Its bones are unbroken and still carry remnants of flesh, scientists report online July 2 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. “There aren’t many more things you can ask of a fossil,” Chiappe says.

Bits of smooth, scaleless skin anchor long, fine feathers to the tail. Unlike modern feathers, these “protofeathers” or “type 1 feathers” look like simple strands of hair. The thin, flexible feathers are ancient versions of the broad, branching plumage —“type 2 feathers” — that adorn modern birds. Though the feathers look different, both are made from the same basic ingredients.

In life, the hairlike feathers would have given the dinosaur a thick coat and a bushy tail. (Part of the dinosaur’s name, Sciurumimus, derives from the Greek for “squirrel mimic.”)  “It looks like it was a pretty fluffy kind of thing,” Norell says. “Kind of like a baby chick.”

Eventually, the study’s authors hope to figure out the color of the dinosaur’s feathers. But because color tests require fossil snippets, scientists would have to clip bits from the dinosaur’s remains. And since this specimen is one of a kind, researchers aren’t quite ready to disturb it.

So far, nearly all of the feathered dinosaurs ever discovered have come from eastern Asia. But excavators unearthed this fossil in southern Germany. Even in places collectors picked over for 150 years, Norell says, new things keep turning up. “There’s always more out there,” he says.

Found in: Life

Read more: All Dinosaurs May Have Had Feathers – Science News

Natural Green coffee

Just staring into space? Perhaps not – daydreaming helps children …

Daily Mail:

Daydreaming could help children concentrate – and even perform better in tests, researchers claim.

The children also feel less anxious and more motivated to perform, according to a review of studies on the value of time to reflect.

Education should focus more on giving children time to think, claim researchers at the University of Southern California.

A study found that introspection – time to reflect – may be harder and harder to come by but can also be an increasingly valuable part of life.

Researchers from the University of Southern California studied literature from neuroscience and psychological science to explore what it meant to our brains to be ‘at rest’.

Research has looked at the ‘default mode’ network of the brain, which becomes active when we focuse inward.

It suggests that individual differences in brain activity during rest are correlated with components of emotional functioning, such as self-awareness and moral judgment, as well as different aspects of learning and memory, reports journal Perspectives on Psychological Science.

Read the whole story: Daily Mail

Continue reading here: Just staring into space? Perhaps not – daydreaming helps children …

                                   

hair loss treatment for men

Higgs Found – Science News

Finally, physics’s zoo of subatomic particles is full. Scientists have almost certainly snared the Higgs boson, the last particle waiting to be roped into the fold.

Decades after it was proposed, the Higgs emerged in the shards of particle collisions at the world’s most powerful accelerator, the Large Hadron Collider at the CERN laboratory near Geneva. Physicists announced the discovery on July 4 during a seminar at the lab.

“We have now found the last missing cornerstone of the standard model,” said Rolf-Dieter Heuer, CERN’s director-general. “It’s the beginning of a long journey to investigate all the properties of this interesting particle.”

The particle’s mass is around 125 billion electron volts, or about 133 times the mass of a proton. CERN captured the Higgs in two huge experiments, each of which independently reached the gold-standard statistical level for confirming the particle’s discovery.

Peter Higgs in the 60′s

One of the theorists who first proposed the particle nearly five decades ago joined in the all-around congratulations. “It really is an incredible thing that it’s happened in my lifetime,” said Peter Higgs of the University of Edinburgh.

In one respect, finding the Higgs simply confirms the standard model, physicists’ framework for understanding the particles that make up the universe and the forces that govern them. But the discovery also opens new areas to explore, including alternate versions of the standard model that could explain some of the biggest unanswered questions about the cosmos.

The Higgs traces back to 1964, when several physicists independently dreamed up the idea of an energy field that would have permeated the early universe (and persisted to the present). “In all honesty we were trying to solve a more modest problem,” said theorist Carl Hagen of the University of Rochester in New York. In certain theoretical calculations, particles with zero mass kept inconveniently popping up: In trying to get rid of those particles, Higgs, Hagen and others realized that once the universe cooled enough from its initial Big Bang, this energy field would have had to emerge.

Like a puddle of molasses, the field resists the motion of particles moving through it. Such resistance to motion, or inertia, is the defining quality of mass. Subatomic particles therefore acquire differing amounts of mass depending on how strongly they interact with the energy field.

Known as the Higgs field, its existence also required a new particle — the Higgs boson. (Bosons are a class of fundamental particles defined by their quantum properties.) Finding the Higgs was a major goal of the Superconducting Super Collider, an atom-smasher that was being built beneath Waxahachie, Texas, when the U.S. Congress canceled it under budget pressures in 1993. The Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, in Batavia, Ill., also chased the Higgs until shutting down its biggest machine last year.

Today, CERN scientists hunt the Higgs by smashing two beams of protons together at the $10 billion LHC. Out of a trillion proton-proton collisions, perhaps one will create a Higgs particle, which then decays almost instantaneously into other particles. Sensitive detectors placed at the sites of these smashups look for signatures of several ways the Higgs might have decayed. “It’s not a needle in a haystack — it’s much worse than a needle in a haystack,” said Joe Lykken, a theoretical physicist at Fermilab.

In its lifetime, the LHC has created some 500 trillion collisions overall. If each collision were represented by a grain of sand, the total number of those collisions would fill an Olympic-sized swimming pool, said Joe Incandela, a physicist at the University of California, Santa Barbara and a spokesman for one LHC experiment. Yet the grains from the signals of interest — the possible Higgses — would cover only the tip of your finger.

Both experiments looked at multiple ways the Higgs could decay, such as into two photons or into two Z particles.

One of the LHC’s two main detectors, the CMS experiment, found signs of a particle with a mass of 125.3 billion electron volts, plus or minus 0.6 billion electron volts, Incandela said. The statistical strength of a signal is measured by a quantity called sigma: A five-sigma result, considered the standard to claim a discovery, means there is a 1-in-3.5 million chance that a statistical fluke could have created a signal of that magnitude or greater.

In three of five decay paths studied, CMS found the Higgs with a statistical significance of 5.1 sigma. Adding in the other two channels, which have relatively little data, lowered that to 4.9 sigma — but the results are still consistent with a Higgs being there, said physicist Elizabeth Simmons of Michigan State University.

The competing ATLAS experiment spotted a new particle with a mass of 126.5 billion electron volts, with a statistical uncertainty at a 5.0 sigma level when combining the decay paths it examined. Independent physicist Philip Gibbs combined data from both ATLAS and CMS, using only the decay in which the Higgs produces two photons, to come up with an unofficial six-sigma signal.

The Higgs masses found by both experiments are consistent with one another given the uncertainty ranges in each measurement, said ATLAS spokeswoman Fabiola Gianotti (though she did not give a numerical error range for her experiment). Both teams will also present their work this week at the International Conference on High-Energy Physics in Melbourne, Australia.

“It’s a great day for particle physics and it’s really a profound discovery about how nature works,” said Pier Oddone, director of Fermilab.

CERN won the transatlantic race to find the Higgs after Fermilab’s proton-antiproton accelerator shut down last September. On July 2, in their final analysis, Fermilab physicists reported that their data could narrow the Higgs mass range only to between 115 billion and 135 billion electron volts, with a statistical significance of 2.9 sigma (SN Online: 7/2/12).

Since April the LHC has been colliding beams at energies of 8 trillion electron volts — 4 trillion electron volts in each beam — at four times the energy of Fermilab’s machine. Lab officials have decided to extend the LHC’s current run by up to three months to gather as much data as possible before it shuts down for two years for a major upgrade to 14 trillion electron volts.

Now that the Higgs has almost certainly been found, scientists are looking forward to learning more about it. So far, the particle seen in the experiments looks like the Higgs as predicted by the standard model, Heuer said, but slight differences could still exist. He compared the task to trying to determine from afar if a person approaching is your best friend or your best friend’s twin. Only when the person gets close enough can you determine which one it is. LHC measurements should soon reveal whether the particle’s properties match those predicted by the standard model, or whether new physics might be at work.

“Confirmation of theory is satisfying, but it would be more eventful if there were significant disagreements and controversies to resolve,” said Frank Taylor, an MIT physicist who works on the ATLAS collaboration.

One well-loved extension of the standard model is a theory known as supersymmetry, which holds that all known particles have a heavy supersymmetric partner as yet unseen. The concept opens up all sorts of areas to explore. One version of supersymmetry, for instance, predicts that at least five kinds of Higgs boson should exist, although only the lightest would be detectable at the LHC. Other supersymmetric particles may account for dark matter, the mysterious stuff that makes up most of the matter in the universe but which scientists have yet to identify.

If supersymmetry is right, the LHC has a shot at detecting many of these new particles as it continues its Higgs-refining quest. “It’s the path to answer these other questions,” said Gordon Kane, a theoretical physicist at the University of Michigan whose work has predicted a Higgs in the mass range found.

Fermilab’s Rob Roser said far more is yet to come from the LHC. “They’re in a new regime of energy and statistical precision, and this may not be the only surprise we have this year from them.”

Found in: Atom & Cosmos and Physics

Follow this link: Higgs Found – Science News

_______________________________________________________________________

                             

green coffee bean prices

Sandwalk: Another IDiot Book: Science and Human Origins

Laurence A. Moran

Larry Moran is a Professor in the Department of Biochemistry at the University of Toronto. You can contact him by looking up his email address on the University of Toronto website.

by Laurence A. Moran.

The IDiots at Disco (Discovery Institute) have published another book. This time the authors are Ann Gauger, Douglas Axe, and Casey Luskin. Gauger and Axe are scientists so this book is supposed to be about science. Unfortunately, Casey Luskin is a lawyer which pretty much negates the authority of Gauger and Axe.

The book has been thoroughly reviewed by Paul McBride on Still Monkeys. McBride is a graduate student studying evolution in New Zealand. Read the reviews at …

Science and Human Origins – Chapter 1 review
Science and Human Origins – Chapter 2 review
Science and Human Origins – Chapter 3 review
Science and Human Origins – Chapter 4 review
Science and Human Origins – Chapter 4 review: Part 2
Science and Human Origins – Chapter 5 review

Wanna know the bottom line?

1. Common descent is still alive and well.
2. Natural selection still works.
3. The human fossil record still demonstrates evolution.
4. Junk DNA still exists.
5. There’s no evidence for Adam and Eve.

Here’s how Paul McBride sums up his review.

Science and Human Origins has to be described first and foremost as being anti-evolution rather than pro-intelligent-design, or pro-science. If it offers solace to those seeking evidence against evolution for their faith, the solace should be as incomplete as the arguments made in the book.

This is a common criticism. Most IDiot literature is nothing more than a misguided attack on evolution. It’s increasingly rare to see any defense of intelligent design. Perhaps that’s because it’s indefensible?


Go here to see the original: Sandwalk: Another IDiot Book: Science and Human Origins

_______________________________________________________________________

                      

Cheaper Auto Insurance

A new dawn for science, God particle found – Tech News – IBNLive

Geneva: Scientists working at the world’s biggest atom smasher near Geneva have announced the discovery of a new subatomic particle that looks remarkably like the long-sought Higgs boson.

British physicist Peter Higgs arrives for a scientific seminar to deliver the latest update in the search for the Higgs boson at the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) in Meyrin near Geneva, Switzerland. AP Photo/Denis Balibouse, Pool

Sometimes called the “God particle” because its existence is fundamental to the creation of the universe, the hunt for the Higgs involved thousands of scientists from all over the world.

What is the God particle anyway?

School physics teaches that everything is made up of atoms, and inside atoms are electrons, protons and neutrons. They, in turn, are made of quarks and other subatomic particles. Scientists have long puzzled over how these minute building blocks of the universe acquire mass. Without mass, particles wouldn’t hold together and there would be no matter.

Scientists are now slated to keep probing the new particle, Higgs Boson, until they fully understand how it works.

A new dawn for science, God particle found

One theory proposed by British physicist Peter Higgs and teams in Belgium and the United States in the 1960s is that a new particle must be creating a “sticky” field that acts as a drag on other particles. The atom-smashing experiments at CERN, the European Center for Nuclear Research, have now captured a glimpse of what appears to be just such a Higgs-like particle.

Why is this important?

The Higgs is part of many theoretical equations underpinning scientists’ understanding of how the world came into being. If it doesn’t exist, then those theories would need to be fundamentally overhauled. The fact that it apparently does exist means scientists have been on the right track with their theories. But there’s a twist: the measurements seem to diverge slightly from what would be expected under the so-called Standard Model of particle physics. This is exciting for scientists because it opens the possibility to potential new discoveries including a theory known as “super-symmetry” where particles don’t just come in pairs — think matter and anti-matter — but quadruplets, all with slightly different characteristics.

How much did it cost?

CERN’s atom smasher, the Large Hadron Collider, alone cost some $10 billion to build and run. This includes the salaries of thousands of scientists and support staff around the world who collaborated on the two experiments that independently pursued the Higgs.

Were there any practical results from the search?

Not directly. But the massive scientific effort that led up to the discovery has paid off in other ways, one of which was the creation of the World Wide Web. CERN scientists developed it to make it easier to exchange information among each other. The vast computing power needed to crunch all of the data produced by the atom smasher has also boosted the development of distributed — or cloud — computing, which is now making its way into mainstream services. Advances in solar energy capture, medical imaging and proton therapy — used in the fight against cancer — have also resulted from the work of particle physicists at CERN and elsewhere.

What’s next?

“This is just the beginning,” says James Gillies, a spokesman for CERN. Scientists will keep probing the new particle until they fully understand how it works. In doing so they hope to understand the 96 per cent of the universe that remains hidden from view. This may result in the discovery of new particles and even hitherto unknown forces of nature.

Visit link: A new dawn for science, God particle found – Tech News – IBNLive

                                 

Green coffee

Apocalypse, Not So Fast – Science News

Ancient Maya reference to 2012 involved politics, not prophecy

Web edition : Tuesday, July 3rd, 2012

Although hieroglyphs previously found at an ancient Maya site may or may not mention December 21, 2012, as the end of time, don’t cancel any New Year’s Eve plans. Scientists working at another Maya city have uncovered a second reference to the same 2012 date, and the writing on the wall — make that the staircase — concerns political turmoil back then, not apocalypse now.

Anthropologists who discovered and deciphered the 2012 reference among hieroglyphs carved on 22 staircase steps at Guatemala’s La Corona site announced their find June 28 in Guatemala City.

“This text talks about ancient political history rather than prophecy,” says excavation codirector Marcello Canuto of Tulane University in New Orleans. “In times of crisis, the ancient Maya used their calendar to promote continuity and stability rather than to predict apocalypse.”

Two centuries of political history plays out in the 1,300-year-old inscription, says anthropologist David Stuart of the University of Texas at Austin, who is in charge of deciphering the carved text.

On one staircase block, Stuart recognized a commemoration of a 696 visit to La Corona by the powerful ruler of Calakmul, a Maya site in what’s now southern Mexico. Long thought to have been killed or captured in a 695 battle lost to a rival kingdom, the Calakmul king apparently weathered that defeat and visited his allies at La Corona to convince them that he remained a strong ruler, Stuart suggests.

In the commemoration, the Calakmul king refers to himself with a title signifying that he presided over and celebrated the end of a key Maya calendar cycle in 692. To attribute special status to his weakened reign, Stuart says, the king also connects himself to a future date when the next calendar cycle would conclude — December 21, 2012.

To a Maya king stung by a major military setback, “the reference to 2012 might even have provided a comforting sense of inevitability” in his continued rule, remarks anthropologist Stephen Houston of Brown University in Providence, R.I.

Researchers located La Corona 15 years ago, after decades of looted sculptures from the Maya city turning up on the antiquities black market. Canuto and anthropologist Tomás Barrientos of Universidad del Valle de Guatemala have led work at La Corona since 2007.

In May and June, the investigators decided to excavate at a building that looters had damaged nearly 40 years ago. Thieves had discarded staircase stones bearing carved writing in front of the structure. Digging produced additional discarded hieroglyphic stones and an intact step consisting of 12 carved stones.

At least 264 hieroglyphs appeared on the La Corona staircase, making it one of the longest known ancient Maya texts.

Linking the 2012 reference at La Corona to a nearby king’s political maneuvering, “while imaginative, is cogent and reasonable,” comments anthropologist David Freidel of Washington University in St. Louis.

And if Canuto and Stuart’s proposal turns out to be wrong — well, it’s not the end of the world.

Found in: Archaeology and Humans

Original post: Apocalypse, Not So Fast – Science News

                                           

Fresh News

This Day in Science History – July 5 – John Northrop

July 5this the birthday of John Howard Northrop. Northrop was an American biochemist who perfected a method to isolate and crystallize enzymes. This allowed him to examine the chemistry and structure of several enzymes and earned him part of the 1946 Nobel Prize in Chemistry. Using these methods, Northrop was first to isolate a bacteriophage or anti-bacterial virus and identify it as a nucleoprotein.Northrop’s research greatly advanced the understanding of the chemical nature of enzymes and proteins. Find out what else occurred on this day in science history.

Follow About.com Chemistry on Facebook or Twitter.

The rest is here: This Day in Science History – July 5 – John Northrop

www.puregreencoffee.org

Supertrees, high-tech flowers: Singapore’s incredible new attraction …

One of the world’s coolest ‘green’ initiatives, the innovative gardens feature solar-powered trees and climate-controlled flower domes.

Forget the casino. Marina Bay Singapore’s hottest new attraction is Gardens by the Bay, a cutting-edge horticultural mega project featuring 50-meter high solar-powered “supertrees” and climate-controlled biomes.

The entire project is estimated to have cost more than S$1 billion. Today is the official opening of Bay South Garden, the largest of the 101-hectare venue’s three gardens. The 54-hectare section features cooled flower domes, multiple heritage-themed outdoor gardens and two lakes.

Cooled conservatories

Bay South Garden’s two glass biomes — dubbed “Cloud Forest” and “Flower Dome” — were designed to replicate the cool-moist climate of the tropical montane region, the Mediterranean and semi-arid sub-tropical regions.

The conservatories feature plants and trees from these areas, which are among the most threatened habitats in the world, say Gardens officials. In addition to the permanent display of plant life and tree species, there will be seasonal changing floral displays in the Flower Dome.

Supertrees

Ranging in height from 25 to 50 metres, the Gardens’ 18 Supertrees are basically vertical gardens covered in bromeliads, ferns and tropical flowering climbers. Two of the trees are connected via an aerial walkway.

It’s pretty innovative stuff. The structures mimic the ecological functions of real trees through their environmentally sustainable features.

Some have photovoltaic cells on their canopies to harvest solar energy to light up at night, others are integrated with cooled conservatories and serve as air exhaust receptacles.

More on CNN: Solar-powered ‘supertrees’ breathe life into Singapore’s urban oasis

Gardens by the Bay by Grant Associates and Wilkinson Eyre Architects (5)

Read more: Supertrees, high-tech flowers: Singapore’s incredible new attraction …

Comparing Car Insurance

Singapore water week: High tech solutions at Holland pavilion draw …

The Holland pavilion at the Singapore International Water Week is well attended by water professionals from all over the world seeking innovative solutions.  This year the pavilion hosts again many international well respected Dutch water technology firms.

The open character of the booth, in combination with Dutch hospitality, makes its very popular amongst water professionals.

Some of the solutions shown at the Holland pavilion (booth R32):

BoxBarrier – Delta Marine Consultants The BoxBarrier is a very effective flood defense system, which can be used to temporarily heighten the crest of a dike.  100m flood barrier is installed in one hour!

Nereda aerobic granular –  Royal HaskoningDHV Nereda purifies waste water with the unique features of ‘aerobic granular biomass’. Nereda was invented by 2012 Lee Kuan Yew Water Prize winner Professor Mark van Loosdrecht.

 MasterBuoy – LG Sound Ultrasonic algae control is an environmental friendly way to kill algae and biofilm. The MasterBuoy monitors, real-time water parameters so the most effective ultrasonic program is used. A MasterBuoy can work in a diameter of 500 meter.flood algae

Visit link: Singapore water week: High tech solutions at Holland pavilion draw …

car insurance

Layer 8: FBI: High-tech economic espionage a vast, expanding threat

Economy, ease of cyber-theft drives illicit market for US technology

By Layer 8 on Fri, 06/29/12 – 12:24pm.

Driven by the general ease of stealing electronically stored data and the reality of growing global businesses, US companies have lost some $13 billion through economic espionage in the current fiscal year – and the problem is growing.

Those observations were made this week by the FBI to a House Committee on Homeland Security, Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence hearing that went on to add that as the FBI’s economic espionage caseload is growing, so is the percentage of cases attributed to an insider threat, meaning that, individuals currently (or formerly) trusted as employees and contractors are a growing part of the problem.

MORE: Who is threatening the security of your network?

FBI Assistant Director, Counterintelligence Division Frank Figliuzzi cited as an example, a February 2012 indictment, where several former employees with more than 70 combined years of service to the company were convinced to sell trade secrets to a competitor in the People’s Republic of China (PRC).

“Entities owned by the PRC government sought information on the production of titanium dioxide, a white pigment used to color paper, plastics, and paint. The PRC government tried for years to compete with DuPont Corporation, which holds the largest share of a $12 billion annual market in titanium dioxide. Five individuals and five companies were commissioned by these PRC state-owned enterprises collaborate in an effort to take DuPont’s technology to the PRC and build competing titanium dioxide plants, which would undercut DuPont revenues and business. Thus far, three co-conspirators have been arrested and one additional co-conspirator has pled guilty in federal court. This case is one of the largest economic espionage cases in FBI history,” he stated.

“The theft of U.S. proprietary technology, including controlled dual-use technology and military grade equipment, from unwitting U.S. companies is one of the most dangerous threats to national security,” John Woods, assistant director of national security investigations at U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, who also testified.

MORE: Do you know your cyberthreats? 

The insider threat, of course, is not new Figliuzzi stated, but it’s becoming more prevalent for a host of reasons, including:

  • The pervasiveness of employee financial hardships during economic difficulties;
  • The global economic crisis facing foreign nations, making it even more attractive, cost-effective, and worth the risk to steal technology rather than invest in research and development;
  • The ease of stealing anything stored electronically, especially when one has legitimate access to it; and
  • The increasing exposure to foreign intelligence services presented by the reality of global business, joint ventures, and the growing international footprint of American firms.

Figliuzzi said that another grave threat to our national security is the illegal transfer of US technology.

China adding to weapon proliferation: US report “The FBI is seeing an expansion of weapons proliferation cases involving US acquired components.  These are components exported from American companies, initially headed to someplace they’re allowed to be, but ultimately destined for someplace they should never be,” he said.

Continued here: Layer 8: FBI: High-tech economic espionage a vast, expanding threat

diet green coffee

Old Battery Gets A High-tech Makeover – Science News

Redesigned nickel-iron battery gives modern lithium-ion devices a run for their money.

By Devin Powell

 Web edition : Tuesday, June 26th, 2012
A rechargeable battery patented by Thomas Edison more than a century ago is staging a comeback. The nickel-iron battery may yet prove to be a viable power source for electric cars, as the inventor had intended.

Thanks to a redesign, Edison’s battery can now store almost as much energy, gram for gram, as the lithium-ion battery in Nissan’s all-electric car, the Leaf. But the redesigned battery charges faster and promises to be cheaper and safer, researchers report online June 26 in Nature Communications.

“People abandoned this type of battery in the 1970s because there were better batteries at the time,” says Hongjie Dai, a chemist at Stanford University. “We have made the Edison battery interesting again by drastically increasing the ability to charge and discharge it.”

Edison’s original design, patented in 1901, calls for two metal electrodes. A mixture of iron compounds and carbon gives off electricity that flows to a sheet of nickel, discharging the battery. Though hardy, it didn’t usher in the revolution in electric cars that Edison had hoped for. Ultimately it was eclipsed by other technologies, including the lithium-ion battery, that stored and delivered more energy.

To resurrect Edison’s battery, Dai and colleagues reshaped its electrodes at nanometer scales. Instead of simply mixing iron and carbon, the researchers grew iron pellets on top of atom-thick sheets of carbon chicken wire called graphene. Tiny plates of nickel perched atop carbon tubes formed the other electrode.

Go here to read the rest: Old Battery Gets A High-tech Makeover – Science News

green coffee beans uk

High-tech interstate weigh stations worth the weight | Yakima Herald …

GORDON KING/Yakima Herald-Republic
  Washington State Patrol Officer Ron Alread checks a reference book to see if the tires on the Ryder truck are the right size for the weight being carried by the truck at the Grandview weigh station June 25, 2012. With the help of information provided by the CVISN electronic screening system Alred was able to see the weight and was able to determine the tires were too small for that weight. He issued the driver a warning for the violation

Read more: High-tech interstate weigh stations worth the weight | Yakima Herald

by Ross Courtney Yakima Herald-Republic; GRANDVIEW — The passing trucker didn’t do anything wrong, but Washington State Patrol Officer Ron Alred made him stop at the weigh station anyway.

About a half mile away on Interstate 82, as the driver approached at 60 miles per hour, an electronic sensor over the freeway came up with some important information about the company operating the truck: It had a history of speeding infractions and long driving hours.

That was enough for the computer to recommend a physical inspection to Alred, seated inside the station. Alred flipped a switch that activated a light on the highway instructing the driver to pull in.

As it happened, the truck checked out as safe and the driver was on his way in 15 minutes.

Fourteen years into a program for electronic weigh-in and monitoring of trucks that traverse cross the state, truckers and the State Patrol are happy with the results. Highways are safer and truckers have less down time waiting at weigh stations, they say.

Crash and financial statistics corroborate it

Read the rest here http://www.yakima-herald.com/stories/2012/06/29/high-tech-interstate-weigh-stations-worth-the-weight

Profollica

Science and Exploring the Past – Quantum Diaries

Many years ago when I was in a grade-eight math class, I was sitting looking out the windows at the dinosaurs playing. Ok, despite what my daughter thinks, I am not quite that old. What I was looking at was planes circling around in the distance.

It turns out that a plane had crashed. It was a Handley Page HPR-7 Herald 211 operated by Eastern Provincial Airlines and all eight people on board were killed.  Now, it is sometimes claimed that science cannot explain the past. It’s even argued that historical sciences like paleontology, archeology, and cosmology, somehow use different methods of discovering the past, than say, determining the reason of a plane crash and that is again different from the method for discovering the laws of nature.  In reality, the methods are all the same.

I suppose, in response to the plane crash, people could have sat around and made predictions for future plane crashes but instead they used science to try to discover the past—what had caused the plane to crash. In this case it turned out to not be so difficult. The Aviation Safety Network describes the cause thus: Failure of corroded skin area along the bottom centre line of the aircraft beneath stringer No.32 which resulted in structural failure of the fuselage and aerial disintegration. This was found out by a metallographic examination which provided clear evidence of stress corrosion in the aluminum alloy. The planes of this type that were remaining in service were repaired to prevent them from crashing as well.

The approach to understanding why the Eastern Provincial Airline’s plane had crashed followed a similar approach to any other plane crash: you analyse the debris, gather records from the black box and whatever other information is available, and construct a model for what happened. You test the model by making predictions for future observations; for example, that corrosion will be found on other planes of the same type.  This sounds very much like the standard scientific method as proposed originally by Roger Bacon (1220 – 1292) and followed by scientists ever since: observe, hypothesize, test, rehypothesize, and repeat as necessary.

Learn the rest of the story. View original post here: Science and Exploring the Past – Quantum Diaries

compare auto insurance quotes

Cloud Computing Technology for Enterprises

Internet is represented as the ‘cloud’ and computing denotes software. Cloud computing refers to the delivery of technological resources to an alternate location. Cloud Computing is a prototype model where the data is permanently stored in servers on the internet and cached temporarily on clients. This includes desktop PCs, net cafes, laptops, palmtops, sensors, monitors, etc. A cloud can be held by a private or public enterprise. A public cloud is net-based service whereas a private cloud is a network or a data center that supplies hosted services to small groups.

Software-as-a-service envisages construction of hardware from the service. Cloud Computing enables infrastructure and services for the computer, as and when required which is called Infrastructure-as-a-service (IaaS). The computer paraphernalia includes hard disk, development platform, database, power or the entire software applications. Platform-as-a-service in the cloud is used when a bundle of software and product development tools hosted on the provider’s infrastructure. Developers create applications on the provider’s platform over the Internet. PaaS providers may use APIs, website portals or gateway software installed on the computer.

Cloud computing for enterprises

Cloud Computing is a technology architecture evolution which is exposed to business models, can revolutionize business. There is no need for organizations to make heavy investment in order to make available these resources but only make usage charges. This is a paradigm shift from fixed capital expenditure to operating expense and huge funds locked up in technology spending can be diverted to address our immediate and urgent needs thereby optimal utilization of funds makes it productive. This strategic shift from investments in servers and data management increases expenditure. Funds can be better utilized in human capital, purchasing advanced technology products, diversifying to new areas, research, services, marketing, etc. wherein the direct use of these funds might prove beneficial.

Cloud computing will grow rapidly and with SaaS, most will adopt a wait-and-watch policy before a full-fledged adoption. Hence, organizations may not drop their existing services.

There are strategic advantages to have multiple suppliers as against a single vendor. Because this will drive the business hard and make it flexible, resilient, adapt to time constraints and become a change agent.

As an innovative measure in the cloud atmosphere, is the possibility to create a virtual public or private cloud space in which a service provider uses public cloud resources to create a private cloud. This switching between commodity cloud resources will strengthen cloud computing technology to get the best value available at the time.

Follow this link: Cloud Computing Technology for Enterprises

compare to central mutual auto insurance

Profile of the Facebook Data Science Team

Back at Facebook, Marlow isn’t the one who makes decisions about what the company charges for, even if his work will shape them. Whatever happens, he says, the primary goal of his team is to support the well-being of the

Go here to read the rest: Profile of the Facebook Data Science Team

auto compare instant insurance london quote

Technology – Four Cheap Spy Cameras That Can Record Audio Too

There was a time not too long ago when spy cameras and hidden spy cameras were so expensive and so difficult to operate that only very rich individuals and our government agencies could get them. Advances in technology have made them easier to use and big-time price competition has lowered the prices to the point where just about anybody can afford one.

Spy cameras are so effective at doing their job because no one suspects that they are being recorded by the common everyday objects that the cameras are hidden inside-objects that you see on a day-to-day basis. Hidden cameras were only used to record video for legal reasons. But now smaller objects that are so-called “body worn” hidden cameras can have audio capabilities too.

Here are four cheap spy cameras that record both video and audio.

First is a car key remote hidden camera with an 8 GB built-in memory to record audio and video. It can take video as well as still photos and can record up to one hour on a single charge. This camera looks just like a remote car key fob but has amazing capabilities to record audio and video files. It comes with a USB cord for downloading.

Second is the stick spy camera that is one of the smallest “body worn” cameras at 2.875″ x 0.75 X.5 “. It can record video or still pictures and audio. It clips right to your pocket. When worn that way it allows you to take hands-free recording. The battery will last up to two hours on a single charge. It comes with a 2 GB built-in memory and is expandable to 8 GB by adding the 8 GB micro SD card. At $59.95 it is an excellent value.

Third is one of the most exciting that looks just like a quality silver watch but inside is 4 GB of built-in memory and a pinhole 1/6″ CMOS image sensor that takes excellent pictures and video. The built-in memory can also capture audio with a mini microphone. The rechargeable battery will last up to two hours on a single charge. At $69.95 it is an in expensive way to record audio and video.

The Pen Hidden Camera has a built-in lithium-ion battery. It’s rechargeable and will last up to three hours on a single charge. This hidden camera has 8 GB of built-in memory. The working ball point pen conceals a one megapixel camera that takes excellent pictures. The built-in microphone is so sensitive it can record audio in a 15 square meter area. This quality recording device is $129.95.

Those are four newer, cheap spy cameras that record video and audio for situations where recording is difficult at best.

 

Follow this link: Technology – Four Cheap Spy Cameras That Can Record Audio Too

                              

how to compare auto insurance rates

all mine!: Keynote about Open Science

At Akademy, about an hour ago, the keynote by Will Schroeder from Kittware was finished. It was a very nice talk – and I’ve collected some notes, see below!

What is this thing called science?

After introducing Kitware and what they do (‘all things scientific computing related’), Will starts to talk about science: where does it come from?

You might remember this Descartes dude. He questioned everything – and that is where it started. Nullius in Verba, “take nobody’s word for it”, that was the thought behind this movement.

And realize that this did not go down easily! People were locked up for this, faced jail time for their convictions. They were the hackers of their time, trying new things, finding new ways. And sharing knowledge.

Because that is what science was (and should be) all about. The way it worked was as follows:
A scientist wrote a paper, a letter. This would go to the Royal Society or another ‘science institution’. There the experiments were replicated and verified. Once verified, the letter, paper or book was replicated and distributed through society.

Things changed since then

But commerce took over and now, the process goes from scientist to commercial publisher where volunteers do peer review and then the article gets published in a journal.

This looks like the same process, but it is not. First of all – in reality, replication of experiments does not happen. There is a number of reasons for that, some practical (huge computational requirements, growth time of tissue samples) but often it is also lacking data, details on how the experiment works or closed, unavailable software or procedures.

The thirst for {fame, power|control|money} has tainted science: we’ve lost the search for truth. It is “publish or persih”, career pressure is huge and scientists are afraid to share knowledge because it might loose them a paper or even patents and licensing income.

Meanwhile, according to a case study, licensing revenue on patents is about 2 billion, but if you substract the costs the university breaks even. And the push for patents is corrupting and damaging science and creates resistance to collaboration.

 The results

And it shows: Nature published a study showing that more than 90% of papers in science journals describing ‘landmark’ breakthroughs in preclinical cancer research are NOT reproducible and are thus just plain wrong.

Will gives a computational science/medical imaging example. It is quite complicated – but boils down to the fact that we can’t reproduce the result because we lack knowledge of how it was obtained.

So there is a huge pressure on scientists to do bad science and nobody checks up on the results. Meanwhile, journals take easily 2 years and hundreds of euro’s to publish their articles and you also have to pay thousands to read the results – which were peer reviewed by volunteers!

Our data is unavailable or put in proprietary formats, publishers control the flow of information and closed and proprietary software is used to do analysis and controls how scientists work.

What we need

What we need is open science: open access to knowledge, open access to data and open access to source.

it is a real tragedy that we have to put the word ‘open’ in front of science!

But we have to. Science, part of this three hundred years old tradition of hacking and sharing knowledge, has been corrupted and locked up.

The good news is that things are changing. Universities realize that the status quo does not benefit society and change their policies. Harvard now asks professors to publish in open access journals and the UK is going to only fund research which ends up in the open.

Of course, we already knew that: both society and business show a clear trend. Open is better and will take over closed!

note that these are personal notes and not reviewed: no guarantees about the correctness!

More: all mine!: Keynote about Open Science

Profollica

3quarksdaily: Science: A Call for Humility

June 30, 2012

Science: A Call for Humility

Portrait.tif_Russell Stannard in The Huffington Post [h/t: Namit Arora]:

[E]ven if the M-theory hypothesis is correct, does it in fact answer the question of “Why is there something rather than nothing?” It would certainly account for the existence of the world. But would it not raise a fresh question: “Where did M-theory come from? What is responsible for its existence?”

This brings us up against what one suspects is a fundamental limitation of the scientific enterprise. The job of science is to describe the world we find ourselves in — what it consists of, and how it operates. But it appears to fall short of explaining why we are presented with this kind of world rather than some other — or why there should be a world at all.

Indeed, there is cause to wonder whether science even gets as far as describing the world. For instance, what is the world made of? One might answer in terms of the electrons, protons, and neutrons that make up atoms. But what are electrons, protons and neutrons? Quantum physics shows how they are observed to behave like waves as they move about. But on reaching their destination and giving up their energy and momentum they behave like tiny particles. But how can something be both a spread out wave with humps and troughs, and at the same time be a tiny localized particle? This is the famous wave/particle paradox. It afflicts everything, including light.

The solution given by the Danish physicist Neils Bohr was that one has to stop trying to explain what something, such as an electron, is. Instead, we are confined to explaining how something behaves in the context of a certain kind of observation being made on it — whether we are observing it moving from one place to another (in which case the language of waves is appropriate), or alternatively observing it interacting on reaching its destination (requiring the language of particles).

 

Posted by Robin Varghese at 06:29 AM | Permalink

Go here to read the rest: 3quarksdaily: Science: A Call for Humility

Natural Raspberry Ketone

Penniless Teacher: Free Science Equipment

LAST DAY TO ENTER

Science teachers!!!  Especially secondary science teachers.  Like this if you have already entered.
If you are selected as the winner of the CPO Science giveaway, you select the item you would like to receive.
Ends 11:59 ET TONIGHT (July 1, 2012)

Photobucket
Get updates delivered to your email daily. Subscribe to Penniless Teacher by Email
#Giveaway #sweepstakes #teachers #education #teaching

See the original post here: Penniless Teacher: Free Science Equipment

How To Save on Car Insurance

Space station science is at a crossroads, NASA says | MNN – Mother …

DENVER — It’s time to get serious about science in space, and the International Space Station is the perfect place to start, NASA officials said on June 26.

“We are in a position in space research and space exploration where we have to push the ball and advance forward or we’re about ready to retreat from space,” William Gerstenmaier, NASA’s associate administrator for human exploration and operations, told a crowd of researchers here at the first annual ISS Research and Development Conference.
Science experiments on the space station have been under way since the outpost’s early days, of course. Construction of the orbiting laboratory began in 1998, and there has been a continuous human presence on the station since 2000. Now, however, there is little left to build and many opportunities to exploit, according to NASA speakers, who encouraged scientists to spread the word.
In May, SpaceX’s unmanned Dragon capsule successfully docked with the space station, becoming the first commercial spacecraft in history to do so. With SpaceX and other private companies providing transportation, private research companies will have the routine access they need to commit to space research, Gerstenmaier said. Meanwhile, upgrades like Earth-compatible power outlets and wireless internet connectivity will make it easier for terrestrially bound scientists to create experiments that will work in space, said Mike Suffredini, NASA’s ISS Program Director.

Keeping humans in space

The human component to space exploration was at the forefront in NASA officials’ messages. Human experimenters can be part of experiments, making observations in a way that an automated system never could, said NASA Chief Scientist Waleed Abdalati. And human perseverance can also yield surprising results.

For example, now-retired astronaut Shannon Lucid was once conducting a fluid physics experiment on the Russian research satellite Mir, Gerstenmaier said. Her job was to shake a container of liquid in an attempt to form a bubble in a certain spot. Based on computer models, researchers were certain that the experiment was physically impossible — but Lucid didn’t know that. With communications temporarily interrupted between Mir and Earth, she kept at the experiment for over an hour. Finally, she got the bubble to form.

“It blew away their theory,” Gerstenmaier said. “They believed their computer analysis. She didn’t know that and really pushed that boundary.”

Space station research can have applications for humanity on Earth — one experiment performed on the station uncovered immune system changes that can predict shingles, a painful skin disorder caused by the chickenpox virus, Suffredini said — as well as for future space travel and basic science.

Some instruments on the space station pull double duty. For example, Gerstenmaier said, a particle physics detector called the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer is designed to detect dark matter and antimatter.

But it also detects cosmic rays, providing data that researchers can use to understand how exposure to these rays could affect astronauts during long-term space travel.

“I think of this as really a gateway to our future, to a universe of opportunity,” Abdalati said of the ISS. “It’s an opportunity to look outward, an opportunity to look inwards and an opportunity to look homeward.”

Related on SPACE.com:

Copyright 2012 SPACE.com, a TechMediaNetwork company. All rights reserved.

Read the original post: Space station science is at a crossroads, NASA says | MNN – Mother …

Kollagen Intensiv

Economist’s View: ‘Science’ without Falsification

Bryan Caplan is tired of being sneered at by “high-status academic economists”:

The Curious Ethos of the Academic/Appointee, by Bryan Caplan: High-status academic economists often look down on economists who engage in blogging and punditry. Their view: If you can’t “definitively prove” your claims, you should remain silent.

At the same time, though, high-status academic economists often receive top political appointments. Part of their job is to stand behind the administration’s party line. They don’t merely make claims they can’t definitively prove; to keep their positions, appointees have to make claims they don’t even believe! Yet high-status academic economists are proud to accept these jobs – and their colleagues admire them for doing so. …

Noah Smith has something to say about “definitive proof”:

“Science” without falsification is no science, by Noah Smith: Simon Wren-Lewis notes that although plenty of new macroeconomics has been added in response to the recent crisis/depression, nothing has been thrown out

Four years after a huge deflationary shock with no apparent shock to technology, asset-pricing papers and labor search papers and international finance papers and even some business-cycle papers continue to use models in which business cycles are driven by technology shocks. No theory seems to have been thrown out. And these are young economists writing these papers, so it’s not a generational effect. …

If smart people don’t agree, it may because they are waiting for new evidence or because they don’t understand each other’s math. But if enough time passes and people are still having the same arguments they had a hundred years ago – as is exactly the case in macro today – then we have to conclude that very little is being accomplished in the field. The creation of new theories does not represent scientific progress until it is matched by the rejection of failed alternative theories.

The root problem here is that macroeconomics seems to have no commonly agreed-upon criteria for falsification of hypotheses. Time-series data – in other words, watching history go by and trying to pick out recurring patterns – does not seem to be persuasive enough to kill any existing theory. Nobody seems to believe in cross-country regressions. And there are basically no macro experiments. …

So as things stand, macro is mostly a “science” without falsification. In other words, it is barely a science at all. Microeconomists know this. The educated public knows this. And that is why the prestige of the macro field is falling. The solution is for macroeconomists to A) admit their ignorance more often (see this Mankiw article and this Cochrane article for good examples of how to do this), and B) search for better ways to falsify macro theories in a convincing way.

I have a slightly different take on this. From a column last summer:

What Caused the Financial Crisis? Don’t Ask An Economist, by Mark Thoma: What caused the financial crisis that is still reverberating through the global economy? Last week’s 4th Nobel Laureate Meeting in Lindau, Germany – a meeting that brings Nobel laureates in economics together with several hundred young economists from all over the world – illustrates how little agreement there is on the answer to this important question.

Surprisingly, the financial crisis did not receive much attention at the conference. Many of the sessions on macroeconomics and finance didn’t mention it at all, and when it was finally discussed, the reasons cited for the financial meltdown were all over the map.

It was the banks, the Fed, too much regulation, too little regulation, Fannie and Freddie, moral hazard from too-big-to-fail banks, bad and intentionally misleading accounting, irrational exuberance, faulty models, and the ratings agencies. In addition, factors I view as important contributors to the crisis, such as the conditions that allowed troublesome runs on the shadow banking system after regulators let Lehman fail, were hardly mentioned.

Macroeconomic models have not fared well in recent years – the models didn’t predict the financial crisis and gave little guidance to policymakers, and I was anxious to hear the laureates discuss what macroeconomists need to do to fix them. So I found the lack of consensus on what caused the crisis distressing. If the very best economists in the profession cannot come to anything close to agreement about why the crisis happened almost four years after the recession began, how can we possibly address the problems? …

How can some of the best economists in the profession come to such different conclusions? A big part of the problem is that macroeconomists have not settled on a single model of the economy, and the various models often deliver very different, contradictory advice on how to solve economic problems. The basic problem is that economics is not an experimental science. We use historical data rather than experimental data, and it’s possible to construct more than one model that explains the historical data equally well. Time and more data may allow us to settle on a particular model someday – as new data arrives it may favor one model over the other – but as long as this problem is present, macroeconomists will continue to hold opposing views and give conflicting advice.

 

This problem is not just of concern to macroeconomists; it has contributed to the dysfunction we are seeing in Washington as well. When Republicans need to find support for policies such as deregulation, they can enlist prominent economists – Nobel laureates perhaps – to back them up. Similarly, when Democrats need support for proposals to increase regulation, they can also count noted economists in their camp. If economists were largely unified, it would be harder for differences in Congress to persist, but unfortunately such unanimity is not generally present.

This divide in the profession also increases the possibility that the public will be sold false or misleading ideas intended to promote an ideological or political agenda.  If the experts disagree, how is the public supposed to know what to believe? They often don’t have the expertise to analyze policy initiatives on their own, so they rely on experts to help them. But when the experts disagree at such a fundamental level, the public can no longer trust what it hears, and that leaves it vulnerable to people peddling all sorts of crazy ideas.

When the recession began, I had high hopes that it would help us to sort between competing macroeconomic models. As noted above, it’s difficult to choose one model over another because the models do equally well at explaining the past. But this recession is so unlike any event for which there is existing data that it pushes the models into new territory that tests their explanatory power (macroeconomic data does not exist prior to 1947 in most cases, so it does not include the Great Depression). But, disappointingly, even though I believe the data point clearly toward models that emphasize the demand side rather than the supply side as the source of our problems, the crisis has not propelled us toward a particular class of models as would be expected in a data-driven, scientific discipline. Instead, the two sides have dug in their heels and the differences – many of which have been aired in public – have become larger and more contentious than ever.

Finally, on the usefulness of microeconomic models for macroeconomists — what is known as microfoundations — see here: The Macroeconomic Foundations of Microeconomics.

Update: See here too: Why Economists Can’t Agree, another column of mine from the past, and also Simon Wren-Lewis: What microeconomists think about macroeconomics.

Read more here: Economist’s View: ‘Science’ without Falsification

Saving Money On Car Insurance

Vaccination – The Religious Science :

By Liam Scheff
theintelhub.com

June 29, 2012

Excerpted fromOfficial Stories

The following is an exclusive excerpt from the new book “Official Stories” by Liam Scheff, from Chapter 5: Vaccination – The Religious Science.

The Official Story: Vaccination, injecting viruses into people, especially small children, prevents future infection and is therefore good for you. It began with Louis Pasteur, who devised germ theory. Then Edward Jenner developed a vaccine against smallpox. Jonas Salk’s vaccine stopped Polio in the 1950s. We use vaccines today to fight latent “slow viruses” like HPV which, officials say, can cause cancer in women, eventually.

The Lone Gunman: Viruses. But this time there’s a counter-attack and it’s equally powerful – the syringe full of specially-prepared viruses.

The Magic Bullet: Whatever is in those syringes; it stopped polio, it’ll stop HPV and the bird, pig and every other flu too.

Scratch 1: Vaccination comes from the word “vacca.” We could call it cow-injection, to be true to history, because, and we’re never really told this, but the vaccine that made it all famous – smallpox – came from the sores on the underbellies and legs of cows and horses. Pus and blood were scraped off, put on the ends of small, sharp pronged forks or lancets and jabbed into people’s arms. Yes, “vacca” means “cow.” Does that surprise you? Do we generally think that animal blood and pus is good thing to put into our bodies? Probably not, but we’ll get into that in a minute.

Vaccines are regarded as a nearly magical process, like a totem or a crucible, a station of the cross in the Western world; it has replaced baptism as a holy right. Those who are opposed are mistrusted and feared, almost as witches; certainly as troubled heretics. But no one ever asks the question:

What Is In A Vaccine?

Scratch 2: Vaccines are not conjured at Hogwarts by honest wizards. Willy Wonka doesn’t brew them in his chocolate factory. They are not magical and there is a reason, or many, why some people oppose them so strongly. Vaccines are toxic, by their very nature.

The liquid in the syringe is filled with very small pieces of…well, a lot of things. These materials come from laboratory dishes where putative viruses are grown. But nothing biological can be grown, except in a “medium” or substrate. That is, it takes living tissue to grow living microscopic entities. So, what tissues are vaccines grown in, or really, culled from?

The first substrates were a variety of animal body parts, including spines and brains; rabbits were often used. Sometimes it was pus and blood from a sick animal. Then it was monkey kidneys and testicles; that’s what the putative polio virus was grown in. Of course, monkey cells contain monkey proteins, viruses, bacteria, mycoplasmas and toxins. It is not possible to filter out one microscopic particle, from a sea of similarly-sized or smaller particles. These particles, proteins, viruses and cellular debris have been and are being injected into millions of people, in the name of stopping polio – and every other disease for which there is a vaccine.

Hamster ovaries, washed sheep blood, dog kidney cells and here’s a favorite with the Christian crowd – aborted human fetal tissue; these are newer substrates. These cells are cultured, fed, stimulated and made to replicate so as to produce…well, that’s what this chapter is about and we’re almost there.

In addition to the living tissue, vaccines have added to them a series of metals and preservatives, as well as chemical agents sent to inflame and agitate your cells. Mercury is one of the longest-used metals in vaccines. Formaldehyde has made it into countless batches. Formaldehyde is used to embalm dead people – to keep them from rotting. Is that good for children? No, it’s a toxic poison. But there it goes, into the blood.

Squalene is one of the most famous adjuvants for its starring role in Gulf War Illness. Its job is to agitate your muscles, blood vessels, cells and tissue into an inflamed state. Vaccine manufacturers actively seek this inflammatory response. They feel it helps their vaccine work. But it can also bring on real illness: Pain, nausea, cramps, fainting, tremors, seizures and a long list of neurological responses. Some-times vaccines cause death; sometimes instantly. Yes, that has happened too.

Vaccine proponents will tell you that the 30,000 adverse events reported annually on the government’s VAERS self-reporting system for vaccine side effects are worth it. It doesn’t seem to bother them that even the government agrees that VAERS captures about 1% of the total number of toxic events due to vaccination. It’s like a religion. There are the vaccine true-believers – and their generally ridiculed opponents.

The Doctor’s Office

If you can believe it, I was agnostic for a long time about vaccines. Understanding vaccination came late in my studies. I didn’t like them, but, I wasn’t sure. Maybe they helped. After all, there had been polio and now there isn’t. Smallpox has gone away. I couldn’t discount vaccination entirely.

I was three or four years old. I was in a doctor’s office. I saw a needle coming for me – it was going to be put into me. INTO. I knew with all my being that this was insane. Wrong. WRONG. Not going to happen. Large hands held my small limbs and forced the needle and fluid into me, sending a hot swelling pressure into my arm.
“That’s not so bad,” they said. “That’s a big boy.”

I had a lot of strep throats as a kid. I had a number of very bad fevers. I felt awful, a lot. The next time I went, I remember being older by a few years. I held still; I looked away; I held my breath. “That’s a brave young man,” they said. I continued to have a lot of flus and strep. But, I had a terrible diet.

I stopped getting stuck with needles in my…I can’t quite recall. Early teens? After childhood, I avoided doctors and all medical procedures. Maybe it’s that I come from a family of doctors. It turns you off to it. On the inside of a group of medical men they’ll tell you, “Oh, it’s just a flu, tough it out.” So you do. Decades on, I don’t get sick the way I used to, but my diet is entirely different. I also haven’t been injected with anything for decades.

So I was agnostic. I did not know. I had to read and study, starting with polio 6 or 7 years ago, then HPV and then reaching back to the beginning, Pasteur and Jenner. What I learned was a hidden history. What I can do for you is to share it.

Vaccination, The Other History

People have always gotten sick and people have always died. That seems to be part of the deal here on Earth, for as long as anyone can remember. In order to deal with this reality, some ancient cultures, including the Chinese and Indian, devised complex medical systems involving categorization of energy types, effects of food and herbs and interaction among the organ systems. They had great success with them for thousands of years.

One method of disease prevention was to take pus from people and animals who had the “pox” or pustule-forming diseases, remove it from the pustules and dry it in the sun. (Sunlight and fresh air – the ultimate disinfectants). That dried material would then be crumbled or ground into a powder and blown (whoosh!) up your nose and sinuses, if you’d never had the disease and especially if you were young. By this method of introducing dried, sterilized powder from a sick creature into the nasal passages, the recipient would receive a benign exposure to an otherwise toxic substance. Some cultures would prick your skin with this dried, sterilized substance.

Let’s make a check here: Breathing something into your nasal passage is very different than opening a wound in your flesh and pouring in the dripping wet pus and blood drawn from the sick animal. And pricking skin with dried, sterile material is different than injecting diseased animal remains deep into your muscle. Without reading another word, you can begin to understand the problem with the Western system of vaccination.

.        .        .


Buy Official Stories Online, Ships Worldwide

In the UK and Europe on Amazon

On Audiobook and Kindle in late 2012

Read (and write) reviews for “Official Stories”

Follow “Official Stories” on facebook

Read more: Vaccination – The Religious Science :

Raspberry Ketone

Can’t Tell if Trolling or Science – Dropping the Science

Dropping The Science: Cool Science News – Amazing Science Experiments – Astonishing Science Photos – and some very silly Science Memes.

funny science news experiments memes - Can't tell if trolling or science

See the original post and even better stuff here: Can’t Tell if Trolling or Science – Dropping the Science

auto insurance

‘Stand back, I’m going to try science’: Inside the brain of – Grist

That talk by ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson at the Council on Foreign Relations that Gristmill linked to earlier today is a stunning demonstration of how to sow confusion and delay. It’s worth deeper analysis. So let’s dig in!

It’s very long, so we’ll summarize some sections and zero in on a couple of key passages. You can read the whole thing here.

Paragraphs 1-6, in short: Energy prices sure go up and down a lot! But we keep finding more fossil fuels when we need to.

Next 3 paragraphs: Boy, there was a lot more natural gas in the shale here in North America than we expected.

Next 6 paragraphs: Let’s all say “energy security” rather than “energy independence,” OK? Exxon is a multinational, and I want everyone to be friends and not worry about where their oil comes from as long as it keeps coming.


Here’s where Tillerson starts to gets interesting. Let’s quote his original and then translate:

Ours is an industry that is built on technology, it’s built on science, it’s built on engineering, and because we have a society that by and large is illiterate in these areas, science, math and engineering, what we do is a mystery to them and they find it scary. And because of that, it creates easy opportunities for opponents of development, activist organizations, to manufacture fear.

Translation: You thought those people out there sounding an alarm about climate change were scientists? Forget it. We here at Exxon, we’re the scientists. And all those people with fancy degrees and titles who have been desperately trying to teach the U.S. public about global warming? They’re illiterates! We’re the clean guys in white coats; they’re the dirty “manufacturers” of fear.

And so as these technologies emerge, we know the immediate response from certain parts of interested parties out there is going to be to manufacture fear because that’s how you slow this down. And nowhere is it more effective than in the United States. And so that’s — the pace at which these things occur oftentimes is our ability to deal with the manufactured fear, our ability as an industry, working with well-intended regulators and policymakers to address the fears.

Translation: I am a dispassionate man of reason. Forget that I run one of the richest corporations in the world. I am not an “interested party.” The interested parties are all those illiterate, fear-mongering activists who are getting filthy rich off their fabulously wealthy nonprofit activities.

It requires a lot of education, requires taking an illiterate public — illiterate in the sciences, engineering and mathematics — and trying to help them understand why we can manage these risks. And that’s a very intensive, almost one-on-one process — town by town, city council by city council, state by state. So it takes a while. And we’re not particularly aided in our efforts by the broad-based media, because it’s a lot sexier to write the fear stories than it is to write the here’s-how-you-manage-it story.

Translation: Do not think that we buy advertisements and pay lobbyists in order to influence public policy in our favor. At Exxon, we re having one-on-one conversations with our community. Sadly, journalists sometimes help out those fearmongering ignoramuses by repeating their lies. So we have to spend lots of money setting the record straight.

Now, that’s just a fact, it’s not a complaint. But it’s part of why do things take so long. Well, that’s one of the reasons it takes us a long time to get the policy solutions, because it all becomes then a political process instead of a scientific process.

Translation: If only we could leave energy policy safely in the hands of scientists. Wait, maybe that’s not the best idea.

There are important questions about the things that people worry about, and we have an obligation to address them, and we devote a tremendous amount of effort in addressing those. But I think if you look at the technologies that are front and center today around the shale resources — hydraulic fracturing, horizontal drilling, the integration of those technologies, how we drill these wells, how we protect fresh water zone, how we protect emissions — we have all of that engineered. And as long as we as an industry follow good engineering practices and standards, these risks are entirely manageable. And the consequences of a misstep by any member of our industry — and I’m speaking again about the shale revolution — the consequences of a misstep in a well, while large to the immediate people that live around that well, in the great scheme of things are pretty small, and even to the immediate people around the well, they could be mitigated.

Translation: Accidents don’t happen if you do things right, and at Exxon, we always do things right. And even if there is an accident with fracking, which sometimes is done by people who don’t work for Exxon who might not do everything right, it will only wreck the lives of a limited number of people in a small number of communities. So who cares?

These are not life-threatening, they’re not long-lasting, and they’re not new. They are the same risks that our industry has been managing for more than 100 years in the conventional development of oil and natural gas. There’s nothing new in what we’re doing, and we’ve been hydraulically refracturing (sic) wells in large numbers since the 1960s; first developed in 1940. So this is an old technology just being applied, integrated with some new technologies. So the risks are very manageable.

Translation: If you look at the history of our industry, why would anyone worry? It’s not as if there have ever been any accidents, right?

The fears are real. We don’t discount that people’s fears are their fears. We have to address that. We want to address it with sound science, we want to address it with real data, and somehow we have to overcome the manufactured fear which gets most of the headlines.

Translation: The fears aren’t real! But unfortunately the U.S. still has elections, and the government can still make trouble for us. So we have to pretend to take public fears seriously. After all, if we lose a few towns here and there, you and I here at this elite conference understand that that’s an acceptable risk — but the illiterate masses out there might get really upset.


There is much, much more in this speech, but that’s enough for now. OK, almost enough. Here’s one last bit from the Q&A at the end.

QUESTIONER: Hi, I’m David Fenton. Mr. Tillerson, I want to talk about science and risk, and I agree with you that’s the way we must proceed. So, as you know, it’s a basic fact of physics that CO2 traps heat, and too much CO2 will mean it will get too hot, and we will face enormous risks as a result of this not only to our way of life, but to the world economy. It will be devastating: The seas will rise, the coastlines will be unstable for generations, the price of food will go crazy. This is what we face, and we all know it.

Now — so my question for you is since we all know this knowledge, we’re a little in denial of it. You know, if we burn all these reserves you’ve talked about, you can kiss future generations good-bye. And maybe we’ll find a solution to take it out of the air. But, as you know, we don’t have one. So what are you going to do about this? We need your help to do something about this.

TILLERSON: Well, let me — let me say that we have studied that issue and continue to study it as well. We are and have been long-time participants in the IPCC panels. We author many of the IPCC subcommittee papers, and we peer-review most of them. So we are very current on the science, our understanding of the science, and importantly — and this is where I’m going to take exception to something you said — the competency of the models to predict the future. We’ve been working with a very good team at MIT now for more than 20 years on this area of modeling the climate, which, since obviously it’s an area of great interest to you, you know and have to know the competencies of the models are not particularly good.

Now you can plug in assumptions on many elements of the climate system that we cannot model — and you know what they all are. We cannot model aerosols; we cannot model clouds, which are big, big factors in how the CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere affect temperatures at surface level. The models we need — and we are putting a lot of money supporting people and continuing to work on these models, try and become more competent with the models. But our ability to predict, with any accuracy, what the future’s going to be is really pretty limited.

So our approach is we do look at the range of the outcomes and try and understand the consequences of that, and clearly there’s going to be an impact. So I’m not disputing that increasing CO2 emissions in the atmosphere is going to have an impact. It’ll have a warming impact. The — how large it is is what is very hard for anyone to predict. And depending on how large it is, then projects how dire the consequences are.

As we have looked at the most recent studies coming — and the IPCC reports, which we — I’ve seen the drafts; I can’t say too much because they’re not out yet. But when you predict things like sea level rise, you get numbers all over the map. If you take a — what I would call a reasonable scientific approach to that, we believe those consequences are manageable. They do require us to begin to exert — or spend more policy effort on adaptation. What do you want to do if we think the future has sea level rising four inches, six inches? Where are the impacted areas, and what do you want to do to adapt to that?

And as human beings as a — as a — as a species, that’s why we’re all still here. We have spent our entire existence adapting, OK? So we will adapt to this. Changes to weather patterns that move crop production areas around — we’ll adapt to that. It’s an engineering problem, and it has engineering solutions. And so I don’t — the fear factor that people want to throw out there to say we just have to stop this, I do not accept.

I do believe we have to — we have to be efficient and we have to manage it, but we also need to look at the other side of the engineering solution, which is how are we going to adapt to it. And there are solutions. It’s not a problem that we can’t solve.

Translation: Yes, global warming is real. Carbon emissions really do boost temperatures. But nobody knows by how much — that’s impossible to predict. So what the hell? Let’s just take that risk of apocalypse. The consequences will be manageable — for us here at ExxonMobil. As for the human race? It will just have to adapt! And you can count on us engineers to help you out with that. After all, by that time we’re going to need a new line of business.

Read the original here: ‘Stand back, I’m going to try science’: Inside the brain of – Grist

green coffee beans online

Engaging Children In Science – Samantha Stein At The Sixth World …

Engaging Children In Science – Samantha Stein At The Sixth World Skeptics Congress

You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Leave a Reply

Allowed Tags

Do you already have an account? log in or…

Go here to see the original: Engaging Children In Science – Samantha Stein At The Sixth World …

puregreencoffee.org

Knight Science Journalism Tracker » Blog Archive » LA Times, Chr …

The highest temperature anywhere on Earth ever,  anywhere in today’s universe for all I know, has been briefly inferred in the teeny fireballs of colliding particles at the US’s Brookhaven National Laboratory. The Guinness World Record people are in agreement. To set the mark, the physicists banged gold nuclei into each another at near-light speed. They have a whole program devoted to smashing gold that way. This record is just a footnote. But superlatives are natural stories. They grab eyeballs (Fastest! Smallest! Densest! Farthest! Anythingest! will do). Hottest makes the A-list.

But this has the advantage of not only being cutting edge science (quark gluon soup comes up), but of letting us know that while Europe has the Large Hadron Collider and is thus glamour queen of high energy particle physics, the US still does have machines hard at work and with PhD physicists at the helm. This is so even with Fermilab’s Tevatron shuttered and the lab’s public affairs shop reduced to inviting reporters to see new calves in its bison herd as about the only thing going on. Yes, that’s an exaggeration. But Tevatron is dark.

Stories:

Nostalgia Dept:

Grist for the Mill: Guinness record announcement ;

- Charlie Petit

View original post here: Knight Science Journalism Tracker » Blog Archive » LA Times, Chr …

anti aging wrinkle cream