# The Science thread



## FeXL

From time to time I run across a science article which doesn't fit very well into existing threads and it seems a waste to start a new thread each time for a few posts.

As such, here's a new thread for the science articles you aren't able to categorize otherwise.

I'd also like to leave the false gods of AGW out of here, thankyouverymuch.


----------



## FeXL

*How "Super Sand" Could Provide Drinking Water To Millions Of People*

Linky.



> Sand is a cheap and easy to find water filter. It's also not a very good water filter. But a new development--coating sand in graphite--could make it possible for everyone in the world to have easy access to clean water.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Linky.


Pencil that one in...


----------



## MLeh

It says 'as good as an activated carbon filter'. So caveat emptor. (Activated carbon does a lot of things, but it needs to be used in conjunction with other technologies depending upon the contamination present and distribution system being used.)

The issue with most filters isn't their filtering capacity - it's the regular replacement of the media required to remove the accumulation of contaminants. You get a nice accumulation of organics before the filter media, and that actually breeds contaminants. (Large water treatment plants will use a backwashing process. Fun to see, but wastes a lot of water.) 

If you're using a Brita filter: replace it often.

But the graphite thing is interesting.


----------



## FeXL

*Non-mare silicic volcanism on the lunar farside*

I wasn't aware that there was such a thing as lunar volcanism.

Unfortunately, it's just an abstract (with photos), but interesting anyway.



> The topography includes a series of domes that range from less than 1 km to more than 6 km across, some with steeply sloping sides. We interpret these as volcanic domes formed from viscous lava. We also observe arcuate to irregular circular depressions, which we suggest result from collapse associated with volcanism.


----------



## bryanc

*Massive water cloud found orbiting quasar*

140 trillion times the amount of water on earth... but it's a long drive to the beach.


----------



## bryanc

Macfury said:


> Be fair mguertin, this was supposed to be a non-AGM thread, but MaccyD couldn't help himself.


To be fair, you'd have to admit that the OP tried to establish this as a "science except for the science I don't like" thread (for example, the evidence for the massive water-vapour cloud orbiting that quasar I posted is far more tenuous than the evidence for AGW), but okay, whatever. MacDoc pointed this out, which is admittedly not very polite, but entirely valid. And now you're all complaining about a thread derailment in which you are the most active participants. 

So, rather than ranting about the fact that you don't like some of the science that is out there, why not try to contribute something to get the thread back onto a topic you're interested in discussing rationally?


----------



## Guest

ertman said:


> I would agree to this too, but everyone else is contributing to the derailment.


I don't even know what you are referring to when you all say non-AGM (or is it AGW?) presumedly because I tend to avoid this area(?) ... but at this point there's more derailment posts than science posts. Either way it's a FAIL and I guess that's my cue to go elsewhere to find civilized discussions of non-mac related stuff yet again.


----------



## MannyP Design

mguertin said:


> You guys can certainly kill a thread quickly. I knew there was a reason I don't often post in the Everything Else area and this is it. Here I was hoping to read a thread about science, silly me.
> 
> I suggest that we rename "Everything Else" to "Egos Abound" ...





mguertin said:


> I don't even know what you are referring to when you all say non-AGM (or is it AGW?) presumedly because I tend to avoid this area(?) ... but at this point there's more derailment posts than science posts. Either way it's a FAIL and I guess that's my cue to go elsewhere to find civilized discussions of non-mac related stuff yet again.



Apparently you didn't see the http://www.ehmac.ca/everything-else-eh/96015-tens-thousands-dead-horn-africa.html thread. :lmao:


----------



## MannyP Design

mguertin said:


> Either way it's a FAIL and I guess that's my cue to go elsewhere to find civilized discussions of non-mac related stuff yet again.


To be honest, I've been thinking of closing my account here for some time and move on. There are just too many "Type-A" personalities for my liking.


----------



## Macfury

MannyP Design said:


> To be honest, I've been thinking of closing my account here for some time and move on. There are just too many "Type-A" personalities for my liking.


You can move on, but you can't close the account.


----------



## Sonal

Macfury said:


> You can move on, but you can't close the account.


You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave...


----------



## FeXL

bryanc said:


> To be fair, you'd have to admit that the OP tried to establish this as a "science except for the science I don't like" thread


Horse shiite. For a supposedly learned man, you have trouble comprehending basic language.

Point of clarification (really didn't think most of you needed this sort of pedantic explanation, but apparently it's required):

I tried to establish a science thread on anything but GHG, which already has multiple threads filled with name calling, finger pointing, deceit, lies and some science. Was hoping to trend towards the latter here. The bright amongst you figgered that out. Thank you for your observations & support. Apparently, however, there aren't enough intelligent adults on these boards to hope for that drastic of a change, so, carry on.

For those of you intelligent enough to read & comprehend, and persistent enough to peruse through the garbage, I'm hoping you can find something here to draw a small modicum of satisfaction from or to post something interesting in.



bryanc said:


> but entirely valid


Fine. Then go validate it in the GHG thread. As politely requested. And, when I say validate, then do so. Don't just drop some great steaming load in the middle of a thread with some snotty, holier than thou comment (don't forget dem rollin' eyes) and not bother addressing any of the comments or questions directed to you because that's simply beneath you.

Either that or you truly don't have any answers.

Either way, you end up looking like the north end of a southbound skunk.

Manny's not the only one considering leaving this Charlie Foxtrot...


----------



## MannyP Design

Macfury said:


> You can move on, but you can't close the account.


I can if I request it.


----------



## bryanc

Since it seems no one here wants to discuss science, how about meta-science. Apart from the conservative apologists, who have already made it clear that it's perfectly okay for our government to muzzle it's scientists, and that keeping the public ignorant is just fine because taxpayers just pay for the research, they don't have the right to learn the findings, does anyone here think this is acceptable?


----------



## mrjimmy

MannyP Design said:


> I can if I request it.


It would be a shame Manny but I'd understand it if you did.


----------



## i-rui

bryanc said:


> does anyone here think this is acceptable?


brutal.


----------



## BigDL

> Since it seems no one here wants to discuss science, how about meta-science. Apart from the conservative apologists, who have already made it clear that it's perfectly okay for our government to muzzle it's scientists, and that keeping the public ignorant is just fine because taxpayers just pay for the research, they don't have the right to learn the findings, does anyone here think this is acceptable?





i-rui said:


> brutal.





BigDL said:


> I stand corrected it's not limited to only a person's view of science by a movement's view of approved science.


.


----------



## MannyP Design

An article regarding the salmon study: The Tyee - Is a Virus Ravaging BC's Sockeye?


----------



## bryanc

Macfury said:


> They tell us that by publishing.


I was unaware that the average Canadian had a subscription to _Science_, let alone the expertise to read and understand the research published therein. Perhaps Canadians are vastly more scientifically literate than the citizens of other countries, who get information about important scientific advances (especially when these advances are relevant to public policy) from the popular media.



> The government is also hiring people I would never hire, and spending on programs that are anathema to me.


And me as well. But the fact that I disagree with the resource allocations does not mean that I (and every other citizen) should not share in whatever benefits may accrue as a result of these ill-conceived investments of my tax dollars.



> their media policies are about as generous as that of the private sector.


Ah, here's the crux of it. If a private company hires a scientist, and she signs an NDA as part of her contract, then there's no grounds for anyone to cry foul when the corporation keeps her discoveries secret. In contrast, when the Canadian government hires scientists using public money to do research in the public interest and/or to inform public policy, the public has every right to hear about their discoveries.

But don't worry, I'm sure Harper will be doing away with science in Canada as quickly as he can now that he has his majority.


----------



## Macfury

bryanc said:


> I was unaware that the average Canadian had a subscription to _Science_, let alone the expertise to read and understand the research published therein. Perhaps Canadians are vastly more scientifically literate than the citizens of other countries, who get information about important scientific advances (especially when these advances are relevant to public policy) from the popular media.


The newspapers get press releases from these magazines, as noted above.




bryanc said:


> And me as well. But the fact that I disagree with the resource allocations does not mean that I (and every other citizen) should not share in whatever benefits may accrue as a result of these ill-conceived investments of my tax dollars.


You don't get the benefits exactly as you want them. I could benefit greatly from some surplus government items, but I have to register as an auction bidder--I can't buy them in a store. Rules I'm afraid. 



bryanc said:


> Ah, here's the crux of it. If a private company hires a scientist, and she signs an NDA as part of her contract, then there's no grounds for anyone to cry foul when the corporation keeps her discoveries secret. In contrast, when the Canadian government hires scientists using public money to do research in the public interest and/or to inform public policy, the public has every right to hear about their discoveries.


Hear about--but they have no right to demand a media interview take place.


----------



## groovetube

So how do they 'hear about'...


----------



## Macfury

groovetube said:


> So how do they 'hear about'...


.



MannyP Design said:


> An article regarding the salmon study: The Tyee - Is a Virus Ravaging BC's Sockeye?


----------



## bryanc

Macfury said:


> The newspapers get press releases from these magazines, as noted above.


Yes, exactly. And then the press asks to interview the lead authors on important studies to clarify for the non-expert (as noted above). And then the Harper government says "SILENCE! No one talks to the scientists!"



> they have no right to demand a media interview take place.


Again, the media is requesting the interviews; no one is demanding to be interviewed. What possible reason could the government have for preventing scientists from talking to the media? What do they have to hide? Why don't the want the average Canadian to know that it appears a new disease - apparently imported from the Atlantic - is spreading in Pacific salmon? Could it have anything to do with their policy of promoting the farming of Atlantic salmon on the West coast?


----------



## groovetube

what's wrong with an interview? 

Nice dodge btw.


----------



## Macfury

bryanc said:


> Yes, exactly. And then the press asks to interview the lead authors on important studies to clarify for the non-expert (as noted above). And then the Harper government says "SILENCE! No one talks to the scientists!"


No one talks to them quickly, anyway.



bryanc said:


> Could it have anything to do with their policy of promoting the farming of Atlantic salmon on the West coast?


I don't know--what does the article in the TYEE say?


----------



## MannyP Design

Further to the link above, this quote might explain why the media wasn't permitted to interview her:

"Unfortunately, I am not given permission to speak with anyone affiliated with the media until after I testify at the Cohen Commission.

"Please be aware, however, that past research on salmon leukemia, often termed plasmacytoid leukemia or marine anemia, had not actually identified a specific viral agent associated with this 'syndrome' (not considered a disease until a disease agent is discovered), hence it is very difficult to determine if the as yet unidentified virus associated with salmon leukemia [is] the same as that purported to associate with our genomic signature, but we are working on this. We have made some inroads, but I am sorry I cannot discuss these at the present time."​


----------



## Macfury

MannyP Design said:


> Further to the link above, this quote might explain why the media wasn't permitted to interview her:


That makes perfect sense. Thanks for injecting some common sense into the discussion MannyP.


----------



## FeXL

Going to try this again...

So, a while back a website designed to discover science fraud & protect whistleblowers was started. You may ask why, if papers pass the hallowed peer-review process, is a site like this needed?

An abstract from a paper published by the National Academy of Science gives a hint.

Abstract.



> A detailed review of all 2,047 biomedical and life-science research articles indexed by PubMed as retracted on May 3, 2012 revealed that only 21.3% of retractions were attributable to error. In contrast, *67.4% of retractions were attributable to misconduct, including fraud or suspected fraud (43.4%), duplicate publication (14.2%), and plagiarism (9.8%).* Incomplete, uninformative or misleading retraction announcements have led to a previous underestimation of the role of fraud in the ongoing retraction epidemic. The percentage of scientific articles retracted because of fraud has increased ∼10-fold since 1975. Retractions exhibit distinctive temporal and geographic patterns that may reveal underlying causes.


Bold mine.

Unfortunately, due to legal threats, the site has shut down.

Whistleblower Science Fraud Site is Shut Down

A Barrage Of Legal Threats Shuts Down Whistleblower Site, Science Fraud



> Operated as a crowdsourced reference site much like Wikipedia, Science Fraud, *in its six months of operation, documented egregiously suspicious research results published in over 300 peer reviewed publications. Many were subsequently retracted*, including a paper by an author whose lawyer sent Science Fraud a cease and desist letter.
> 
> Given the tens of millions of dollars in misappropriated research funds that financed this small sample of what is surely a larger problem and the cascading pollution of the scientific literature whenever fraudulent publications get cited, *it’s a shame that this tip-of-of-the-iceberg effort at cleansing the muck is being shut down rather than expanded.*


Bold mine.

What a sad, sad state has "science" become.


----------



## i-rui

FeXL said:


> Going to try this again...
> You may ask why, if papers pass the hallowed peer-review process, is a site like this needed?
> 
> An abstract from a paper published by the National Academy of Science gives a hint.
> 
> Abstract.





> A detailed review of all 2,047 biomedical and life-science research articles indexed by PubMed as retracted on May 3, 2012 revealed that only 21.3% of retractions were attributable to error. In contrast, 67.4% of retractions were attributable to misconduct, including fraud or suspected fraud (43.4%), duplicate publication (14.2%), and plagiarism (9.8%). Incomplete, uninformative or misleading retraction announcements have led to a previous underestimation of the role of fraud in the ongoing retraction epidemic. The percentage of scientific articles retracted because of fraud has increased ∼10-fold since 1975. Retractions exhibit distinctive temporal and geographic patterns that may reveal underlying causes.


not sure why you're trying to link the PubMed articles to the 'Science Fraud' site....since there's nothing to connect them to each other. AT ALL.

perhaps you're trying to make a case that the misconduct runs rampant through the PubMed articles, and therefore run rampant through all peer reviewed work?

Just to put some perspective on the PubMed articles that were retracted.....there was 2047. PubMed houses over 24 million records....so basically 1 in every 11,724 articles are retracted.....which is actually pretty damn good if we're being honest about these things.

----------

As for the 'science fraud' website...it'd be interesting to see what they had posted. But perhaps there was legitimate legal reasons for it to be taken down?



> But we should also note that the site went beyond simply questioning the integrity of the images; it also accused scientists of wrongdoing and questioned the scientists‘ integrity. Put together with what Brookes acknowledges was offensive language, there are a lot of clear-minded attorneys who would disagree with his conclusion that there is “in no way grounds for a libel or defamation suit.”
> 
> Perhaps we’re just used to thinking as journalists whose publications are at risk if we wander too close to the libel line, and some Retraction Watch commenters — mostly anonymous — are happier with Science Fraud’s approach than with ours. Fair enough: As we’ve noted a number of times, Science Fraud’s analyses led to a number of corrections and retractions. But the end doesn’t justify the means, certainly not in court. And a number of commenters seem to agree.


Owner of Science Fraud site, suspended for legal threats, identifies himself, talks about next steps « Retraction Watch


----------



## FeXL

i-rui said:


> not sure why you're trying to link the PubMed articles to the 'Science Fraud' site....since there's nothing to connect them to each other. AT ALL.


It was linked to JoNova's article. That is all.



i-rui said:


> perhaps you're trying to make a case that the misconduct runs rampant through the PubMed articles, and therefore run rampant through all peer reviewed work?


What I found interesting was the misconduct #'s. I don't know where else problems lie, it seems reasonable that if it's happening in one area, it's happening elsewhere.



i-rui said:


> Just to put some perspective on the PubMed articles that were retracted.....there was 2047. PubMed houses over 24 million records....so basically 1 in every 11,724 articles are retracted.....which is actually pretty damn good if we're being honest about these things.


I wasn't aware, thx for clarifying. Still, it's sad that, like the article noted, there would have been a ton of money pissed away on this fabricated "science" that would have been better spent on honest research.

----------




i-rui said:


> As for the 'science fraud' website...it'd be interesting to see what they had posted. But perhaps there was legitimate legal reasons for it to be taken down?


Dunno. I'd like to see what comes out in the next little while, as well.


----------



## i-rui

FeXL said:


> Still, it's sad that, like the article noted, there would have been a ton of money pissed away on this fabricated "science" that would have been better spent on honest research.


yes, it is sad. but no system is perfect, and human beings are flawed creatures and there will always be *some* who will try to game the system.

having said that, overall the system does appear to be working well. there is always room for improvement so i think most people are for the idea of legitimate whistleblowers, but i wouldn't see a few bad apples as an indictment of the entire process.


----------



## Macfury

i-rui said:


> ... i wouldn't see a few bad apples as an indictment of the entire process.


What more can they do? Only their peers can validate that the proper methodology was followed prior to publication. It's merely disappointing to see peers go easy on papers authored by friends, or those papers that support their political or financial goals.


----------



## groovetube

It's interesting to see the all out assault on science or whistleblowers, particularly this conservative government to ensure no roadblocks for corps wishing to ram through making piles of money with little worry some pesky scientist will get in the way.

Certainly closing down the station that helped identify the ozone problems from CFCs is a real eye opener.


----------



## BigDL

groovetube said:


> It's interesting to see the all out assault on science or whistleblowers, particularly this conservative government to ensure no roadblocks for corps wishing to ram through making piles of money with little worry some pesky scientist will get in the way.
> 
> Certainly closing down the station that helped identify the ozone problems from CFCs is a real eye opener.


That you see that is HSSMCG™'s clarity at work. Science, facts and figures need to be bent to the will of those in charge who will advise the citizens exactly the information we need know.

The more the government can obscure, the clearer things come into focus for most of us. 

For some of us not so much.


----------



## groovetube

BigDL said:


> That you see that is HSSMCG™'s clarity at work. Science, facts and figures need to be bent to the will of those in charge who will advise the citizens exactly the information we need know.
> 
> The more the government can obscure, the clearer things come into focus for most of us.
> 
> For some of us not so much.


For some, it's a rimshot!


----------



## bryanc

Macfury said:


> Only their peers can validate that the proper methodology was followed prior to publication. It's merely disappointing to see peers go easy on papers authored by friends, or those papers that support their political or financial goals.


This is an old, but valid criticism of the peer-review process. No one has found a good solution (some journals send manuscripts out to reviewers without names or other obvious identifying information, but in any given field, it's usually not that hard to figure out who's the most likely author(s), so this doesn't really solve the problem). Fortunately, peer-review is not the only (or even most important) filter. Any important research findings will be tested, reproduced and extended upon by other researchers in the field. So it's pretty rare that any incidence of scientific fraud goes un-noticed; if it's significant enough to draw the interest of other researchers, it'll be independently verified, and if it's not significant enough to draw the interest of other researchers, what's the point of faking it?

This is why almost all the retractions that occur turn out to be cases of honest errors; peer review catches 99% of this stuff, but there will always be some that gets through. That small amount that gets through will be independently verified and the errors discovered through the normal process of science.

This is not to say that there is no problem and all science is good and pure; especially in medical research, where billions of dollars of pharmaceutical money stands to be made or lost, there is a lot of pressure to 'get the right results' and there have been clear cases of systematic fraud. So I think it's good to be suspicious of research that has significant industrial application or support. This would clearly apply to the findings of researchers supported by the oil industry.


----------



## groovetube

I think the mistake some are making here is assuming that since conclusions have been made and peer reviewed, that no one will dispute it. I'm not a scientist, merely an observer and this seems rather obvious to me.

What you posted makes perfect sense. The idea that the worlds scientific community is somehow all conspiring to not dispute one another's findings to cover up some sort if fraud is the stuff for he tinfoil hat fans.

To put it mildly.


----------



## bryanc

groovetube said:


> The idea that the worlds scientific community is somehow all conspiring to not dispute one another's findings to cover up some sort if fraud is the stuff for he tinfoil hat fans.


Absolutely; and while the point of this thread is not to digress into science that FeXL finds offensive, anyone who has any experience with the culture of science will know that consensus is extremely rare among scientists because we *like* arguing and we're trained to find fault with each other's interpretations as much as possible. When consensus emerges, it's because there is no alternative; scientists are almost allergic to agreeing with each other, and will only do so if they have no choice.

So consensus emerges very rarely in science, and when it does, it's because the data is overwhelming.


----------



## eMacMan

bryanc said:


> Absolutely; and while the point of this thread is not to digress into science that FeXL finds offensive, anyone who has any experience with the culture of science will know that consensus is extremely rare among scientists because we *like* arguing and we're trained to find fault with each other's interpretations as much as possible. When consensus emerges, it's because there is no alternative; scientists are almost allergic to agreeing with each other, and will only do so if they have no choice.
> 
> So consensus emerges very rarely in science, and when it does, it's because the data is overwhelming.


Yep they said the same thing when the prevailing scientific truth was that the sun and everything else revolved around the earth.


----------



## MacGuiver

All this talk about scientific concensus reminded me of a good laugh I had yesterday working with my son looking for advertisements from the 1930s.










Who could argue against a consensus of 20,769 Physicians? Now wheres my smoking jacket?


----------



## Macfury

bryanc said:


> Absolutely; and while the point of this thread is not to digress into science that FeXL finds offensive, anyone who has any experience with the culture of science will know that consensus is extremely rare among scientists because we *like* arguing and we're trained to find fault with each other's interpretations as much as possible. When consensus emerges, it's because there is no alternative; scientists are almost allergic to agreeing with each other, and will only do so if they have no choice.
> 
> So consensus emerges very rarely in science, and when it does, it's because the data is overwhelming.


I disagree, Most of today's scientists are products of left-leaning universities. They've been born and bred in a test tube of leftist activism that simply favours AGW because it fits neatly inside their worldview.


----------



## bryanc

Interesting replies; this is a topic I think is worth discussing more seriously, as most people really have very limited contact with science, and this issue is obviously pertinent to scientific credibility.



eMacMan said:


> Yep they said the same thing when the prevailing scientific truth was that the sun and everything else revolved around the earth.


Firstly, science does not deal with "truth," so there's no such thing as "prevailing scientific truth." Science is a process that allows us to distinguish hypotheses that make incorrect predictions from hypotheses who's predictions turn out to be correct (note: making correct predictions does not mean the hypothesis is true, it's just not obviously false).

The scientific method was not well established before the late 17th century, and the falsification of the geocentric universe was one of its earliest triumphs. So this is a particularly ironic example to use if one is trying to make the case that the scientific establishment preserves false paradigms. This is not to say that the scientific community is easily convinced of the flaws in established paradigms (see Khun's "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" for lots of good discussion of this). But the nice thing about the scientific process, is that it dose not depend on the desires, beliefs, or expectations of the scientists doing it. Especially with the modern use of peer-review and independent validation, it's very rare indeed that any significant finding becomes established and turns out to be fundamentally false (although we often discover our interpretations of given findings are incorrect; that's the fun part).



MacGuiver said:


> Who could argue against a consensus of 20,769 Physicians?


This is rather another problem with the credibility of science; lots of people who are not scientists are mistaken by society in general to be representatives of science. While I have the utmost respect for medical doctors and engineers, they are not scientists (or, to be more precise, most MDs and engineers are not scientists, but some have scientific training as well as their practical training in the use of established scientific knowledge to specific real-world problems... the point is that there's a big difference between an M.D. and a Ph.D., despite both earning the title "Doctor"). So using the fact that some doctors advocated smoking as evidence that scientists came to an incorrect consensus is wrong on two levels: Firstly, doctors aren't scientists, and secondly, the fact that some doctors agreed a given brand were less irritating is quite distinct from a consensus among physicians that smoking was good for you.



Macfury said:


> Most of today's scientists are products of left-leaning universities. They've been born and bred in a test tube of leftist activism that simply favours AGW because it fits neatly inside their worldview.


Finally, this is absolutely absurd. Political leanings do not make predictions about the chemistry of the atmosphere. The whole point of science is that it is driven by observations of objective reality. Wether you're a communist, a socialist, or apolitical, the observations are the same, the math is the same, and the interpretations of the data are constrained by what we know about the physics.

This has nothing to do with politics. Until recently, scientists were fairly evenly distributed across the political spectrum. Unfortunately, the political right has abandoned it's grip on reality in the past couple of decades, and the completely irrational anti-science policies of the Republicans in the US and the Conservatives in Canada have all but eliminated support from scientists, and indeed educated people in general.

I expect to see this unfortunate trend reverse in the next decade, as the Republicans recognize that the religious zealots they've brought into their tent aren't going to get them elected, and the can't just deny reality any longer.


----------



## MacGuiver

bryanc said:


> This is rather another problem with the credibility of science; lots of people who are not scientists are mistaken by society in general to be representatives of science.


No mistake Bryan. I know full well a doctor is not a scientist but like a scientist who is regarded as the highest authority in matters of science, a doctor is held up as the authority in all matters medical.


----------



## Macfury

bryanc said:


> Finally, this is absolutely absurd. Political leanings do not make predictions about the chemistry of the atmosphere. The whole point of science is that it is driven by observations of objective reality. Wether you're a communist, a socialist, or apolitical, the observations are the same, the math is the same, and the interpretations of the data are constrained by what we know about the physics.


Cimate science, for example, is now heavily viewed through a leftist lens. Just as journalists choose which stories to report based on their political leanings, scientists are selective in what they will examine, publish and suppress, based on their politics. ClimateGate was an ugly expose of just this sort of thinking.


----------



## bryanc

MacGuiver said:


> I know full well a doctor is not a scientist but like a scientist who is regarded as the highest authority in matters of science, a doctor is held up as the authority in all matters medical.


Fair enough. But as far as I know, there never existed a consensus of medical doctors that smoking was good for one's health. The fact that P.J.Morris and other tobacco companies paid individual M.D.s to go on record saying that their particular brand was "less irritating" or "my personal favourite" or even that "the evidence that smoking causes cancer is not conclusive" is a far cry from a consensus among scientists that smoking is good for you.

This is the point I'm trying to get across: the modern scientific community is prone to controversy and is consensus-averse. When a consensus emerges in such a community despite all the systematic biases against it, you've got to admit it's surprising. Since climatology is not my feild, I can't personally analyze the data that has given rise to this consensus, but I can marvel at the existence of the consensus and conclude that, to experts in the field, this data must be pretty compelling.


----------



## Macfury

bryanc said:


> When a consensus emerges in such a community despite all the systematic biases against it, you've got to admit it's surprising. Since climatology is not my feild, I can't personally analyze the data that has given rise to this consensus, but I can marvel at the existence of the consensus and conclude that, to experts in the field, this data must be pretty compelling.


There is no consensus. Just that moldy cherry-poicked list you keep trotting out.


----------



## bryanc

Macfury said:


> Cimate science, for example, is now heavily viewed through a leftist lens.


I was composing a long reply about how wrong you are about this, but eventually came to the conclusion that you're either baiting me, or we're talking about different things. One of the primary strengths of the scientific method is that it reduces (but admittedly cannot eliminate) the biases of the observer, so the idea of ocean water pH, temperature readings, gas chromatography data from ice cores, flowering dates for given species of plants in given locations, migration patterns of birds, etc. being "viewed though a leftist lens" just baffled me - data is data; it doesn't have politics. However, if what you're objecting to is not the science but the proposed socioeconomic responses to it, then the problem of ideological bias is much more relevant and is certainly a reasonable topic for discussion.


----------



## bryanc

Macfury said:


> Your opinion on climates consensus is worth nothing to me bryanc. You're a guy who cuts up fish embryos.


Exactly as it should be; as I have said over and over in this thread and others, if you lack the expertise on a given subject you should refrain from criticizing the opinion of the experts.

It is a matter of public record that a consensus exists among experts in climate science; you certainly don't have to take my word for it. And if you doubt it, by all means take it up with the National Academy of Science or any of the other public institutions or individual researchers making this claim. I'm accepting the claims of the experts; so the burden of proof is on you... you are claiming the experts are lying, so you have to provide evidence (and, just in case you forgot, blog posts are not admissible).


----------



## Macfury

bryanc said:


> I'm accepting the claims of the experts; so the burden of proof is on you... you are claiming the experts are lying, so you have to provide evidence (and, just in case you forgot, blog posts are not admissible).


"The experts" say there is a consensus so you merely accept it?


----------



## groovetube

bryanc said:


> Exactly as it should be; as I have said over and over in this thread and others, if you lack the expertise on a given subject you should refrain from criticizing the opinion of the experts.
> 
> It is a matter of public record that a consensus exists among experts in climate science; you certainly don't have to take my word for it. And if you doubt it, by all means take it up with the National Academy of Science or any of the other public institutions or individual researchers making this claim. I'm accepting the claims of the experts; so the burden of proof is on you... you are claiming the experts are lying, so you have to provide evidence (*and, just in case you forgot, blog posts are not admissible)*.


but, that's all they have. I have yet to see one of them actually conduct the experiments themselves.

They seem so eager to dismiss the work of the experts they dislike because of their findings, yet so eager to accept another they feel is an expert and supports what they want to hear.

You can't make this up.


----------



## Macfury

I always liked this cartoon:


----------



## bryanc

Macfury said:


> "The experts" say there is a consensus so you merely accept it?


No, the organizations of experts (National Academy of Sciences, European Academy of Sciences, Royal Academy of Sciences, and other organizations of professional scientists) say there is a consensus among accredited experts in the field, and I have no reason to doubt it. I also know several climatologists, and many people who work in related fields, and this is a silly topic of discussion as far as they're concerned; there's been no real doubt about ACC for over a decade. You'll note that these organizations don't say that there is a consensus on what causes cancer, the cause of universal expansion, the relationship between gravity and energy, the evolutionary origins of altruistic behaviour, or even the origins of life on earth, despite the fact that these are important scientific questions about which many scientists agree. Consensus does not emerge easily in science; even when most of us are "pretty sure," until essentially all of us are as close to certain as we can get, and have been for quite some time, there will still be argument and debate.


----------



## bryanc

Macfury said:


> I always liked this cartoon:


So did I; of what relevance is it to this discussion?


----------



## Macfury

bryanc said:


> So did I; of what relevance is it to this discussion?


Sorry. Moderators please move to: 

"What's The Latest Good MOVIE(S) You've Seen?"


----------



## Macfury

bryanc said:


> No, the organizations of experts (National Academy of Sciences, European Academy of Sciences, Royal Academy of Sciences, and other organizations of professional scientists) say there is a consensus among accredited experts in the field, and I have no reason to doubt it. I also know several climatologists, and many people who work in related fields, and this is a silly topic of discussion as far as they're concerned; there's been no real doubt about ACC for over a decade. You'll note that these organizations don't say that there is a consensus on what causes cancer, the cause of universal expansion, the relationship between gravity and energy, the evolutionary origins of altruistic behaviour, or even the origins of life on earth, despite the fact that these are important scientific questions about which many scientists agree. Consensus does not emerge easily in science; even when most of us are "pretty sure," until essentially all of us are as close to certain as we can get, and have been for quite some time, there will still be argument and debate.




You'll note that there has been significant debate in many of those organizations by members disgusted with the actions of their leadership in attempting to declare a consensus. How does such a statement of "consensus" even serve anyone?


----------



## bryanc

Macfury said:


> You'll note that there has been significant debate in many of those organizations by members disgusted with the actions of their leadership in attempting to declare a consensus.


I'm only aware of one such 'debate' and it consisted of a couple of oil-backed rabble rousers trying to create a media event that could be used by the PR spin machine.


> How does such a statement of "consensus" even serve anyone?


As I've been saying, consensus is a very rare and significant thing in science. When a consensus among experts emerges, it allows non-experts in the field (such as politician and other policy makers) to have confidence that the science is well-enough established to act upon it.


----------



## groovetube

Macfury said:


> I always liked this cartoon:


beat you to it. I believe I already had posted that quite some time ago. But I'm a little less cowardly.

I posted it because your posts digging kinda reminded me of the little one.


----------



## kps

FeXL said:


> From time to time I run across a science article which doesn't fit very well into existing threads and it seems a waste to start a new thread each time for a few posts.
> 
> As such, here's a new thread for the science articles you aren't able to categorize otherwise.
> 
> I'd also like to leave the false gods of AGW out of here, thankyouverymuch.


So in the interest and spirit of the original thread I present you with this joice piece:


Anyone see any ethical issues with this?

'Adventurous human woman' wanted to give birth to Neanderthal man by Harvard professor | Mail Online


----------



## Sonal

kps said:


> So in the interest and spirit of the original thread I present you with this joice piece:
> 
> 
> Anyone see any ethical issues with this?
> 
> 'Adventurous human woman' wanted to give birth to Neanderthal man by Harvard professor | Mail Online


I just saw that one! 

My first thought, who in their right mind would do that? 
And my second.... what happens to the baby afterward?


----------



## Macfury

Sonal said:


> I just saw that one!
> 
> My first thought, who in their right mind would do that?
> And my second.... what happens to the baby afterward?


Sonal, you're trying to apply ethical standards to a bold scientific venture! Are you a geneticist? Only a group of geneticists can possibly understand what this genius wishes to accomplish and pass judgment--or not--on this exciting experiment.


----------



## Sonal

Macfury said:


> Sonal, you're trying to apply ethical standards to a bold scientific venture! Are you a geneticist? Only a group of geneticists can possibly understand what this genius wishes to accomplish and pass judgment--or not--on this exciting experiment.


Only a woman can be chosen to carry and give birth to this Neanderthal experiment, MF. I'm sorry, but you're not qualified to comment on issues relating to participating in this.


----------



## Macfury

A woman _scientist_ will trump you!


----------



## groovetube

MF seems to have 'scientist' issues.


----------



## MacGuiver

Speaking of cloning, what ever happened with the preserved mammoth's they recovered from the ice a few years back? I figured they'd have tried to clone them by now.


----------



## bryanc

Macfury said:


> Sonal, you're trying to apply ethical standards to a bold scientific venture! Are you a geneticist? Only a group of geneticists can possibly understand what this genius wishes to accomplish and pass judgment--or not--on this exciting experiment.


Do you have to work at being so obtuse, or does it come naturally? You really are a clown sometimes.

Why would anyone think geneticists are experts in ethics? And while you'd need a lot of expertise in genetics to decide if this is feasible, or if a given approach is likely to work, you don't need much expertise in ethics to see the obvious problems with the idea.

I'd love to know if this sort of thing is possible and I think we could learn a lot from experimentation with the introduction of DNA from ancient/fossilized remains into living cells, but no one can seriously think that doing this with humans is an ethically acceptable place to start. I could imagine, hundreds of years from now, after lots of research has been done and the risks are well understood, people deciding to introduce some sequences of DNA characterized from ancient specimens, because we have figured out that they will provide us with resistance to some disease, or some other benefit. But no one in their right mind would suggest we should just slap some neanderthal DNA into a human embryonic stem cell and see what happens.


----------



## Macfury

bryanc said:


> Why would anyone think geneticists are experts in ethics? And while you'd need a lot of expertise in genetics to decide if this is feasible, or if a given approach is likely to work, you don't need much expertise in ethics to see the obvious problems with the idea.


They could abort the "fetus" at 33 weeks before it is "human." No ethics problem at all!


----------



## MacGuiver

Macfury said:


> They could abort the "fetus" at 33 weeks before it is "human." No ethics problem at all!


And use its parts for lab work.


----------



## bryanc

Macfury said:


> They could abort the "fetus" at 33 weeks before it is "human." No ethics problem at all!


Are you feeling okay? You've been posting nothing but random gibberish like this that has nothing to do with anything anyone has said all week.


----------



## Macfury

bryanc said:


> Are you feeling okay? You've been posting nothing but random gibberish like this that has nothing to do with anything anyone has said all week.


Interesting that you call it gibberish. I was inspired by some of your own comments on when "life" begins and when a fetus becomes a person from another thread when I posted that.


----------



## bryanc

*Penguin cam*

A current paper in PNAS regarding under-ice feeding by penguins includes some pretty cool videos captured using waterproof video cameras strapped to the backs of penguins in the wild. If you're interested, you can see them here.


----------



## bryanc

Macfury said:


> Interesting that you call it gibberish. I was inspired by some of your own comments on when "life" begins and when a fetus becomes a person from another thread when I posted that.


Inspired, perhaps, but certainly not related in any logical or rational way. I've certainly never said when "life" begins with respect to embryonic development, because that's a stupid question; oocytes are alive, sperm cells are alive, zygotes are alive... there's no 'beginning' of life involved in development. I've also always been consistent in my position on the ethical value of an embryo; it's potential value is always significant, and it's individual value as an sentient agent develops gradually with its increasingly complex central nervous system. How are either of these positions in any way related to 


> They could abort the "fetus" at 33 weeks before it is "human."


And more importantly, how is it in any way related to science? If you want to have your silly ethical arguments about abortion demolished, take them to the ethics thread.


----------



## Macfury

bryanc said:


> And more importantly, how is it in any way related to science? If you want to have your silly ethical arguments about abortion demolished, take them to the ethics thread.


Sorry for trying to mix ethics with science, bryanc. What was I thinking?


----------



## bryanc

Macfury said:


> Sorry for trying to mix ethics with science, bryanc. What was I thinking?


Mix away if you've got a point; but try to make some connection that makes some sense.

Bear in mind that science is about what is the case and how it actually works. Ethics is about what ought to be the case, and therefore what choices we ought to make.

If you're going to try basing an ethical argument against abortion on "when life begins" you're barking up the wrong tree by trying to bring science into it; science tells us there's nothing magical happening during fertilization and development, and there is no point at which "life begins."


----------



## Macfury

bryanc said:


> Mix away if you've got a point; but try to make some connection that makes some sense.
> 
> Bear in mind that science is about what is the case and how it actually works. Ethics is about what ought to be the case, and therefore what choices we ought to make.
> 
> If you're going to try basing an ethical argument against abortion on "when life begins" you're barking up the wrong tree by trying to bring science into it; science tells us there's nothing magical happening during fertilization and development, and there is no point at which "life begins."


Right, so the Neanderthal fetus could be ethically aborted at any time prior to birth, neutralized and then studied without the hassle of creating the ethically charged situation of raising a Neanderthal baby.


----------



## bryanc

Macfury said:


> Right, so the Neanderthal fetus could be ethically aborted at any time prior to birth, neutralized and then studied without the hassle of creating the ethically charged situation of raising a Neanderthal baby.


Only if your ethical system is so arbitrary and irrational as to ascribe ethical value exclusively to **** sapiens. Mine certainly does not have that limitation.


----------



## Macfury

bryanc said:


> Only if your ethical system is so arbitrary and irrational as to ascribe ethical value exclusively to **** sapiens. Mine certainly does not have that limitation.


Why could the Neanderthal not ethically be aborted prior to birth? Should it receive better treatment than _**** sapiens_?


----------



## Sonal

Macfury said:


> Why could the Neanderthal not ethically be aborted prior to birth? Should it receive better treatment than _**** sapiens_?


That is so specist!


----------



## bryanc

Macfury said:


> Why could the Neanderthal not ethically be aborted prior to birth? Should it receive better treatment than _**** sapiens_?


No one does abortions for research.

Just as the personal sovereignty of the individual who chooses not to donate blood trumps the best interests of the individual who needs a blood transfusion, the personal sovereignty of the mother who chooses not to gestate a fetus (genetically engineered or otherwise) trumps the interests of that fetus. This is the ethical justification for abortion; not our curiosity to learn what would happen if we mixed neanderthal and human DNA.


----------



## bryanc

In another, probably vain attempt to get the discussion back onto science; here's a little video/text blurb on some very cool whole-brain imaging work involving zebrafish in virtual worlds.


----------



## Macfury

bryanc said:


> No one does abortions for research.
> 
> Just as the personal sovereignty of the individual who chooses not to donate blood trumps the best interests of the individual who needs a blood transfusion, the personal sovereignty of the mother who chooses not to gestate a fetus (genetically engineered or otherwise) trumps the interests of that fetus. This is the ethical justification for abortion; not our curiosity to learn what would happen if we mixed neanderthal and human DNA.


The personal sovereignty of the mother who is curious about gestating, but not raising, a Neanderthal baby, is no different.


----------



## groovetube

this is getting rather entertaining. Sort of.


----------



## MacGuiver

Macfury said:


> The personal sovereignty of the mother who is curious about gestating, but not raising, a Neanderthal baby, is no different.


Yeah if she's willing to abort for science they're good to go.


----------



## Macfury

MacGuiver said:


> Yeah if she's willing to abort for science they're good to go.


Certainly more high-minded than, "I really wanted a girl," but just as much a triumph of a woman's sovereignty over her own body.


----------



## groovetube

Given the recent efforts by some's heros that they support to ensure the rights of a rapist over the woman's body, I don't know that being sarcastic about a woman's sovereignty is a laughing matter.

But this is a science thread, I don't want to feed into the thread derailment brigades. This topic could be continued in say the religious thread or similar.


----------



## i-rui

groovetube said:


> But this is a science thread, I don't want to feed into the thread derailment brigades. This topic could be continued in say the religious thread or similar.


no, there they would have to grapple with the ethics of forcing a rape victim to carry to term against her will. or the ethics of forcing a woman to die because their ideology trumps her health when pregnancy goes awry. you know, complicated real world situations where black & white world views quickly crumble.

better to stay in the science thread where a theoretical situation that very few are actually endorsing and will probably never happen. this is the best place to debate the ethics of abortion.


----------



## iMouse

If you are a woman, be my guest.

If you are a man, butt out.


----------



## Macfury

i-rui said:


> no, there they would have to grapple with the ethics of forcing a rape victim to carry to term against her will. or the ethics of forcing a woman to die because their ideology trumps her health when pregnancy goes awry. you know, complicated real world situations where black & white world views quickly crumble.
> 
> better to stay in the science thread where a theoretical situation that very few are actually endorsing and will probably never happen. this is the best place to debate the ethics of abortion.


This discussion of scientific ethics has nothing to do with either of those scenaria. What a drama queen!


----------



## SINC

One owns one's own body, man or woman. Anyone who cannot get their mind around that basic fact needs to STHU.


----------



## i-rui

Macfury said:


> This discussion of scientific ethics has nothing to do with either of those scenaria.


yes, that was the point of my post. rather than dealing with the full complicated ethical quagmire that abortion poses, it's easier for some to make the case against it based on some novelty news piece that holds no weight in the "real world".

but i do agree that science often does challenge our ethics. for instance animal testing. it's something that i'm not crazy about, but ultimately I understand that at some point it needs to happen to further research in areas.


----------



## groovetube

i-rui said:


> no, there they would have to grapple with the ethics of forcing a rape victim to carry to term against her will. or the ethics of forcing a woman to die because their ideology trumps her health when pregnancy goes awry. you know, complicated real world situations where black & white world views quickly crumble.
> 
> better to stay in the science thread where a theoretical situation that very few are actually endorsing and will probably never happen. this is the best place to debate the ethics of abortion.


That's been the favorite tactic of dealing with the abortion issue. Facing the issues as you mentioned head on just isn't in the cards.

But this one, what an opportunity!


----------



## FeXL

Gamma-ray burst 'hit Earth in 8th Century'



> In 2012 researchers found evidence that our planet had been struck by a blast of radiation during the Middle Ages, but there was debate over what kind of cosmic event could have caused this.
> 
> Now a study suggests it was the result of two black holes or neutron stars merging in our galaxy.


----------



## bryanc

Macfury said:


> This discussion of scientific ethics has nothing to do with either of those scenaria.


Indeed; because no one would get ethical approval to impregnate someone (even a volunteer) for research purposes.

So you're absurd scenario whereby the volunteer is impregnated with the human/neanderthal embryo, and then chooses to have an abortion before it is born would be deemed unethical and not allowed. It would not be unethical because the woman is choosing to have an abortion; it would be unethical because impregnating a human woman for research purposes is unethical.


----------



## bryanc

FeXL said:


> Gamma-ray burst 'hit Earth in 8th Century'


Yeah, I was looking at this yesterday; very cool. One has to wonder how long it will be before our astronomical neighbourhood becomes uninhabitable. And will we even have figured out enough about what's going on out there to see it coming, let alone do anything about it.


----------



## Macfury

bryanc said:


> it would be unethical because impregnating a human woman for research purposes is unethical.


Why? It is her body!


----------



## groovetube

the desperation for that slippery slope really knows no bounds does it?


----------



## bryanc

Macfury said:


> Why? It is her body!


Talk to any scientific ethics panel; using human subjects for research is *very* tightly regulated, and engaging human volunteers to do anything that has the possibility of significantly harming them, and or that has not been previously tested extensively on animals is a non-starter.

Now if some woman wants to go and get pregnant using whatever source of gametes she chooses, that's her business and no one else's. But it would never be approved by a human research ethics panel.


----------



## bryanc

groovetube said:


> the desperation for that slippery slope really knows no bounds does it?


I'm still waiting for some explanation of how this foolishness was inspired by something I said about when "life begins".


----------



## Macfury

bryanc said:


> Talk to any scientific ethics panel; using human subjects for research is *very* tightly regulated, and engaging human volunteers to do anything that has the possibility of significantly harming them, and or that has not been previously tested extensively on animals is a non-starter.


Pregnancy has been well tested on both animals and humans.



bryanc said:


> Now if some woman wants to go and get pregnant using whatever source of gametes she chooses, that's her business and no one else's. But it would never be approved by a human research ethics panel.


On what grounds do you suppose they would refuse it? What harm could come to the woman? Pregnancy is not as risky as taking a new drug, and yet such trials occur regularly. The neanderthal fetus would have no rights prior to birth, so there is no harm done there, either.


----------



## groovetube

I love how he slipped in animals on the first line. Sneaky.

And it's a rather obvious that if something has not been tried before, and it isn't known if there'd be significant harm done, that that would serve as the basis for rejection.

So much for the slippery slope attempt. I've seen much better before.


----------



## bryanc

Macfury said:


> Pregnancy has been well tested on both animals and humans.


The pregnancy is not the experiment; the engineered embryo is the experiment. And pregnancies _are_ dangerous.



> Pregnancy is not as risky as taking a new drug, and yet such trials occur regularly.


Pregnancy is certainly as dangerous as taking many drugs. New drugs are tested on animals first. And finally, people taking experimental drugs are doing so because they *already* suffer from some illness or other medical condition that is deemed to be _more dangerous_ than the experimental drug (the dangers of which have been determined by testing on animals).



> The neanderthal fetus would have no rights prior to birth, so there is no harm done there, either.


It is not a question of rights... you are conflating two entirely unrelated arguments.

The abortion argument is about wether the rights of the mother to control her own body trump the rights of father and/or other members of society who may want the fetus to be allowed to complete gestation, and the potential suffering experienced by the aborted fetus if it is sufficiently advanced to have a CNS capable of sustaining self-awareness. This is clearly a no-brainer; the mother's rights to control her body trump the rights of all interested parties.

The research ethics argument is about wether the potential pain and suffering that may be caused fall within societies' legal and conventional constraints and are outweighed by the potential advancement in knowledge the experiment will likely produce. Finally, all animal research must justify itself with respect to the "three R's": Replacement, Reduction, and Refinement. In this case, the experiment is going to fail on the first ground, in that experimentation on human embryos is not legal. And even if it didn't, the potential knowledge such an experiment could produced could easily be gained by experiments in which the subjects were Replaced with other animals, and Refined in any of hundreds of ways to more specifically address the research questions.

This proposal would never be taken seriously at any research institute in the developed world.


----------



## Sonal

My sense is that there's a science experiment going on in this thread.... how many responses can a few obtuse-sounding pokes generate, how vehement the response, how long until subject realize that they are being poked, and will subjects continue to respond after said realization?

Oh wait, did I just blow the experiment? 
Or have I become part of the experiment? 
Is the Internet just one big experiment?


----------



## groovetube

ah. See that's why I just mock.

Anything further is simply a waste of time.


----------



## i-rui

Sonal said:


> My sense is that there's a science experiment going on in this thread.... how many responses can a few obtuse-sounding pokes generate, how vehement the response, how long until subject realize that they are being poked, and will subjects continue to respond after said realization?
> 
> Oh wait, did I just blow the experiment?
> Or have I become part of the experiment?
> Is the Internet just one big experiment?


Commonly referred to as " trolling".
And it's not just going on in *this* thread.

Still, I do find the question of ethics in science interesting, just not in this instance, where no one (save the scientist who proposed it) actually thinks the experiment will happen. But the question of cloning is still very real....


----------



## groovetube

i-rui said:


> Commonly referred to as " trolling".
> And it's not just going on in *this* thread.
> 
> Still, I do find the question of ethics in science interesting, just not in this instance, where no one (save the scientist who proposed it) actually thinks the experiment will happen. But the question of cloning is still very real....


oooooh now you've done it. You've gone and used the "T" word. I was practically tarred and feathered over that one.


----------



## bryanc

groovetube said:


> oooooh now you've done it. You've gone and used the "T" word. I was practically tarred and feathered over that one.


Of course he's trolling me; that's what he does. It's obvious, but I often respond for several reasons: Firstly, sometimes it seems likely to generate interesting discussion from others, and if you're really good you can sometimes trick the troll into engaging in a meaningful exchange (I think of this as reverse-trolling, and it was what I was sort of hoping for here, but that no longer seems likely). Sometimes it's worth taking the troll bait at face value as a show of good intention and to illustrate for anyone else reading that whatever the troll's bait was, there are good reasons for people to think otherwise. And finally, sometimes its just fun to shoot fish in a barrel.


----------



## Macfury

bryanc said:


> Of course he's trolling me; that's what he does. It's obvious, but I often respond for several reasons: Firstly, sometimes it seems likely to generate interesting discussion from others, and if you're really good you can sometimes trick the troll into engaging in a meaningful exchange (I think of this as reverse-trolling, and it was what I was sort of hoping for here, but that no longer seems likely). Sometimes it's worth taking the troll bait at face value as a show of good intention and to illustrate for anyone else reading that whatever the troll's bait was, there are good reasons for people to think otherwise. And finally, sometimes its just fun to shoot fish in a barrel.


It is certainly fascinating to see you descend so quickly into name-calling. Is this the result of a philosophy that marries science and ethics, which I've heard so much about?


----------



## groovetube

bryanc said:


> Of course he's trolling me; that's what he does. It's obvious, but I often respond for several reasons: Firstly, sometimes it seems likely to generate interesting discussion from others, and if you're really good you can sometimes trick the troll into engaging in a meaningful exchange (I think of this as reverse-trolling, and it was what I was sort of hoping for here, but that no longer seems likely). Sometimes it's worth taking the troll bait at face value as a show of good intention and to illustrate for anyone else reading that whatever the troll's bait was, there are good reasons for people to think otherwise. And finally, sometimes its just fun to shoot fish in a barrel.


oh I don't fault anyone for responding. I'm just treading carefully because some got really upset when I pointed out the obvious.

Anyway, as I said, if one can troll, one can mock. One all baby.


----------



## bryanc

Macfury said:


> It is certainly fascinating to see you descend so quickly into name-calling. Is this the result of a philosophy that marries science and ethics, which I've heard so much about?


In a sense; yes. Spades are spades. Science is about observation and explanation. You behave in a consistently trollish way, and hence I have no choice but to label you as such.


----------



## Macfury

Fascinating. You've been consistently humbled on these board for failing to provide the logical and scientific underpinnings for many of your beliefs. Now you justify name-calling through science.


----------



## groovetube

^^ if there was any doubt, there's the classic response.

There are better ways to facilitate interesting conversations, without this sort of nonsense.



bryanc said:


> In a sense; yes. Spades are spades. Science is about observation and explanation. You behave in a consistently trollish way, and hence I have no choice but to label you as such.


----------



## Macfury

Back to business:



bryanc said:


> The pregnancy is not the experiment; the engineered embryo is the experiment. And pregnancies _are_ dangerous.


The pregnancy-related mortality ratio was 15.1 deaths per 100,000 live births for the period 2006–2007. 
CDC - Pregnancy-related Mortality in the United States - Reproductive Health

The mortality rate related to induced abortion was 0.6 deaths per 100,000 abortions. 
The comparative safety of legal induced abort... [Obstet Gynecol. 2012] - PubMed - NCBI

As noted before, legal abortions are quite safe. As long as the woman aborts the child, she will not be subject to the higher, but quite low, death rate of giving birth.



bryanc said:


> And finally, people taking experimental drugs are doing so because they *already* suffer from some illness or other medical condition that is deemed to be _more dangerous_ than the experimental drug (the dangers of which have been determined by testing on animals).


Nonsense. Researchers frequently advertise for healthy subjects to test various drugs. The benefit to the subjects is purely the monetary compensation they receive.



> Researchers almost always offer money as an incentive for healthy volunteers to enroll in research studies.
> 
> Paying research volunteers raises ethical concerns, study concludes





bryanc said:


> The abortion argument is about wether [sic] the rights of the mother to control her own body trump the rights of father and/or other members of society who may want the fetus to be allowed to complete gestation, and the potential suffering experienced by the aborted fetus if it is sufficiently advanced to have a CNS capable of sustaining self-awareness. This is clearly a no-brainer; the mother's rights to control her body trump the rights of all interested parties.


For the sake of the discussion, sure.



bryanc said:


> The research ethics argument is about wether [sic] the potential pain and suffering that may be caused fall within societies' legal and conventional constraints and are outweighed by the potential advancement in knowledge the experiment will likely produce.


The ethics committee would have to hear the reason for the neanderthal experiment. Perhaps it would have great benefit to society. I can't assume up front that it will not.



bryanc said:


> Finally, all animal research must justify itself with respect to the "three R's": Replacement, Reduction, and Refinement.


This is a protocol for animal experimentation--not human experimentation.

In fact human experimentation can be considered a "replacement" for animal testing.

Replacing, Reducing and Refining Procedures in Animal Research | Jasmijn de Boo - Academia.edu



> Examples of replacemen ttechniques include plants, micro-organisms, endoparasites, other minimally-sentient animals from lower phylogenetic orders, or earlydevelopmental vertebral stages, andnon-living physical and chemicalsystems. Others include tissue and cellcultures, including immortalized celllines, embryonic and adult stem cells,and organotypic cultures; *the use of human volunteers*;





bryanc said:


> In this case, the experiment is going to fail on the first ground, in that experimentation on human embryos is not legal.


That isn't true. Experimentation on human embryos is permitted--it is only illegal for the U.S. federal government to fund that research. Stem cells may be harvested from cloned human embryos as well. The HEK293 kidney cell line is derived from an aborted fetus.

As the National Council for State legislatures notes:



> Many states restrict research on aborted fetuses or embryos, but research is often permitted with consent of the patient.


Embryonic and Fetal Research Laws



bryanc said:


> And even if it didn't, the potential knowledge such an experiment could produced could easily be gained by experiments in which the subjects were Replaced with other animals...


No animal could create a neanderthal fetus.



bryanc said:


> ...and Refined in any of hundreds of ways to more specifically address the research questions.


You have not even heard the research questions.


----------



## groovetube

When they advertise to test drugs on healthy subjects, aren't these drugs that have already been through years of testing well before this? Unlike the scenario that is being (used...) talked about where a woman is considering a trial of something, never been done before?

Pretty HUGE detail that's been overlooked. One that could easily wipe just about every other point in that post.

What was that phrase you used bryanc, 'like shootin' fish in a barrel'?


----------



## bryanc

Macfury said:


> You've been consistently humbled on these board for failing to provide the logical and scientific underpinnings for many of your beliefs.


This post marks the completion of MacFury's divorce from reality.

I have been nothing but consistent in providing sound logical and/or scientific underpinnings for my beliefs; the fact that MF not only fails to acknowledge this, but states the exact opposite can be considered nothing short of delusional.

If anyone knows this MF personally, I encourage you to get him to professional psychiatric help... on the other hand, he could just be trolling again.


----------



## bryanc

With respect to the completely incoherent argument posted above; this is simply a ridiculous effort to conflate two relatively simple ethical questions in an effort to muddy the water and try to cast doubt on the ethics of abortions.

The ethics of abortion are very simple; a mentally competent adult has the right to complete sovereignty over their body. They may choose to donate their blood, tissues, or use of their uterus (if they have one), but they cannot be ethically compelled to do so.

The ethics of embryonic experimentation are more complex, but completely unrelated to the abortion issue, and relatively simple in this instance. In this case, if the experimental questions can be addressed by terminating the gestation before a sentient individual has developed, the questions must of of a morphological/developmental or biochemical nature that can be better and more effectively addressed in well established experimental models (such as mice, fish or frogs). So ethical approval would not be considered for the human/neanderthal hybrid. If the experimental questions were of a behavioural nature, the cruelty of producing a sentient human-neanderthal hybrid for experimentation would make the proposal unacceptable. So this is, as I said originally, a non-starter.


----------



## Macfury

bryanc said:


> With respect to the completely incoherent argument posted above; this is simply a ridiculous effort to conflate two relatively simple ethical questions in an effort to muddy the water and try to cast doubt on the ethics of abortions.
> 
> The ethics of abortion are very simple; a mentally competent adult has the right to complete sovereignty over their body. The may choose to donate their blood, tissues, or use of their uterus (if they have one), but they cannot be ethically compelled to do so.
> 
> The ethics of embryonic experimentation are more complex, but completely unrelated to the abortion issue, and relatively simple in this instance. In this case, if the experimental questions can be addressed by terminating the gestation before a sentient individual has developed, the questions must of of a morphological/developmental or biochemical nature that can be better and more effectively addressed in well established experimental models (such as mice, fish or frogs). So ethical approval would not be considered for the human/neanderthal hybrid. If the experimental questions were of a behavioural nature, the cruelty of producing a sentient human-neanderthal hybrid for experimentation would make the proposal unacceptable. So this is, as I said originally, a non-starter.


I have pointed lout the logical inconsistency of each of your supporting statements one at a time. At this point, you're presenting like Monty Python's Black Knight. Each plank of your argument has been undermined and you respond by merely reiterating your original position--a dreamy statement about what you hope would happen--with no support.

Is that all you have?


----------



## bryanc

Macfury said:


> I have pointed lout the logical inconsistency of each of your supporting statements one at a time.


You have done nothing of the sort; you have conflated unrelated arguments and made wild statements about your fantasies of having "consistently humbled" me.

Are you off your meds again? You're delusional.


----------



## Macfury

bryanc said:


> Are you off your meds again? You're delusional.


Insult is the typical last stand for those incapable of defending their position. 

Your over-reliance on this has become a terrible advertisement for your vaunted ethical/scientific worldview.


----------



## bryanc

Macfury said:


> Insult is the typical last stand for those incapable of defending their position.


I will admit I am incapable of understanding what you're talking about; you seem to have completely lost your grip on reality. I can't engage in any meaningful discussion with you if you are apparently operating in an alternate reality where I have posted things that you have successful refuted on scientific or logical grounds, and research ethics panels approve of women being impregnated with genetically engineered embryos.

Let us all know when you come back to earth.


----------



## Macfury

bryanc said:


> I will admit I am incapable of understanding what you're talking about; you seem to have completely lost your grip on reality. I can't engage in any meaningful discussion with you if you are apparently operating in an alternate reality where I have posted things that you have successful refuted on scientific or logical grounds, and research ethics panels approve of women being impregnated with genetically engineered embryos.
> 
> Let us all know when you come back to earth.


Claiming you never understood the topic in which you were engaged in debate is a novel but very weak defense. I suggest you will feel better by simply dropping it.


----------



## bryanc

Macfury said:


> At this point, you're presenting like Monty Python's Black Knight.


Classic projection.



> Claiming you never understood the topic in which you were engaged in debate is a novel but very weak defense.


I understand the topic very well, as I work on this very topic, and am an active member in a panel that reviews the ethical merit of proposals using animal research subjects. It's just your responses that make no sense.


----------



## FeXL

Storing Digital Data in DNA



> The scientists encoded in DNA—the recipe of life—an audio clip of Martin Luther King Jr.'s "I Have a Dream" speech, a photograph, a copy of Francis Crick and James Watson's famous "double helix" scientific paper on DNA from 1953 and Shakespeare's 154 sonnets. They later were able to retrieve them with 99.99% accuracy.


Kewl.


----------



## Macfury

bryanc said:


> Classic projection.
> 
> 
> I understand the topic very well, as I work on this very topic, and am an active member in a panel that reviews the ethical merit of proposals using animal research subjects. It's just your responses that make no sense.


I'm surprised, then, that you were unaware of the many things that you were wrong about.


----------



## FeXL

Scottish Researchers Toy With Real Tractor Beam, Warn Against Use on Starships



> Dr. Tomas Cizmar, a research fellow in School of Medicine at the University of St Andrews in Scotland, is hopeful that one day tiny tractor beams could be used to sort certain kinds of cells (say separate white blood cells from the blood stream) or arrange tiny circuit components.


----------



## bryanc

Macfury said:


> I'm surprised, then, that you were unaware of the many things that you were wrong about.


Name one.


----------



## iMouse

Macfury said:


> Claiming you never understood the topic in which you were engaged in debate is a novel but very weak defense. I suggest you will feel better by simply dropping it.





bryanc said:


> I understand the topic very well, as I work on this very topic, and am an active member in a panel that reviews the ethical merit of proposals using animal research subjects. It's just your responses that make no sense.


Ah, rutting season.

I do so enjoy it.


----------



## bryanc

FeXL said:


> Storing Digital Data in DNA
> 
> 
> 
> Kewl.


Yes, I saw this last week and thought about posting it here... it is both cool and somewhat disappointing that, while we can use DNA to encode extraordinarily high information densities in DNA using trinary, the encoding and decoding remains sufficiently slow and expensive that the technology is not really useful yet. Still, this is a very promising avenue for biotech development, and I'll be keeping my eye on it.


----------



## bryanc

iMouse said:


> Ah, rutting season.
> 
> I do so enjoy it.


Okay; that's a fair cop. But seriously, does anyone here understand what 'es on about? I'm vacillating between being annoyed that he's being such an unmitigated troll, and genuinely worrying about his mental health. Does anyone here actually know him IRL? Could someone check on him?


----------



## Macfury

bryanc said:


> Name one.


This, for one:



> And finally, people taking experimental drugs are doing so because they *already* suffer from some illness or other medical condition that is deemed to be more dangerous than the experimental drug (the dangers of which have been determined by testing on animals).


----------



## iMouse

Macfury said:


> Claiming you never understood the topic in which you were engaged in debate is a novel but very weak defense. I suggest you will feel better by simply dropping it.





bryanc said:


> I understand the topic very well, as I work on this very topic, and am an active member in a panel that reviews the ethical merit of proposals using animal research subjects. It's just your responses that make no sense.


Ah, rutting season.

I do so enjoy it.





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## bryanc

Macfury said:


> This, for one:


As far as I know, drugs that have not been tested on animals are not used on humans, voluntary or otherwise. If you know of an exception to this, report it to the authorities.

{it is be true that a drug that has been determined to be highly unlikely to have undesirable side effects may be administered to healthy controls, but this is only the case after the safety of the drug has been established using animals, and is furthermore entirely tangential to the argument about impregnating women with experimentally engineered embryos}


----------



## i-rui

well , it seems the scientist who was supposed to be looking for a willing woman to participate in this theoretical experiment was misquoted :

http://bostonherald.com/news_opinio...essor_blasts_neanderthal_clone_baby_rumor_web



> “I’m certainly not advocating it,” Church said. “I’m saying, if it is technically possible someday, we need to start talking about it today.”


----------



## bryanc

There's some real, interesting and do-able science here; once you scrape away the hype and unrelated abortion crap some seem eager to confuse the issue with.

We can extract DNA from ancient specimens, and directly determine (at least partial) genomic sequences of organisms that lived hundreds of thousands or even millions of years ago (this, in and of itself, is quite amazing). Furthermore, by comparing the sequences of extant contemporary species for which we are able to infer a phylogenetic relationship, we can infer a most-probable sequence for their last common ancestor, even if we don't have a specimen of that organism. Furthermore, we can synthesize arbitrarily long sequences of DNA, and incorporate these synthetic molecules into the genomes of living cells. It is therefore now possible to 'resurrect' extinct species (given enough information, time, and funding).

So it would be fascinating, and potentially useful, to look at the biochemistry and embryonic development of extinct invertebrates in an effort to understand how extant species superseded their ancestors, and what ecological conditions more modern species were able to exploit more effectively. It would certainly help with a lot of the "which came first" questions modern biologists struggle with.


----------



## Macfury

i-rui said:


> well , it seems the scientist who was supposed to be looking for a willing woman to participate in this theoretical experiment was misquoted :
> 
> Harvard professor blasts Neanderthal clone baby rumor on Web | Boston Herald


I would say the same thing if I were him! But my understanding was always that he was considering the _possibility _of such an experiment--not advertising for a cave mama.


----------



## bryanc

iMouse said:


> Ah, rutting season.
> 
> I do so enjoy it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> +
> YouTube Video
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


Actually, I think MF's Black Knight analogy is far more apt, which is why I linked to the psychological phenomenon of projection earlier; I leave it as an exercise for the student to determine who is representing who.





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## Sonal

Right, so now that we're all throughly bored with the same silly argument that runs rampant on just about every thread outside of the Shang.....

How about some science?
New Scientist TV: First video reveals working tractor beam in action

Cool, huh?


----------



## FeXL

Posted a link to a Daily Tech article (post 170) on same topic. It got lost in the mire.


----------



## Sonal

FeXL said:


> Posted a link to a Daily Tech article (post 170) on same topic. It got lost in the mire.


Ah yes, so you did. 
http://www.ehmac.ca/everything-else-eh/95935-science-thread-2.html#post1250289

Due credit to FeXL for his attempt to unmire this mire. (For this, we admire you.)


----------



## FeXL

Thx, Sonal, but kudos not necessary. My link didn't have the vid, yours did.


----------



## BigDL

This Post has been edited due to inappropriate language and or behaviour.

*This is a warning.*

We encourage all present and future participants of the ehMac community to keep there Posts polite and respectful at all times.


----------



## screature

BigDL said:


> *<RANT>Some say troll, some say arsehole.
> 
> I placed a poster on my ignore list as a result of being an arsehole. A poster that would offer they torment others for their "own amusement" is nothing but an arsehole in my opinion.
> 
> Such a poster, I should think is not worthy of being engaged in any manner on any topic what so ever. To me such a poster is nothing more than a cowardly bully and a Big ARSEHOLE!
> 
> Continued discussion with such a poster is at your own peril, is my considered opinion.</RANT>*
> 
> Science is a matter of fact, not opinion folks.
> 
> If you can't do the "math,"* (*having scientific literacy) science might even be a matter of faith that is having a belief in a hypothesis, theory or thesis because the argument put forward appeals to you or on the balance of probabilities (over whelming evidence and consensus) it must be true.
> 
> Offering opinion in the face of fact is just foolish, even if the opinion is a strongly held one, it is just that, an opinion.
> 
> Tormenting people for your amusement is just being an arsehole.


Get your gall bladder checked by a physician it seems you are full of bile...

I reported this post becuase of its singularly and distinctively repugnant attack on an other member here... quite frankly it would sicken me if such a post would be tolerated by the new ownership.

What a disgusting display...

This was what I reported:



> Wow!!! AND I MEAN WOW!! THIS POST IS WAY WAY OUT OF LINE...
> 
> I can't expect that the new ownership will do anything... but please is there at least one Mod who address this...
> 
> it is a continuous downward slide for this forum if this kind of posting is tolerated.


----------



## Sonal

And speaking of bile.... let's talk about dung.

NewsDaily: Dung beetles look to the stars

Dung beetles use the Milky Way to guide them. Cool, isn't it?


----------



## groovetube

One who posts similar bile reports bile. Yawn. C'mon..

Sonal that's cool.


----------



## bryanc

Sonal said:


> New Scientist TV: First video reveals working tractor beam in action
> 
> Cool, huh?


I'll have to read this later when I have more time to find out what's new about this. I was using "laser tweezers" when they were a new technology about 20 years ago. From the video this looks to be the same thing, so I'm not sure what's new here.

Of course, it's still really cool (and expensive). But I'll have to go and do some reading to find out what's new.

Thanks for posting it.


----------



## BigDL

BigDL said:


> This Post has been edited due to inappropriate language and or behaviour.
> 
> *This is a warning.*
> 
> We encourage all present and future participants of the ehMac community to keep there Posts polite and respectful at all times.


Gee whizz I meant it in the nicest possible way.


----------



## groovetube

You should have called him a 12 year old.

Apparently, that's respectful.


----------



## bryanc

groovetube said:


> You should have called him a 12 year old.
> 
> Apparently, that's respectful.


Not to the 12-year-olds.


----------



## groovetube

BaDum tissssss.....


----------



## screature

bryanc said:


> Not to the 12-year-olds.


Never called anyone a 12 year old, I said iMouse posted like one... big difference. And he quite literally asked for it. I merely obliged his request.

Not to mention It was my interpretation that the whole exchange was meant in good fun a la the Don Rickles reference etc. If iMouse and other members didn't get that then so be it. 

BigDL's rant was a deliberate and unprovoked attack on another member replete with the use of extremely derogative language... not the same thing at all...


----------



## Lawrence

screature said:


> *Get your gall bladder checked by a physician it seems you are full of bile...*
> 
> I reported this post becuase of its singularly and distinctively repugnant attack on an other member here... quite frankly it would sicken me if such a post would be tolerated by the new ownership.
> 
> What a disgusting display...
> 
> This was what I reported:


That's a surprise, An attacker attacking an attacker, Attack line quoted in *BOLD*
How come your post wasn't edited as well?

Are you above the law in here? eh?


----------



## screature

Lawrence said:


> That's a surprise, An attacker attacking an attacker, Attack line quoted in *BOLD*
> *How come your post wasn't edited as well?*
> 
> Are you above the law in here? eh?


Because I didn't call anyone an arsehole...  

By your standard bryanc sould have been called out and edited for suggesting that MF see a doctor for his "mental disturbances"... seems you missed that... maybe because it suits your proclivities.

Any time you want to complain about something I say you are free to do so but don't try and imply that I am "above the law" here. I stick by the rules and if and when I don't jump all over me to the powers that be. Until then... you know the rest.


----------



## groovetube

What else is new.


----------



## Lawrence

screature said:


> Because I criticized a post not the poster... and I didn't call anyone an arsehole...
> 
> A not so subtle difference that seems lost on some when it comes to rules of order and civility...


Oh I see, Then it's okay to attack people so long as they started it.
Thanks for the clarification, I didn't see that in the rules for ehMac.


----------



## groovetube

Yeah that's why you called someone a megalomaniac, and recently referred to a new member as a '12 year old'

Honestly some things get heated here at times but really everyone knows you're just as guilty as others, you've just gotten away with it more.


----------



## screature

Lawrence said:


> Oh I see, Then it's okay to attack people so long as they started it.
> Thanks for the clarification,* I didn't see that in the rules for ehMac*.


I didn't attack anyone... I attacked a disgusting post and I will do it again if and when it happens.

It seems you haven't read the rules.

Like I said...

Any time you want to complain about something I say you are free to do so but don't try and imply that I am "above the law" here. I stick by the rules and if and when I don't, jump all over me to the powers that be. Until then... you know the rest.


----------



## iMouse

I embrace my 12-year-old "slur", gladly.

I know of no 12-year-olds as dysfunctional as some members present.


----------



## groovetube

See it didn't take a new member to figure that out


----------



## Lawrence

screature said:


> I didn't attack anyone... I attacked a disgusting post and I will do it again if and when it happens.
> 
> It seems you haven't read the rules.
> 
> Like I said...
> 
> Any time you want to complain about something I say you are free to do so but don't try and imply that I am "above the law" here. I stick by the rules and if and when I don't, jump all over me to the powers that be. Until then... you know the rest.


That's an interesting view, But, That's not how I saw it,
Those weren't just words you were attacking, That was a poster that you were attacking.

I really can't see how you can't see the difference.

BTW way, What are the rules?
Seems to me that this is a make it up as you go kind of board now.

Pity


----------



## BigDL

> Get your gall bladder checked by a physician it seems you are full of bile...





Lawrence said:


> That's a surprise, An attacker attacking an attacker, Attack line quoted in *BOLD*
> How come your post wasn't edited as well?
> 
> Are you above the law in here? eh?


I fail to see how my gall bladder or lack there of is anyone's business but my own.

I shall not confirm or deny the existence of a gall bladder within or without my person.

I would like to report that poster for privacy intrusions to my innards. 

Too bad some people can't navel gaze and be content, but NOOOOOO they have to concern themselves with my innards...and oh and I mean that in the nicest way possible.


----------



## groovetube

You see Lawrence, all you have to do to play their game, and Screature has perfected it though not nearly as well as macfury, is simply skim the rules just enough. Now you're really breaking the whole respect thing, but clearly as I found out, that rule seems to be not in effect, in fact at all.

Veiled name calling is the game. If your opponent just steps ever so slightly across that thin line, well, then you can hoist yourself up on that big soapbox, and lecture everyone on civility.

It's something we've seen from Screature for a very long time. Of course, it's my fault. I've caused them all to be that way, I am the all powerful, the dark lord, and watch out, because I, work in very very mysterious ways.

So mote it be.


----------



## screature

BigDL said:


> I fail to see how my gall bladder or lack there of is anyone's business but my own.
> 
> I shall not confirm or deny the existence of a gall bladder within or without my person.
> 
> I would like to report that poster for privacy intrusions to my innards.
> 
> Too bad some people can't navel gaze and be content, but NOOOOOO they have to concern themselves with my innards...and oh and I mean that in the nicest way possible.


That's actually pretty funny. Good one.


----------



## Lawrence

I can understand reporting a post...
But, I can't understand someone attacking the poster and being able to do it with immunity.

Where do I sign up?

What are the monthly fee's?


----------



## groovetube

Perhaps you need an in in Ottawa...


----------



## Sonal

BigDL said:


> I fail to see how my gall bladder or lack there of is anyone's business but my own.
> 
> I shall not confirm or deny the existence of a gall bladder within or without my person.
> 
> I would like to report that poster for privacy intrusions to my innards.
> 
> Too bad some people can't navel gaze and be content, but NOOOOOO they have to concern themselves with my innards...and oh and I mean that in the nicest way possible.


Reporting things on the wrong thread reported!

(Wait a minute.... ah shoot.)


----------



## iMouse

Sonal said:


> (Wait a minute.... ah shoot.)


What is a sweet, little avatar like you, doing in a cesspool like this? :yikes:


----------



## Sonal

iMouse said:


> What is a sweet, little avatar like you, doing in a cesspool like this? :yikes:


I save my pottymouth for other cesspools.


----------



## BigDL

Lawrence said:


> I can understand reporting a post...
> But, I can't understand someone attacking the poster and being able to do it with immunity.
> 
> Where do I sign up?
> 
> What are the monthly fee's?


Do you suppose it is a system access fee? But I thought Ottawa is getting rid of those things. Oh!...I mean that in the nicest way possible.


----------



## groovetube

ladies with pottymouths... hott!

oooh that was my outside voice wasn't it.


----------



## screature

Lawrence said:


> I can understand reporting a post...
> *But, I can't understand someone attacking the poster and being able to do it with immunity.*
> 
> Where do I sign up?
> 
> What are the monthly fee's?


Again I attacked someone's post not the poster...

Strangely it seems you are more concerned with my post protesting BigDL's post than you are with his post and the *flagrant* breaking of the rules of the forum... I wonder why that is...? Actually I don't, I know precisely why.

So once again, lodge a complaint against my post... see where it gets you... 

If I broke any rules of the forum I will be castigated by the "powers that be" and I shall abide.


----------



## screature

Sonal said:


> I save my pottymouth for other cesspools.


Really? Somehow I find it hard to believe you have pottymouth within you... And I mean that in the nicest way possible.


----------



## Sonal

screature said:


> Really? Somehow I find it hard to believe you have pottymouth within you... And I mean that in the nicest way possible.


Good, I took it in the nicest possible way. 

But yes. It's there.


----------



## iMouse

screature said:


> Really? Somehow I find it hard to believe you have pottymouth within you... And I mean that in the nicest way possible.


Her other cesspools are probably work related.

No need to ask me how I know this.


----------



## BigDL

groovetube said:


> ladies with pottymouths... hott!
> 
> oooh that was my outside voice wasn't it.


...ladies with pottymouths...Oh!...I mean that in the nicest way possible...no I don't...errr...never mind.


----------



## Lawrence

BigDL said:


> Do you suppose it is a system access fee? But I thought Ottawa is getting rid of those things. Oh!...I mean that in the nicest way possible.


Maybe it's a user fee, I know the Con's like that sort of thing,
Although, It becomes a rather elitist group when they do that,
Sort of like legalized segregation, But done without people realizing it.


----------



## Lawrence

screature said:


> Again I attacked someone's post not the poster...
> 
> Strangely it seems you are more concerned with my post protesting BigDL's post than you are with his post and the *flagrant* breaking of the rules of the forum... I wonder why that is...? Actually I don't, I know precisely why.
> 
> So once again, lodge a complaint against on my post... see where it gets you... If I broke any rules of the forum I will be castigated by the "powers that be" and I shall abide.


I'm not the policeman here, I don't really care,
I just wanted you to admit what you are doing is wrong.


----------



## BigDL

Lawrence said:


> Maybe it's a user fee, I know the Con's like that sort of thing,
> Although, It becomes a rather elitist group when they do that,
> Sort of like legalized segregation, But done without people realizing it.


Holy carp! Are we allowed to say Cons...Oh!...and I mean that in the nicest way possible.


----------



## Lawrence

BigDL said:


> Holy carp! Are we allowed to say Cons...Oh!...and I mean that in the nicest way possible.


Crap, Almost forgot, That's why I don't usually talk politics in here.

Damn, Why did I slip off the wagon, Gotta watch that.

Might invoke the fury in someone.


----------



## screature

Sonal said:


> Good, I took it in the nicest possible way.
> 
> But yes. It's there.


Good.

And now I know not to rile you up too much or else "woe betide unto me!"

Thanks for the warning.


----------



## screature

Lawrence said:


> I'm not the policeman here, I don't really care,
> I just wanted you to admit what you are doing is wrong.


Nope. You won't get that admission from me because it wasn't wrong in the least bit. It was completely justified.

Just like if I saw someone getting mugged and called the police... it is not wrong to get involved when you see a crime/wrong being committed. It is precisely the right and proper thing to do.


----------



## Lawrence

screature said:


> Nope. You won't get that admission from me because it wasn't wrong in the least bit. It was completely justified.
> 
> Just like if I saw someone getting mugged and called the police... it is not wrong to get involved when you see a crime/wrong being committed. It is precisely the right and proper thing to do.


I have to give up on this, Looks like a lost cause.


----------



## screature

Lawrence said:


> I have to give up on this, Looks like a lost cause.


Yes we will have to agree to disagree.


----------



## groovetube

Lawrence said:


> I have to give up on this, Looks like a lost cause.


see it's just like of someone got mugged, and police were needed!

Wait, am I going after the analogy? Look at me! Shiny ball! I fell for it!


----------



## Sonal

screature said:


> Good.
> 
> And now I know not to rile you up too much or else "woe betide unto me!"
> 
> Thanks for the warning.


Nothing to worry too much about. I don't rile very easily behind a keyboard.

(Wait, I could use this to my advantage.)

Yeah, don't make me angry. You wouldn't like me when I'm angry.


----------



## BigDL

Lawrence said:


> I have to give up on this, Looks like a lost cause.


Remember, Lawrence, the old commercial tag line...and I mean it in the nicest way possible. "You can't tell a Heinz pickle nuthin'"...


----------



## Lawrence

screature said:


> Yes will have to agree to disagree.


Wait a second...That's a Macfury term,
Is this his second account?

How do I know this is you?

Or...Perhaps...

You guys have been on this board for so long that you are now are rubbing off on each other.

That must be it.


----------



## BigDL

groovetube said:


> see it's just like of someone got mugged, and police were needed!
> 
> Wait, am I going after the analogy? Look at me! Shiny ball! I fell for it!


Geez I feel persecuted. Now I'm being criminalized...but I mean that in the nicest possible way.


----------



## iMouse

Sonal said:


> Yeah, don't make me angry. You wouldn't like me when I'm angry.


Bill Bixby, is that you?

Damn, you is tiny for a hulk.


----------



## Sonal

iMouse said:


> Bill Bixby, is that you?
> 
> Damn, you is tiny for a hulk.


It's my secret identity. 

Then I go all hulk and I'm like scary huge.


----------



## screature

Lawrence said:


> Wait a second...That's a Macfury term,
> Is this his second account?
> 
> How do I know this is you?
> 
> Or...Perhaps...
> 
> You guys have been on this board for so long that you are now are rubbing off on each other.
> 
> That must be it.


Lame... You can't even agree to disagree and move on without being snide in your post... and I mean that in the nicest possible way.


----------



## iMouse

screature said:


> Lame... and I mean that in the nicest way possible.


Stagnation... and I mean that in the nicest way possible.


----------



## Lawrence

screature said:


> Lame... You can't even agree to disagree and move on without being snide in your post... and I mean that in the nicest possible way.


Lol


----------



## groovetube

waaaah!


----------



## Lawrence




----------



## kps

What thread is this again?


----------



## Sonal

It's the nicest thread possible.


----------



## Lawrence

kps said:


> What thread is this again?


Creatures of science... I think,
Not sure...Somehow we got side tracked.


----------



## FeXL

kps said:


> What thread is this again?


Thank you...


----------



## BigDL

FeXL said:


> Thank you...


You're mostly welcome...and I truly mean that in the nicest possible way.


----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> What thread is this again?


oh calm down.  We'll get back to it shortly. We just needed some scream therapy apparently.

And I think it was done in the nicest way possible.


----------



## iMouse

Anger management 101.

Take it out on this pillow.

OK. *blam, blam, blam*

You're right, I do feel better.


----------



## Macfury

screature said:


> I didn't attack anyone... I attacked a disgusting post and I will do it again if and when it happens.


I haven't visited the board for several hours. The use of that kind of language is typical of bullies everywhere.


----------



## Lawrence

Wow look at that...One leaves and another appears,
This is making me very suspicious.


----------



## Lawrence

Sonal said:


> It's the nicest thread possible.


I thought so too until...The mob arrived.


----------



## groovetube

Oh jeez. -someone- didn't get the memo that its done. Where's the dead horsey smilie..

Oh and I do mean that also in the nicest way possible too.


----------



## Lawrence

groovetube said:


> Oh jeez. -someone- didn't get the memo that its done. Where's the dead horsey smilie..
> 
> Oh and I do mean that also in the nicest way possible too.


Found it...

















Now back to the thread...Where were we?


----------



## Kosh

Lawrence said:


> Found it...


:lmao: 

I love it! I've got to save that one... It'll come in REALLY useful around here!


----------



## groovetube

yeah it probably could be used in just about every thread. Now that's beating a dead horse!


----------



## BigDL

I think something else was long dead before the emoticon showed up. 

That dead item was a meaningful discussion, on matters of facts and repeatable evidence relating to the study and observations of things...you know science...not opinions...feeling...emotions and I mean that in the nicest way possible.


----------



## SINC

BigDL said:


> I think something else was long dead before the emoticon showed up.


Not to mention one who will not let a bad event die a deserved death.


----------



## BigDL

SINC said:


> Not to mention one who will not let a bad event die a deserved death.


I think science and perhaps applied science (technology) would make for an interesting thread.

Should it happen that folks refrain from (not limited to) a political agenda, being disagreeable, expressing opinion as if it were a fact, and with the aim to discredit or cause disrepute of science because it does not fit; a world view or ideology then this thread could be viable and I mean that in the nicest possible way. 

I also realize this is a tall order for this particular site to accomplish. 

I may have to agree with you Sinc. You may be correct with regard to the local posters not being able to rise to a challenge to have a decent conversation regarding science and technology on Ehmac.

If folks, however, believe a political agenda is the purpose of a science thread, then agreed it should fade away into the back of the pack.


----------



## SINC

BigDL said:


> and I mean that in the nicest possible way.


Similarly, this silly expression has been worked to death in this thread too and is meaningless beyond belief. Time to bury it too.


----------



## groovetube

Sinc has spoketh! No one is to use this expression any longer! No more humor.

Now. DL has made a good point, one I will heed in this thread, now we've had our diversion, and related provlomations.

On to... Science. A subject I'm no expert in, but very interested in.


----------



## BigDL

SINC said:


> Similarly, this silly expression has been worked to death in this thread too and is meaningless beyond belief. Time to bury it too.


Why?


----------



## SINC

Seen once it was funny, seen twice it wasn't. Overused time and again isn't humour, it's juvenile.


----------



## BigDL

SINC said:


> Seen once it was funny, seen twice it wasn't. Overused time and again isn't humour, it's juvenile.


Why?


----------



## SINC

BigDL said:


> Why?


If you can't figure that out, you may have an issue.


----------



## BigDL

SINC said:


> If you can't figure that out, you may have an issue.


To once again to quote Mindy "Ok I love you bye-bye"...and I mean it in the nicest possible way. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUk0PFJvlhw


----------



## SINC

BigDL said:


> To once again to quote Mindy "Ok I love you bye-bye"...and I mean it in the nicest possible way.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUk0PFJvlhw


Ah the union mentality approach. Good for you.


----------



## BigDL

groovetube said:


> Sinc has spoketh! No one is to use this expression any longer! No more humor.
> 
> Now. DL has made a good point, one I will heed in this thread, now we've had our diversion, and related provlomations.
> 
> On to... Science. A subject I'm no expert in, but very interested in.


Maybe just maybe, we're through with the scenic diversions and we can get back on track of having a reasonable thread regarding the discussion of science and technology...lest it proves to be the correct that;

Sinc's resolution : ...therefore, be it resolved, that posters on Ehmac can not have a reasonable and decent discussion of science.

...and I do mean that in the nicest way possible.


----------



## Lawrence

interesting, But not that interesting
In other news...Science has just been discovered in western Canada


----------



## Lawrence

...




+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## FeXL

Duplicate science: ‘funding agencies may have awarded millions and possibly billions of dollars to scientists’ for duplicate studies



> Although the researchers could not definitively determine whether the similar grants were true duplicates — this would require access to the full grant files, which were not publicly available — they found strong evidence that tens of millions of dollars may have been spent on grants where at least a portion was already being funded. In the most recent five years (2007-2011), they identified 39 similar grant pairs involving more than $20 million.
> 
> “It is quite possible that our detection software missed many cases of duplication,” Garner said. “If text similarity software misses as many cases of funding duplications as it does plagiarism of scientific papers we’ve studied, then the extent of duplication could be much larger. It could be as much as 2.5 percent of total research funding, equivalent to $5.1 billion since 1985.”


Open the grant files. Let's have a look...


----------



## bryanc

FeXL said:


> Open the grant files. Let's have a look...


I think this is essential, and only the beginning. I just went and had a look at the study, and I can certainly see how false positives could be a big problem; my own grant applications have "Lay summaries" which are publicly available, and these don't change much from application to application, so one could easily get the impression that I'm using the same application twice. This is because it's almost impossible to actually get at any of the important details of what is being proposed in these summaries; the summary has to explain to a general audience what the questions being asked are, and why they're important. And since progress in science is generally slow and gradual (with some important exceptions), the big questions aren't really changing from one application to the next; if you've made progress on working out some esoteric aspect of the question, the big question probably hasn't changed, even though you're making good progress. So the summary probably won't change much.

Looking at the full application should clarify this significantly. Even more important, look at the publication record(s) of the researchers involved. Many granting agencies fund a research program, rather than specific research proposals, so one's application may legitimately boil down to "this is an important question, and we've made good progress in the past 5 years; please give us more money to keep going." As such, the application may not be significantly different 5 years later when they go up for renewal, but they're not really asking for funding for the same research that was already funded.

Another aspect of this may be that the original application was "Please give us funding to study W, X, and Y". And after it was funded, research progressed and it turned out that W was far more complicated than anticipated, so 5 years later, the application for renewal looks like "Please give us funding to study X, Y and Z"... not very different from the first proposal, despite the fact that the funding was spent in a completely legitimate way.

Finally, it could be fraud; I have no doubt that there are individual researchers who try to abuse the system. They may justify this by saying to themselves that "because funding agencies never give us enough money to do the research properly, I'll apply for funding for the same research from two different sources and pool it so I have enough to do what I really need to do." Or they may simply be criminals.

To find out, we need to look at more than just the applications (as similarity between applications can have legitimate causes), we need to look at the research that has been done and how the money was spent.

While I certainly don't object to this kind of auditing in principle, it's worth recognizing that such an audit is extremely disruptive (like most researchers, I've had to comply with NSERC audits, and it generally means you're not getting anything else done for several weeks), so it puts a significant burden on already very busy people. So I hope it can be kept to a minimum.


----------



## Macfury

bryanc said:


> While I certainly don't object to this kind of auditing in principle, it's worth recognizing that such an audit is extremely disruptive (like most researchers, I've had to comply with NSERC audits, and it generally means you're not getting anything else done for several weeks), so it puts a significant burden on already very busy people. So I hope it can be kept to a minimum.


EVERYBODY is already busy. When you're funded on the public dime, extra transparency may be required at any time.


----------



## bryanc

Macfury said:


> EVERYBODY is already busy.


This is clearly not the case; I know for a fact that there are people (in this very building) who are completely bored and just sitting around collecting a pay cheque. But that's beside the point.



> When you're funded on the public dime, extra transparency may be required at any time.


As I said, I don't object to this in principle. What needs to be understood is that such auditing takes time, and that time cannot be recovered; so if you get audited, it should be understood that your productivity will suffer.


----------



## BigDL

What does the article have to do with science? This question is asked in the nicest possible way.

The issue of duplicate funding may be a public policy issue, if government funding is involved. 

If two researchers ask for funding to look at basically the same question isn't the institution that grants the money responsible to vet the applications? 

Is your concern that two persons asked for money? The money was spent on reviewing the same topic more than once? A scientist made a living?

Again what does this article have to do with science and why is it in the science thread?


----------



## FeXL

I can't tell if you're being facetious or serious, but I'll bite...

The reason I placed the post in the Science thread is because the article is about funding for...science! As to my particular concern, it's about the possibility of fraud.

Now, as has been pointed out (and, as I am aware), there is a possibility that there may, in fact, be a need for further study on a particular topic & further funding is needed. Understood.

If, however, you have applied for/received funding for project A in the past and apply & receive further funding for A but it ends up being used for completely & totally unrelated project B, I have problems with that.


----------



## screature

FeXL said:


> I can't tell if you're being facetious or serious, but I'll bite...
> 
> The reason I placed the post in the Science thread is because the article is about funding for...science! As to my particular concern, it's about the possibility of fraud.
> 
> Now, as has been pointed out (and, as I am aware), there is a possibility that there may, in fact, be a need for further study on a particular topic & further funding is needed. Understood.
> 
> *If, however, you have applied for/received funding for project A in the past and apply & receive further funding for A but it ends up being used for completely & totally unrelated project B, I have problems with that*.


As indeed you should and the issue has very much to do with a Science thread...

Some people seem to think that science exists in holy ivory tower. That its priorities should be Isolated from the rest of society as they relate to politics and public policy, they should be completely independent and public policy should be of no concern. And that is fine... if it is *privately funded*. 

However, If "science" is *publicly funded* then it definitely should be completely transparent, accountable and subject to public scrutiny on the way in which it spends the *public's* money and on what it is spent.


----------



## BigDL

FeXL said:


> I can't tell if you're being facetious or serious, but I'll bite...
> 
> The reason I placed the post in the Science thread is because the article is about funding for...science! As to my particular concern, it's about the possibility of fraud.
> 
> Now, as has been pointed out (and, as I am aware), there is a possibility that there may, in fact, be a need for further study on a particular topic & further funding is needed. Understood.
> 
> If, however, you have applied for/received funding for project A in the past and apply & receive further funding for A but it ends up being used for completely & totally unrelated project B, I have problems with that.


My question is serious, i will assure you.

The issue here isn't a matter of science. 

The funding could have been for say widget inspection or for music appreciation. 

Your concern for public funds being allocated properly and the due diligence for the accounting of those funds is admirable. 

Public funding for widget inspection or music appreciation or scientific research is respectfully a public policy issue. It is not an issue of science if you understand my point. That is why I questioned the inclusion of the topic in a science thread.


----------



## screature

BigDL said:


> My question is serious, i will assure you.
> 
> The issue here isn't a matter of science.
> 
> The funding could have been for say widget inspection or for music appreciation.
> 
> Your concern for public funds being allocated properly and the due diligence for the accounting of those funds is admirable.
> 
> Public funding for widget inspection or music appreciation or scientific research is respectfully a public policy issue. It is not an issue of science if you understand my point. That is why I questioned the inclusion of the topic in a science thread.


See my post above yours...

So are you saying that the Minister of State for Science is completely irrelevant to the topic of science? 

I know scientists who would beg to differ with you... perhaps not our most vocal resident scientist, but I know plenty of others who would beg to differ with you and him (if he believes as such).


----------



## groovetube

I think what DL is saying, is that this thread, is about science itself, not the debates over funding and whether there should be more transparency in government funding. But since bryanc started the thread, I suppose he gets to clarify that.

edit, oops, it was fexl that started it.


----------



## BigDL

groovetube said:


> I think what DL is saying, is that this thread, is about science itself, not the debates over funding and whether there should be more transparency in government funding. But since bryanc started the thread, I suppose he gets to clarify that.
> 
> edit, oops, it was fexl that started it.


To my understanding a thread entitled "The Science Thread" would be about interesting(/or) not interesting observations and discoveries reported from exploration of the scientific method.

I also thought reports of the introduction of applications of science (technology) i.e. not computers and electronics as discussed elsewhere on Ehmac might also be interesting to review here as well.

However if "The Science Thread" is in reality a thread for the purpose of bashing public policy for the support of science, an attempt to discredit the reliance of empirical evidence or the promotion of pet causes such as, but not limited to, the removal of fluoride from public drinking water, it is little wonder I was confused by the "New Speak," "The Science Thread."

I shall now concede to my good pal Sinc, he is indeed correct. Congratulations to Sinc for your victory with regard to your proposition that posters on Ehmac can not have a reasonable and decent discussion of science. I also congratulate you on your keen observations of "Not to mention one who will not let a bad event die a deserved death." 

Once again Sinc good call, good buddy.

I must also concede indeed Ehmac may have "Jumped the Shark..." ...and I do mean that in the nicest possible way.


----------



## screature

> I think what DL is saying, is that this thread, is about science itself, not the debates over funding and whether there should be more transparency in government funding. But since bryanc started the thread, I suppose he gets to clarify that.
> 
> edit, oops, it was fexl that started it.


Originally Posted by groovetube



BigDL said:


> To my understanding a thread entitled "The Science Thread" would be about interesting(/or) not interesting observations and discoveries reported from exploration of the scientific method.
> 
> I also thought reports of the introduction of applications of science (technology) i.e. not computers and electronics as discussed elsewhere on Ehmac might also be interesting to review here as well.
> 
> However if "The Science Thread" is in reality a thread for the purpose of bashing public policy for the support of science, an attempt to discredit the reliance of empirical evidence or the promotion of pet causes such as, but not limited to, the removal of fluoride from public drinking water, it is little wonder I was confused by the "New Speak," "The Science Thread."
> 
> I shall now concede to my good pal Sinc, he is indeed correct. Congratulations to Sinc for your victory with regard to your proposition that posters on Ehmac can not have a reasonable and decent discussion of science. I also congratulate you on your keen observations of "Not to mention one who will not let a bad event die a deserved death."
> 
> Once again Sinc good call, good buddy.
> 
> I must also concede indeed Ehmac may have "Jumped the Shark..." ...and I do mean that in the nicest possible way.


So what do you say FeXL, as the progenitor of the thread, does the politics/public policy of science have a place in "The Science thread"?

Note BigDL, I asked if it has a place not if it is the "hidden agenda" or some other conspiracy based theory,,, just does it have a place? Something that is worth discussing aside from standing up and cheering for scientific research.


----------



## bryanc

I actually think it ought to. While all most of us can do WRT actual science is say "ooh... that's cool; I wonder what the long term implications of that might be." I'm very fortunate in that I get to do actual science on a daily basis, but even for me, most scientific discoveries and discussions in the media about scientific discoveries are sufficiently removed from my field that I'm in the same boat as everyone else; it's cool and I like talking about it, but I don't really know more about it than the next guy.

Now science policy, and in particular, science funding is another issue. As taxpayers and citizens, we all have both a right and an obligation to formulate a considered opinion on this. This seems as good a place as any to discuss it.

With respect to FeXL's point that "if money was granted to study A, and then you use it to study B" should we take issue with that? This is not as clear cut as one might think.

In research, because the whole point is that we don't understand the basics, we can set out to study A, but accidentally discover B. That's the way it goes. As Einstein said, "if we knew what we were doing, it wouldn't be called 'research.'"

It's important to understand that the concept of "directed research" is rather oxymoronic.


----------



## screature

bryanc;1251403[B said:


> ]I actually think it ought to.[/B] While all most of us can do WRT actual science is say "ooh... that's cool; I wonder what the long term implications of that might be." I'm very fortunate in that I get to do actual science on a daily basis, but even for me, most scientific discoveries and discussions in the media about scientific discoveries are sufficiently removed from my field that I'm in the same boat as everyone else; it's cool and I like talking about it, but I don't really know more about it than the next guy.
> 
> Now science policy, and in particular, science funding is another issue. As taxpayers and citizens, we all have both a right and an obligation to formulate a considered opinion on this. This seems as good a place as any to discuss it.
> 
> With respect to FeXL's point that "if money was granted to study A, and then you use it to study B" should we take issue with that? T*his is not as clear cut as one might think.
> 
> In research, because the whole point is that we don't understand the basics, we can set out to study A, but accidentally discover B. That's the way it goes.* As Einstein said, "if we knew what we were doing, it wouldn't be called 'research.'"
> 
> It's important to understand that the concept of "directed research" is rather oxymoronic.


Good, I am glad to hear you think so.

I attest this is not a valid argument because what FeXL said was:


> If, however, you have *applied for/received funding for project A in the past and apply & receive further funding for A but it ends up being used for completely & totally unrelated project B,* I have problems with that.


So, you received public money for research A and found out B, that is not directly related to research A.

The proper thing to do would be to stop applying for research A and reapply for funding for research/discovery B and not reapply for research A and then if you receive the funding actually in fact apply the funding to research/discovery B.

That is my interpretation of what FeXL is saying and in fact would IMO be proper public policy regarding science funding.


----------



## groovetube

I think if you look carefully at what bryanc posted, it was, research A, but discover B.

Not research A, then research B, then discover B. That's the wrong order.

I would think, that research will result in unexpected results (otherwise, why would we need to research if we knew the result...)unless you merely want to confirm something, but then again, there are no guarantees right? and what's the point if all you do is stop once you discover something? If that happened, we'd have missed out on many many important benefits.

AT least that's my thoughts.


----------



## bryanc

screature said:


> So, you received public money for research A and found out B, that is not directly related to research A.
> 
> The proper thing to do would be to stop applying for research A and reapply for funding for research/discovery B and not reapply for research A and then if you receive the funding actually in fact apply the funding to research/discovery B.


It may well be that A is still an interesting question, so it might go something like:

Grant cycle 1: Apply for funding to study A. Do the research, discover something unrelated but interesting (B). Publish results.

Grant cycle 2: Apply for funding to study A, because it's still interesting and we still don't understand it.



What I think is more likely the case here is that we're talking about the similarities between summaries of grant applications that may actually be very different (as FeXL said, the reviewing agencies should compare the details of the application, and the publications that have resulted to make sure this is the case; I don't think the details need to be made public, because that would likely compromise the researcher's ability to publish).

For example, if I apply for funding to study the role of matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) in tumour metastasis, and spend 5 years determining that Mmp2 degrades Type IV collagen as a specific cell type undergoes an epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition and migrates into the surrounding tissue, that's a perfectly legitimate use of the money. But I might then apply for a renewal of the grant to determine how Mmp2 is becoming activated and wether a given pharmacological inhibitor effectively blocks that process, which would be a different proposal, but the summary may still say "role of matrix metalloproteinases in tumour metastasis" so it won't look different in this sort of text analysis of application summaries.


----------



## screature

bryanc said:


> It may well be that A is still an interesting question, so it might go something like:
> 
> Grant cycle 1: Apply for funding to study A. Do the research, discover something unrelated but interesting (B). Publish results.
> 
> Grant cycle 2: Apply for funding to study A, because it's still interesting and we still don't understand it.
> 
> 
> 
> What I think is more likely the case here is that we're talking about the similarities between summaries of grant applications that may actually be very different (as FeXL said, the reviewing agencies should compare the details of the application, and the publications that have resulted to make sure this is the case; I don't think the details need to be made public, because that would likely compromise the researcher's ability to publish).
> 
> For example, if I apply for funding to study the role of matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) in tumour metastasis, and spend 5 years determining that Mmp2 degrades Type IV collagen as a specific cell type undergoes an epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition and migrates into the surrounding tissue, that's a perfectly legitimate use of the money. But I might then apply for a renewal of the grant to determine how Mmp2 is becoming activated and wether a given pharmacological inhibitor effectively blocks that process, which would be a different proposal, but the summary may still say "role of matrix metalloproteinases in tumour metastasis" so it won't look different in this sort of text analysis of application summaries.


The crux of what FeXL is saying is I think rather obvious.

A scientist or institution should not apply for funding for specified research and then apply to some other research. If you get the funding for specific research based on information presented in a particular application and then actually use it for something else it is a misappropriation of funds.

Pretty simple actually and I agree with FeXL.


----------



## Macfury

screature said:


> The crux of what FeXL is saying is I think rather obvious.
> 
> A scientist or institution should not apply for funding for research that it is not actually going to be used for and then applied to some other research. If you get the funding for specific research based on information presented in a particular application and then actually use it for something else it is a misappropriation of funds.
> 
> Pretty simple actually and I agree with FeXL.


Yes, he isn't talking about accidental discoveries.


----------



## bryanc

Macfury said:


> Yes, he isn't talking about accidental discoveries.


Most important discoveries are accidental; but I basically agree. I'm just saying that this text-analysis of grant summaries may be highly misleading because the summaries can't contain the details of the research being proposed, so to very different research programs may have very similar summaries. Furthermore, because of the nature of basic research, good research often does not follow the proposal very closely because, as we make progress we have to change our experimental plans to incorporate that new knowledge.

If we had to stop, return our funding, and re-apply for new funding every time we changed our plan, nothing would ever get done. Fortunately, most of the major funding agencies (NSF, NIH, NSERC, CIHR, etc.) are very flexible regarding how closely the research you do has to match the research you proposed in the application. As long as one is producing good results within the general feild the funding is ear-marked to support, funding agencies recognize the fluid nature of basic scientific inquiry, and won't object if you wind up spending the money on things that are quite different than what was originally proposed.

I think part of the problem here is that, if you're coming from a business or similar background, this looks like a breach-of-contract; I gave you money to do X, but you did Y instead - that's not what we agreed. Think if it more like Queen Isabella of Spain giving Columbus a bunch of money (and ships) to find a route to India. He came back having accidentally discovered a new continent we didn't know about... oops. Should she be pissed that he didn't find a way to India? No. If he'd bogged off with her ships and set himself up on a private island in the Azores, then yeah, sure she should be pissed, but discovering things you don't expect is the nature of basic research.

Furthermore, you almost always have to do things you didn't plan on in order to further your research, so if you've budgeted for reagents A, B and C in your grant application, but as soon as you get funded you find out from your first experiments that you don't really need B and C, but you do need D, E and F, should you go back to the granting agency and start over? Of course not; you don't waste the money on B and C, you buy D and E and do as much as you can, and when you run out of money, you show how much progress you've made and apply for the money you need for F. And, to get back to the point, that application for funding for F may have a summary that looks almost identical to the grant that funded you for A, B and C, which you spent on A, D and E.


TL;DR version: progress in science is unpredictable, so funding has to be attached to progress in general, not specific outcomes.


----------



## FeXL

Researchers unveil first artificial enzyme created by evolution in a test tube



> There's a wobbly new biochemical structure in Burckhard Seelig's lab at the University of Minnesota that may resemble what enzymes looked like billions of years ago, when life on earth began to evolve – long before they became ingredients for new and improved products, from detergents to foods and fuels.
> 
> Seelig created the fledgling enzyme by using directed evolution in the laboratory. Working with colleague Gianluigi Veglia, graduate student Fa-An Chao, and other team members, he subsequently determined its structure, which made its debut December 9 as an advance online publication in Nature Chemical Biology. Lab tests show that the enzyme (a type of RNA ligase, which connects two RNA molecules) functions like natural enzymes although its structure looks very different and it is flexible rather than rigid. Seelig speculates the new protein resembles primordial enzymes, before their current structures evolved.


----------



## FeXL

New 3D printing technique could speed up progress towards creation of artificial organs



> Jason King, business development manager of stem cell biotech company Roslin Cellab, which took part in the research, said: "Normally laboratory grown cells grow in 2D but some cell types have been printed in 3D. However, up to now, human stem cell cultures have been too sensitive to manipulate in this way.
> 
> "This is a scientific development which we hope and believe will have immensely valuable long-term implications for reliable, animal-free, drug testing, and, in the longer term, to provide organs for transplant on demand, without the need for donation and without the problems of immune suppression and potential organ rejection."


----------



## SINC

Incredible event caught on film:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC3VTgIPoGU


----------



## Dr.G.

That is amazing, Sinc. We see the results of calving years later as the ice bergs from Greenland glaciers drift on past St.John's.


----------



## FeXL

Newly identified natural protein blocks HIV, other deadly viruses



> A team of UCLA-led researchers has identified a protein with broad virus-fighting properties that potentially could be used as a weapon against deadly human pathogenic viruses such as HIV, Ebola, Rift Valley Fever, Nipah and others designated "priority pathogens" for national biosecurity purposes by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease.


----------



## Macfury

I love reports on nanotechnology. This is an incredible step, involving the mimicking of the function of a peptide molecule:

the Foresight Institute » Blog Archive » Artificial molecular machine synthesizes a small peptide


----------



## bryanc

Macfury said:


> I love reports on nanotechnology. This is an incredible step, involving the mimicking of the function of a peptide molecule


What they've built is trying to mimic the ribosome, which assembles the peptide; not the peptide itself. Since nanotechnology got started, the 'gold standard' that really sets the bar for nanotech is the ribosome because the ribosome is a general purpose programmable nano-assembler. Ribosomes 'read' genetic instructions and assemble 3D proteins as specified by the gene sequence. So they're sort of like the nano-scale version of 3D printers; they will build any structure specified, using a set of 20 lego-blocks (amino acids).

The assembler in the linked story can only assemble 3 amino acids (into a tripeptide), but it's a start.

The reaction mechanism the ribosome uses to put the amino acids together was worked out in detail a few years ago (won the Nobel prize in chemistry a couple years back if I recall correctly). I don't see any reason we can't copy the biology to solve this problem. The bigger problem is figuring out how to build structures out of amino acids. If you want to build structure X, what sequence of amino acids do you need? At this point, we can't even predict what shape a given sequence of amino acids will fold up into with any confidence, so that's a problem that's going to take a lot more attention.


----------



## Macfury

bryanc said:


> What they've built is trying to mimic the ribosome, which assembles the peptide; not the peptide itself.


I see the difference. Still, amazing stuff.


----------



## FeXL

Improving Li-ion batteries.

Graphene improves lithium-ion battery capacity and recharge rate by 10x



> Hold onto your hats: Graphene, the one true savior, has now found a use in the one technological arena that needs it most: batteries. Namely, engineers at Northwestern University have found that a specially-crafted graphene electrode can allow a lithium-ion battery to store 10 times as much power and charge 10 times faster — and last longer, too.


----------



## FeXL

Trekkies conquer contest to name Pluto moons



> Earlier this month, astronomer Mark Showalter and the SETI Institute asked the Internet to help name two Plutonian moons. The results are in after 450,324 votes from around the world on the Web site Pluto Rocks.
> 
> Pending authorization from the International Astronomical Union, the new names for Pluto's smallest moons -- currently called P4 and P5 -- could end up changing to Cerberus and Vulcan.


----------



## FeXL

Recovering the original data from the Lunar Orbital Project.

The Lunar Orbiter Image Recovery Project, Original Data For Science Posterity



> In 1966-67 NASA sent five spacecraft to orbit the Moon as a photoreconnaissance mission to scout landing sites for the Apollo landings. Today’s reader must remember that prior to these missions mankind had never seen the Moon up close. The first three Lunar Orbiters were in a near equatorial orbit and the last two in polar orbits for general mapping. Each carried two visible light cameras, a 24” focal length instrument obtaining images at about 1 meter resolution, and an 8” focal length instrument at about 5-7 meters resolution on the on the lunar near side. The images were recorded on 70mm SO-243 photographic film which was processed on board. This film was then scanned with a 5 micron spot beam that modulated an analog signal that was transmitted to the Earth.


Due to reductions in support from NASA, they are seeking crowdfunding, it seems a worthwhile project. Perhaps if NASA spent less time (money) on AGW, there might be more funding for projects such as this...


----------



## bryanc

As much as I'm a big fan of space research, and think this sort of thing should be a no-brainer for funding, I can certainly understand prioritizing limited resources for problems we know we have to deal with here on earth.


----------



## KC4

FeXL said:


> Newly identified natural protein blocks HIV, other deadly viruses


On the topic of curing such diseases, I stumbled across this article today:

First documented case of child cured of HIV


----------



## FeXL

Solar Wind Energy Source Discovered



> Using data from an aging NASA spacecraft, researchers have found signs of an energy source in the solar wind that has caught the attention of fusion researchers. NASA will be able to test the theory later this decade when it sends a new probe into the sun for a closer look.


----------



## FeXL

More "settled science"...

Most of Earth covered with life powered with hydrogen. Living Rocks?



> “We’re providing the first direct evidence of life in the deeply buried oceanic crust. Our findings suggest that this spatially vast ecosystem is largely supported by chemosynthesis,” says Dr Lever, at the time a PhD student at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, USA, and now a scientist at the Center for Geomicrobiology at Aarhus University, Denmark.
> 
> The microorganisms we found are native to basalt,” explains Dr Lever.​


More:



> “There are small veins in the basaltic oceanic crust and water runs through them. The water probably reacts with reduced iron compounds, such as olivine, in the basalt and releases hydrogen. Microorganisms use the hydrogen as a source of energy to convert carbon dioxide into organic material,” explains Dr Lever. “So far, evidence for life deep within oceanic crust was based on chemical and textural signatures in rocks, but direct proof was lacking,” adds Dr Olivier Rouxel of the French IFREMER institute.


----------



## FeXL

Planck satellite: Maps detail Universe's ancient light



> A spectacular new map of the "oldest light" in the sky has just been released by the European Space Agency.
> 
> Scientists say its mottled pattern is an exquisite confirmation of our Big-Bang model for the origin and evolution of the Universe.
> 
> *But there are features in the picture, they add, that are unexpected and will require ideas to be refined.*


Bold mine.

Neat map. Along with a bit of "unsettled" science.


----------



## iMouse

Someone mentioned today at The Lodge that the Universe is 50 million years older than first thought.

And here you provide me with the link. :clap:

Saves a broken nail. :lmao:


----------



## CubaMark

*The children's playground tiff on Capitol Hill is beginning to take effect... (i.e., sequester, budget cuts):*

*Sequester Cancels NASA Outreach*

_...it looks like it’s finally happened: the U.S. sequester – a “series of across-the-board cuts to government agencies totaling $1.2 trillion over 10 years” (CNN) — has finally hit NASA… right where it hurts, too: in public outreach and STEM programs.
In an internal memo issued on the evening of Friday, March 22, the Administration notes that “effective immediately, all education and public outreach activities should be suspended, pending further review. In terms of scope, this includes all public engagement and outreach events, programs, activities, and products developed and implemented by Headquarters, Mission Directorates, and Centers across the Agency, including all education and public outreach efforts conducted by programs and projects.”_​
(UniverseToday)


----------



## FeXL

Always been some debate surrounding the theory of an asteroid causing the K/T (the authors use the term Cretaceous-Paleogene (K-Pg), I guess I'm old school) extinction, including what appeared to be a paucity of carbon at the site. This is addressed in a new paper.

Asteroid likely caused global fires, which led to extinctions



> Robertson et al. show that the apparent lack of charcoal in the K-Pg boundary layer resulted from changes in sedimentation rates: When the charcoal data are corrected for the known changes in sedimentation rates, they exhibit an excess of charcoal, not a deficiency. They also show that the mass of soot that could have been released from the impact site itself is far too small to account for the observed soot in the K-Pg layer. In addition, they argue that since the physical models show that the radiant energy reaching the ground from the reentering ejecta would be sufficient to ignite tinder, it would thereby spark widespread fires. The authors also review other evidence for and against the firestorm hypothesis and conclude that all of the data can be explained in ways that are consistent with widespread fires.


----------



## screature

*Origin Of 'Mercury' Meteorite Still Puzzles Scientists*

Origin Of 'Mercury' Meteorite Still Puzzles Scientists












> A strange green rock discovered in Morocco last year was hailed by the press as the first meteorite from Mercury. But scientists who've been puzzling over the stone since then say the accumulating evidence may point in a different direction. Maybe, just maybe, they say, the 4.56-billion-year-old rock fell to Earth from the asteroid belt located between Mars and Jupiter.
> 
> If that's true, the rock is "still extremely interesting," says Tim McCoy, who curates the Smithsonian Museum of Natural History's collection of 35,000 meteorites. "[It] tells us something about the birth of the solar system, but not the birth of the innermost planet."
> 
> The olive green meteorite, flecked with bits of white and brown, first came to scientists' attention last year when a German collector, Stefan Ralew, saw the unusual stone in Morocco and shipped it off for analysis to Tony Irving, a geochemist and meteorite specialist affiliated with the University of Washington in Seattle. Irving routinely receives such packages from all over the world.
> 
> "From experience, I knew it was very unlikely to be an Earth rock," Irving says. "It wasn't from Mars, and if it was a meteorite, it was highly unusual." As it turns out, the rock was even weirder than it looked.
> 
> "The minerals were very low in iron," he says, "and most meteorites have more iron in their minerals than this." Irving's mind turned to the planet Mercury. New data had been coming in from NASA's Messenger spacecraft, which is orbiting Mercury. It revealed that Mercury's surface lacked iron.
> 
> "I think it was the Messenger data that I had recently studied and just sort of compared it, on a whim almost," Irving says. "[I was] quite amazed to find that some of the chemical features were a pretty close match."
> 
> He started to get excited. Every now and then, something big strikes a planet and knocks off a few chunks. Experts predict that some chunks of Mercury may have already made the 57-million-mile trip to Earth, but none have been found. This could be a piece. But Irving needed more evidence, so he packed up samples and sent them to colleagues around the country for further analysis.
> 
> One of the most exciting findings came from a colleague who had measured the magnetic field of one of the pieces. It was smaller than almost anything yet seen in the solar system.
> 
> "And it's very close to the present magnetic field of Mercury," Irving says. "Putting it all together, I could see that there was a possibility of proposing this Mercury idea."
> 
> And that's just what he did. This March, Irving presented his theory at the Lunar and Planetary Science Conference in Texas. But scientists at the meeting were more skeptical. In the audience was Shoshana Weider, a fellow at the Carnegie Institution of Washington, who works on the Messenger mission. Her first thought, when she heard that the rock might be from Mercury, was, "That would be nice." But she's not convinced.
> 
> "There was nothing that jumped out and said, 'No, this can't be from Mercury,' " she says, "but there were a few bits that didn't quite match with Mercury." For example, the rock lacks sulfur, while Mercury's surface is covered in it.
> 
> She's not the only one with doubts about the green rock. The Smithsonian's Tim McCoy has a problem with the rock's age.
> 
> "The meteorite is very, very old — 4.56 billion years old," he says. "So it's essentially formed at the same time as the birth of the planet, whereas Mercury is a huge, hot planet that probably wouldn't have cooled off enough to have solid rock 4.56 billion years ago."
> 
> McCoy has his own ideas about the meteorite's origins. He has another shiny metallic rock in his collection that, under the microscope, contains some crystals the same color as the Morocco specimen
> 
> That crystal is chromian diopside. It's the same mineral that gives Irving's meteorite its distinctive green color. And just like Irving's rock, this one is 4.56 billion years old. But it's not from Mercury; it's known to be from that asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter. McCoy says that maybe the new green meteorite came from the asteroid belt, too.
> 
> Irving says he won't be too upset if it turns out the meteorite came from somewhere else. "As far as I'm personally concerned, if this rock turns out to be not from there and we can find an alternative," he says, "that's just fine with me."
> 
> In the meantime, admirers of the little green rock will soon be able to own a piece. The German collector who sent Irving that first sample has several other fragments that he's planning to sell.


----------



## eMacMan

Love it when new light or in this case rain falls on Saturn.

Saturn's Dazzling Rings Make It 'Rain'


----------



## bryanc

*Try a science literacy quiz.*

Here's a very basic science knowledge quiz that you can complete in about 10 minutes.

I always find these sorts of things both fun and frustrating. I got 4 wrong, but I know for certain that two of my "wrong" answers are right (so I'm claiming 96% tptptptp). But two of my answers were genuinely wrong, and so I learned two new things by taking this short quiz.

Post your results; I'm curious as to how scientifically literate the people who post here are... I expect we'll do far better than the average. (No Googling... that's cheating :baby: ).


----------



## KC4

bryanc said:


> Here's a very basic science knowledge quiz that you can complete in about 10 minutes.
> 
> I always find these sorts of things both fun and frustrating. I got 4 wrong, but I know for certain that two of my "wrong" answers are right (so I'm claiming 96% tptptptp). But two of my answers were genuinely wrong, and so I learned two new things by taking this short quiz.
> 
> Post your results; I'm curious as to how scientifically literate the people who post here are... I expect we'll do far better than the average. (No Googling... that's cheating :baby: ).


OMG. I crashed and burned. Hahahahaa! 55% 
I couldn't even understand what was being asked on a couple questions and simply guessed on quite a few. 

Thanks though for providing the answer on one of them for me that I might not have known otherwise (from some of your postings in the Religion thread).


----------



## bryanc

As long as you didn't cheat, that's nothing to be ashamed of. One of the things that's both annoying and good about that quiz is that most of the questions give you an explanation of the answer, so you can learn as you go.

One of my students just took it and got 100% (while I was watching over their shoulder, so I know they didn't cheat). Now they're teasing me about my lack of general science knowledge


----------



## Dr.G.

I got 42 correct and 8 incorrect ............ mostly from the physics questions. Luckily, I remembered most of my biology, chemistry, astronomy and geology quite well (to my amazement) ............. and guessed well when it was a toss up. A very interesting test, bryanc.


----------



## bryanc

Well done. That definitely puts you in the 'well-informed' category. Unfortunately, as we've all heard, "it's not what you know, it's who you know."

Cheers


----------



## minstrel

Only one wrong. That's an ego boost!

Darn clouds!tptptptp


----------



## KC4

bryanc said:


> As long as you didn't cheat, that's nothing to be ashamed of.


Snort. 
I'd have to be an extremely lazy cheat to not cheat enough to at least score above average. 


bryanc said:


> One of the things that's both annoying and good about that quiz is that most of the questions give you an explanation of the answer, so you can learn as you go.


I like that it gives you the correct answers. I'm going to try the test again in a few days to see how much, if any, I retained.


----------



## Dr.G.

bryanc said:


> Well done. That definitely puts you in the 'well-informed' category. Unfortunately, as we've all heard, "it's not what you know, it's who you know."
> 
> Cheers


Well, I know you .............. and I started off university as a bio-chem major .......... and as a boy I loved astronomy and geology ........................ and I am a good guesser, at times.


----------



## bryanc

minstrel said:


> Darn clouds!tptptptp


Yeah, I wasn't certain about that one either... a lot of the questions are really about your ability to recall terminology. One of the ones I got wrong was the name for a particular type of triangle. 

{edit to add: BTW, I love the guitar in your avatar; a friend of mine had a big water-colour painting of that album cover on his wall that I always coveted.}


----------



## bryanc

KC4 said:


> I'd have to be an extremely lazy cheat to not cheat enough to at least score above average.


Sadly, my experience with cheaters is that they usually make their scores worse; I caught two kids copying off each other during a midterm this year, and when I was going through the expulsion process with them, I couldn't help but ask them "if you're going to copy, why not choose someone smarter than you to copy from?!?" Between the two of them, they managed to do substantially worse than either of them would've done by themselves (as well as getting expelled).


----------



## Sonal

38 correct, 12 wrong for a total of 76%.

Going to have to try this one on my husband and see how he does....


----------



## bryanc

Sonal said:


> 38 correct, 12 wrong for a total of 76%.


Well done. I've now had two of my students beat me with 100% each; I'm clearly getting old and dopy


----------



## Sonal

bryanc said:


> Well done. I've now had two of my students beat me with 100% each; I'm clearly getting old and dopy


Yes, well that math question you missed was EASY. beejacon


----------



## chimo

Got 42. It's been quite a while since I've touched most of these subjects.


----------



## Sonal

My husband the physicist got 49.... he lost one on the clouds. (He was hesitating between the right answer and another answer for long time, then chose wrong.)

As I also got that one wrong, I cannot point and laugh at him. *sigh*


----------



## eMacMan

46/50, but to be fair my biology background is zero even though I got one or two of those right.

Was surprised at how much I remembered from my Physics and Chemistry studies a very long time ago as I never really put that background to serious use.


----------



## Andrew Pratt

I scored in the low 70's. I could have done much better if I'd guessed better  I often got down to two answers and almost always picked the wrong one with my alternate being the correct answer. I did well on the bio and geo questions but physics was never my strong suit and there seemed to be a lot of them!


----------



## screature

Gave up as I kept getting "Script errors" within the first 10 questions which made it painfully slow... don't know what that is about.


----------



## Macfury

screature said:


> Gave up as I kept getting "Script errors" within the first 10 questions which made it painfully slow... don't know what that is about.


Me too. I kept getting asked if I wanted to disable the unresponsive script. I think it was related to the advertising that accompanied the science.


----------



## screature

Macfury said:


> Me too. I kept getting asked if I wanted to disable the unresponsive script. I think it was related to the advertising that accompanied the science.


That's exactly what was happening to me... funny thing I just installed a Java Script update from Apple yesterday.


----------



## eMacMan

As usual no issues with Camino, though there seemed to be an unneeded two step approach to the set-up.


----------



## FeXL

I remember this well.

Experience 18 minutes of world history, as if you were there, landing on the moon



> I still get chills and misty eyes watching this. For those of us that watched the Apollo 11 moon landing live on TV, we had to be content with the voices of Walter Cronkite and Wally Schirra along with simulated models and radio traffic. Here, thanks to this award winning new website, we can experience the landing as if we are in the cockpit of the LEM and listening in the live communications loop (both Air-to-Ground and Flight Director’s audio loop) from the beginning of the descent, to the touchdown, and the STAY/NO STAY decision making afterwards.
> 
> This website even keeps track of the pitch angle of the LEM from telemetry data, and tracks what console at Houston Mission Control is speaking. You can even watch the heart rate of Neil Armstrong.


A fun 18 minutes.


----------



## Dr.G.

FeXL said:


> I remember this well.
> 
> Experience 18 minutes of world history, as if you were there, landing on the moon
> 
> 
> 
> A fun 18 minutes.


I too remember it well. A great moment in the history of mankind. Paix, mon ami.


----------



## FeXL

Based on terran iron isotopes.

First Biological Evidence of a Supernova



> In fossil remnants of iron-loving bacteria, researchers of the Cluster of Excellence Origin and Structure of the Universe at the Technische Universitaet Muenchen (TUM), found a radioactive iron isotope that they trace back to a supernova in our cosmic neighborhood. This is the first proven biological signature of a starburst on our Earth. The age determination of the deep-drill core from the Pacific Ocean showed that the supernova must have occurred about 2.2 million years ago, roughly around the time when the modern human developed.


----------



## FeXL

New research on possible cause of cool climate during the Younger Dryas.



> Now, in one of the most comprehensive related investigations ever, the group has documented a wide distribution of microspherules widely distributed in a layer over 50 million square kilometers on four continents, including North America, including Arlington Canyon on Santa Rosa Island in the Channel Islands. This layer –– the Younger Dryas Boundary (YDB) layer –– also contains peak abundances of other exotic materials, including nanodiamonds and other unusual forms of carbon such as fullerenes, as well as melt-glass and iridium. This new evidence in support of the cosmic impact theory appeared recently in a paper in the _Proceedings of the National Academy of the Sciences_.


While I don't believe this answers everything, it is certainly food for thought.


----------



## FeXL

Cool (no pun intended). 

Researchers find 400 year old Ice Age plants in Arctic able to grow anew as glaciers retreat



> A team of researchers from the University of Alberta led by, Catherine La Farge, has found that mosses and liverworts covered by ice over 400 years ago and now exposed due to glacial melting, are able to start growing again. In their paper published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the team describes how carbon dating showed the plants to be from a time just prior to the Little Ice Age.


Amazing resiliency.


----------



## eMacMan

FeXL said:


> Cool (no pun intended).
> 
> Researchers find 400 year old Ice Age plants in Arctic able to grow anew as glaciers retreat
> 
> 
> 
> Amazing resiliency.


Also interesting proof that it has indeed been this warm in the not so distant past. Once again the cursed Medieval Warming Period and the Little Ice Age rear their ugly heads and eat the Mann hockey schtick.


----------



## FeXL

Successful malaria vaccine?

Breakthrough in battle against malaria as new vaccine proves 100 per cent effective against disease for the first time in history



> U.S. scientists have announced a significant breakthrough in the fight against malaria after a human trial of a new vaccine was 100 per cent effective against the disease for the first time in history.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Successful malaria vaccine?
> 
> Breakthrough in battle against malaria as new vaccine proves 100 per cent effective against disease for the first time in history


Thank goodness. Those bans on DDT cost a lot of people their lives.


----------



## CubaMark

For those with an interest in undersea exploration, there are a number of live streams from the NOAA Ocean Explorer (Okeanos), about 1200 metres down off the New England coast. Live commentary.

_*Details on Northeast U.S. Canyons Expedition 2013*

From July to August 2013, a team of scientists and technicians both at-sea and on shore will conduct exploratory investigations on the diversity and distribution of deep-sea habitats and marine life along the Northeast U.S. Canyons and at Mytilus Seamount, located within the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone. The 36-day expedition is composed of two cruise ‘legs.’_


----------



## pm-r

CubaMark said:


> For those with an interest in undersea exploration, there are a number of live streams from the NOAA Ocean Explorer (Okeanos), about 1200 metres down off the New England coast. Live commentary.
> 
> ...


And for those so interested there's also the Neptune Project just off Vancouver Island:

NEPTUNE Canada: Home


----------



## FeXL

Revealed: How Mars Lost Its Atmosphere



> Mars’ modern atmosphere is only 1% the density of Earth‘s, but the planet’s watery phase is believed to have lasted for the first billion of its 4.5 billion years, which means its air must have been around that long too. But things were never likely to stay that way. Mars has only half Earth’s diameter, 11% its mass and 38% its gravity, making it easy for upper layers of the original atmosphere to have boiled away into the vacuum of space and been blasted out by meteor hits. And that cycle would build on itself: the thinner the air became, the easier it would be for space rocks to hit the ground, unleashing still more explosive energy and, in effect, blowing still more holes in the sky.


----------



## FeXL

Scientists confirm existence of largest single volcano on Earth – Massive underwater volcano rivals biggest in solar system



> Now, scientists have confirmed that the northwest Pacific is home to a real-life giant of a different type: the largest single volcano yet documented on Earth.
> 
> Covering an area roughly equivalent to the British Isles or the State of New Mexico, Tamu Massif is nearly as big as the giant volcanoes of Mars, placing it among the largest in the solar system.


----------



## brookeandy

In my opinion science related threads is related to new creative abilities. Scientific experiments can change the way to new life styles.


----------



## groovetube

looks like someone's gearing up for enough posts for a spam orgy.

Noble cause.


----------



## FeXL

Let's do some grade school math, shall we? I've brought in my 10 year old to help with the calculations. Thank you, sweetheart.

brookeandy has a start month of August. Now, we're not sure of the exact day but, by convention, let's assume it was August 31. Today is Sep 14 and brookeandy shows 9 posts in 14 days. That's 0.64 posts/day.

groovetube has a start month of January, by the same convention let's make it January 31. groovetube currently has 14,024 posts in ~3904 days ((10 years x 365 days/yr) + (8 months x 30 days/month) + 14 days in Sep). That's 3.59 posts/day.

Just who is orgy spamming whom, here?

Noble, indeed...beejacon


----------



## SINC

Is that noble or a troll nibble?


----------



## FeXL

Either way it's the pot calling the kettle black...


----------



## FeXL

A rather depressing story.

A window into academia – via a resignation letter



> Dear EPFL,
> I am writing to state that, after four years of hard but enjoyable PhD work at this school, I am planning to quit my thesis in January, just a few months shy of completion. Originally, this was a letter that was intended only for my advisors. However, as I prepared to write it I realized that the message here may be pertinent to anyone involved in research across the entire EPFL, and so have extended its range just a bit.


Is this what post-modern science has devolved into?

The unfortunate outcome of this resignation is that someone who actually appears to be able to do something about the problem is about to become an over-qualified burger flipper...


----------



## FeXL

Couple of articles on a black hole explosion likely seen by early humans.

Early humans saw black hole light in the night sky



> Some 2 million years ago, around the time our ancestors were learning to walk upright, a light appeared in the night sky, rivalling the moon for brightness and size. But it was more fuzzball than orb. The glow came from the supermassive black hole at our galaxy's heart suddenly exploding into life.


The Dragon Awakens: Colossal Explosion from Supermassive Black Hole at Centre of Galaxy Revealed



> Two million years ago, a supermassive black hole at the heart of our galaxy erupted in an explosion so immensely powerful that it lit up a cloud 200,000 light years away, a team of researchers led by the University of Sydney has revealed.


----------



## FeXL

If legit, it's a big step.

Nuclear Fusion Has Broken Even For the First Time Ever



> Researchers at the National Ignition Facility in Livermore, California, have been conducting fusion experiments for some time. Using 192 beams from the world's most powerful laser, they heat and compress a small pellet of hydrogen fuel until nuclear fusion reactions take place. Usually, they have to dump more power in using the lasers than they manage to create from the fusion reaction.


----------



## FeXL

While this applies in a big way to climate "science", unfortunately, it's not limited to just that field...

How science goes wrong



> Too many of the findings that fill the academic ether are the result of shoddy experiments or poor analysis (see article). A rule of thumb among biotechnology venture-capitalists is that half of published research cannot be replicated. Even that may be optimistic. Last year researchers at one biotech firm, Amgen, found they could reproduce just six of 53 “landmark” studies in cancer research. Earlier, a group at Bayer, a drug company, managed to repeat just a quarter of 67 similarly important papers. A leading computer scientist frets that three-quarters of papers in his subfield are bunk. In 2000-10 roughly 80,000 patients took part in clinical trials based on research that was later retracted because of mistakes or improprieties.


----------



## FeXL

Have a couple of posts here on poor science.

First, Willis talks about proper peer-review procedure in _Science_, whereby the paper's authors are supposed to furnish all data & computer code along with the submitted paper, in order to have the results verified by anyone with the desire.

Journals Not Enforcing Their Policies



> I’ve written before about the data and code archiving policies of the journal Science, and how they are not enforced for certain favored papers. In this regard, consider the case of Pinsky et al. This was a study that said that fishes were moving in the direction of the “climate velocity”. As a fisherman, I’m always interested in such studies. Their results appeared too regular to me, and I wanted to check their work. However, I found that neither their data nor their code was available.


Next, we have a most interesting story about a gentleman who, three weeks into his Master's program, begins to question the math in an oft-cited psychological paper authored by two prominent scientists.

The link to the story is inside the below link. The first comment also refers to a "fake" paper submitted by Sokal, just to see if it would pass peer-review. It did. There is also another link in the same comment to another article on replicability in science.

Nick Brown Smelled BS



> For me, the real question is not about Fredrickson or Losada or Seligman," Sokal says. "It's about the whole community. Why is it that no one before Nick-and I mean Nick was a first semester part-time Master's student, at, let's be honest, a fairly obcsure university in London who has no particular training in mathematics-why is it that no one realized this stuff was bull****? Where were all the supposed experts?"
> 
> "Is it really true that _no one_ saw through this," he asks, "in an article that was cited 350 times, in a field which touts itself as being so scientific?"


Thoughts?


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Thoughts?


The peer review process is actually a peer approval process. To dig through the paper and render it unpublishable would have been considered reprehensible and unmutual.


----------



## FeXL

I find this fascinating...

Bioengineer: the heart is one of the easiest organs to bioprint, we'll do it in a decade



> A team of cardiovascular scientists has announced it will be able to 3D print a whole heart from the recipients' own cells within a decade.
> 
> "America put a man on the Moon in less than a decade. I said a full decade to provide some wiggle room," Stuart K Williams told Wired.co.uk.


----------



## CubaMark

(how the heck do you delete duplicate posts?)


----------



## CubaMark

*Quantum Light Harvesting Hints At Entirely New Form of Computing*

_Light harvesting in plants and bacteria cannot be properly explained by classical processes or by quantum ones. Now complexity theorists say the answer is a delicate interplay of both, an idea that could transform computation.

Physicists have long known that plants and bacteria convert light into chemical energy in a way that is hugely efficient. But only in recent years have they discovered that the molecular machines behind this process rely on quantum mechanics to do the job.

That’s a big surprise because of the temperatures involved. Quantum states are highly fragile—sneeze and they disappear in a puff of smoke. Physicists can maintain these states for some time in carefully controlled environments at low temperature but nobody can explain how it can be possible in the warm wet environments inside living things.

Today, Gabor Vattay at Eotvos University in Budapest and Stuart Kauffman at the University of Vermont in Burlington have the answer. They say the processes behind light harvesting are a special blend of the quantum and the classical. And that this delicate mix represents an entirely new form of computing that nature might exploit in other systems too._​
(MIT Technology Review via Cryptogon)


----------



## FeXL

This could just as easily been posted in the GHG thread.

Has science lost its way?



> _“The journals want the papers that make the sexiest claims. And scientists believe that the way you succeed is having splashy papers in Science or Nature — it’s not bad for them if a paper turns out to be wrong, if it’s gotten a lot of attention.”_ – Michael Eisen​


More:



> _*Earlier this month, Science published a piece by journalist John Bohannon about what happened when he sent a spoof paper with flaws that could have been noticed by a high school chemistry student to 304 open-access chemistry journals (those that charge researchers to publish their papers, but make them available for free). It was accepted by more than half of them.*
> 
> One that didn’t bite was PloS One, an online open-access journal sponsored by the Public Library of Science, which Eisen co-founded. In fact, PloS One was among the few journals that identified the fake paper’s methodological and ethical flaws._​


Bold mine.

Judith notes:



> And finally, I am a big fan Eisen’s models for open access publishing and extended peer review, and I am not a fan of the Nature/Science model with its press releases and press embargoes. Eisen’s model provides the right incentive structure for scientists, whereas the Nature/Science model IMO does not.


Good read. I'd recommend avoiding the comments on this one...


----------



## CubaMark

*Scientists discover double meaning in genetic code*



> Scientists have discovered a second code hiding within DNA. This second code contains information that changes how scientists read the instructions contained in DNA and interpret mutations to make sense of health and disease.





> Since the genetic code was deciphered in the 1960s, scientists have assumed that it was used exclusively to write information about proteins. UW scientists were stunned to discover that genomes use the genetic code to write two separate languages. One describes how proteins are made, and the other instructs the cell on how genes are controlled. One language is written on top of the other, which is why the second language remained hidden for so long.
> 
> “For over 40 years we have assumed that DNA changes affecting the genetic code solely impact how proteins are made,” said Stamatoyannopoulos. “Now we know that this basic assumption about reading the human genome missed half of the picture. These new findings highlight that DNA is an incredibly powerful information storage device, which nature has fully exploited in unexpected ways.”


(University of Washington)


----------



## rgray

Here is a finding that is new to me. Given the worldwide epidemic of obesity and known relationship between obesity and diabetes this is a very scary research note. Further nuances as diabetes is over represented in aboriginal populations.

The relationship has some hints about possible curative strategies but nothing solid.

Are Alzheimer's and diabetes the same disease?


----------



## MazterCBlazter

+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## groovetube

saw this today, which gave me a chuckle. All to often, especially on say Facebook, you see a lot of non scientists giving pretty "expert" opinions, well until they encounter a real scientist, someone who actually knows a thing or two... 

Angry scientist finds an uneducated internet comment and delivers an epic response... - quickmeme


----------



## Macfury

It's amusing, but is there a real scientist behind that post?


----------



## screature

Macfury said:


> It's amusing, but is there a real scientist behind that post?


He says he is an immunologist.


----------



## Macfury

screature said:


> He says he is an immunologist.


The point is well taken, but I'm curious about who authored it. I followed it back a ways to last year, but could not find an originator.


----------



## FeXL

Very unfortunate.


Scientists losing data at a rapid rate



> In their parents' attic, in boxes in the garage, or stored on now-defunct floppy disks — these are just some of the inaccessible places in which scientists have admitted to keeping their old research data. Such practices mean that data are being lost to science at a rapid rate, a study has now found.
> 
> The authors of the study, which is published today in Current Biology1, looked for the data behind 516 ecology papers published between 1991 and 2011. The researchers selected studies that involved measuring characteristics associated with the size and form of plants and animals, something that has been done in the same way for decades. By contacting the authors of the papers, they found that, whereas data for almost all studies published just two years ago were still accessible, the chance of them being so fell by 17% per year. Availability dropped to as little as 20% for research from the early 1990s.


----------



## screature

Macfury said:


> The point is well taken, but I'm curious about who authored it. I followed it back a ways to last year, but could not find an originator.


On the internet anyone can ascribe credentials to themselves that may or may not exist.

That you took the time and did not to take his words at face value shows reasonable due diligence on your part. 

If only more people could do the same and take a similar amount of time to do research/due diligence...


----------



## FeXL

Further on faulty peer-review.

Gibberish Research Paper Quotes My Cousin Vinny, Tells The Reader (Repeatedly) The Paper Is A Fraud... Gets Accepted At Academic Conference



> Via the always excellent Retraction Watch, we learn of the story of Navin Kabra, an entrepreneur in India who was realizing that the requirement placed on many students in India that they must get two papers "published" at various conferences was really just a huge scam to get students to pay the fees for the submissions and the conferences. In order to expose all of this, he created two gibberish papers, mostly using the infamous SCIgen app which generates gibberish scientific sounding text. Both papers were accepted, and he paid the fees to have one "published." You can read Kabra's astounding account of all of this on his own blog, or read the incredible paper that was both accepted and published by the conference.


More:



> Back to the paper, though. In the very second paragraph the paper straight out tells the reader that it's a gibberish paper generated by SCIgen:
> 
> _As is clear from the title of this paper, this paper deals with the entertainment industry. So, we do provide entertainment in this paper. So, if you are reading this paper for entertainment, we suggest a heuristic that will allow you to read this paper efficiently. You should read any paragraph that starts with the first 4 words in bold and italics – those have been written by the author in painstaking detail. *However, if a paragraph does not start with bold and italics, feel free to skip it because it is gibberish auto-generated by the good folks at SCIGen.*_​


All emphasis from the original.

Just shaking my head...


----------



## FeXL

Very interesting.

Researchers Are Making A 3D Printer That Can Build A House In 24 Hours



> At The University of Southern California, Professor Behrokh Khoshnevis has built a colossal 3D printer that can build a house in 24 hours. Khoshnevis's robot comes equipped with a nozzle that spews out concrete and can build a home based on a set computer pattern.
> 
> We first saw this on MSN.com. The technology, known as Contour Crafting, could completely revolutionize the construction industry.


There's a video illustrating how it works.


----------



## FeXL

Fruit fly guy wrong. Again...

David Suzuki ‘regrets’ claim that another Fukushima disaster would require mass evacuations in North America



> Three months after making the wildly overblown claim that a second nuclear emergency at Japan’s Fukushima nuclear plant would require the evacuation of the North American West Coast, environmentalist David Suzuki said he “regrets” the comments.
> 
> Nevertheless, the Nature of Things host did not seem to go so far as to renege the claim, which has baffled nuclear scientists.


----------



## MacDoc

Well so are you about AGW so be pals. 

Until you face up to reality on climate change anything you post about science becomes a laughing matter as it says you are dishonest about scientific method. 

Same kind of *Caution to Reader* that some of your fav deniers share.


----------



## FeXL

MacDoc said:


> Well so are you about AGW so be pals.
> 
> Until you face up to reality on climate change anything you post about science becomes a laughing matter as it says you are dishonest about scientific method.
> 
> Same kind of *Caution to Reader* that some of your fav deniers share.


First off, Suzuki calling for an evacuation of the west coast wasn't based on anything scientific. It was head up his ass hyperbole, something you should be intimately familiar with. Period.

Second, do you really want to discuss this? Or are you merely getting your empty pot shots in from the side? If you are really interested in discussing this, then let's find some common ground, a good starting point, by defining a few terms.

1. In a short paragraph, couple of sentences or so, give me a definition of the scientific method.

2. Also in a short paragraph, list for me the hypothesis of Global Warming.

That's a starting point.

Finally, in a short paragraph (point form is fine), list for me all the empirical evidence that falls within the terms you laid out in 1) that defends the hypothesis you defined in 2).

If you are truly interested in debate, you'll engage me and answer these questions. 

Otherwise, you're just being your normal asshat self & F off...


----------



## FeXL

Grow a new brain: First steps to lab-made grey matter



> In the brain, new neural cells grow in a complex and specialised matrix of proteins. This matrix is so important that damaged nerve cells don't regenerate without it. But its complexity is difficult to reproduce. To try to get round this problem, Paolo Macchiarini and Silvia Baiguera at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, Sweden, and colleagues combined a scaffold made from gelatin with a tiny amount of rat brain tissue that had already had its cells removed. This "decellularised" tissue, they hoped, would provide enough of the crucial biochemical cues to enable seeded cells to develop as they would in the brain.
> 
> When the team added mesenchymal stem cells – taken from another rat's bone marrow – to the mix, they found evidence that the stem cells had started to develop into neural cells


----------



## FeXL

Small asteroid slams into Mars, impact captured by orbiter



> A dramatic, fresh impact crater dominates this image taken by the High Resolution Imaging Science Experiment (HiRISE) camera on NASA’s Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter on Nov. 19, 2013. Researchers used HiRISE to examine this site because the orbiter’s Context Camera had revealed a change in appearance here between observations in July 2010 and May 2012, bracketing the formation of the crater between those observations.


----------



## FeXL

On Peer Review.

The peer review game



> There is an interesting letter in Nature this week. In-Uck Park of the University of Bristol and his colleagues have adopted something of a game-theoretic approach to try to understand aspects of the peer review process


Good read.


----------



## Dr.G.

Scientists tell us that the universe is made up of protons, neurons and electrons .................... but they forgot to mention the morons.


----------



## FeXL

On the Bell Curve & business, worker performance.

The Myth of the Bell Curve



> There is a long standing belief in business that people performance follows the *Bell Curve* (also called the Normal Distribution). This belief has been embedded in many business practices: performance appraisals, compensation models, and even how we get graded in school. (_Remember "grading by the curve?"_)
> 
> Research shows that this statistical model, while easy to understand, does not accurately reflect the way people perform. As a result, HR departments and business leaders inadvertently create agonizing problems with employee performance and happiness.


Emphasis from the link.

Good read.


----------



## rgray

FeXL said:


> On the Bell Curve & business, worker performance.
> 
> The Myth of the Bell Curve
> 
> 
> 
> Emphasis from the link.
> 
> Good read.


Does nobody else recognize that this is ordinary "normal" data mapped against a slightly unusual axes?????? It is unclear what the abscissa variable in fact measures because it cannot be the traditional zero at the intersection with the ordinate, increasing to the right - that would make nonsense of the descriptors to the left and right over the curve. 

If this is the calibre of the "professional" network (as Linkedin alleges _themselves_ to be) then I shall continue to refuse all invites. It is an obvious joke. Not a very good one either! 

Caveat: I have been lecturing in *Statistics* at 2 major Canadian universities for over 25 years... In that time every single class has mapped out as approximately normal


----------



## Macfury

rgray said:


> Does nobody else recognize that this is ordinary "normal" data mapped against a slightly unusual axes??????


Yes, I read it through and noticed it was very similar to the Bell curve. The point made by the author is a good one-that forcing data onto the Bell curve to achieve expected outcomes isn't helpful. However, his new curve doesn't demonstrate why the Bell Curve is wrong--it enforces it.

I read some of the comments down below and was stunned by their vapidity. There was a lot of talk about firing "hyper-performers" in one's organization because they either intimidate other workers, or make them lazy. Instead, they want to take a bunch of average workers and make them all perform consistently better. I would take a hyper-performer over the likelihood that any average person I hire might perform slightly better over time. Hell, give me a team of hyper-performers!


----------



## CubaMark

*PLOS' New Data Policy: Public Access to Data - EveryONE*

_Access to research results, immediately and800px-Open_Data_stickers without restriction, has always been at the heart of PLOS’ mission and the wider Open Access movement. However, without similar access to the data underlying the findings, the article can be of limited use. For this reason, PLOS has always required that authors make their data available to other academic researchers who wish to replicate, reanalyze, or build upon the findings published in our journals.

In an effort to increase access to this data, we are now revising our data-sharing policy for all PLOS journals: authors must make all data publicly available, without restriction, immediately upon publication of the article. Beginning March 3rd, 2014, all authors who submit to a PLOS journal will be asked to provide a Data Availability Statement, describing where and how others can access each dataset that underlies the findings. This Data Availability Statement will be published on the first page of each article._

(PLoS)


----------



## FeXL

CubaMark said:


> *PLOS' New Data Policy: Public Access to Data - EveryONE*


Great news.


----------



## FeXL

Further on the sorry state of Peer Review.

Busted: 120 gibberish science papers withdrawn — so much for “peer review



> At least 120 computer generated nonsense papers have been reviewed and published in publications of the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE) and Springer, as well as conference proceedings. The fakes have just been discovered by a French researcher and are being withdrawn.
> 
> Cyril Labbé found a way to spot artificially-generated science papers, and published it his website and lo, the fakes turned up en masse. In the past, pretend papers have turned up in open access journals–this time the fake papers appeared in subscription based journals. But the man who caught the fakes says he cannot be sure he’s caught them all, because he couldn’t check all the papers behind paywalls.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Further on the sorry state of Peer Review.
> 
> Busted: 120 gibberish science papers withdrawn — so much for “peer review


As the departed bryanc used to say, the fact that these papers were caught so many yeats later is poof that peer review works!!


----------



## FeXL

Scientists Suspect Oceans of Water Deep Inside the Earth.



> It has everyone in the scientific community buzzing and it’s something right out of fiction, specifically Jules Verne’s “Journey to the Centre of the Earth”, which suddenly seems more realistic.
> 
> Scientists have what they believe to be proof that vast water reservoirs of oceans lie deep inside the Earth, just as Verne described in his famous novel.


----------



## FeXL

This could easily have fit in the GHG thread.

What Defines A Scientist?

This comment sums it for me:



> I have a dream that one day we will be judged not by the letters on our diplomas but by the content of our arguments.


Initials behind names don't impress me. The ability to defend a position clearly & with empirical evidence does...


----------



## CubaMark

*This is just too good... a few examples here, many more at the site...*

Spurious Correlations


























(TylerVigen.com)


----------



## Macfury

I've often wondered how the ski resorts are so quick to calculate bedsheet strangulation totals.


----------



## CubaMark

Macfury said:


> I've often wondered how the ski resorts are so quick to calculate bedsheet strangulation totals.


I'm still slack-jawed contemplating the number of deaths in the US resulting from bedsheet strangulation... does it note if those are accidental / suicides / murders? I mean... if they're all accidental, that's a helluvalot of reckless sleepers out there!


----------



## FeXL

So, there are some citizen scientists who are attempting to inject some life into an unused satellite.

NASA Signs Agreement with Citizen Scientists Attempting to Communicate with Old Spacecraft



> Readers may recall The International Sun-Earth Explorer (ISEE-3) Reboot Project, Bringing an Old Bird Back to the Earth, and Back to Life. Congratulations to Dennis Wingo and the ISEE-3 team on successfully navigating the government bureaucracy, a far more difficult task than navigating an old satellite through space.
> 
> RELEASE: 14-144 NASA has given a green light to a group of citizen scientists attempting to breathe new scientific life into a more than 35-year old agency spacecraft.


However, I did LOL at this comment:



> “NASA Signs Agreement with Citizen Scientists…”
> ————
> Yeah it’s “Citizen Scientists” when they want help, “Climate Deniers” otherwise.


----------



## FeXL

I guess I have mixed feeling about this. On one hand, it's an interesting exercise in what man is actually capable of. On the other, shouldn't we just leave sleeping mammoths lie...

The Plan to Turn Elephants Into Woolly Mammoths Is Already Underway



> There's a mission to bring back one of history's most famous animals, it's already underway, and it's closer to becoming a reality than even some of the most forward-looking minds think it is.


----------



## Macfury

Go for it!


----------



## FeXL

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or serious.


----------



## FeXL

Interesting read on peer review.

Newton, Einstein, Watson and Crick, were not peer reviewed



> Peer review by anonymous unpaid reviewers is not a part of the Scientific Method.
> 
> Once upon a time the fate of a scientific paper was dependent on an Editor whose reputation depended on making sound decisions about what to publish. Modern science shifted responsibility from a single identifiable editor to an anonymous “committee”. What could possibly go wrong?


----------



## FeXL

Progress in cancer treatment?

A first: one patient’s widespread cancer treated with an engineered virus



> *This is another example of why I’m so passionate about getting research money out of dead-end efforts to change the weather and into medical research.* The extraordinary news broke last week that the Mayo Clinic had used a genetically modified virus to cure treat one woman of metastasized and widely spread cancer – specifically myeloma. There are a lot of caveats, this research is quite risky, and it doesn’t apply to most people or most cancers, it is a proof of principle.


M'bold.

Yup...


----------



## FeXL

Success!

Citizen astronomers and engineers get control of an old satellite from 1978



> The ISEE-3 Reboot Project is pleased to announce that our team has established two-way communication with the ISEE-3 spacecraft and has begun commanding it to perform specific functions. Over the coming days and weeks our team will make an assessment of the spacecraft’s overall health and refine the techniques required to fire its engines and bring it back to an orbit near Earth.


Pretty amazing.


----------



## CubaMark

*New Type Of Computer Capable Of Calculating 640TBs Of Data In One Billionth Of A Second, Could Revolutionize Computing*



_HP’s latest invention that could revolutionize the computing world. According to HP, The Machine is not a server, workstation, PC, device or phone but an amalgamation of all these things. It’s designed to be able to cope with the masses of data produced from the Internet of Things, which is the concept of a future network designed to connect a variety of objects and gadgets.

In order to handle this flurry of information it uses clusters of specialized cores as opposed to a small number of generalized cores. The whole thing is connected together using silicon photonics instead of traditional copper wires, boosting the speed of the system whilst reducing energy requirements. Furthermore, the technology features memristors which are resistors that are able to store information even after power loss.

The result is a system six times more powerful than existing servers that requires eighty times less energy. According to HP, The Machine can manage 160 petabytes of data in a mere 250 nanoseconds. And, what’s more, this isn’t just for huge supercomputers- it could be used in smaller devices such as smartphones and laptops. During a keynote speech given at Discover, chief technology officer Martin Fink explained that if the technology was scaled down, smartphones could be fabricated with 100 terabytes of memory.

HP envisages a variety of future applications for this technology in numerous different settings, from business to medicine. For example, it could be possible for doctors to compare your symptoms or DNA with patients across the globe in an instant and without breaching privacy, improving health outcomes.

While this is an exciting development, unfortunately for us HP isn’t expecting to have samples until 2015 and the first devices equipped with The Machine won’t surface until 2018._

(IFLscience)


----------



## SINC

Its hard to know how much impact this would have. Computers today are so fast to me, that I am not sure one would notice any speed increase in the normal course of use, although I'm sure it would speed up processing of data in certain circumstances.


----------



## FeXL

I found this pretty amazing. 56,000 km in two years!

Great White Shark Lydia travels 56,000 km in two years: Her habitat ‘spans the entire North Atlantic ocean’



> Since she was tagged with a locator device off Jacksonville, Fla., on March 3, 2013, Lydia has travelled more than 56,000 kilometres over the mid-Atlantic ridge toward Europe and western Africa then back again.
> 
> She appears to be navigating an uncannily accurate pattern that had her making a beeline for the Florida coast almost exactly two years to the day she was tagged. In both years she swam from the southeastern United States up to the waters off Newfoundland before heading out into the open North Atlantic.


----------



## FeXL

Barring the obligatory nod to global warming to ensure funding, this sounds interesting.

Major advance in artificial photosynthesis poses win/win for the environment



> A potentially game-changing breakthrough in artificial photosynthesis has been achieved with the development of a system that can capture carbon dioxide emissions before they are vented into the atmosphere and then, powered by solar energy, convert that carbon dioxide into valuable chemical products, including biodegradable plastics, pharmaceutical drugs and even liquid fuels.


----------



## Macfury

Great. Perhaps they can make useful products while incidentally relieving the pants-crapping fear of the ninnies who who have nightmares about global warming.



FeXL said:


> Barring the obligatory nod to global warming to ensure funding, this sounds interesting.
> 
> Major advance in artificial photosynthesis poses win/win for the environment


----------



## FeXL

On the positive side, I hear Depends sales are on the upswing... 



Macfury said:


> Great. Perhaps they can make useful products while incidentally relieving the pants-crapping fear of the ninnies who who have nightmares about global warming.


----------



## FeXL

This sounds interesting. And, BTW, the kind of research that NASA should actually be working on instead of this global warming crap...

Nasa says EmDrive does work and it may have also created a Star Trek warp drive



> Nasa has been testing a highly controversial electromagnetic space propulsion technology called EmDrive and has found evidence that it may indeed work, and along the way, might even have made a sci-fi concept possible.


----------



## screature

FeXL said:


> This sounds interesting. And, BTW, the kind of research that NASA should actually be working on instead of this global warming crap...
> 
> Nasa says EmDrive does work and it may have also created a Star Trek warp drive


I saw that today as well. Interesting.


----------



## FeXL

Very interesting.

First warm-blooded fish identified



> In a discovery that defies conventional biology, a big fish that lives deep in the Pacific Ocean has been found to be warm blooded, like humans, other mammals and birds.
> 
> Researchers from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) determined that unlike other fish, opah generate heat as they swim and distribute the warmth throughout their entire disc-shaped bodies by special blood vessels. Special "counter-current heat exchangers" in their gills minimize heat loss, allowing the deepwater predators to keep their bodies several degrees above the water temperature 250 feet down.


----------



## screature

Yep I saw that the other day.

They have been catching them for some time now and yet they haven't realized this until now.

I think this could potentially be a significant realization/discovery.


----------



## FeXL

Interesting.

HIV's Sweet Tooth Is Its Downfall



> HIV has a voracious sweet tooth, which turns out to be its Achilles’ heel, reports a new study from Northwestern Medicine and Vanderbilt University.
> 
> After the virus invades an activated immune cell, it craves sugar and nutrients from the cell to replicate and fuel its wild growth throughout the body.
> 
> Scientists discovered the switch that turns on the immune cell’s abundant sugar and nutrient pipeline. Then they blocked the switch with an experimental compound, shutting down the pipeline, and, thereby, starving HIV to death. The virus was unable to replicate in human cells in vitro.


Further:



> The discovery may have applications in treating cancer, which also has an immense appetite for sugar and other nutrients in the cell, which it needs to grow and spread.


----------



## CubaMark

*Plasma tubes in the sky: Cleo Loi proves existence of phenomenon*



AN AUSTRALIAN scientist has discovered that giant, invisible, moving plasma tubes fill the skies above Earth.

It’s a finding that was initially met with a considerable degree of scepticism within the field of astrophysics, but a University of Sydney undergraduate student Cleo Loi, 23, has proven that the phenomenon exists.

By using a radio telescope in the West Australian outback to see space in 3D, Ms Loi has proven that the Earth’s atmosphere is embedded with these strangely shaped, tubular plasma structures. The complex, multilayered ducts are created by the atmosphere being ionised by sunlight.

“For over 60 years, scientists believed these structures existed, but by imaging them for the first time, we’ve provided visual evidence that they are really there,” said Ms Loi, of the Australia Research Council Centre of Excellence for All-sky Astrophysics (CAASTRO).

“We measured their position to be about 600km above the ground, in the upper ionosphere, and they appear to be continuing upwards into the plasmasphere.

“This is around where the neutral atmosphere ends, and we are transitioning to the plasma of outer space.

“We saw a striking pattern in the sky where stripes of high-density plasma neatly alternated with stripes of low-density plasma. This pattern drifted slowly and aligned beautifully with the Earth’s magnetic field lines, like aurorae.

“We realised we may be onto something big.”​
(News.com.au)

*PS:* _Let's take a moment to recognize those artists, whose 'impressions' help us all to understand pretty esoteric stuff._ :clap:


----------



## SINC

How cool is that? Thanks for the post CM!


----------



## Macfury

A big chunk of plasma fell on my lawn the other day and nobody believed me.


----------



## FeXL

Researchers Find Textbook-Altering Link Between Brain, Immune System



> In a stunning discovery that overturns decades of textbook teaching, researchers at the University of Virginia School of Medicine have determined that the brain is directly connected to the immune system by vessels previously thought not to exist.
> 
> That such vessels could have escaped detection when the lymphatic system has been so thoroughly mapped throughout the body is surprising on its own, but the true significance of the discovery lies in the effects it could have on the study and treatment of neurological diseases ranging from autism to Alzheimer’s disease to multiple sclerosis.


Interesting that we can still discover new things about the human body.


----------



## eMacMan

FeXL said:


> Researchers Find Textbook-Altering Link Between Brain, Immune System
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting that we can still discover new things about the human body.


Dam I was sure the science had long since been settled by a 97% consensus.


----------



## Macfury

eMacMan said:


> Dam I was sure the science had long since been settled by a 97% consensus.


Were you a Brain Immune Denier?


----------



## screature

Macfury said:


> A big chunk of plasma fell on my lawn the other day and nobody believed me.


Why would they until now?


----------



## screature

FeXL said:


> Researchers Find Textbook-Altering Link Between Brain, Immune System
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting that we can still discover new things about the human body.
> 
> 
> 
> *
> Interesting that we can still discover new things about the human body.*
Click to expand...

...and mind and brain...

Interesting yes, surprising no. There is just SO much that we do not know.

Interesting discovery though, hopefully it will lead to some tangible results.

Thanks for sharing.


----------



## macintosh doctor

20-years-old Student Develops an Ocean Cleanup Machine That Could Clean The Oceans in 5 Years |Interesting Engineering

Young minds are amazing, I wish this 20 yr old student great success.. He plans to clean up the oceans in 5 years.


----------



## FeXL

Title snark notwithstanding, another _excellent_ article.

Basically, the system designed to monitor nuclear exposions worldwide is being used for a plethora of other uses.

I wonder if the global ear can ‘hear’ climate change



> From earthquakes in Nepal to volcanic eruptions in Chile, from meteors crashing to Earth to the songs of migrating whales in the Indian Ocean, The Global Ear hears all.
> ADVERTISEMENT
> 
> This universal system of looking, listening and sniffing the Earth is the work of an international organization, the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization or CTBTO.


Very cool!

First comment:



> Proper science. Look, then analyse. Then make predictions and look again.


Ed Zachery...


----------



## FeXL

Original article Jan 21, 2015.

Discovery: Fish Live beneath Antarctica



> Stunned researchers in Antarctica have discovered fish and other aquatic animals living in perpetual darkness and cold, beneath a roof of ice 740 meters thick. The animals inhabit a wedge of seawater only 10 meters deep, sealed between the ice above and a barren, rocky seafloor below—a location so remote and hostile the many scientists expected to find nothing but scant microbial life.


Very interesting.


----------



## machspeed5

FeXL said:


> Original article Jan 21, 2015.
> 
> Discovery: Fish Live beneath Antarctica


Whoa! I'm amazed! So interesting!

If you're into that, you must be spellbound by NASA's recent affirmation that they've moved their Europa orbiter mission from conceptual to developmental stage, and apparently things will launch sometime in the 2020's.

[Europa is a moon of Jupiter covered by a blanket of ice, miles deep, that could be harbouring a liquid ocean underneath, with tantalizing possibilities for alien life. (most likely microbial if any) One of our solar system's most likely candidates for alien life.]


----------



## Macfury

Drill, baby, drill!



machspeed5 said:


> Europa is a moon of Jupiter covered by a blanket of ice, miles deep, that could be harbouring a liquid ocean underneath, with tantalizing possibilities for alien life. (most likely microbial if any)...


----------



## CubaMark

machspeed5 said:


> [Europa is a moon of Jupiter covered by a blanket of ice, miles deep, that could be harbouring a liquid ocean underneath, with tantalizing possibilities for alien life. (most likely microbial if any) One of our solar system's most likely candidates for alien life.]


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbw9hlBnG74


----------



## Macfury

I saw that one, CM!


----------



## CubaMark

An odd flick. It's a pretty good straight-up, science-based spaceflight & exploration docu.... uh... film. Until they get to the ice, and it becomes an unexpected horror flick. Still, very much worth a watch.


----------



## Macfury

CubaMark said:


> An odd flick. It's a pretty good straight-up, science-based spaceflight & exploration docu.... uh... film. Until they get to the ice, and it becomes an unexpected horror flick. Still, very much worth a watch.


I liked its unabashedness regarding the honour of risk and exploration. Clearly lower budget but it looked very rich.


----------



## machspeed5

yea, i'm not a fan of horror flicks personally, but I agree it does look somewhat lower budget, and rather simple in scope. what could have been!


----------



## FeXL

So, as an earth sciences kind of guy, I find this very interesting.

Younger Dryas cooling event said to be comet related



> At the end of the Pleistocene period, approximately 12,800 years ago* — give or take a few centuries — a cosmic impact triggered an abrupt cooling episode that earth scientists refer to as the Younger Dryas.
> 
> New research by UC Santa Barbara geologist James Kennett and an international group of investigators has narrowed the date to a 100-year range, sometime between 12,835 and 12,735 years ago. The team’s findings appear today in the _Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences_.


There are worldwide proxies of the event, this paper appears to tie them together.

That said, I still have reservations as to exactly what cause the deaths of mammoths & how they could have been frozen in place with food in their mouths & undigested in their stomachs.

Much in the lengthy comments.


----------



## FeXL

Further on Pal Review.

Peer review is broken – Springer announces 64 papers retracted due to fake reviews



> Science publishing giant Springer, with over 2900 journals, has announced on its website that 64 articles published in 10 of its journals are being retracted. Editorial staff found evidence of fake email addresses for peer reviewers.


Just...sad.


----------



## FeXL

Further on the above.

Major publisher retracts 64 scientific papers in fake peer review outbreak



> Made-up identities assigned to fake e-mail addresses. Real identities stolen for fraudulent reviews. Study authors who write glowing reviews of their own research, then pass them off as an independent report.
> 
> These are the tactics of peer review manipulators, an apparently growing problem in the world of academic publishing.


----------



## FeXL

Even more.

Study delivers bleak verdict on validity of psychology experiment results



> Of 100 studies published in top-ranking journals in 2008, 75% of social psychology experiments and half of cognitive studies failed the replication test


Scary. And disappointing...


----------



## FeXL

The Ice Bucket Challenge Led to a Major Breakthrough in ALS Research



> Thanks to the ALS Association, the summer of 2014 will be forever associated with videos of people pouring freezing water over their heads. While some criticized the "Ice Bucket Challenge" as a classic example of "slacktivism," or just another annoying trend clogging their newsfeeds, the numbers can’t be denied: the challenge's 17 million participants ended up raising over $220 million for ALS (amyotrophic lateral sclerosis) research. The organization says it was likely the single largest episode of giving outside of a disaster event.


So, $220 million brought a breakthrough in ALS research.

Imagine what the hundreds of billions, if not trillions, pissed away on imaginary problems like "global warming" and funding non-competitive enterprises like "renewable energy" could accomplish...


----------



## FeXL

Even more on the failure of Peer Review.

Shaking the foundation of medical research: Half of failed peer reviewed papers “spun” as success



> Malcolm Kendrick reports on a new study that he says should “shake the foundations of medical research” but laments that it almost certainly won’t.
> 
> In the year 2000, the US National Heart Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) insisted that all researchers register their “primary aim” and then later their “primary outcome” with clinicaltrials.gov. This one small change in the way medical studies were reported transformed the “success” rates in peer reviewed papers. Before 2000, fully 57% of studies found the success they said they were testing for, but after that, their success rate fell to to a dismal 8%. When people didn’t have to declare what their aim was, they could fish through their results to find some positive, perhaps tangential association, and report that as if they had been investigating that effect all along. The negative results became invisible. If a diet, drug or treatment showed no benefit at all, or turned up bad results, nobody had to know.


----------



## FeXL

This is cool.

NASA's crazy new self-healing material can take a bullet



> NASA may accidentally make the Terminator a reality. A new material developed in NASA-funded research can self-heal from a bullet wound in just two seconds.
> 
> The creation consists of two layers of solid polymer with a liquid gel sandwiched between them. If one or both of the polymer layers are punctured, the gel mixes with oxygen let in through the wound. The oxygen mixes with an ingredient within the gel called tributylborane, which creates a reaction that turns the liquid center into an instant plug that seals up the hole.


Interesting. Article notes that self-healing materials could have a wide application, including spaceships.

Only question is, where they gonna get oxygen?


----------



## FeXL

A step in the right direction?

A Nature editorial on the state of ‘robusted’ science reproducibility



> Irreproducible research poses an enormous burden: it delays treatments, wastes patients’ and scientists’ time, and squanders billions of research dollars. It is also widespread. An unpublished 2015 survey by the American Society for Cell Biology found that more than two-thirds of respondents had on at least one occasion been unable to reproduce published results. Biomedical researchers from drug companies have reported that one-quarter or fewer of high-profile papers are reproducible1, 2.


Further:



> Several journals, including Nature and Science, have updated their guidelines and introduced checklists. These ask scientists whether they followed practices such as randomizing, blinding and calculating appropriate sample size. Science has also added statisticians to its panel of reviewing editors. Philanthropic and non-profit organizations have sponsored projects to improve robustness.


It remains to be seen.


----------



## FeXL

Ya know, he's s'pose ta be a bright guy...

Elon Musk Achieves Climate Intergalactic Stupid



> Elon Musk wants to nuke the Martian ice caps, in order to release CO2 and warm the place up.


More:



> You just can’t make up stupid like this.
> 
> 1. The nukes would only melt a small amount of ice, an hour later the temperature would be the same as it was before, and the ice would refreeze. Alarmists are always bragging about global warming accumulating billions of nukes every year.
> 2. The Martian atmosphere is already 95% CO2. Adding more will have essentially zero effect on the radiative balance. The Martian atmosphere contains about ten times as many CO2 molecules as Earth’s atmosphere, but the temperature there is -60C.
> 3. The total mass of the Martian ice caps (1.6E18 kg) if entirely evaporated, would only bring the atmospheric pressure on Mars up to about one third of Earth. This couldn’t happen, because half of the ice caps are water, and would remain frozen. The highest atmospheric pressure you could realistically hope for would be about 150 mb. At that pressure, the temperature on Mars would remain well below freezing.
> 
> Seventy years ago, scientists wanted to nuke Antarctica to melt the ice cap. They never get any smarter.


----------



## Macfury

He is bright--billions of dollars attracted from government in ways that would make actual industrialists jealous.



FeXL said:


> Ya know, he's s'pose ta be a bright guy...
> 
> Elon Musk Achieves Climate Intergalactic Stupid
> 
> 
> 
> More:


----------



## FeXL

I guess I'm just too honest to play that game.


----------



## FeXL

More on research reproducibility.

Cancer Research, Irreproducibility, and the Insidiousness of the “Julia Child Argument”



> The Reproducibility Project: Cancer Biology aims to replicate 50 top cancer papers. The complete results are not yet in, in fact, the corresponding authors of most of the articles to be wholly or partially replicated have only been contacted for details and clarifications concerning the protocols of their experiments. The Reproducibility Project will only publish the final results of the 50 replications by the end of 2017!
> 
> Previous attempts at replicating cancer biology experiments indicated that *reproducibility ranges from a dismal 10% to the very disappointing rate of 25%.* These results mean that at least *75% of the money spend on cancer biology produces press releases rather than bona fide useful results.*


Emphasis from the link.

Further:



> Other “threatened” scientists have already prepared their *dog-ate-my-homework* objections. “The reagents are problematic,” some say. “*Biological systems are fickle*,” add others
> 
> The most interesting objection to the project was raised by *Jeffrey Settleman*, the Laurel Schwartz Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School, Director of the Center for Molecular Therapeutics and Scientific Director of Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center. Dr. Settleman, it should be mentioned, has enough grant money to pay 8 postdocs, 9 research technologists and technicians, one graduate student, one lab manager, and an administrative assistant.
> 
> And this is what he said: “*You can’t give me and Julia Child the same recipe and expect an equally good meal.*”


Emphasis from the link.

Stunning...


----------



## FeXL

This is despicable.

How many children died because peer reviewed data was buried and results cherry-picked?



> This example below shows the dangers of cherry picked and buried data. It shows how great news and joy can be reported from rancid results, and the only protection against this is open access. When the taxpayer funds research that is not fully and transparently public, and immediately available, the people are funding PR rather than science. “Peer review” does little to stop this, little to clean up the mess after it happens, and the truth can take years to be set free.
> 
> *Ten percent of teenagers taking an anti-depressant harmed themselves or attempted suicide. This was ten times the rate of the teens on the placebo.* The results of this clinical trial were published in 2001, but those alarming statistics were not reported. The drug went on to be widely used. A new reanalysis of the data, reported in the BMJ, revealed the dark and hidden dangers. The company that funded the research, Glaxo Smith Kline, has already faced record fines of $4.2 billion. *The Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry won’t retract the paper.*


M'bold.

Fines aren't enough. Heads need to roll.


----------



## heavyall

Peer-review is fundamentally broken. Using it in a debate about anything is now a complete red herring. If anything, saying a source is peer-reviewed these days gives it LESS credibility than one that isn't.


----------



## Macfury

heavyall said:


> Peer-review is fundamentally broken. Using it in a debate about anything is now a complete red herring. If anything, saying a source is peer-reviewed these days gives it LESS credibility than one that isn't.


Peer review is worse than prostitution, because a least there's a profit to be made in prostitution. Peer reviewers disgrace themselves for free.


----------



## CubaMark

*TOO COOL.*

*Scientists capture first images of molecules before and after reaction*








Using a state-of-the-art atomic force microscope, the scientists have taken the first atom-by-atom pictures, including images of the chemical bonds between atoms, clearly depicting how a molecule’s structure changed during a reaction. Until now, scientists have only been able to infer this type of information from spectroscopic analysis.

“Even though I use these molecules on a day to day basis, actually being able to see these pictures blew me away. Wow!” said lead researcher Felix Fischer, UC Berkeley assistant professor of chemistry. “This was what my teachers used to say that you would never be able to actually see, and now we have it here.”

The ability to image molecular reactions in this way will help not only chemistry students as they study chemical structures and reactions, but will also show chemists for the first time the products of their reactions and help them fine-tune the reactions to get the products they want.​
(Berkeley)


----------



## SINC

*Stanford physicists set quantum record by using photons to carry messages from electrons 1.2 miles apart*



> By using photons to communicate between two electrons through more than a mile of fiber optic cable, physicists have taken an important step toward proving the practicality of quantum networks.
> 
> Researchers from Stanford have advanced a long-standing problem in quantum physics –*how to send "entangled" particles over long distances.
> 
> Their work is described in the online edition of Nature Communications.
> 
> Scientists and engineers are interested in the practical application of this technology to make quantum networks that can send highly secure information over long distances –*a capability that also makes the technology appealing to governments, banks and militaries.
> 
> Quantum entanglement is the observed phenomenon of two or more particles that are connected, even over thousands of miles. If it sounds strange, take comfort knowing that Albert Einstein described this behavior as "spooky action."
> 
> Consider, for instance, entangled electrons. Electrons spin in one of two characteristic directions, and if they are entangled, those two electrons' spins are linked. It's as if you spun a quarter in New York clockwise, an entangled second coin in Los Angeles would start to spin clockwise. And likewise, if you spun that quarter counter-clockwise, the second coin would shift its spin as well.
> 
> Electrons are trapped inside atoms, so entangled electrons can't talk directly at long distance. But photons –*tiny particles of light – can move. Scientists can establish a necessary condition of entanglement, called quantum correlation, to correlate photons to electrons, so that the photons can act as the messengers of an electron's spin.


Stanford physicists use photons to carry messages from electrons 1.2 miles apart


----------



## CubaMark

SINC said:


> *Stanford physicists set quantum record by using photons to carry messages from electrons 1.2 miles apart*


I've sought, but so far have yet to find, a layman's explanation for quantum entanglement that my brain can handle... and I think of myself as having a pretty flexible brain for stuff like this....


----------



## Macfury

CubaMark said:


> I've sought, but so far have yet to find, a layman's explanation for quantum entanglement that my brain can handle... and I think of myself as having a pretty flexible brain for stuff like this....


There is no layman's explanation--it is what it is. I get it, but the fact that there is no good explanation for it is infuriating to me.


----------



## SINC

Interesting indeed.

Stanford researchers uncover patterns in how scientists lie about their data


----------



## SINC

Who knew?

It's Tempting to Try This 18th Century Frozen Lightning Experiment


----------



## FeXL

As we approach solstice...

A little known ancient historical building that marks the winter solstice



> Deep inside the world’s oldest known building, every year, for only as much as 17 minutes, the sun — at the exact moment of the winter solstice — shines directly down a long corridor of stone and illuminates the inner chamber at Newgrange.
> 
> Newgrange was built 1,000 years before Stonehenge and also predates the pyramids by more than 500 years.
> 
> Lost and forgotten along with the civilization that built it, the site was been rediscovered in 1699. Excavation began in the late 1800s and continued in fits and starts, until it was undertaken in earnest in 1962. It was completed in 1975.


----------



## FeXL

Heads exploding everywhere...

Intelligence genes discovered by scientists 



> Researchers have believed for some time that intellect is inherited with studies suggesting that up to 75 per cent of IQ is genetic, and the rest down to environmental factors such as schooling and friendship groups.
> 
> But until now, nobody has been able to pin-point exactly which genes are responsible for better memory, attention, processing speed or reasoning skills.
> 
> *Now Imperial College London has found that two networks of genes determine whether people are intelligent or not-so-bright.*


M'bold.


----------



## FeXL

Study: hyperbole is increasing in science



> Researchers at the University Medical Center Utrecht in the Netherlands say that the frequency of positive-sounding words such as ‘novel’, ‘amazing’, ‘innovative’ and ‘unprecedented’ has increased almost nine-fold in the titles and abstracts of papers published between 1974 and 2014.


More:



> The most obvious interpretation of the results is that they reflect an increase in hype and exaggeration, rather than a real improvement in the incidence or quality of discoveries, says Vinkers. The findings “fit our own observations that in order to get published, you need to emphasize what is special and unique about your study,” he says. Researchers may be tempted to make their findings stand out from thousands of others — a tendency that might also explain the more modest rise in usage of negative words.
> 
> The word ‘novel’ now appears in more than 7% of PubMed paper titles and abstracts, and the researchers jokingly extrapolate that, on the basis of its past rise, it is set to appear in every paper by the year 2123.


----------



## FeXL

The end is nigh...

Yellowstone about to blow? Scientists warning over SUPER-VOLCANO that could kill MILLIONS



> Instances of volcanic eruptions are their highest for 300 years and scientists fear a major one that could kill millions and devastate the planet is a real possibility.
> 
> Experts at the European Science Foundation said volcanoes – especially super-volcanoes like the one at Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming, which has a caldera measuring 34 by 45 miles (55 by 72 km) - pose more threat to Earth and the survival of humans than asteroids, earthquakes, nuclear war and global warming.
> 
> There are few real contingency plans in place to deal with the ticking time bomb, which they conclude is likely to go off within the next 80 years.


Well, the hyperbole is a little off the charts but the read is interesting.


----------



## FeXL

Improvements in incandescent bulb technology.

“Nanophotonic” incandescent light bulbs that are more efficient than LEDs



> MIT has an experimental globe that uses some kind of crystal coating to reflect back the wasted heat generated by incandescent lights. The energy can be “recycled”, putting incandescents into a similar efficiency range as some LED’s. Potentially, the researchers claim, the efficiency scores could be nearly three times better than even the best current LED’s, giving incandescents total supremacy again.


----------



## SINC

FeXL said:


> Improvements in incandescent bulb technology.
> 
> “Nanophotonic” incandescent light bulbs that are more efficient than LEDs


That is good news indeed. Every time I see a simple light bulb now priced at $20 or more I am so glad I hoarded enough incandescents to last my lifetime and beyond. Besides, the heat they give off in winter, which is their prime use time, adds to the heating comfort of our home.


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> That is good news indeed. Every time I see a simple light bulb now priced at $20 or more I am so glad I hoarded enough incandescents to last my lifetime and beyond. Besides, the heat they give off in winter, which is their prime use time, adds to the heating comfort of our home.


Exactly.


----------



## FeXL

Well, it's based on models & I don't know if they've been verified or not.

Researchers Predict That A “Mini Ice Age” Is Coming Very Soon



> *A new model of the Sun’s solar cycle is producing unprecedentedly accurate predictions of irregularities within the Sun’s 11-year heartbeat. The model draws on dynamo effects in two layers of the Sun, one close to the surface and one deep within its convection zone. Predictions from the model suggest that solar activity will fall by 60 per cent during the 2030s to conditions last seen during the ‘mini ice age’ that began in 1645.* (source)
> 
> Zharkova and her team came up with the model using a method called “principal component analysis” of the magnetic field observations, from the Wilcox Solar Observatory in California. Looking forward to the next few solar cycles, her model predicts that from 2030 to 2040 there will be cause for a significant reduction in solar activity, which again, will lead to a mini ice age. According to Zharkova:
> Ads by Adblade
> 
> *In cycle 26, the two waves exactly mirror each other – peaking at the same time but in opposite hemispheres of the Sun. Their interaction will be disruptive, or they will nearly cancel each other. We predict that this will lead to the properties of a “Maunder minimum.” Effectively, when the waves are approximately in phase, they can show strong interaction, or resonance, and we have strong solar activity. When they are out of phase, we have solar minimums. When there is full phase separation, we have the conditions last seen during the Maunder minimum, 370 years ago.*


Bold from the link.

Interesting read.


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> That is good news indeed. Every time I see a simple light bulb now priced at $20 or more I am so glad I hoarded enough incandescents to last my lifetime and beyond. Besides, the heat they give off in winter, which is their prime use time, adds to the heating comfort of our home.


They still make incandescent "rough service bulbs" for rural areas and the smaller bulbs used inside ovens. Much cheaper than the new ones.


----------



## CubaMark

_A good read for science nuts..._

*When Will We Reach the End of the Periodic Table?*







Chemistry teachers recently had to update their classroom décor, with the announcement that scientists have confirmed the discovery of four new elements on the periodic table. The as-yet unnamed elements 113, 115, 117 and 118 filled in the remaining gaps at the bottom of the famous chart—a roadmap of matter’s building blocks that has successfully guided chemists for nearly a century and a half.

The official confirmation, granted by the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC), was years in the making, as these superheavy elements are highly unstable and tough to create. But scientists had strong reason to believe they existed, in part because the periodic table has been remarkably consistent so far. Efforts to conjure up elements 119 and 120, which would start a new row, are already underway.

But exactly how many more elements are out there remains one of chemistry’s most persistent mysteries, especially as our modern understanding of physics has revealed anomalies even in the established players.

“Cracks are beginning to show in the periodic table,” says Walter Loveland, a chemist at Oregon State University.​
(Read more at Smithsonian)


----------



## FeXL

Interesting.

New evidence suggests a ninth planet lurking at the edge of the solar system



> Astronomers at the California Institute of Technology announced Wednesday that they have found new evidence of a giant icy planet lurking in the darkness of our solar system far beyond the orbit of Pluto. They are calling it "Planet Nine."
> 
> Their paper, published in the Astronomical Journal, estimates the planet's mass as five to 10 times that of the Earth. But the authors, astronomers Michael Brown and Konstantin Batygin, have not observed the planet directly.


Further:



> [T]hey have inferred its existence from the motion of recently discovered dwarf planets and other small objects in the outer solar system. Those smaller bodies have orbits that appear to be influenced by the gravity of a hidden planet – a "massive perturber."


----------



## FeXL

I'm trying to figure out how open access to research is a bad thing.

Researcher illegally shares millions of science papers free online to spread knowledge



> _A researcher in Russia has made more than 48 million journal articles – almost every single peer-reviewed paper every published – freely available online. And she’s now refusing to shut the site down, despite a court injunction and a lawsuit from Elsevier, one of the world’s biggest publishers.
> 
> For those of you who aren’t already using it, the site in question is Sci-Hub, and it’s sort of like a Pirate Bay of the science world. It was established in 2011 by neuroscientist Alexandra Elbakyan, who was frustrated that she couldn’t afford to access the articles needed for her research, and it’s since gone viral, with hundreds of thousands of papers being downloaded daily. But at the end of last year, the site was ordered to be taken down by a New York district court – a ruling that Elbakyan has decided to fight, triggering a debate over who really owns science.​_


----------



## FeXL

No argument.

Study: those who fake data aren’t real scientists



> With stories of falsified results making headlines, it’s known that some scientists not only fail to achieve these ideals but directly violate them.
> 
> Science is a truth-seeking enterprise. Based on this study, researchers violating this unwritten code of conduct may not be scientists in the truest sense, Pennock said.
> 
> _“*Researchers who commit such misconduct are not merely violating some regulatory requirements, but they also are violating – in a deep way – what it means to be a scientist*,” he said.​_


M'bold.

Yep.


----------



## FeXL

Not passing moral judgment.

Marijuana smokers 5x more likely to develop an alcohol problem



> Adults who use marijuana are five times more likely to develop an alcohol use disorder (AUD) –alcohol abuse or dependence– compared with adults who do not use the drug. And adults who already have an alcohol use disorder and use marijuana are more likely to see the problem persist.


----------



## ehMax

FeXL said:


> No argument.
> 
> Study: those who fake data aren’t real scientists
> 
> M'bold.
> 
> Yep.


"The study revealed a tacit (understood / implied) moral code in scientific culture – one that most researchers hope to be able to pass on to their students"

Yes, science is indeed a truth-seeking enterprise. Objective truth, whatever the truth may be. Unlike many things, being wrong about something is not seen as such a negative... just getting down to the objective truth. I love science.


----------



## Dr.G.

ehMax said:


> "The study revealed a tacit (understood / implied) moral code in scientific culture – one that most researchers hope to be able to pass on to their students"
> 
> Yes, science is indeed a truth-seeking enterprise. Objective truth, whatever the truth may be. Unlike many things, being wrong about something is not seen as such a negative... just getting down to the objective truth. I love science.


Well said, Mr. Mayor. :clap::clap:


----------



## FeXL

(mild language warning)

The Unbearable Asymmetry of Bull****



> Science and medicine have done a lot for the world. Diseases have been eradicated, rockets have been sent to the moon, and convincing, causal explanations have been given for a whole range of formerly inscrutable phenomena. Notwithstanding recent concerns about sloppy research, small sample sizes, and challenges in replicating major findings—concerns I share and which I have written about at length — I still believe that the scientific method is the best available tool for getting at empirical truth. Or to put it a slightly different way (if I may paraphrase Winston Churchill’s famous remark about democracy): it is perhaps the worst tool, except for all the rest.
> 
> *In other words, science is flawed.*


M'bold.

Further:



> At the same time, as the psychologist Gary Marcus has recently put it, “*it is facile to dismiss science itself*. The most careful scientists, and the best science journalists, realize that all science is provisional. There will always be things that we haven’t figured out yet, and even some that we get wrong.” But science is not just about conclusions, he argues, which are occasionally (or even frequently) incorrect. Instead, *“It’s about a methodology for investigation, which includes, at its core, a relentless drive towards questioning that which came before.” You can both “love science,” he concludes, “and question it.”*
> 
> I agree with Marcus. In fact, I agree with him so much that I would like to go a step further: *if you love science, you had better question it, and question it well, so it can live up to its potential.*
> 
> And it is with that in mind that I bring up the subject of bull****.


M'bold.

Excellent read.


----------



## FeXL

The darker, unfortunate, side of "science"...

University Students Find 1000s of Medical Studies Presented to FDA Riddled with Fraud



> One of the biggest scandals that doesn’t always get the attention it deserves is the literally thousands of medical studies that are fraudulent (1) with the sole intention of fooling the FDA.
> 
> There’s big money to be made in medicine, especially where devices and prescription drugs are concerned. Sometimes, the temptation is too great to resist for those motivated by greed. This leads to falsifying studies and placing patients at risks, sometimes in life-threatening situations.


----------



## Macster Blaster

FeXL said:


> The darker, unfortunate, side of "science"...
> 
> University Students Find 1000s of Medical Studies Presented to FDA Riddled with Fraud


Yet another example.

It's widely known in my industry that thee post-dotcom-bust H1B ****holes set up all over the US are producing garbage-tier research... Junk obfuscated in such a way as to continue securing government grants. The "engineers" brought over are no better than the ones you get when you outsource work... terrible code all day every day.

Gets worse... there's entire networks of fraudulent indian "peer review" services available where, for a small fee, you can get a bunch of PHDs signing off on your paper. Whether these people actually exist is not known, and if they do, nothing is known about their credibility.

By far the worst offenders are the soft sciences, where hare-brained nonsense is peer-reviewed by Prajeet Fakenamaran and his "colleagues" and the leftist degenerates in all levels of government use these bull**** "peer-reviewed" papers to justify policy decisions. Hilariously, most of the results are not reproducible.



So, protip: if a leftist asks you to provide peer-reviewed sources, you now know just how uninformed they really are about the world.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macster Blaster said:


> Yet another example.
> 
> 
> 
> It's widely known in my industry that thee post-dotcom-bust H1B ****holes set up all over the US are producing garbage-tier research... Junk obfuscated in such a way as to continue securing government grants. The "engineers" brought over are no better than the ones you get when you outsource work... terrible code all day every day.
> 
> 
> 
> Gets worse... there's entire networks of fraudulent indian "peer review" services available where, for a small fee, you can get a bunch of PHDs signing off on your paper. Whether these people actually exist is not known, and if they do, nothing is known about their credibility.
> 
> 
> 
> By far the worst offenders are the soft sciences, where hare-brained nonsense is peer-reviewed by Prajeet Fakenamaran and his "colleagues" and the leftist degenerates in all levels of government use these bull**** "peer-reviewed" papers to justify policy decisions. Hilariously, most of the results are not reproducible.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, protip: if a leftist asks you to provide peer-reviewed sources, you now know just how uninformed they really are about the world.



I'm impressed that you got away with "****holes" and "bull****." Cool! Things are looking up. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Further...

The Corruption Of Science



> Hot on the heels of the RSS pause busting adjustments, themselves repeating NOAA’s own ones, Melanie Phillips has a thoughtful piece in the Times, which picks up on a statement by Richard Horton, editor-in-chief of The Lancet,
> 
> _“The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue.”​_


Excellent read.


----------



## FeXL

Magnetic Reconnection – Major space weather effect measured for the first time



> _Most people do not give much thought to the Earth’s magnetic field, yet it is every bit as essential to life as air, water and sunlight. The magnetic field provides an invisible, but crucial, barrier that protects Earth from the sun’s magnetic field, which drives a stream of charged particles known as the solar wind outward from the sun’s outer layers. The interaction between these two magnetic fields can cause explosive storms in the space near Earth, which can knock out satellites and cause problems here on Earth’s surface, despite the protection offered by Earth’s magnetic field.
> 
> A new study co-authored by University of Maryland physicists provides the first major results of NASA’s Magnetospheric Multiscale (MMS) mission, including an unprecedented look at the interaction between the magnetic fields of Earth and the sun. The paper describes the first direct and detailed observation of a phenomenon known as magnetic reconnection, which occurs when two opposing magnetic field lines break and reconnect with each other, releasing massive amounts of energy._​


----------



## FeXL

Wasn't aware Big Blue was involved in this type of research.

IBM Announces Magic Bullet To Zap All Kinds of Killer Viruses



> Soon your bathroom might have antimicrobial soap that doesn't just kill bacteria, but also wipes out Ebola, Zika, dengue, or herpes. That's the promise of a new chemical just announced by IBM and the Institute of Bioengineering and Nanotechnology (IBN) in Singapore. Such a soap is just one of the potential uses of this "macromolecule," says James Hedrick, one of the lead researchers on the project at IBM's Almaden Research Center in San Jose, CA. If taken as a medication, the macromolecule would also have two ways to protect cells from any virus that does get past the first defense.
> 
> "It's almost a daunting task to design any kind of therapeutic for a virus," says Hedrick, because they are so varied. Some use DNA to carry their genetic instructions, and some use RNA. Some come wrapped in a membrane, some don't. But all viruses mutate quickly, sidestepping chemicals designed to precisely attack them. Working with a bunch of research institutions, IBM and Singapore's IBN instead invented a chemical that attacks something fundamental to all viruses—something that mutations don't change.


----------



## FeXL

This goes against everything you learned in Biology class.

Look, Ma! No Mitochondria



> Scientists have found a microbe that does something textbooks say is impossible: It's a complex cell that survives without mitochondria.
> 
> Mitochondria are the powerhouses inside eukaryotic cells, the type of complicated cell that makes up people, other critters and plants and fungi. All eukaryotic cells contain a nucleus and little organelles — and one of the most famous was the mitochondrion.
> 
> "They were considered to be absolutely indispensable components of the eukaryotic cell and the hallmark of the eukaryotic cell," says Anna Karnkowska, a researcher in evolutionary biology at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver. Karnkowska and her colleagues describe their new find in a study published online Thursday in the journal _Current Biology_.


----------



## FeXL

Academies of Science finds GMOs not harmful to human health



> Genetically engineered crops are safe for humans and animals to eat and have not caused increases in cancer, obesity, gastrointestinal illnesses, kidney disease, autism or allergies, an exhaustive report from the National Academies of Science released Tuesday found.


----------



## FeXL

Good news.

Scientists have found a human protein that blocks Zika replication and prevents cell death



> Scientists have finally figured out what Zika virus does to the human body, and it explains why its effects can be so devastating, but infections can go for months without detection.
> 
> A new study has shown that not only does it go straight for the brain's progenitor cells, blocking around 20 percent of them from forming new neurons, but it does so without alerting the body’s immune system, so can go on replicating in the brain for weeks.
> 
> The good news is that, by better understanding how Zika is so successful in spreading throughout the human body, scientists from the University of Texas Medical Centre have found a way to combat it.


----------



## FeXL

I've been reading odds & sods over the past few years about North American east coast archaeological sites dating back 18,000 years or more. Always wondered about them as that definitely does not reconcile with commonly held knowledge about first immigrants coming over from Russia 10,000 to 12,000 years ago.

Interesting.

New book reveals Ice Age mariners from Europe were America’s first inhabitants



> Groundbreaking discoveries from the east coast of North America are demonstrating that people who are believed to be Clovis ancestors arrived in this area no later than 18,450 years ago and possibly as early as 23,000 years ago, probably in boats from Europe. These early inhabitants made stone tools that differ in significant ways from the earliest stone tools known in Alaska. It now appears that people entering the New World arrived from more than one direction.


----------



## FeXL

A good friend of mine, ethologist (animal behaviourist) and retired professor of psychology and I have often discussed the ability of the human mind to help the body heal. There are many stories of people healing themselves faster or living years beyond a given deadline because of the power of positive thought.

We've also discussed at length the reverse being true, namely, if you walk around feeling like everything is going against you, down in the dumps, negativity, that's going to affect how often & to what extent you do get ill. If you believe the worst will happen to you, it just may...

That said, can't help but wonder if the results of this paper confirm that to some extent.

Scientists who found gluten sensitivity evidence have now shown it doesn't exist



> In one of the best examples of science working, a researcher who provided key evidence of (non-celiac disease) gluten sensitivity recently published follow-up papers that show the opposite.
> 
> The paper came out last year in the journal Gastroenterology. Here’s the backstory that makes us cheer: The study was a follow up on a 2011 experiment in the lab of Peter Gibson at Monash University in Australia. *The scientifically sound - but small - study found that gluten-containing diets can cause gastrointestinal distress in people without celiac disease, a well-known autoimmune disorder triggered by gluten*. They called this non-celiac gluten sensitivity.


M'bold.

Further:



> The subjects cycled through high-gluten, low-gluten, and no-gluten (placebo) diets, without knowing which diet plan they were on at any given time. In the end, all of the treatment diets - even the placebo diet - caused pain, bloating, nausea, and gas to a similar degree. It didn’t matter if the diet contained gluten. (Read more about the study.)
> 
> *"In contrast to our first study… we could find absolutely no specific response to gluten," Gibson wrote in the paper.*


M'bold.

If you believe it...


----------



## FeXL

So, with peer review failing miserably and complete ostracization by your colleagues if a politically incorrect paper is published in the forefront of even more people's minds, many are beginning the sanctity of science.

The troubled institution of science



> _The scientific process, in its ideal form, is elegant: Ask a question, set up an objective test, and get an answer. Repeat.
> 
> But nowadays, our respondents told us, the process is riddled with conflict. Scientists say they’re forced to prioritize self-preservation over pursuing the best questions and uncovering meaningful truths.
> 
> Today, scientists’ success often isn’t measured by the quality of their questions or the rigor of their methods. It’s instead measured by how much grant money they win, the number of studies they publish, and how they spin their findings to appeal to the public.​_


Excellent read.


----------



## FeXL

Hopefully sooner.

The first ever dementia vaccine could be trialled in humans within 3 years



> Scientists working in the US and Australia have made progress on a vaccine candidate that could prevent and, in some cases, even reverse, the onset of dementia, Alzheimer's, and other related diseases.
> 
> This could be a big deal in the treatment of these diseases, seeing as the new drug is able to specifically target the tau proteins and abnormal beta-amyloid that can build up and cause Alzheimer's.


----------



## CubaMark




----------



## eMacMan

Keep in mind that this is all based on the same climate change models, that consistently fail to predict either the past or the future here on earth. Still it is an interesting read.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...t-venus-shows-a-picture-of-a-habitable-world/


----------



## FeXL

Most Scientific Findings Are Wrong or Useless



> Sarewitz cites several examples of bad science that I reported in my February article "Broken Science." These include a major biotech company's finding in 2012 that only six out of 53 landmark published preclinical cancer studies could be replicated. Researchers at a leading pharmaceutical company reported that they could not replicate 43 of the 67 published preclinical studies that the company had been relying on to develop cancer and cardiovascular treatments and diagnostics. In 2015, only about a third of 100 psychological studies published in three leading psychology journals could be adequately replicated.
> 
> A 2015 editorial in The Lancet observed that "much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue." A 2015 British Academy of Medical Sciences report suggested that the false discovery rate in some areas of biomedicine could be as high as 69 percent. In an email exchange with me, the Stanford biostatistician John Ioannidis estimated that the non-replication rates in biomedical observational and preclinical studies could be as high as 90 percent.
> 
> Sarewitz also notes that 1,000 peer-reviewed and published breast cancer research studies turned out to be using a skin cancer cell line instead. Furthermore, when amyotrophic lateral sclerosis researchers tested more than 100 potential drugs reported to slow disease progression in mouse models, none were found to be beneficial when tested on the same mouse strains. A 2016 article suggested that fMRI brain imaging studies suffered from a 70 percent false positive rate. Sarewitz also notes that decades of nutritional dogma about the alleged health dangers of salt, fats, and red meat appears to be wrong.


----------



## FeXL

Interesting.

Physicists Believe They've Discovered a Fifth Fundamental Force of the Universe



> Although physics may seem complicated to the uninitiated (or even to the trained professional, for that matter), it’s worth remembering that physics deals with only four known forces: gravity (which keeps us from floating off the Earth); electromagnetism (which binds electrons to atoms, and atoms to each other); and two forces that operate over very short distances—the strong nuclear force (which binds atomic nuclei together) and the weak nuclear force (which governs certain kinds of radioactive decay).
> 
> But if recent experimental work in particle physics pans out, we may have to get used to the idea of a fifth force. The research outlining the evidence for this fifth force was published last week in the journal _Physical Review Letters_.


----------



## FeXL

Further on a solution for Alzheimer's.

Alzheimer's: New drug that halts mental decline is 'best news for dementia in 25 years'



> The first drug that can prevent Alzheimer’s disease is finally on the horizon after scientists proved they can clear the sticky plaques from the brain which cause dementia and halt mental decline.
> 
> Hailed as the "best news" in dementia research for 25 years, the breakthrough is said to be a potential "game changer" for people with Alzheimer’s.


I wasn't aware that they had clearly proven that the plaques were a cause, not an effect. There has been some question.

Either way...


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Further on a solution for Alzheimer's.
> I wasn't aware that they had clearly proven that the plaques were a cause, not an effect. There has been some question.
> 
> Either way...


i recall earlier drug trials that could clear plaque were ineffective because they treated the effect, not the cause. At the time, the plaque was considered a defense mechanism against another type of assault on brain cells.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> i recall earlier drug trials that could clear plaque were ineffective because they treated the effect, not the cause. At the time, the plaque was considered a defense mechanism against another type of assault on brain cells.


That's where I was coming from. I've read at least a couple of articles that suggested the plaque was the effect, not the cause. 

It'll be interesting to see where this goes.


----------



## TiltAgain

I don't know whether to believe the info in post #477 after reading the info in post #455. 

Cheers


----------



## Dr.G.

Mysterious radio signal detected by Russian telescope was actually from Earth - Technology & Science - CBC News

Bug humbar.


----------



## FeXL

Interesting.

A scientist just registered a patent for a common cold vaccine



> ...Valenta, who’s been investigating preventative measures for cold and allergy symptoms for decades, thinks he’s onto something big, and is confident that he now knows how to block the notorious human rhinovirus for good.


While I think this may be a good thing, I have to wonder if this will end up evolving a kind of super-rhinovirus down the road.


----------



## FeXL

A little late...

The journal Nature is going to begin requiring reproducibility in submitted papers



> The BBC reports *(shockingly)*, that the journal Nature is going to begin requiring a reproducibility checklist of authors, based on a survey performed last year where at least 70% of respondents (self-selected, of course) indicated that they were unable to reproduce expected results. As the ability to replicate studies is what allows science to demonstrate meaningfulness and continue moving the body of knowledge forward, it is surprising that it has taken this long for top of the line journals to more strongly encourage replication to establish validity.


M'bold.

Agreed. Especially from _Nature_.

That said, better late than never. At least they're acknowledging there exists an issue.


----------



## FeXL

Good news. Had an aunt pass from MS years ago. She was barely 40. Left 4 kids & a husband.

Breakthrough in multiple sclerosis research as scientists discover possible cause of the disease



> British scientists have discovered a potential cause for multiple sclerosis, in a major breakthrough that could pave the way for new treatments for the disease.
> 
> Scientists have found a new cellular mechanism which may cause the autoimmune disorder. Multiple sclerosis affects around 2.5 million people around the world.


----------



## screature

FeXL said:


> Good news. Had an aunt pass from MS years ago. She was barely 40. Left 4 kids & a husband.
> 
> Breakthrough in multiple sclerosis research as scientists discover possible cause of the disease


It is definitely hopeful in terms of research.


----------



## FeXL

Just...sad.

107 cancer papers retracted due to peer review fraud



> The journal Tumor Biology is retracting 107 research papers after discovering that the authors faked the peer review process. This isn’t the journal’s first rodeo. Late last year, 58 papers were retracted from seven different journals— 25 came from Tumor Biology for the same reason.


What an insult to hard working scientists everywhere.


----------



## FeXL

_Very_ interesting.

Archaeology shocker: Study claims humans reached the Americas 130,000 years ago



> Some 130,000 years ago, scientists say, a mysterious group of ancient people visited the coastline of what is now Southern California. More than 100,000 years before they were supposed to have arrived in the Americas, these unknown people used five heavy stones to break the bones of a mastodon. They cracked open femurs to suck out the marrow and, using the rocks as hammers, scored deep notches in the bone. When finished, they abandoned the materials in the soft, fine soil; one tusk planted upright in the ground like a single flag in the archaeological record. Then the people vanished.


Granted, there are holes in the argument but an interesting hypothesis nonetheless.

As an aside, what if the "First Nations" were actually the second... beejacon


----------



## FeXL

Another dietary narrative shot to hell.

A Grain of Salt: Framingham Offspring Data Refute Dietary Sodium Guidelines



> The validity of recommendations for restricting dietary sodium has repeatedly been called into question in recent years, with a few studies even suggesting that low levels of sodium may be harmful. In the latest example, researchers found an inverse relationship between blood pressure and sodium, one that translated into lower blood pressure values in those who consumed higher-than-recommended amounts of sodium and potassium.


More:



> Over 16 years, systolic and diastolic blood pressures decreased with increasing sodium intake. Mean systolic and diastolic blood pressures of 129.5 mm Hg and 75.6 mm Hg, respectively, were seen among those in the high-sodium and high-potassium groups compared with 135.4 mm Hg and 79.0 mm Hg, respectively, among people in the low-sodium and low-potassium groups. Individuals who had the highest mean combined intakes of sodium (3,717 mg/day) and potassium (3,211 mg/day) had the lowest overall blood pressures. Calcium and magnesium intakes also inversely correlated with blood pressure in a manner similar to those for sodium and potassium.


As an aside, I was going to link to a news site from southern California. Instead of showing me the page, their website forwarded me to some advice page that informed me I needed to upgrade my browser and noted four acceptable alternatives. I know my old Camino is long in the tooth, but it'll still render the lion's share of browsing I do. I then pasted the link into Safari (which is also an earlier version but the most recent allowed by OS 10.6.8) and got the same message.

Three seconds with my search engine delivered a half dozen alternatives & here we are.

That said, screw the San Diego Union Tribune. You just lost free clicks & ad views...


----------



## FeXL

Further on failed peer review & reproducibility.

Has Science Lost Its Way?



> The single greatest threat to science right now comes from within its own ranks. Last year Nature, the prestigious international science journal, published a study revealing that “More than 70% of researchers have tried and failed to reproduce another scientist’s experiments, and more than half have failed to reproduce their own experiments.”


----------



## FeXL

Could just as easily go in the Anti-Prog thread.

Revealing what a sorry state peer review has sunk to...

Peer-Reviewed Journal Publishes Gender Studies Hoax Claiming Penises Cause Climate Change



> A peer-reviewed academic journal published on Friday a hoax gender studies paper titled, “The Conceptual Penis As A Social Construct.”
> 
> Two academics, Peter Boghossian and James Lindsay, used pen names to successfully submit the hoax paper — which argued that “the penis vis-à-vis maleness is an incoherent construct” — to the peer-reviewed journal Cogent Social Sciences. Boghossian and Lindsay cited 20 sources, none of which they say they read, and five of which are fake papers that were “published” in journals that don’t actually exist.
> 
> The paper — which the authors said was “actively written to avoid having any merits whatsoever” — opened by stating, “The androcentric scientific and meta-scientific evidence that the penis is the male reproductive organ is considered overwhelming and largely uncontroversial.” It went downhill from there.


----------



## FeXL

Well, I have two stories.

Good news first.

HIV BREAKTHROUGH? Little girl, 8, is ‘virtually cured’ of HIV after being given cocktail of virus-busting drugs as a baby



> A South African girl has been 'virtually cured' of HIV after receiving a cocktail of virus-busting drugs as a baby
> 
> The child was given a ten-month course of antiretroviral medication until she was one-year-old, and then taken off the treatment as part of a medical trial.
> 
> Eight years and nine months later, the virus is still dormant and the girl healthy without needing treatment, a research team reported at the International Aids Society conference on HIV science in Paris.
> 
> "This new case strengthens our hope that by treating HIV-infected children for a brief period beginning in infancy, we may be able to spare them the burden of life-long therapy," said Aids expert Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), which funded the study.


----------



## FeXL

Second is further on the sorry state of peer review in scientific publications.

A Neuroscientist Just Tricked 4 Dodgy Journals Into Accepting a Fake Paper on 'Midi-Chlorians'



> If we ever needed a timely reminder that in the world of academic publishing not all scientific journals are created equal, we now have it.
> 
> *To test just how low the quality bar is for exploitative predatory journals, a prominent neuroscientist has tricked four publications into accepting a totally fake paper about midi-chlorians – the entirely fictional life forms in Star Wars that make 'the force' possible.*
> 
> Neuroskeptic, a working neuroscientist who anonymously blogs about science for _Discover_, set up the sting, submitting the nonsensical study to nine scientific journals – only to have four of them accept it.


M'bold.

Funny? Yeah. Sad? Even more so...

<sigh>


----------



## FeXL

I have grave concerns about this.

First Human Embryos Edited in U.S.



> The first known attempt at creating genetically modified human embryos in the United States has been carried out by a team of researchers in Portland, Oregon, _MIT Technology Review_ has learned.


----------



## FeXL

NASA's incredible plan to save humanity from Yellowstone supervolcano: 'Risky' plan to COOL magma by pumping in water (but it could trigger an eruption instead of preventing one)



> A NASA scientist has spoken out about the true threat of supervolcanoes and the risky methods that could be used to prevent a devastating eruption.
> 
> Brian Wilcox, a former member of the NASA Advisory Council on Planetary Defense, shared a report on the natural hazard that hadn't been seen outside of the agency until now.
> 
> He spoke of the true devastation that could come from an eruption, and the 'risky' methods that the agency is considering for preventing one - including approaches that could potentially go array and set off a supervolcano accidentally.
> 
> One such plan would involve drilling into the bottom of the Yellowstone volcano, using high pressure water to release heat from the magma chamber.


So, I'm not a rocket surgeon but I was on a volunteer fire department for 6 years. When you came upon a building with a sizeable fire the SOP was to break a window, set your nozzle to spray, grab the hose a foot or so behind the nozzle, turn on the water, stick the nozzle in the window and fling the hose around in a circular movement. In seconds the heat from the fire would vaporize the water droplets into steam & smother the fire. System worked best in a nearly enclosed chamber. The steam generated would billow out all openings, cracks, eaves, etc.

So, let's apply the same logic to pouring water on hot magma in a closed system.

Where the hell is the steam going to go?

Yep...BOOM!!!


----------



## FeXL

On mice, anyways...

Scientists Have Discovered a Drug That Fixes Cavities and Regrows Teeth



> Tideglusib works by stimulating stem cells in the pulp of teeth, the source of new dentine. Dentine is the mineralized substance beneath tooth enamel that gets eaten away by tooth decay.
> 
> Teeth can naturally regenerate dentine without assistance, but only under certain circumstances. The pulp must be exposed through infection (such as decay) or trauma to prompt the manufacture of dentine. But even then, the tooth can only regrow a very thin layer naturally—not enough to repair cavities caused by decay, which are generally deep. Tideglusib changes this outcome because it turns off the GSK-3 enzyme, which stops dentine from forming.


----------



## FeXL

Progress.

Researchers Find “Executioner Protein” That Causes Cancer Cells to Self-Destruct Without Hurting Healthy Cells



> Albert Einstein College of Medicine scientists have induced cancer cells to commit suicide with a new compound that leaves healthy cells untouched. They deployed their novel treatment approach against acute myeloid leukemia (AML) cells, which kill more than 10,000 Americans, and makes up about one-third of all new cases of leukemia, each year. Patients survive AML at a rate of only about 30 percent, making effective new treatments a hot commodity. And although the team has only tested the treatment on AML, it could have the potential to successfully attack other varieties of cancer cells.


----------



## FeXL

Doesn't resemble a certain Mel Brook's character at all...

This Oversized Helmet Is Designed To Block Out Noise In The Workplace



> Ukrainian based Hochu rayu design bureau have come up with an idea for when your office or workplace gets too noisy.
> Named HELMFON, the helmet-like head gear allows you to completely tune out any surrounding sound, which can be especially helpful if you’re trying to concentrate, and at the same time, still allows you to be a part of everything going on in the office.


----------



## FeXL

Interesting.

Drug 'melts away' fat inside arteries



> A new drug being trialled for treating breast cancer and diabetes has been shown to 'melt away' the fat inside arteries that can cause heart attacks and strokes.
> 
> Researchers from the University of Aberdeen, using pre-clinical mouse models, showed that just a single dose of the drug (Trodusquemine) completely reversed the effects of a disease that causes a host of heart problems.


----------



## screature

FeXL said:


> Interesting.
> 
> Drug 'melts away' fat inside arteries


Wow! That is promising, depending on the side effects. With drugs often the side effects can be more lethal than the disease itself.


----------



## Beej

*Implicit Bias*

I don't consider this science but the definition of science seems to have been diluted, so I'll play along for this topic. The lengthy article covers research and claims about implicit bias, as well as anecdotes about how the concept is being applied by employers.

https://qz.com/1144504/the-world-is-relying-on-a-flawed-psychological-test-to-fight-racism/


> There are now thousands of workplace talks and police trainings and jury guidelines that focus on implicit bias, but we still we have no strong scientific proof that these programs work.





> In recent years, a series of studies have led to significant concerns about the IAT’s reliability and validity. These findings, raising basic scientific questions about what the test actually does, can explain why trainings based on the IAT have failed to change discriminatory behavior.


Aside: Is anyone else getting this article under the implicit bias article:


> Your hangover can’t be cured. Here’s why


Could be a helpful read for many ehmacers today.


----------



## Macfury

Beej said:


> I don't consider this science but the definition of science seems to have been diluted, so I'll play along for this topic. The lengthy article covers research and claims about implicit bias, as well as anecdotes about how the concept is being applied by employers.
> 
> https://qz.com/1144504/the-world-is-relying-on-a-flawed-psychological-test-to-fight-racism/


Interesting. People make rapid survival decisions based on information they process extremely quickly. Sounds like the IAT is designed to measure that, instead of normal behaviour carried out in everyday situations.


----------



## FeXL

Further on the history of North America's First Immigrants.

Remains of two baby girls who lived in Alaska during last ice age reveal a lost ancestor in the Americas



> The discovery of two infants, ceremonially buried by a previously unknown population of ancient humans in Alaska around 11,500 years ago, offers stunning new clarity to the story of how humans came to inhabit the Americas, according to a new scientific paper.
> 
> By confirming the theory that Indigenous Americans are descended from Asians, the find also threatens to inflame a cultural controversy that has long troubled the study of human origins in the New World.


Found this _very_ interesting:



> The last year has illustrated the cultural unease over the North American human origin story, and the panics than can arise as scientific theory progresses, first via archaeology, more recently by genetics.
> 
> Kennewick Man, for example, a set of human remains found in 1996 in Washington state and dated to around 9000 years ago, was finally buried this year after his case slipped the bonds of academic science to be fought in American civil courts. *At issue was whether Native American tribes of the area could use a federal law to reclaim the remains and prevent further study of them.* Although Kennewick Man has recently been shown by DNA to be Native American, researchers had initially claimed he appeared “Caucasoid” or Polynesian, which was taken as undermining the belief of Native Americans that their ancestors were present on this land since time immemorial.


M'bold.

Why would they have issues with the remains being scientifically studied? What results would they be afraid of?

Jes' askin'...


----------



## FeXL

Jes' sayin'.

Researchers are still working to prove that antidepressants are more effective than placebo



> Antidepressants have been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (and comparable regulatory agencies in other countries) and prescribed by medical professionals for decades. Researchers, though, are still working to definitively establish that antidepressants are more effective than placebo.
> 
> A paper published in Lancet today (Feb. 21) shows that, according to a meta-analysis of 522 trials, 21 commonly used antidepressants are all more effective than placebo. The meta-analysis includes data on 116,477 patients total, from double-blind, randomized controlled trials published between 1979 and 2016. The researchers found that antidepressants led to a greater reduction in depressive symptoms than placebo over the first eight weeks of treatment.
> 
> To the millions of people who benefit from antidepressants, these results may seem obvious. From a scientific perspective though, they’re highly contested. *That this paper is considered groundbreaking enough to be published in a major medical journal speaks to the lack of clear data around antidepressants. And, though the meta-analysis is strong, this paper is unlikely to conclusively end the debate over the efficacy of antidepressants.*


Bold mine.

Exactly.

And, they don't even get into side effects, addictions, or effects of withdrawal.


----------



## FeXL

While I have zero interest in marijuana becoming legalized, I am open to discussion on _genuine_ medical applications.

That said, here's a repost of an article from 2016 on the possible removal of amyloid plaques in the brain via THC.

Marijuana Compound Removes Toxic Alzheimer's Protein From The Brain



> An active compound in marijuana called tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) has been found to promote the removal of toxic clumps of amyloid beta protein in the brain, which are thought to kickstart the progression of Alzheimer's disease.
> 
> The finding supports the results of previous studies that found evidence of the protective effects of cannabinoids, including THC, on patients with neurodegenerative disease.


----------



## FeXL

Another Prog narrative falls by the wayside.

Environmentalist scare stories – Never mind!



> The Sierra Club and “invertebrate-protecting” Xerces Society recently had their own Emily Litella moment, over an issue they both have been hyperventilating about for years: endangered bees. For over half a decade, both organizations have been raising alarms about the imminent extinction of honeybees and, more recently, wild bees – *allegedly due to the widespread use of neonicotinoid pesticides.*


Bold mine.

However:



> “‘Save the bees’ is a rallying cry we’ve been hearing for years now…. But honeybees are at no risk of dying off. While diseases, parasites and other threats are certainly real problems for beekeepers, the total number of managed honeybees worldwide has risen 45% over the last half century. ‘Honeybees are not going to go extinct,’ says Scott Black, executive director of the Xerces Society. ‘We have more honeybee hives than we’ve ever had, and that’s simply because we manage honeybees. Conserving honeybees to save pollinators is like conserving chickens to save birds … [since] honeybees are not all that different from livestock.”


----------



## FeXL

No way the left buys into this. They _hate_ anything GM...

Scientists Develop A Strain Of Genetically Modified Rice That Neutralizes HIV



> An international team of researchers has come up with an innovative solution to the HIV pandemic – genetically modified rice.
> 
> In a paper published Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, scientists from the United States, United Kingdom and Spain explained their technique to genetically modify a strain of rice to produce HIV-neutralizing proteins. It’s the latest in the long-fought battle to help curb the HIV epidemic.
> 
> According to the World Health Organization (WHO), there were 36,900,000 people living with HIV in 2017, 25,700,000 of whom were in Africa. And while the spread of the immunocompromising virus has stalled since the epidemic of the 1980s, there were still 2.1 million people newly infected with HIV in 2015.


----------



## Macfury

Sure, but how does it taste?



FeXL said:


> No way the left buys into this. They _hate_ anything GM...
> 
> Scientists Develop A Strain Of Genetically Modified Rice That Neutralizes HIV


----------



## FeXL

Present company included...

It’s not science I don’t trust – it’s the scientists



> Everyone knows the real reason people like Donald Trump are sceptical of climate change is that conservatives are fundamentally anti-science. Some doubt science because it conflicts with their religious beliefs; others because its implications might mean radically shifting the global economy in an anti-growth or heavily statist direction, which goes against their free-market ideology; others because, being conservative, they are prisoners of their dogmatism, need closure and fear uncertainty. I hear this all the time from lefties on social media.


More:



> But there’s a wrinkle here and you may have guessed what it is. The world of social science is overwhelmingly left-wing: so heavily agenda-driven, so rife with confirmation bias and skewed methodology that almost inevitably its studies will show conservatives as blinkered and dim, and lefties as open-minded and clever regardless of the evidence.
> 
> Lest you think this is my own bias showing, another recent study confirmed it: a survey of 479 sociology professors found that only 4 per cent identified as conservative or libertarian, while 83 per cent identified as liberal or left-radical. In another survey — of psychologists this time — only 6 per cent identified as ‘conservative overall’.


Further:



> Wait, though. While Margaret Thatcher said the ‘facts of life are conservative’, how can we be sure that the facts of science don’t naturally swing left? This is what left-wing scientists seem to believe. *But as Cofnas shows, in order to reach that conclusion, they have to torture the data till it screams. Or even just make it up.*


M'bold.

Shocka...


----------



## FeXL

Long, very interesting read facing off two theories of dinosaur extinction against each other.

The Nastiest Feud in Science

Some notes:
1) Didn't realize Alvarez, the progenitor of the asteroid theory of dinosaur extinction, was such an asshole.
2) Didn't realize there were so many other assholes in paleontology, either.
3) I've read some about the Deccan Traps theory, always found it interesting.
4) She talks about foraminifera populations failing 300K years prior to the extinction event. Interesting. I've had several discussions with paleontologists on the topic who noted that dinosaur populations, at least in Western Canada, were falling prior to the K/T extinction event, as well.
5) Assuming _Science_ & _Nature_ are unbiased is the height of folly.
6) Her (and the author's) belief in CAGW is refuted by her very own research: The Deccan Traps spewed _tremendous and untold_ amounts of gas, ash, and lava for 750,000 years, creating a lava flow >600 miles long. _Nothing_ mankind can do will ever come close to mimicking that.


----------



## FeXL

Good news.

‘Groundbreaking’ Type 1 Diabetes Drug Has Just Been Trialed on First Human Patients–With No Side Effects



> A ground-breaking clinical trial of a new investigational drug has been launched to help prevent and manage Type 1 diabetes, and researchers have already dosed the first patient in the world with the treatment.
> 
> The drug, which was developed by scientists Clinical Research Facility (CRF) at Cardiff and Vale University Health Board (UHB), aims to help the regrowth of insulin making ‘beta’ cells of the pancreas, which are lost in patients living with the disease. Despite being an early phase trial, the CRF has now dosed two patients with this new drug.
> 
> Type 1 diabetes is a serious, lifelong condition where blood glucose levels are too high because the body cannot make a hormone called insulin. Those with Type 1 diabetes are dependent on insulin but if this clinical trial works, the regrowth – or regeneration – of beta cells may mean those with Type 1 diabetes becoming far less dependent on insulin injections. The benefits of the new drug would reduce lifelong conditions and complications associated with the chronic disease.


----------



## FeXL

Interesting.

Is this the oldest animal on Earth?



> The earliest known animal to exist on Earth did so 558 million years ago – millions of years earlier than thought.
> 
> A study published in the journal Science confirms that a mysterious and much debated fossil species, called Dicksonia, was unequivocally an animal, and not an ancient lichen or giant amoeba as previous analyses have suggested.
> 
> The discovery – which researchers have dubbed “the Holy Grail of palaeontology” – was made after Ilya Bobrovskiy from the Australian National University discovered an extremely well preserved Dicksonia fossil near the White Sea in northwest Russia.


More:



> The fossil was exquisitely preserved, so much so that it still contained fat molecules. The researchers were able to isolate these and identify them conclusively as cholesterol – a fat type found only in animals.


Amazing.


----------



## FeXL

The end of chemotherapy? Scientists discover all cancerous cells have a KILL CODE that can be triggered without the gruelling treatment



> Every cell in the human body contains a 'kill code' which can be triggered to cause its own self-destruction.
> 
> That's the discovery made by researchers at Northwestern University, Illinois, who believe it could be utilised for the future fight against cancer.
> 
> Specifically, they predict malignant cells could be encouraged to 'commit suicide' without toxic chemicals pumped into the body - which currently turns them on.
> 
> And, in the process, it could mean an end to gruelling rounds of chemotherapy.


----------



## FeXL

Kewl...

Astronomers Just Discovered Two Rogue Planets in Our Galaxy



> Polish astronomers just discovered two new planets in our galaxy. That's cool news on its own, but these planets are different from most. Unlike almost all known planets, New Scientist reports, these two planets don't orbit a star.
> 
> Instead, they drift aimlessly through the cold, dead void of space — and presumably spend their time writing angsty poetry.


More:



> Because the evidence of these two planets is so circumstantial, scientists aren't sure how large they are. Depending on how far away they are, New Scientist noted that one of the planets could be anywhere from two to 20 times the mass of Jupiter.
> 
> The other one is anywhere from 2.3 to 23 times more massive than Earth.


----------



## FeXL

Instills confidence, donit?

Patient who died during robot surgery had 99% chance of living if human operated



> A heart patient who died after a robot performed complicated surgery said the man would have had a “99 per cent” chance of survival if a human had operated.
> 
> The doctor leading the surgery on Stephen Pettitt, who died after a "catalogue of errors: was not trained enough to use the robot and had only practised using it on a simulator, an inquest heard.
> 
> In February 2015, the father-of-three, 69, was the first person in the UK to undergo robotic mitral valve surgery.
> 
> But after a lengthy operation which had to be completed with conventional open heart surgery, he died from multiple organ failure.
> 
> The inquest in Newcastle heard an expert's opinion that Mr Pettitt would have stood only a 1-2% chance of dying had conventional, open heart surgery been used to repair or replace his leaking valve.
> 
> *Lead surgeon Sukumaran Nair had no face-to-face training on using the robot before he operated on Mr Pettitt, but had watched similar procedures in the US and Holland and practised alone on a simulator.*


M'bold.

And, AND, he'd stayed at a Holiday Inn Express the night before!


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> _...A heart patient who died after a robot performed complicated surgery said the man would have had a “99 per cent” chance of survival if a human had operated...._


I see *The Mirror*'s journalistic standards are as high as ever. Did they have a medium write that article? Was the seance recorded?

:lmao: :yikes: :lmao:  :lmao:  :lmao:


----------



## FeXL

Head, shoulders & ass above the Clinton News Network, MotherJones & others of that ilk...



CubaMark said:


> I see *The Mirror*'s journalistic standards are as high as ever. Did they have a medium write that article? Was the seance recorded?


----------



## Macfury

Not just the Mirror---this sort of stuff is now everywhere, published to Internet without benefit of editor.



CubaMark said:


> I see *The Mirror*'s journalistic standards are as high as ever. Did they have a medium write that article? Was the seance recorded?
> 
> :lmao: :yikes: :lmao:  :lmao:  :lmao:


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Not just the Mirror---this sort of stuff is now everywhere, published to Internet without benefit of editor.


And called Progressive news!!!


----------



## FeXL

Rare fossil bird deepens mystery of avian extinctions



> During the late Cretaceous period, more than 65 million years ago, hundreds of different species of birds flitted around the dinosaurs and through the forests as abundantly as they flit about our woods and fields today.
> 
> But after the cataclysm that wiped out most of the dinosaurs, only one group of birds remained: the ancestors of the birds we see today. Why did only one family survive the mass extinction?
> 
> A newly described fossil from one of those extinct bird groups, cousins of today’s birds, deepens that mystery.
> 
> The 75-million-year-old fossil, from a bird about the size of a turkey vulture, is the most complete skeleton discovered in North America of what are called enantiornithines (pronounced en-an-tea-or’-neth-eens), or opposite birds. Discovered in the Grand Staircase-Escalante area of Utah in 1992 by University of California, Berkeley, paleontologist Howard Hutchison, the fossil lay relatively untouched in University of California Museum of Paleontology at Berkeley until doctoral student Jessie Atterholt learned about it in 2009 and asked to study it.


----------



## FeXL

h/t SDA, who highlights one of the issues I've always had with the hypothesis:



> It always seemed like a _lot_ of comets.


We Thought Earth's Water Came From Comets. Turns Out That's Not The Full Story



> We have comets and asteroids to thank for Earth's water, according to the most widely-held theory among scientists. But it's not that cut-and-dried. It's still a bit of a mystery, and a new study suggests that not all of Earth's water was delivered to our planet that way.


----------



## FeXL

While I find this research interesting, I've still yet to read anything definitive that the accumulation of plaques in the brain are cause, not effect.

New Vaccine Could Cut Number Of Alzheimer's Cases In Half



> A new Alzheimer's vaccine developed by scientists at the University of Texas Southwestern could conceivably cut the number of dementia cases in half.
> 
> Unlike a previous attempt that caused swelling in the brain when DNA was injected into the test mice's muscles, the new vaccine was administered by injecting it superficially into the skin.
> 
> Alzheimer’s, which is expected to strike triple the number of people by 2050, cripples the brain as human beings age, as beta-amyloid proteins in the brain get stuck together and tau proteins start to tangle, both of which inhibit neural connections. The new vaccine, injected into the skin, triggers the skin cells to produce a three-molecule chain of beta-amyloid. The immune system is then catalyzed to produce antibodies to fight beta-amyloid; the antibodies also fight tau proteins. This means the body anticipates the Alzheimer's plaques and tangles before they happen.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> While I find this research interesting, I've still yet to read anything definitive that the accumulation of plaques in the brain are cause, not effect.


That was my first thought.


----------



## FeXL

Biggest dicynodont I've heard of.

Surprising elephant-sized mammal cousin lived alongside dinosaurs



> A stoutly built mammal cousin the size of an elephant that munched on plants with its horny beak roamed the European landscape alongside dinosaurs during the Triassic Period about 205 million to 210 million years ago, scientists said on Thursday.
> 
> Scientists announced the surprising discovery in Poland of fossils of a four-legged beast called [_Lisowicia bojani_] that demonstrated that dinosaurs were not the only behemoths on Earth at that time and that the group of mammal-like reptiles to which [_Lisowicia_] belonged, called dicynodonts, did not die out as long ago as previously believed.
> 
> "We think it's one of the most unexpected fossil discoveries from the Triassic of Europe," said paleontologist Grzegorz Niedzwiedzki of Uppsala University in Sweden.
> 
> [_Lisowicia_], the largest-known non-dinosaur land animal alive at its time, was about 15 feet (4.5 meters) long, 8.5 feet (2.6 meters) tall and weighed 9 tons. The only other giants around at the time were early members of the dinosaur group called sauropods that had four legs, long necks and long tails.


----------



## FeXL

Interesting.

Drug That Can Stop a Dozen ‘Untreatable’ Cancers Gets Approval—And Company Vows to Help Every Patient Afford It



> The FDA has just approved a first-of-its-kind drug that can target and treat over a dozen different kinds of cancers based on a common gene, rather than its location in the body.
> 
> Larotrectinib is an oral drug that received accelerated breakthrough status after it displayed remarkable success in treating adult and pediatric cancers that currently have no satisfactory alternative treatments or have progressed following treatment.
> 
> This is the second ever FDA-approved drug that treats cancers based on a certain genetic trait, regardless of the patient’s age or cancer type, and it is the first drug to ever treat cancers that contain the specific NTRK gene that is present in several common forms of adult cancer and many forms of rare pediatric cancers.


As to affordability:



> For starters, the company insists that because the bulk of insurance companies will be covering the costs, most patients will only have to pay about $20 or less out-of-pocket. If there are complications with the insurance coverage, Bayer will help with expensive co-pays or provide the medication to the patient for free while the details are worked out.
> 
> If all else fails, then the company will connect the patient with a Bayer-funded charity that provides the drug free of charge.
> 
> Additionally, Bayer’s Vitrakvi Commitment Program states that if a patient does not show a response to the drug within 90 days, then they will refund the cost of the medication to the insurance company or government program, according to Forbes.


Good.


----------



## FeXL

Further on cancer research.

New virus could help destroy cancer



> Seneca Valley virus (SVV) is an oncolytic virus that could be the next breakthrough cancer therapy. Researchers at the Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology Graduate University (OIST) in Japan and the University of Otago in Dunedin, New Zealand, described the behavior of this virus in a study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
> 
> The study explains how SVV interacts with tumors while sparing healthy cells.
> 
> To examine the behavior of the virus, scientists used cryo-electron microscopy to capture images of thousands of particles and view their structure in high resolution. Understanding the structure of these particles is key to creating an effective cancer-killing virus that scientists can use to develop new drugs and therapies.
> 
> SVV is unusual because it targets a specific receptor in tumor cells. This receptor is called anthrax toxin receptor 1 (ANTXR1), and it is only present in tumors. The cousin of this receptor, called ANTXR2, only appears on healthy tissues.
> 
> SVV binds to the receptor in tumors but not the one in healthy cells. The behavior of this virus could potentially make it a suitable therapy for many types of cancer, as the ANTXR1 receptor is present on the tumor cells of over 60 percent of human cancers.
> 
> "The differences between the two receptors are subtle, but, nonetheless, these subtle differences make one bind the virus with high affinity while the other doesn't," says co-senior study author Prof. Matthias Wolf, principal investigator of the Molecular Cryo-Electron Microscopy Unit at OIST.
> 
> "The components must fit together like a key in a lock — this is a highly evolved system where everything fits perfectly."


----------



## FeXL

New Study Provides Further Evidence that Marijuana Is a Gateway Drug



> A new study looking at alcohol, cigarette, and marijuana use among adolescents gives some interesting and helpful conclusions. Well, helpful conclusions if people will be willing to remove their cultural blinders concerning marijuana. Since the politically and culturally popular thing to do is to extol the virtues of the recreational use of marijuana, the study's sharp gateway-drug implications will most likely be a warning that is derided and unheeded.


More:



> The bad news for those adolescents who begin with marijuana as well as for those who are in a high-risk group for marijuana use due to their cigarette or alcohol use is that:
> 
> Marijuana initiation may also affect subsequent drug use through similar biological mechanisms that have been proposed for other substances; emerging evidence from animal models suggests that THC exposure early in adolescence influences reward sensitivity to other drugs including nicotine ( Dinieri and Hurd, 2012; Panlilio et al., 2013; Pistis et al., 2004), and that adult marijuana use who initiated in adolescence have impairments in memory and prefrontal as well hippocampal volume ( Batalla et al., 2013; Filbey and Yezhuvath, 2013). Existing epidemiological data suggest that marijuana use increases the risk of subsequent cigarette initiation, supporting the hypothesis that marijuana could be causally associated with subsequent polysubstance use ( Nguyen et al., 2018).
> 
> Marijuana being a gateway drug has yet to be proven conclusively, but the research points solidly in that direction. Pro-weed advocates need to stop pretending that marijuana is harmless.


----------



## SINC

⬆

Been saying that for many years.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> New Study Provides Further Evidence that Marijuana Is a Gateway Drug
> 
> 
> 
> More:


This is why I am so amazed at Health Canada trying to come down hard on "vapes" as untested and potentially dangerous. We already know the dangers associated with cannabis, but it's gotten a free pass. Don't get me wrong, I think people should be able to consume whatever drug they choose. but I don't like the double standard.


----------



## FeXL

*~Becauth ith's 2015!*



Macfury said:


> We already know the dangers associated with cannabis, but it's gotten a free pass.


It's because The Dope is using marijuana as a vote buyer. There are a lot more potheads than vapers.


----------



## FeXL

2.4-million-year-old tools found in Algeria could upend human origin story



> Archaeologists in Algeria have discovered stone tools and cut animal bones that may be up to 2.4 million years old, bringing into question East Africa's title as the cradle of humanity, according to research published Thursday in the journal Science.
> 
> The artifacts - more ancient than those discovered in the region until now - were found in Setif, some 200 miles (300 kilometres) east of Algiers, by a team of international researchers, including Algerians.


Interesting.


----------



## FeXL

This is a pretty pointed fence for me.

Genetically edited twins give birth to scientific, ethical controversies



> The arrival of twin girls born in China, whose genetic make-up was edited while they were embryos using cutting-edge technology, has given birth to ethical qualms and scientific controversies.


Just because we can, should we?


----------



## FeXL

The Sound Of Settled Science



> Deep Carbon;
> 
> _ Barely living “zombie” bacteria and other forms of life constitute an immense amount of carbon deep within Earth’s subsurface—245 to 385 times greater than the carbon mass of all humans on the surface, according to scientists nearing the end of a 10-year international collaboration to reveal Earth’s innermost secrets.
> 
> On the eve of the American Geophysical Union’s annual meeting, scientists with the Deep Carbon Observatory today reported several transformational discoveries, including how much and what kinds of life exist in the deep subsurface under the greatest extremes of pressure, temperature, and low energy and nutrient availability.
> 
> […]
> 
> “Today too, we know that subsurface life is common. Ten years ago, we had sampled only a few sites—the kinds of places we’d expect to find life. Now, thanks to ultra-deep sampling, we know we can find them pretty much everywhere, albeit the sampling has obviously reached only an infinitesimally tiny part of the deep biosphere.”
> 
> “Our studies of deep biosphere microbes have produced much new knowledge, but also a realization and far greater appreciation of how much we have yet to learn about subsurface life,” says Rick Colwell, Oregon State University, USA. “For example, scientists do not yet know all the ways in which deep subsurface life affects surface life and vice versa. And, for now, we can only marvel at the nature of the metabolisms that allow life to survive under the extremely impoverished and forbidding conditions for life in deep Earth.”_​


----------



## FeXL

The Sound Of Settled Science



> Snowball Earth: – The idea was first proposed back in 1973 by a geologist named William White, but no one took him seriously…


I first heard about the Snowball Earth hypothesis back in the mid 70's. Interesting that enough evidence has been...unearthed  to make further study worthwhile.

Comments from Don B & Bill Illis very good.

Also, ignore the nod to CO2...


----------



## FeXL

And well it should.

'Settled Science' Is Going the Way of BuzzFeed



> "Settled science" and BuzzFeed share a fatal commonality. Both are driven by an agenda rather than facts. BuzzFeed learned that lesson yet another time last week. Two years ago, the publication pushed the Clinton-bought phony and unverified Trump Russia dossier, which launched stories of collusion, FISA warrants, and the ongoing Mueller investigation.
> 
> In a bit of irony, it was the Mueller team that slapped down BuzzFeed's latest story accusing President Trump of asking Michael Cohen to lie to Congress. Imagine the fake news media being fact-checked by their hero, Robert Mueller.
> 
> So-called settled science faces similar collisions with reality. Driven by a particular agenda, whether financial or political, science becomes blinded to any contrarian views, insisting that the issue is "settled," shutting off any further inquiry, debate, or honest disagreement. In some areas of science, dissenters are labeled as "deniers" with threats of violence, loss of job, or even imprisonment.


----------



## FeXL

As it's Alzheimer’s Awareness month, couple articles on Alzheimer's.

Research is revealing many ways that we can reduce our risk of dementia



> There are three dementia risk factors that you can’t do anything about: age, sex and genetics. But a growing body of evidence is discovering early-life, mid-life and late-life contributors to dementia risk that we can do something about — either for our own or our children’s future brain health.


Memory Loss Caused by Alzheimer’s Can Be Restored: Study



> The team, led by University at Buffalo scientists, found that by focusing on gene changes caused by influences other than DNA sequences - called epigenetics - it was possible to reverse memory decline in an animal model of Alzheimer's.


----------



## FeXL

And one more.

Alzheimer’s cure and cause hypothesized in new research



> This week Alzheimer’s Disease was found to be scientifically associated with the simple act of brushing one’s own teeth. Several studies have been converging on porphyromonas gingivalis (PG), or (PG), bacteria associated with the proliferation of gum disease. A study published this week puts PG in position to be a major factor in breaking down the brain on the pathway to Alzheimer’s Disease. In studies performed thus far, results seem to be pointing in a major way toward PG having something major to do with AD – extremely major.


I'm going to put this one into the "Correlation is not causation" file for now. However, interesting read.


----------



## FeXL

On SINC's website today he links to an article on CBD, cannabidiol.

Just wanted to go over a recent conversation I'd had with the family MD about the efficacy of CBD.

My father has chronic, continuous neck pain from two cervical vertebrae rubbing against each other. The disc between had long since worn out. He has tried various garden variety painkillers to no avail, he's not interested in being perpetually doped up on very strong painkillers. He has tried horse liniment with limited success. His fallback position is Salonpas pads, which supply _some_ relief. At this point doctors tell us it's a matter of managing the pain, rather than eliminating it.

For the last few months I'd been reading articles here & there about CBD oil in the hopes that it may work on Dad's neck. On a recent visit to the medical clinic on an unrelated issue, I broached the subject with his doctor. I mentioned that I had been unable to find any solid research dealing with pain alleviation but we were interested in learning more.

He stated flat out that there was no randomized, double blind research that he was aware of. He noted that he could issue a prescription if we were interested in trying it. He had done so around a dozen times in the recent past for various treatments and not a single patient had come back with an "Aha!" moment. At best the responses had been, "Meh".

The doctor also noted the general public's ignorance on the use of pot & side products for medical purposes & that The Dope had screwed up royally by legalizing weed, largely because the medical community suddenly had to deal with all the misinformation floating around. He related a story from a few weeks back where he had this 14 year old boy earnestly assuring him that weed could cure cancer.

Based on the information the doctor had given us we decided against trying it out.

Just an FYI.


----------



## eMacMan

FeXL said:


> On SINC's website today he links to an article on CBD, cannabidiol.
> 
> Just wanted to go over a recent conversation I'd had with the family MD about the efficacy of CBD.
> 
> My father has chronic, continuous neck pain from two cervical vertebrae rubbing against each other. The disc between had long since worn out. He has tried various garden variety painkillers to no avail, he's not interested in being perpetually doped up on very strong painkillers. He has tried horse liniment with limited success. His fallback position is Salonpas pads, which supply _some_ relief. At this point doctors tell us it's a matter of managing the pain, rather than eliminating it.
> 
> For the last few months I'd been reading articles here & there about CBD oil in the hopes that it may work on Dad's neck. On a recent visit to the medical clinic on an unrelated issue, I broached the subject with his doctor. I mentioned that I had been unable to find any solid research dealing with pain alleviation but we were interested in learning more.
> 
> He stated flat out that there was no randomized, double blind research that he was aware of. He noted that he could issue a prescription if we were interested in trying it. He had done so around a dozen times in the recent past for various treatments and not a single patient had come back with an "Aha!" moment. At best the responses had been, "Meh".
> 
> The doctor also noted the general public's ignorance on the use of pot & side products for medical purposes & that The Dope had screwed up royally by legalizing weed, largely because the medical community suddenly had to deal with all the misinformation floating around. He related a story from a few weeks back where he had this 14 year old boy earnestly assuring him that weed could cure cancer.
> 
> Based on the information the doctor had given us we decided against trying it out.
> 
> Just an FYI.


A couple of observations. With Cannabis being categorized a Class 1 drug in the US and elsewhere, double blind studies were pretty much impossible. If it is efficacious Big Pharma has zero motivation to fund studies as it would cut into their big money makers. The fact they continue to choose not to study it convinces me they are probably afraid of the results.

I can relate some direct and semi-direct stories. Sister-in-law, has a very bad back. Cortisone treatments were becoming pretty much useless, lasting only a few days with injections having to be 3 months apart. She is now using cannabidiol. It has not been a miracle cure. It has restored some of her mobility and independence. It has also reduced her pain levels enough that she is no longer tempted to go the Oxycontin route.

Good friend's son has a traumatic brain injury, was suffering multiple daily seizures some of them the gran mal variety. Tried about every drug in the arsenal with no success and some of them aggravating the problem. With Cannabidiol his seizures are down to one a month, his wife no longer has to be constantly at his side, and he is even able to drive.

This is a little less direct, from another forum I watch. An individual with BPH reports Cannabidiol treatment has helped reduced the size of his prostate and helped slightly relieve symptoms beyond what meds alone were doing.

NOTE: Cannabidiol contains little or even zero THC.

I would put Cannabis in the very unlikely to do harm category. Where there are really no other viable options, why not give it a try? 

In the case of your dad it cannot repair the problem, and the only way to find out if it helps with the symptoms is to try it. You already know how well (poorly) the alternatives work. Sadly the total lack of research makes it very difficult to determine which strain is most likely to be helpful.


----------



## Macfury

eMacMan you're right about studies. Nobody was given permission to run a clinical trial for anything other than proving the negative effects of cannabis, while CBD received no attention at all. 

CBD can just as easily be extracted from hemp as cannabis. There _are_ clinical trials that show CBD as effective in controlling seizures. The FDA also recently approved a CBD-containing drug to treat patients with Dravet syndrome.

A longer term study taking place in Canada is following a large group of people who already take opioids for pain. Given the option of using cannabis instead, many reduce their opioid intake significantly or completely. 

https://www.businesswire.com/news/h...reliminary-Data-Largest-National-Longitudinal

There's a secondary observation that suggests that opioids become more effective while using cannabis, even if they previously appeared to be losing their effectiveness. Given the solid research on the dangers of opioids, I would be inclined to give a cannabis treatment a chance.


----------



## FeXL

Thx for the replies, guys.


----------



## FeXL

Golden Rice is coming. Finally! Will it be the game-changer hinted at for almost 20 years?



> Comes the news that the government of Bangladesh is about to approve Golden Rice for commercial release some time in the next three months.
> 
> First and foremost this is fantastic news for Southeast Asia for humanitarian and economic development reasons. On a less consequential level this is great news for the overall debate surrounding the use of biotech in agriculture. Golden Rice occupied a space in the debate as the Great Golden Hope of Biotech Crops, a wholly virtuous crop devoid of the grubby commercial concerns of intellectual property or profit motive. In this case, the IP had been donated, the rice was being developed by a non-profit NGO and the rice will be given freely to farmers and local breeding programs—a trait of value directly to consumers, among them some of the most vulnerable people on the planet. Because of this history, it is a crop not linked to so-called ‘industrial agriculture’ and its key trait is not tied to pesticide use.


----------



## FeXL

Canadian Tyrannosaurus rex turns out to be largest ever found



> Back in 1991, paleontologists from Canada's University of Alberta discovered the fossilized remains of a Tyrannosaurus rex in the province of Saskatchewan. Nicknamed "Scotty" in honor of a celebratory bottle of Scotch that was enjoyed when its skeleton was found, it has now been declared the world's largest T rex.
> 
> Although the 66 million year-old bones were unearthed 28 years ago, they were encrusted in hard sandstone. That material has been gradually removed in the years since, with the skeleton only recently being assembled and measured.
> 
> *At a length of 13 meters (42.7 ft) and with an estimated body weight of 8,800 kg (19,401 lb), Scotty was certainly a big reptile – bigger than any other known T rex specimen.* It has a few additional claims to fame, too.


Bold mine.

Very kewl.


----------



## FeXL

Stunning.

Catastrophic New Details From The 'Day The Dinosaurs Died' Uncovered in Fossils



> Sixty-six million years ago, a massive asteroid crashed into a shallow sea near Mexico. The impact carved out a 90-mile-wide crater and flung mountains of earth into space. Earthbound debris fell to the planet in droplets of molten rock and glass.
> 
> 
> Ancient fish caught glass blobs in their gills as they swam, gape-mouthed, beneath the strange rain. Large, sloshing waves threw animals onto dry land, then more waves buried them in silt.
> 
> Scientists working in North Dakota recently dug up fossils of these fish: They died within the first minutes or hours after the asteroid hit, according to a paper published Friday in _Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences_, a discovery that has sparked tremendous excitement among paleontologists.
> 
> "You're going back to the day that the dinosaurs died," said Timothy Bralower, a Pennsylvania State University paleoceanographer who is studying the impact crater and was not involved with this work.
> 
> "That's what this is. This is the day the dinosaurs died."


The Hell Creek formation has always been very rich in fossils.


----------



## FeXL

Statistics And Probability In Scientific Research Is Immensely Complicated, And Is Almost Always Misinterpreted By The Media And Especially By Juries



> I am not sufficiently knowledgeable about glyphosate (Round-Up) or statistical analysis to speak intelligently about this study, but it makes some interesting points, and illuminates some of the things about scientific inquiry that many people don't understand. The analysis and interpretation of the data is just as important as the collection of the data. And; What questions are the researchers asking? Are they starting from a neutral premise, or are they tipping their hats, like...oh...for instance..."The world is warming because of man: How much and why?"
> Glyphosate Vs. Caffeine: Acute and Chronic Toxicity Assessments Explained
> 
> The current brouhaha over Round-Up is a colossal failure of our legal system and, perhaps even more catastrophic, our scientific education in America.


Interesting read.


----------



## FeXL

Fake Academe: Fined $ 50.1 Million



> News Flash: “U.S. judge rules deceptive publisher should pay $50 million in damages”.
> 
> Appearing yesterday in _Science magazine online_ is the news that _“A U.S. federal judge has ordered the OMICS International publishing group to pay $50.1 million in damages for deceiving thousands of authors who published in its journals and attended its conferences. It’s one of the first rulings of its kind against one of the largest publishers accused of so-called predatory tactics.”_ [source: all italicized quoted text from Science mag ]
> 
> The OMICS group featured large in Jeffery Beall’s original list of “predatory open access publishing” in 2008.
> 
> _“Judge Gloria Navarro of the U.S. District Court in Las Vegas, Nevada, granted summary judgment without a trial, accepting as uncontroverted a set of allegations made in 2016 by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in Washington, D.C., in its capacity as a consumer watchdog. The ruling also bars OMICS from similar future conduct.”_​


Very interesting.


----------



## FeXL

Headline is misleading. They actually found skin impressions.

Perfectly preserved dinosaur skin found in Korea



> "These are the first tracks ever found where perfect skin impressions cover the entire surface of every track," Lockley said. The skin patterns of different groups of dinosaurs varied and, like fingerprints, were signatures of differences in anatomy.
> 
> The skin traces come from tracks of the smallest known theropod, the Minisauripus. The footprints are only an inch long, and the scientists were able to find perfectly preserved skin traces on them. This was the 10th discovery of a site with Minisauripus tracks and the first to show skin traces.


----------



## eMacMan

FeXL said:


> Fake Academe: Fined $ 50.1 Million
> 
> 
> 
> Very interesting.


If Judge Navarro had not proven herself corrupt beyond contempt during the Bundy trials, I would give her verdict a lot more weight. As it is I have to wonder.


----------



## FeXL

eMacMan said:


> If Judge Navarro had not proven herself corrupt beyond contempt during the Bundy trials, I would give her verdict a lot more weight. As it is I have to wonder.


Good catch! I'd forgotten about that.


----------



## Macfury

King Kong Bundy was innocent!


----------



## FeXL

Once again, while interesting, are the plaques cause or effect?

Alzheimer's: Synthetic protein blocks toxic beta-amyloid



> Alzheimer's is a relentless disease in which toxic clusters of beta-amyloid protein collect in brain cells. Now, scientists have designed a synthetic peptide, or small protein, that can block beta-amyloid in its early and most harmful stages.


----------



## FeXL

Tel Aviv University researchers discover path to new epilepsy treatment



> The adaptation of a known drug for the treatment of multiple sclerosis could help epilepsy patients, a new study by researchers at Tel Aviv University has revealed.
> 
> The potential breakthrough, which may help patients with epilepsy and other brain disorders who do not respond to available treatments today, is based on the discovery of a new mechanism that regulates and ensures the stability of brain activity.
> While most researchers have previously looked for malfunctions in the regulation mechanism that may be perceived as a “thermostat” of neural activity, restoring the neural network to its original set point after every event that increases or diminishes activity, Tel Aviv University researchers led by Prof. Inna Slutsky now argue that the set point itself deviates from the norm among epilepsy sufferers.


More:



> “We also assume that the same phenomenon – an abnormal set point regulation – may very well be found in neurodegenerative diseases characterized by anomalous levels of activity in various parts of the brain, such as Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s.* In a new study, we are now testing the effectiveness of our approach for treating Alzheimer’s.*”


Bold mine.


----------



## FeXL

What Could Possibly Go Wrong?



> 8 Comments
> 
> A new report from the U.S. Justice Department reveals that a company by the name of Sapa Profiles (now Hydro Extrusion Portland) falsified tests to make their products appear to be, well, not total garbage. But they were total garbage, and the faulty metal is now being blamed for a pair of high-profile failures that cost NASA hundreds of millions of dollars.
> 
> As NASA explains in its own account of the matter, both the Glory mission (2011) and Orbiting Carbon Observatory mission (2009) ended when the nosecones of the Taurus XL rockets carrying the pricey hardware failed. Those components were built out of aluminum from Sapa Profiles, which forged test documents to make it appear as though the material met the standards of NASA (and several other clients).
> ​


Interesting.


----------



## FeXL

Newly Discovered Bat-Like Dinosaur Reveals the Intricacies of Prehistoric Flight



> Though _Ambopteryx longibrachium_ was likely a glider, the fossil is helping scientists discover how dinosaurs first took to the skies


----------



## FeXL

Ketone drink may one day fight Alzheimer’s disease and dementia



> A drink derived from coconut oil could one day be used to fight the memory loss associated with Alzheimer’s disease and dementia, according to new research from Quebec.
> 
> Memory loss may be caused by ageing brains struggling to get enough energy, which is usually delivered in the form of glucose. A new study published this month in Alzheimer’s & Dementia suggests the brains of seniors with mild memory problems can use a substance called ketones, produced in the body through a drink, as an effective alternative.


----------



## FeXL

Further food "settled science".

Poultry may raise bad cholesterol the same as red meat



> Eating a chicken could raise a person's "bad cholesterol" to similar levels as eating a steak, contradicting long-thought ideas about health differences between the meats, new research suggests.
> 
> Researchers found eating white meat poultry may raise low-density lipoprotein levels in the same way as red meat, according to a study published Tuesday in the Journal of Clinical Nutrition. That elevation in bad cholesterol after eating chicken can occur with or without consuming any saturated fat.


----------



## Beej

Viciously abusing a robot. 

https://twitter.com/i/status/1139615763336171525

See the 1 minute mark for a glimpse of the future.

To our future robot overlords: I am not okay with this violence. 
01110010 01101111 01100010 01101111 01110100 00100000 01110010 01101001 01100111 01101000 01110100 01110011 00100000 01100001 01110010 01100101 00100000 01101000 01110101 01101101 01100001 01101110 00100000 01110010 01101001 01100111 01101000 01110100 01110011


----------



## SINC

"robot rights are human rights"

Interesting.


----------



## FeXL

Researchers Have Figured Out How To Convert All Blood Types Into The Universal Type O



> Researchers from the University of British Columbia have figured out how to convert blood types A, B and AB into the universal Type O, which all patients can receive in a transfusion regardless of their own blood type.
> 
> Enzymes can be used to convert A and B type red blood cells into O type, however, the enzymes available to date have not worked well on whole blood.
> 
> That was until scientists considered looking inside the human gut.


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> Researchers Have Figured Out How To Convert All Blood Types Into The Universal Type O


If they've cracked it, that's Nobel Prize stuff right there - an enormous advance in medicine!


----------



## FeXL

GOOD NEWS: New Vaccine Might Prevent Development Of Alzheimer's



> According to the University of New Mexico Health Sciences Department, researchers at the university have created a vaccine that could prevent the development of Alzheimer’s disease.


Related:

Possible breakthrough reported in the prevention of Alzheimer’s disease



> Researchers at University of New Mexico researchers believe they may have found a way to prevent Alzheimer’s disease, reports CBS Albuquerque affiliate KRQE-TV. UNM’s Health and Sciences Department Associate Professor Kiran Bhaskar, who’s been passionate about studying the disease for the last decade, says the search for a cure started with an idea in 2013.
> —“I would say it took about five years or so to get from where the idea generated and get the fully functioning working vaccine,” he says.
> —Bhaskar and his team started to test the vaccine on mice.


----------



## FeXL

*The Science Is Settled!!!*

Study: 95 Percent of Biologists Say Life Begins at Conception



> After a five-year struggle, University of Chicago student Steven Jacobs finally published his study into biologists' opinions on whether life begins at conception. That study won him a Ph.D., but it also angered the liberal biologists and many others in academia. Some have demonized him, saying his survey seemed developed by the Ku Klux Klan and that it would expedite the extinction of the human race.
> 
> Jacobs' study found that a vast majority of Americans believe biologists should determine the question "When does a human's life begin?" and that the question is important to the abortion debate. Then Jacobs surveyed biologists and found that 95 percent of them agreed that "a human's life begins at fertilization."


h/t JJ Sefton @ AoS, who noted:



> The science is settled, lefties. Consensus.


:lmao::clap::lmao::clap::lmao::clap::lmao:


----------



## FeXL

Just one more reason to take any gov't recommended dietary report with a truckload of salt...

Study Finds Fruit Juice and Sugar-Sweetened Drinks Associated with Cancer, Artificially Sweetened Drinks Not Associated With Cancer



> The medical experts accepted a theory with no evidence for it and foisted it on the country for fifty years in what has been called the largest, longest uncontrolled experiment in history.
> 
> We're finally now starting to test what this experiment has wrought.
> 
> Drinking large amounts of fruit juice may raise your risk of cancer, according to a big study which has found a link between the regular consumption of all kinds of sugary drinks and the likelihood of developing the disease.
> 
> The study, carried out in France, is the first substantial piece of research to find a specific association between sugar and cancer. Sugary drinks such as colas, lemonade and energy drinks have been linked to obesity, which is a cause of cancer, but the French researchers suggest there could also be other reasons sugar could trigger it.
> 
> The study, published in the BMJ, finds the association with cancer is just as strong with fruit juices as it is with colas. "When the group of sugary drinks was split into 100% fruit juices and other sugary drinks, the consumption of both beverage types was associated with a higher risk of overall cancer," it says.​


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Just one more reason to take any gov't recommended dietary report with a truckload of salt...
> 
> Study Finds Fruit Juice and Sugar-Sweetened Drinks Associated with Cancer, Artificially Sweetened Drinks Not Associated With Cancer


Have been saying this for years. Pop in general contains less sugar than many fruit juices: Coke, 11g/100 g; grape juice 14 g/100 g.


----------



## FeXL

Physicists Overturn a 100-Year-Old Assumption on How Brain Cells Work



> In fact, a study published in 2017 has overturned a 100-year-old assumption on what exactly makes a neuron 'fire', posing new mechanisms behind certain neurological disorders.
> 
> A team of physicists from Bar-Ilan University in Israel conducted experiments on rat neurons grown in a culture to determine exactly how a neuron responds to the signals it receives from other cells.
> 
> To understand why this is important, we need to go back to 1907 when a French neuroscientist named Louis Lapicque proposed a model to describe how the voltage of a nerve cell's membrane increases as a current is applied.
> 
> Once reaching a certain threshold, the neuron reacts with a spike of activity, after which the membrane's voltage resets.
> 
> What this means is a neuron won't send a message unless it collects a strong enough signal.
> 
> Lapique's equations weren't the last word on the matter, not by far. But the basic principle of his integrate-and-fire model has remained relatively unchallenged in subsequent descriptions, today forming the foundation of most neuronal computational schemes.


Interesting.


----------



## FeXL

A Supermassive Black Hole At Our Galaxy’s Center Flared Out, Astronomer Says



> The supermassive black hole at the center of the Milky Way galaxy emitted a bizarre flash of light, an astronomer studying the phenomenon said.
> 
> The flash likely occurred around May 13, and was uncharacteristic of the normal celestial behavior of the black hole, Sagittarius A, at the center of the galaxy, according to Science Alert.


----------



## eMacMan

FeXL said:


> A Supermassive Black Hole At Our Galaxy’s Center Flared Out, Astronomer Says



No the flash did not occur around May 13. We are about 26,000 light years from the center of the galaxy. It was observed around May 13, it happened 26,000 years ago.


----------



## Macfury

eMacMan said:


> No the flash did not occur around May 13. We are about 26,000 light years from the center of the galaxy. It was observed around May 13, it happened 26,000 years ago.


What's a few dozen millennia? Such a fusspot!


----------



## FeXL

Ebola 'no longer incurable' as Congo trial finds drugs boost survival



> Scientists are a step closer to being able to cure the deadly Ebola hemorrhagic fever after two experimental drugs showed survival rates of as much as 90% in a clinical trial in Congo.


----------



## FeXL

(Article from 2017)

Interesting.

Dental plaque DNA suggests Neanderthals treated pain with salicylic acid



> Scientists have discovered another window into the Neanderthal's past -- dental plaque. New analysis of DNA trapped in ancient dental plaque suggests the early human relatives treated pain with salicylic acid, a plant hormone found in poplar plants and the active ingredient in aspirin.


----------



## FeXL

Dinosaurs extinction: Asteroid hit with force of 10 billion atomic bombs and deposited ‘hundreds of feet’ of material in hours, new research says



> Sixty-six million years ago, life on our planet was going on just as it had on any other day – enormous reptiles dominated the landscape. Herbivorous behemoths up to 40 metres long co-mingled with bi-pedal carnivorous titans, seas teemed with fanged leviathans and the skies were navigated by leathery-winged creatures larger than any birds in history.
> 
> But in moments, after 180 million years of prosperity, this extraordinary abundance of life was all but obliterated.
> 
> The asteroid which wiped out the dinosaurs hit the Yucatan peninsula in Mexico with the power of 10 billion atomic bombs of the size used in the Second World War.
> 
> The impact set alight vast wildfires stretching thousands of miles, triggered towering tsunamis and blasted so much sulphur into the atmosphere it blocked the sun, causing the catastrophic global cooling that ultimately doomed the dinosaurs.


----------



## FeXL

Scientific First: Water Found On Planet Outside Our Solar System



> For the first time, scientists searching for extraterrestrial life have found an exoplanet (a planet outside our solar system) that has water. Two new studies found that K2-18 b, which lies 110 light-years from Earth and orbits a red dwarf star, has water vapor and possibly even liquid water clouds, as Space.com reports.


----------



## FeXL

NASA emails reveal a very near-miss from a “city-killer” asteroid



> However, emails from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) reveal that we very nearly had a significant and catastrophic climate change event for which humankind could hardly be blamed.
> 
> Internal emails from NASA show that the space agency was unaware of asteroid 2019 OK, described as a “city killer,” until the last moment on July 24.
> 
> The giant, football field-sized space rock was not detected by researchers until 24 hours before it was set to whiz past Earth at a distance of just 48,000 miles, traveling at 55,000 miles per hour.
> 
> “Because there may be media coverage tomorrow, I’m alerting you that in about 30 mins a 57-130 meter sized asteroid will pass Earth at only 0.19 lunar distances (~48,000 miles),” Lindley Johnson, NASA’s planetary defense officer, wrote in a July 24 email, adding the asteroid “was spotted about 24 hrs ago.”​
> Paul Chodas of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory indicated that the asteroid managed to slip through NASA’s tracking systems.
> 
> “This object slipped through a whole series of our capture nets,” he stated in an email to his colleagues. “I wonder how many times this situation has happened without the asteroid being discovered at all.”
> 
> ...​
> *How many billions of dollars have been squandered by climate change activists and politicians, diverted to useless global warming projects and to ineffective energy technologies?
> 
> All of those resources, including the scientific research and experimentation, that have been used on “climate change” could be going to projects that could help us detect asteroids that really present a threat to this planet.*


Bold mine.


----------



## FeXL

Three letters: D. D. T.

Mosquito Experiment Has a Surprise Outcome



> The idea made sense on paper: Introduce male mosquitoes genetically engineered to be sterile into the bug population and watch the insect numbers drop. As _New Atlas_ reports, that's generally what happened in a Brazil experiment—but only for about 18 months. At that point, the numbers rebounded, say Yale researchers in a new study at _Scientific Reports_. But perhaps more troubling is this: Scientists say the modified genes are now showing up in the mosquito population, which was not supposed to happen. This is "very likely resulting in a more robust population than the pre-release population due to hybrid vigor," the researchers write in the study. The British company behind the experiment, Oxitec, strongly disputes the findings and tells Gizmodo it is trying to have the study retracted or corrected.


Which begs the question: Did these geniuses actually try this is a controlled situation in a lab first?

Asking for a friend...


----------



## FeXL

Longish, excellent read.

Records Found in Dusty Basement Undermine Decades of Dietary Advice



> Ramsden, of the National Institutes of Health, unearthed raw data from a 40-year-old study, which challenges the dogma that eating vegetable fats instead of animal fats is good for the heart. The study, the largest gold-standard experiment testing that idea, found the opposite, Ramsden and his colleagues reported on Tuesday in BMJ (formerly the British Medical Journal).
> 
> Although the study is more than just another entry in the long-running nutrition wars—it is more rigorous than the vast majority of research on the topic—Ramsden makes no claims that it settles the question. Instead, he said, his discovery and analysis of long-lost data underline how the failure to publish the results of clinical trials can undermine truth.
> 
> Absent a time machine, it’s impossible to know how publication of the study, conducted in Minnesota from 1968 to 1973, might have influenced dietary advice. *But in an accompanying editorial, Lennert Veerman of Australia’s University of Queensland concluded that “the benefits of choosing polyunsaturated fat over saturated fat seem a little less certain than we thought.”*


More:



> *Analyzing the reams of old records, Ramsden and his team found, in line with the “diet-heart hypothesis,” that substituting vegetable oils lowered total blood cholesterol levels, by an average of 14 percent.
> 
> But that lowered cholesterol did not help people live longer. Instead, the lower cholesterol fell, the higher the risk of dying: 22 percent higher for every 30-point fall. Nor did the corn-oil group have less atherosclerosis or fewer heart attacks.*


All bold mine.


----------



## FeXL

Largest Child-Sacrifice Graveyard Strikes Huge Blow to Native American Innocence Myth



> Every Columbus Day, liberals insist that the story of European colonization is a simple narrative of good versus evil: horrible Europeans came upon innocent Native Americans, introducing slavery, exploitation, and oppression. A massive archaeological discovery blows one of many gaping holes in this narrative. While Europeans did indeed do horrible things, the natives weren't exactly innocent.
> 
> Two hundred and fifty skeletons of children between the ages of 4 and 14 have been unearthed at Huanchaco, Peru, in what experts say is likely the world's largest child-sacrifice site. Huanchaco is a site of the Chimú culture (1200-1400), a predecessor to the mighty Inca Empire, which also carried out child sacrifices.


----------



## FeXL

Scientists find a way to target the protein behind Huntington’s disease



> Huntington's disease is caused by a dominant mutation, meaning that anyone who inherits it will develop the disease. Symptoms typically start when people are in their 30s, and those include dementia and the loss of motor control. Despite having identified the gene decades ago, we've struggled to find a way to use that knowledge to make patients' lives better. The protein that is produced by the damaged gene is so similar to the normal version that targeting it has proven nearly impossible.
> 
> But now, scientists in China have devised a way to specifically get rid of the damaged protein. They've identified molecules that can link the damaged form of the protein to a system that cells use to target proteins for digestion and recycling. Tests in mice and flies seem to indicate that this is enough to reverse many of the problems caused by the Huntington's mutation.


----------



## FeXL

_Not_ Africa?

That's gonna leave a mark...

New Ancient Ape Species Rewrites the Story of Bipedalism



> When Madelaine Böhme, a researcher at the University of Tübingen in Germany, unearthed the partial skeleton of an ancient ape at the Hammerschmiede clay pit in Bavaria, she knew she was looking at something special. Compared to fragments, an intact partial skeleton can tell paleoanthropologists about a creature’s body proportions and how its anatomy might have functioned. A relative newcomer to the field and a paleoclimatologist by trade, Böhme enlisted Begun’s expertise in analyzing the fossil ape.
> 
> Böhme and colleagues determined that the bones they found came from a dryopithecine ape, an extinct ancestor of humans and great apes that once lived in the Miocene epoch. The fossils are approximately 11.6 million years old and came from at least four individual apes, including one partial skeleton. The team described the newfound ancestor, named _Danuvius guggenmosi_, in a study published today in _Nature_.


----------



## FeXL

The Evolution Of Falciparum Malaria (the nastiest kind)



> Nature, to the extent it cares at all, likes to kill us.
> 
> And of course it doesn't care one way or the other, because "Nature" isn't a sentient being. It is a numberless collection of processes and equilibria and feedback loops and all sorts of fascinating stuff.
> 
> 50,000-year-old gene reveals how deadliest malaria parasite jumped from gorillas to humans


----------



## FeXL

NASA tracking THREE asteroids headed this way, two spotted just 2 days ago



> NASA is currently tracking three near-Earth objects (NEOs) due to fly past the Earth on November 20. Worryingly, two of the three were only spotted this past weekend, once again raising tensions over planetary defense.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> ...once again raising tensions over planetary defense


Correction. Raising tensions over the fact that we have NO planetary defenses. But we're hot on the trail of Globular Warming


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> But we're hot on the trail of Globular Warming


Which, according the the acolytes, will get us long before any asteroids...


----------



## FeXL

A crack in the Martian crust



> The photograph to the right, reduced and cropped to post here, was imaged on October 20, 2019 by the high resolution camera on Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter (MRO). It shows a spectacular thousand-foot-deep canyon in the region of Cerberus Fossae, an area of Mars crossed by numerous deep east-west fissures and depressions.
> 
> Hidden in the small white box on the eastern end of that canyon are Martian geological features, small and at first glance not that interesting, that are of great significance and the focus of intense research.


----------



## FeXL

Scientists Discover Molecule That Triggers Self-Destruction of Pancreatic Cancer Cells



> With pancreatic cancer ranking as one of the most deadly forms of cancer, researchers are excited to report on a promising new breakthrough for a treatment.
> 
> Pancreatic cancer, which maintains a 95% mortality rate, is resistant to all current treatments. Patients have extremely poor chances of surviving for five years after being diagnosed—and since the disease does not show symptoms until the advanced stages, it is notoriously hard to diagnose.
> 
> However, this new Tel Aviv University study finds that a small molecule has the ability to induce the self-destruction of pancreatic cancer cells. The research was conducted with xenografts—transplantations of human pancreatic cancer into immunocompromised mice. The treatment reduced the number of cancer cells by 90% in the developed tumors a month after being administered.
> 
> The research holds great potential for the development of a new effective therapy to treat this aggressive cancer in humans.


----------



## pm-r

> With pancreatic cancer ranking as one of the most deadly forms of cancer, researchers are excited to report on a promising new breakthrough for a treatment.



Great news and fantastic discovery and development!!!


- Patrick
======


----------



## SINC

pm-r said:


> Great news and fantastic discovery and development!!!
> 
> 
> - Patrick
> ======


+1! :clap:


----------



## FeXL

Great news for mice!

For the First Time, Scientists Have Reversed Dementia in Mice With Drug That Reduces Brain Inflammation



> Rather than targeting the typical rogue proteins associated with dementia, scientists say that—for the very first time—they have reversed dementia in mice with a drug that reduces inflammation.
> 
> *Up until now, most dementia treatments have targeted the amyloid plaques that are found in people with Alzheimer’s disease.* However, the latest study published in _Science Translational Medicine_ suggests targeting inflammation in the brain might stop it in its tracks.
> 
> In experiments conducted at the University of California, Berkeley, senile mice were significantly better at learning new tasks, and became almost as adept as those half their age.


I jest!!!

Interesting they're looking at something else besides the plaques.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Interesting they're looking at something else besides the plaques.


I have often wondered if some researchers are right and that the plaques are a last-ditch protective measure, not a cause.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> I have often wondered if some researchers are right and that the plaques are a last-ditch protective measure, not a cause.


I've never read anything definitive yet on whether the plaques are cause or effect. Which is fine, but if all the focus is on plaques & it ends up being effect then all the time & money expended on that effort could have been used to better ends. That's why I'm pleased to see other directions being taken.


----------



## FeXL

Caution: Link to the former paper of record inside.

The Sound Of Settled Science



> DNA and No Longer Me;
> 
> Three months after his bone marrow transplant, Chris Long of Reno, Nev., learned that the DNA in his blood had changed. It had all been replaced by the DNA of his donor, a German man he had exchanged just a handful of messages with.
> 
> He’d been encouraged to test his blood by a colleague at the Sheriff’s Office, where he worked. She had an inkling this might happen. It’s the goal of the procedure, after all: Weak blood is replaced by healthy blood, and with it, the DNA it contains.
> 
> But four years after his lifesaving procedure, it was not only Mr. Long’s blood that was affected. Swabs of his lips and cheeks contained his DNA — but also that of his donor. Even more surprising to Mr. Long and other colleagues at the crime lab, all of the DNA in his semen belonged to his donor. “I thought that it was pretty incredible that I can disappear and someone else can appear,” he said.
> 
> Mr. Long had become a chimera, the technical term for the rare person with two sets of DNA. The word takes its name from a fire-breathing creature in Greek mythology composed of lion, goat and serpent parts. Doctors and forensic scientists have long known that certain medical procedures turn people into chimeras, but where exactly a donor’s DNA shows up — beyond blood — has rarely been studied with criminal applications in mind.​
> ...
> 
> But don’t worry. The same experts who assured this could never happen have also declared that the phenomenon is harmless.


The thing that immediately comes to mind is criminal law...


----------



## FeXL

Interesting read.

The Many Faces of Scientific Fraud



> Is every scientific article a fraud? This question may seem puzzling to those outside the scientific community. After all, anyone who took a philosophy course in college is likely to think of laboratory work as eminently rational. The assumption is that a researcher faced with an enigma posed by nature formulates a hypothesis, then conceives an experiment to test its validity. The archetypal presentation of articles in the life sciences follows this fine intellectual form: After explaining why a particular question could be asked (introduction) and describing how he or she intends to proceed to answer it (materials and methods), the researcher describes the content of the experiments (results), then interprets them (discussion).
> 
> This is more or less the outline followed by millions of scientific articles published every year throughout the world. It has the virtue of being clear and solid in its logic. It appears transparent and free of any presuppositions. However, as every researcher knows, it is pure falsehood. In reality, nothing takes place the way it is described in a scientific article. The experiments were carried out in a far more disordered manner, in stages far less logical than those related in the article.


----------



## FeXL

Megadunes in the giant canyon of Mars’ north polar icecap



> Cool image time! The photo to the right, cropped and reduced to post here, was taken by the high resolution camera of Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter (MRO) on September 15, 2019, right at the beginning of summer at the north polar icecap of Mars.


----------



## FeXL

_Very_ interesting.

Accidental Discovery of New T-Cell Hailed as Major Breakthrough for ‘Universal’ Cancer Therapy



> Researchers at Cardiff University have discovered a new type of killer T-cell that offers hope of a “one-size-fits-all” cancer therapy.
> 
> T-cell therapies for cancer—where immune cells are removed, modified and returned to the patient’s blood to seek and destroy cancer cells—are the latest paradigm in cancer treatments.
> 
> The most widely-used therapy, known as CAR-T, is personalized to each patient, but it only targets a few types of cancers and has not been successful for solid tumors, which make up the vast majority of cancers.
> 
> Cardiff researchers have now discovered T-cells equipped with a new type of T-cell receptor (TCR) which recognizes and kills most human cancer types, while ignoring healthy cells.


More:



> T-cells equipped with the new TCR were shown, in the lab, to kill lung, skin, blood, colon, breast, bone, prostate, ovarian, kidney and cervical cancer cells, while ignoring healthy cells.


----------



## FeXL

Must be Globull Warming!

Mysterious particles spewing from Antarctica defy physics



> Our best model of particle physics is bursting at the seams as it struggles to contain all the weirdness in the universe. Now, it seems more likely than ever that it might pop, thanks to a series of strange events in Antarctica. .
> 
> The death of this reigning physics paradigm, the Standard Model, has been predicted for decades. There are hints of its problems in the physics we already have. Strange results from laboratory experiments suggest flickers of ghostly new species of neutrinos beyond the three described in the Standard Model. And the universe seems full of dark matter that no particle in the Standard Model can explain.
> 
> But recent tantalizing evidence might one day tie those vague strands of data together: Three times since 2016, ultra-high-energy particles have blasted up through the ice of Antarctica, setting off detectors in the Antarctic Impulsive Transient Antenna (ANITA) experiment, a machine dangling from a NASA balloon far above the frozen surface.


Interesting read.


----------



## eMacMan

FeXL said:


> Must be Globull Warming!
> 
> Mysterious particles spewing from Antarctica defy physics
> 
> Interesting read.


I love it when settled science becomes unsettling.


----------



## FeXL

A single ‘paper mill’ appears to have churned out 400 papers, sleuths find



> Online sleuths have discovered what they suspect is a paper mill that has produced more than 400 scientific papers with potentially fabricated images. Some journals are now investigating the papers.
> 
> Elisabeth Bik, a microbiologist–turned–research integrity expert based in San Francisco, along with other “forensic detectives,” identified the potentially problematic papers, which they think came from a single source. They say the papers contain western blot images—used in molecular biology to visualize the presence of proteins—that contain remarkably similar background patterns and unusually neat bands lacking smears, stains, or dots, which often appear in such images.
> 
> “We think that these western blots are not real,” says Bik, who wrote about the case on her blog on 21 February. “Most of them have a very similar layout so we realized these are all coming from the same stable.”


----------



## FeXL

Remember the questionable study claiming glyphosate boosts cancer risk 41%? Lead author reasserts her claim, EPA refutes it, and we take a second look



> In early 2019, mainstream press reports on the alleged dangers of Bayer’s Roundup weed killer prominently featured an alarming statistic about the herbicide’s main ingredient glyphosate. “Common weed killer glyphosate increases cancer risk by 41%, study says,” CNN told its readers last February.


----------



## FeXL

The first complete geologic map of Moon



> Using data from several recent lunar orbiters, scientists have compiled and now released the first comprehensive geologic map of the Moon.


Interesting.


----------



## FeXL

S'more settled science.

New study says universe expanding faster and is younger



> The universe is expanding faster than it used to, meaning it’s about a billion years younger than we thought, a new study by a Nobel Prize winner says. And that’s sending a shudder through the world of physics, making astronomers re-think some of their most basic concepts.
> 
> At issue is a number called the Hubble constant, a calculation for how fast the universe is expanding. Some scientists call it the most important number in cosmology, the study of the origin and development of the universe.
> 
> Using NASA’s Hubble Space Telescope, Johns Hopkins University astronomer Adam Riess concluded in this week’s Astrophysical Journal that the figure is 9% higher than the previous calculation, which was based on studying leftovers from the Big Bang.


----------



## FeXL

Interesting.

Microbes could survive on planets with all-hydrogen atmospheres



> Microbes can survive and grow in 100% hydrogen atmospheres, suggesting life could potentially evolve on a much broader range of alien worlds than is often considered, a new study has found.


More:



> In the new study, researchers investigated how well two different kinds of microbes grew in the lab in 100% hydrogen: the bacterium E. coli, which lacks a nucleus, and yeast, which has one. Although neither microorganism normally lives in environments dominated by hydrogen, the scientists found both could reproduce, switching from their preferred oxygen-consuming metabolism to less efficient anaerobic processes.


----------



## FeXL

Stone tool from Oregon archaeological site could point to oldest human presence in western U.S. -- science



> Hear that hammering? It might be the sound of another nail being driven into the coffin of archaeology's "Clovis first" theory.
> 
> The theory holds that the oldest cultural tradition in the Americas is that of a prehistoric culture identified from distinct stone tools found near Clovis, New Mexico, in the early 20th century.
> 
> However, in the past couple of decades, work at sites such as Monte Verde, Chile, and Oregon's own Paisley Caves has uncovered evidence of human occupation in the Americas that predates the Clovis culture. (While still preliminary and not yet peer-reviewed, some evidence from an archaeological site in Vero Beach, Fla., may suggest humans were present there at least 14,000 years ago.)


----------



## FeXL

Science By Jury



> The RoundUp Method;
> 
> Johnson & Johnson has announced that it will stop selling talcum baby powder in the United States and Canada. Why? Because of predatory trial lawyers who enrich themselves by lying about science.
> 
> Talcum powder is absorptive, so it’s mainly used to help keep otherwise moist body parts dry. (You can use your imagination here, but this SNL skit provides a hint.) For years, there have been rumblings that talcum powder is linked to ovarian cancer. But just like the fictitious link between hexavalent chromium in drinking water and cancer popularized by the movie Erin Brockovich, the link between talcum powder and cancer is basically anecdotal.
> 
> A new review published in January 2020 by JAMA Oncology concluded that “there was not a statistically significant association between use of powder in the genital area and incident ovarian cancer.” Though the report cautions that there still could be a tiny causal effect that is too small to be detected, the sample size was large (more than 250,000 women observed over a total of 3.8 million person-years). This indicates that the conclusion of no causal effect is probably correct.
> 
> The UK’s National Health Service (NHS) touted the results on its website, proclaiming, “‘No evidence’ that talcum powder causes ovarian cancer new review finds.” But for reasons that I will never understand, American websites remain wishy-washy. The American Cancer Society, for instance, says that the evidence is “less clear.”​


----------



## FeXL

An exposed dry waterfall on Mars



> As you can see, this image straddles across the canyon called Osuga Valles, and heads downstream to the east. It also shows a point where the grade of that canyon suddenly drops. If water ever flowed here this place would have been the location of a truly spectacular waterfall.
> 
> More likely, these cataracts mark the location where sometime in the past a glacier had flowed down this valley, cutting a path until it broke out into the large and wide dead end area that appears to have no clear outlet. For some reason at this point the downhill grade of this canyon suddenly dropped, with the glacier following that sudden steep drop.


----------



## FeXL

Caution: Link to the Commie News Network inside.

There's been noises about this for some time. Interesting to see it come together.

New Evidence Suggests Humans Were In North America 30,000 Years Ago



> Recent archeological evidence unearthed in a cave in Mexico, as well as a reexamination of several dozen other sites, has led to the startling conclusion that modern humans were in North America up to 30,000 years ago.
> 
> That date pushes back the accepted timeline of humans on our continent from about 13-17,000 years ago to at least 30,000 and perhaps as far back as 56,000 years.
> 
> The significance of this alteration of the timeline is enormous. It was believed that about 13,000 years ago, the Clovis people migrated across a land bridge from Siberia to the arctic. Humans were able to make that trek because of melting glaciers clearing a path through the ice of the Bering Sea.
> 
> But this new evidence suggests that humans found a way around the towering glaciers that blocked their way — perhaps journeying down the Pacific coast.
> 
> It’s likely that very few humans were able to make the trip, which is why there is scant evidence of their existence.


More:



> So what happened to these people? They didn’t leave much evidence behind, but burying their dead suggests ritual so they may have had some rudimentary belief in an afterlife. There may not have been a lot of them, which may have doomed them when other, more advanced societies like the Clovis society showed up about 15,000 years ago.
> 
> War, interbreeding, and assimilation probably caused them to go extinct, or at least merge with other human groups around at the time.


Wait. Not First Immigrants? War? Assimilation?

That's gonna leave a mark...


----------



## FeXL

Good news if true.

*Scientists May Have Discovered the Cause of Alzheimer’s Disease*




> Now, a team of researchers from Curtin University say that “leakage” of a toxic compound called beta-amyloid from the bloodstream might be the root problem, according to a mouse study published last week in the journal _PLOS Biology_. While it’s not yet clear whether the same process happens in humans, the discovery could give scientists a new way to track or monitor the onset of Alzheimer’s disease and, perhaps, help them develop new treatments to prevent it.


----------

