Blog @ MoreWhat.com

Poor Pluto. No, not the Disney character or mythological god but the planet that science demoted from its planet status. Sort of like science being demoted from its former status as something higher than current regard given the AGW scandals. And given this report from earlier in the year it should be no surprise why interest in exploration or organizations like NASA has fallen.

Hubble sees Pluto changing color, ice sheet cover

The report states ‘newly released photos’ but that is only because astronomer Marc Buie waited to announce his ‘findings.’ It is difficult to tell from the AP account if the delay was from fear of being wrong or if it took all that time to perform the analysis. Which raises the natural questions of what do scientists get paid for and how do they perform their tasks relative to the rest of us?

Yes, it’s so unfair. Wondering why photos taken in 2002 took until 2010 to be included in an astronomer’s evaluation of them? But what troubles most people about science is for all the money spent what practical solutions does it serve? Even conceding the point that scientific research is necessary and discoveries or knowledge acquired can take many years to produce, it is just as reasonable to be a little suspicious of how things are done.

For one who has been supportive of science for much of the past as well as a former fan of NASA and other scientific endeavors frequent criticism of the scientific community cannot always be ignored. One simple example should suffice.

Given health issues are dominating the public debate these days one aspect of the topic is rarely discussed. If it is true that American healthcare is the best in the world or second to none why is it that cures for disease are seldom produced yet drugs and procedures to battle human ills litter the landscape?

Although that was largely a rhetorical question here is one answer. If you cure a disease the profit potential diminishes dramatically. It is more profitable to address the symptoms and other temporary conditions than offer a one time cure.

Humans don’t take very good care of themselves and could be to blame for much of their own health problems. The medical industry often expresses prices are great in order to recoup the cost of research. Yet much of that research comes from institutions outside the corporate door. And many other factors influence the state of healthcare.

The final question of this post is for the scientific community. So where are all the cures?

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Only pointing to the bad is as unhelpful as always pointing to the good. Certainly life as well as history is a mixture of both. But the report from Sonja Pace at VOA presented below may not even correctly point to the good when describing Muslim heritage and inventions.

There is evidence to suggest much of what Muslims may claim as their own was provided to them from others and certainly much of it before the beginnings of Islam. For example, Muhammad was born in 570 AD. Algebra likely has roots at least 1000 years earlier in Babylonia. The same culture may be responsible for a number of innovations but the religion known as Islam may have nothing to do with it.

Even in the report below one person interviewed mentions ‘Indian numerals’ which would be more accurate than some other representations. Let’s not try to cover over the terrorism aspect and hate for ‘infidels’ expressed by many Muslims.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

1001 Inventions and Muslim Heritage
Sonja Pace - London

Coffee, computers and piston engines - could we imagine a world without them? These are intricate parts of every day life for most of us and the knowledge that led to them was either invented by or passed down through the ancient Muslim world. That’s the theme of an exhibit in London’s Science Museum and it’s a far cry from the view held by some that the Muslim and Western World represent a “clash of civilizations”.

It has become an intricate part of so many cultures - that cup of coffee - latte, cappuccino, espresso. It’s “Kawha” - where it was first developed as a drink - in the Arabian Peninsula, in today’s Yemen.

Professor Salim al Hassani of the University of Manchester explains the coffee beans were actually brought to Yemen, from Ethiopia. “Well of course, coffee was invented in the very early years of Islam - a guy called Khaled in Ethiopia, a young man looking after his sheep,” he said.

The sheep seemed to like the beans. So the young man took the beans to Yemen - the story goes — and the drink was developed.

And there were many other inventions or innovations passed on by the early Muslim world from the 7th Century onward. “One of them is the invention of the university. This was done in the year 850 by a young lady called Fatima al-Firhi in the city of Fez in Morocco. The first university as we know it in the world, giving degrees and so on,” he said.

And that’s the theme of this exhibit at the London Science Museum. It’s called 1001 inventions: the Muslim Heritage - a bit like “1001 Arabian Nights” the well known fairy tale.

But, the exhibit here focuses on scientific or technological inventions and advances that changed our world — from some of the earliest universities, to innovations in medicine, hygiene, pumps, and water wheels.

“Forgotten history? Not really. Ask just about anyone on the streets of Cairo or Damascus today and they’ll readily tell you about Islam’s glory days - not just its conquests but its cultural, scientific and technological innovations.”

These advances came at the height of the Islamic empire’s glory when it spread from the Middle East, across North Africa to southern Spain and beyond. “During that time, which is about 1,000 years, there were enormous contributions in science and technology, that came to us from other civilizations over another very important civilization and that is the Muslim civilization,” he said.

Muslims absorbed knowledge - from India, China, the Greeks, the ancient Egyptians - and passed it on, a bit like this replica of the elephant clock designed by the Muslim inventor, mathematician and engineer al Jazari in the early 13th Century.

Anne Marie Brennan teaches forensic biology at London’s South Bank University and is fascinated by these innovations. The clock with its giant Indian elephant and Chinese dragons is her favorite. “The elephant clock is wonderful because it is like a United Nations clock. It has all the elements of different civilizations and I like it as a scientist because it shows that science doesn’t have to be boring and sterile and plain, but it can be decorative and it can also pay homage to the cultures that bring it forward,” she said.

And then there is mathematics and algebra. In general, our numbers are known as Arabic numerals today, but it wasn’t always so. “The numbers that we have today - 1,2,3,4 - they’re called Arabic numerals, but actually the Arabs at the time called them Indian numerals,” he said.

And, the number “0″ for example - “zephir” in Arabic - was used first by early Arab scholars as an integral part of mathematical equations. And that’s part of the all-important formula of zeros and ones that was crucial to the development of computers and other new technology.

And, much like coffee, what would we do today without it?

Some in the ’science’ community are honest and some created Climategate.

Disclosure of e-mails and documents from the Climate Research Unit (CRU) in Britain — a collaborator with the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change — reveals some scientists’ willingness to suppress or massage data and rig the peer-review process and the publication of scholarly work. The CRU materials also reveal paranoia on the part of scientists who believe that in trying to engineer “consensus” and alarm about warming, they are a brave and embattled minority. Actually, never in peacetime history has the government-media-academic complex been in such sustained propagandistic lockstep about any subject.

Some ‘deny’ Climategate while others have known about the fraud for a long time.

“My presentation will be the unique one,” said Inhofe, a climate change skeptic who is investigating allegations that some scientists manipulated data to provide proof of global warming. “They’re not even close on votes in the United States Senate.”

“They’re cooking the science,” Inhofe said. “The same things that came out on these e-mails is what I said four years ago.”

You need a flawless scheme and ‘perps’ who can carry it out in order to commit the perfect crime.

Obama’s Top Climate Advisers Can’t Get Doomsday Story Straight While Testifying Before Same Committee on Same Day
Thursday, December 10, 2009

Last week, White House science czar John Holdren told members of the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming that changes in global temperatures could mean a rise in sea levels of 6 feet or more in a century.

But Joan Lubchenco, administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, told the same committee on the same day that changes in global temperatures could mean a rise in sea levels of up to 3.5 feet in this century.

As with all investigations the best strategy is to follow the money.

As for Al Gore, the former Vice President brings emotional fervor to his carbon crusade. He travels the country displaying charts and graphs, quoting scientific experts and appealing to philosophers and religious leaders to save the planet from global warming. But he says nothing about his business partners who yearn to trade on the emerging carbon market. And the media pay no attention to the companies offering “carbon advisory services” that will profit from federal carbon emission controls.

Al Gore’s scam is not especially creative. His strategy is well known in the life insurance market. An old technique is to create fear in the mind of your prospect that their spouse and other dependents will be left penniless if they expire prematurely. The claim is the life insurance they buy will protect them from that fate. While the salesman may actually believe he is helping you he knows his income depends on a successful outcome to the presentation. Then there are the scam artists whose only interest is getting rich off your fear, real or imagined.

The faster someone wants you to act on their suggestion the more likely it is a scam.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Soros scheming at Copenhagen: Eco-redistribution of wealth (Michelle Malkin) 

The following is part of Michael Mann’s attempt to convince you the evidence of the greatest scandal in recent science history does not exist.  Just like he tries to tell you the evidence against AGW does not exist.  In his world the truth is what you want it to be.

“There is nothing in the stolen material which indicates that peer-reviewed publications by CRU, and others, on the nature of global warming and related climate change are not of the highest-quality of scientific investigation and interpretation.”

They’ve turned “something innocent into something nefarious,” Mann added.

Now there’s some arrogance.  Not only does Michael Mann suggest the public is stupid but they cannot read.  But if you lie to the public about a political agenda using fake science how much of a leap is it to simply lie when you get caught?

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Not that all environmentally related efforts on the planet should cease given Climategate but you gotta laugh at the timing. Unless the hacker(s) who exposed the AGW freaks for what they are eludes authorities successfully and forever (he/she/they) will not be laughing at things related to timing or time. Maybe the powers that be will at some point realize what a gift this hack was and give the perp a pass. Right.

As a sidenote, guess the WH had to feature this event since President Obama’s Asia trip is being ‘touted’ as a major bust. At least he’s consistent.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

PM-Obama: The next step

India, US Agree on Climate Change

President Barack Obama and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh have launched what the White House is calling a “green partnership.”

Vidushi Sinha | Washington, DC
25 November 2009

President Barack Obama and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh have launched what the White House is calling a green partnership, affirming the countries’ commitment to combating climate change and ensuring energy security and clean energy.

India and the United States have agreed on a Memorandum of Understanding to increase cooperation on energy security, clean energy, and climate change.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, on a state visit to Washington, said both countries will work together to make the environment cleaner.

“We welcome the president’s commitment to a major program for promotion of renewable energy, and I drew his attention to India’s own ambitious national action plan on climate change which has eight national missions covering both mitigation and adaptation,” Mr. Singh said.

The two leaders said their countries are committed to building a clean energy economy that will drive investment, job creation, and economic growth.

Ron Somers is president of the US-India Business Council. He says India and the United States will soon be close partners in promoting green technology.

“We will be focusing on new collaborations that are going to become platform not only for India to fight global warming or United States to fight global warming but a platform that we together develop to provide technologies for the world. So I see tremendous opportunities coming,” Somers said. “It’s all about low carbon emitting technology.”

But India and China have rejected mandated cuts in carbon emissions. Both countries say rich, developed nations should lead the way in cutting greenhouse gases.

They argue that their economic growth would be stunted if there were mandated cuts.

The US and India have agreed that the Copenhagen climate conference, in early December, should involve targets for emission cuts for developed countries but only mitigation actions — such as improving energy efficiency — for developing countries.

Recently, India announced it would produce 20 Gigawatts of solar power by 2022.

Bo Kong, directs the Global Energy and Climate Initiative at Johns Hopkins University. He says that target is impossible for India.

“Within such a short time frame - we are talking about building about 20 - 20 gigawatts of power plants which translates into at least over 10,000 solar power plants between 2009 to 2020 - in less than 10 years - so I am very suspicious,” Kong said.

Experts say India can only make inroads into green technology if it has financial and technological support from rich countries.

Prime Minister Singh and President Obama agreed to support public and private intiatives that will invest in clean energy projects in India.

On the topic of what has been referred to as climategate, a word. Scandal is a word. But more words than that are presented by the following source which sums up the situation rather well. Don’t be fooled by the excerpt presented here. The account is balanced and may be completely on point.

If you own any shares in alternative energy companies I should start dumping them NOW. The conspiracy behind the Anthropogenic Global Warming myth (aka AGW; aka ManBearPig) has been suddenly, brutally and quite deliciously exposed after a hacker broke into the computers at the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (aka Hadley CRU) and released 61 megabites of confidential files onto the internet

And another group of words from WSJ demonstrate the single item that many seem to ignore.

The documents, hacked from the Climatic Research Unit at East Anglia University in the U.K., show that some climate researchers declined to share their data with fellow scientists, and sought to keep researchers with dissenting views from publishing in leading scientific journals.

If ’spin’ can be defined as emphasizing your argument and diminishing that of your opposition rather than simply lying about a situation for damage control then the following from the MSM demonstrates the strategy.

Skeptics have also pounced on an e-mail from Jones to colleagues that reads: “I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.”

It’s not so much that AGW ’skeptics’ have ‘pounced’ on anything but anticipate those embarrassed by climategate will do their best to dismiss this event just as they do to others who do not agree with their arguments about something they named AGW.

Providing these hacked docs are genuine, which seems to be the case and is mentioned in the link for the first excerpt above, less than honorable actions were taken by AGW scientists that may include fudging the numbers and sabotaging opposing conclusions from fellow scientists. What that demonstrates is a breech of trust without which science is not science. How do you expect people to accept your findings if you engaged in dishonest tactics to support an agenda that has nothing to do with science?

That’s the word, science. If it is not honest, it is not science.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

The hacked emails and other docs that were published on the internet from a ‘leading’ global warming proponent source has raised some discussion. There is the expected shock and dismay that anyone would do such a thing. And there is some commentary on the real point of all this. As an interesting side note, of the 100 entries on the first page of a Google search, about five mainstream news sources cover the story. The NYT, WaPo, LAT, AP and the WSJ are there. But the vast majority of hits comes from lesser known sources. But then who cares what the MSM has to say about it?

The source of the hacked docs had this to say. “The selective publication of some stolen emails and other papers taken out of context is mischievous and cannot be considered a genuine attempt to engage with this issue in a responsible way,” the university said. A completely laughable response from a source who has engaged in dissemination of fake science and other unscrupulous tactics to promote an agenda that to date was suspected but largely hidden. BTW, these were ‘good’ hackers regardless of their intentions as they have exposed a sinister plot.

So what kind of material is in the hacked docs. The emails include discussions of apparent efforts to make sure that reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a United Nations group that monitors climate science, include their own views and exclude others. In addition, emails show that climate scientists declined to make their data available to scientists whose views they disagreed with. Imagine that, the United Nations is involved. There efforts and those of others involved in this sham have conspired to present only what supports their agenda. So who will now step forward to attempt a whitewash of this latest revelation in fake science?

It will come from people like this. …the director of the East Anglia climate center, suggested to climate scientist Michael Mann of Penn State University that skeptics’ research was unwelcome: We “will keep them out somehow — even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!” Neither man could be reached for comment Sunday. Opposing viewpoints in a discussion of science will be kept out somehow. That’s reassuring. So much for the validity of any information from the AGW crowd.

The people that will speak out for truth in science are more closely exemplified by this example. “This is horrible,” said Pat Michaels, a climate scientist at the Cato Institute in Washington who is mentioned negatively in the emails. “This is what everyone feared. Over the years, it has become increasingly difficult for anyone who does not view global warming as an end-of-the-world issue to publish papers. This isn’t questionable practice, this is unethical.”

That would be putting it mildly. If there was any question about the honesty of those supporting AGW on this blog before it is certainly gone now. AGW has been exposed for what it is…. fake science.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

As a post-script, the MSM was mentioned as well as a comment of who cares. Of the five listed specifically, this blog views the WSJ as credible and at one time held that view of WaPo. The others listed rarely get it right.

ClimateGate: Both sides of the pond demand probes into data manipulation scandal 

The climate change and global warming debate may be continuing in the real world but those employed by your tax dollars have jumped ahead to spending more of your money courtesy of Steven Chu.

Nothing like a good stimulus program to find more ways to spend tax dollars. God knows paying down the national debt or reducing trillion dollar plus deficits is a waste of money, right?

Here’s what one of Steven Chu’s bright ideas has paid for with your money.

New program will certify professionals in carbon capture and storage

RICHLAND, Wash. – Scientists and engineers will soon be able to receive advanced training and certification in burying and permanently storing underground the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide as part of a recent stimulus award from the Department of Energy. The DOE awarded nearly $1 million to the Seattle-based Environmental Outreach and Stewardship Alliance (EOS) to develop a carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) curriculum that will be used to build a skilled workforce through regional training.

Imagine that! $1 million to develop climate change curriculum. And there’s at least $7 million more of your money to spend after that. That’ll recover America and create more jobs, right?

Funding for the EOS training project is part of more than $8.4 million recently awarded by DOE Secretary Steven Chu for regional sequestration technology training programs.

And we wouldn’t want to unnecessarily increase our carbon footprint with this project, right?

The project organizers also plan to make lectures and other relevant course material available on the Web for students who cannot attend in person, which will reduce the program’s overall carbon footprint.

Gee, do you suppose this planet-saving method is a proven winner? You know, is it a good idea and will it be effective, reasonable, beneficial and not break the bank?

PNNL is conducting laboratory and field research in the Pacific Northwest to assess the feasibility of permanently storing carbon dioxide in basalt, a type of igneous rock common in eastern Washington, Oregon and parts of Idaho.

Hmmm, seems as though someone is putting the horse before the cart…… again. There’s a pejorative remark about educators that states those who can, do, and those who can’t, teach. Have you ever wondered about public sector science? It may have been considered a noble endeavor for the public to fund scientific research. But these days one has to wonder if geeks and techies who work for the government were unable to get a job in the real world. Add to that the notion they may spend much of their time seeking funding to provide themselves with an income. Not much incentive to be good at science.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

NOAA: Summer Temperature Below Average for U.S.

September 10, 2009

The average June-August 2009 summer temperature for the contiguous United States was below average – the 34th coolest on record, according to a preliminary analysis by NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C. August was also below the long-term average. The analysis is based on records dating back to 1895.

U.S. Temperature Highlights – Summer

* For the 2009 summer, the average temperature of 71.7 degrees F was 0.4 degree F below the 20th Century average. The 2008 average summer temperature was 72.7 degrees F.

* A recurring upper level trough held the June-August temperatures down in the central states, where Michigan experienced its fifth, Wisconsin, Minnesota, and South Dakota their seventh, Nebraska its eighth, and Iowa its ninth coolest summer. By contrast, Florida had its fourth warmest summer, while Washington and Texas experienced their eighth and ninth warmest, respectively.

* The Michigan, Wisconsin, Iowa and Minnesota region experienced its sixth coolest summer on record. Only the Northwest averaged above normal temperatures.

It is not uncommon these days to hear people quip it is time for a revolution. This frequent reaction during casual conversations about the state of the nation is presented with overtones of humor as most would agree that thoughts of revolution do not conjure images of reasonable solutions. While participants in such social intercourse may strain from the the effects of the current plague of political and economic dysfunction their desire is more a longing for a renaissance than a revolution.

OMG, another ‘French’ word enters. The Renaissance (French for “rebirth”; Italian: Rinascimento, from re- “again” and nascere “be born”)[1] was a cultural movement that spanned roughly the 14th to the 17th century, beginning in Florence in the Late Middle Ages and later spreading to the rest of Europe. Well that settles it. Rinascimento is more appealing. Besides, when you think of the French and ideas like revolution eating cake and off with their heads comes to mind. And there’s way too much of that going on these days. So, Rinascimento it is.

Hope and change was the sole product and latest offering from campaigns feeding on the stagnant realm of politics in America. The only result thus far that can be stated with any certainty is hope is disappearing and the only change has been the majority and minority status of the two dominant political parties in Washington DC. And the fourth estate, aka the mainstream media or MSM, unintentionally bears this out with the recurring theme of POLS ‘defending’ their respective positions on issues and lackluster actions to solve them. Even the MSM’s unqualified support of the liberal agenda has waned since the 2008 Presidential campaign that featured a continuous stream of fawning and adulation over then candidate Barack Obama. It appears even the media has limitations on how silly they are willing to look in the face of mounting evidence they have been duped.

We probably do not need a Rinascimento identical to that of centuries ago. And we certainly do not need a revolution that bears any resemblance to those documented historically as major events in world history. Whether a Rinascimento, a rebirth or a new beginning we may simply need enough people to share in an epiphany of sorts to get the ball rolling. Not to borrow the term ‘epiphany’ in its religious connotation rather ‘the sudden realization or comprehension of the (larger) essence or meaning of something.’

What are some of the concepts dealing with discussions of the Rinascimento relevant to our current needs? As a cultural movement, it encompassed a resurgence of learning based on classical sources, the development of linear perspective in painting, and gradual but widespread educational reform. Traditionally, this intellectual transformation has resulted in the Renaissance being viewed as a bridge between the Middle Ages and the Modern era. Although the Renaissance saw revolutions in many intellectual pursuits, as well as social and political upheaval, it is perhaps best known for its artistic developments and the contributions of such polymaths as Leonardo da Vinci and Michelangelo, who inspired the term “Renaissance man”.

We have the ’social and political upheaval’. Some may even suggest we the gradual if not widespread educational reform. But the only evidence of ‘a resurgence of learning based on classical sources’ comes from the conservatives among us. If it is true that the Rinascimento was a bridge between the Dark Ages and the so-called Modern era it could be that conservatives are the Renaissance Man of the next rebirth to a new age of prosperity and enlightenment. Not to exaggerate the significance of conservative thought in America with a comparison to Renaissance Man but it appears the best hope for our nation given the current situation and other historic periods in history where extreme shifts allowed tyrants and their allies to prevail.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Reviewing a recording in a collection of videos assembled over many years is partly what inspired this post. That and the belief that we need to examine the human condition periodically even with all the attention to current events, politics and public affairs. The attraction of ‘culture’ as an addenda to content of many internet sites featuring news and/or analysis largely focus on celebrity, pop culture, gossip, fads and dysfunction. It seems more meaningful to explore people, places and things from the past which may provide a positive guide for the future.

The initial inspiration above relates to a video produced near the century mark of the notable accomplishments of two men from Ohio in the bicycle business which made Kitty Hawk a famous location in the world of aviation. One could say they launched the world of aviation. Although the topic is not without debate.

The story mixes nicely with a recent news story on the failure of the remarkable aircraft known as the Raptor. The F-22 has fallen on hard times and may have blemished the equally remarkable legacy and former home of Clarence ‘Kelly’ Johnson and the Skunkworks of Lockheed, now and for some time, Lockheed Martin. Johnson and the Skunkworks were responsible for such masterpieces as the U2 spyplane and this blog’s favorite, the SR=71 Blackbird.

Much about the history of aviation are the truly amazing developments that occurred over the last century. And the pursuit of such things is virtually littered with accounts of those who tried but failed to achieve what others have since or records of latent genius and intuitive journeys which never advanced from that point.

One such intuitive journey is demonstrated in the visual works of Leonardo Da Vinci. The obvious study and attention to detail in evidence in a drawing assists in documenting the time that can pass from concept to creation.

Perhaps Da Vinci is an example of a fertile mind and ample talent overloaded by the sheer quantity of interests occupying his time. You could use this item to counter the kids next time they say they’re bored and there’s nothing to do. (Just had to say that.)

His notes and drawings display an enormous range of interests and preoccupations, some as mundane as lists of groceries and people who owed him money and some as intriguing as designs for wings and shoes for walking on water. There are compositions for paintings, studies of details and drapery, studies of faces and emotions, of animals, babies, dissections, plant studies, rock formations, whirl pools, war machines, helicopters and architecture

Who are the Da Vinci’s of today and what are they achieving? They certainly cannot be found in healthcare reform or other legislative agendas.

Leonardo di ser Piero da Vinci (it-Leonardo di ser Piero da Vinci.ogg pronunciation (help·info), April 15, 1452 – May 2, 1519) was an Italian polymath, scientist, mathematician, engineer, inventor, anatomist, painter, sculptor, architect, botanist, musician and writer.

Now there’s a resume’.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Critics say it’s unnecessary and costly. Perfect. Some worry about nukes. Perfect. It could lead to solving the world’s energy problems. Perfect. The Sun is an example of fusion. The Sun is a star. There are lots of stars. They operate for a long time with no utility bill or stoppin’ at the pump. Nature. Perfect. How humans operate within it….. not so perfect.

Maybe those who oppose such things could withhold their criticism long enough to allow the seeds of innovation to grow. So many seem to want things to be perfect but are reluctant to let perfect happen. Perfect.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

The world’s strongest laser - powerful enough to create conditions as hot as inside the Sun - was unveiled Friday in the western U.S. state of California for an audience of politicians and scientists.

The stadium-sized National Ignition Facility actually houses 192 lasers that all point towards a tiny blob of hydrogen.

When the lasers shoot, scientists expect the hydrogen will fuse into helium, a chemical reaction like what makes stars burn and nuclear bombs explode.

The project began in 1997 and cost the federal government an estimated $3.5 billion. The government says it will allow scientists to study in a lab what happens in a nuclear explosion. They say it will help scientists assess the safety of the aging U.S. nuclear arsenal.

But critics say the laser is unnecessary and costly. Some also worry it could help develop new nuclear weapons.

Proponents of the giant laser say there is another possible benefit. They say they hope to create a fusion reaction called “fusion ignition.” This reaction could create huge amounts of electricity.

Scientists suggest such reactions could lead to a new green energy source, and eliminate the current dependence on fossil fuels.

California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger hailed the laser as a breakthrough for his state. The unveiling was attended by around 3,500 people.

Scientists say they plan to begin experimenting with fusion ignition by next year.
Some information for this report was provided by AFP and AP.

A couple of years ago it seemed the controversy over embryonic stem cell research had been solved. Obviously with the advent of the Obama Administration releasing restrictions to public funding of such research last imposed by the Bush Administration the debate has not been concluded.

A quick review of some material on the subject answers some questions but raises others. The excerpt from one report below suggests iPS cells (not embryonic) in some ways hold more promise than embryonic stem cells.

Like embryonic stem cells, the new cells—known as induced pluripotent cells—are capable of developing into most types of cells in the body. But the new lines can be created without the use of an embryo.

Such cells could conceivably also be custom-made for any adult, sidestepping issues of cell rejection.

“The advantage of using [such] reprogrammed skin cells is that any cells developed for therapeutic purposes can be customized to the patient,” James Thompson, who led one of the studies, said in a prepared statement.

“They are probably more clinically relevant than embryonic stem cells,” added Thompson, a biologist at the University of Wisconsin, Madison.

Another report had one notable scientist involved in the research stating the need to continue research on embryonic stem cells to answer all the questions related to this field of inquiry. That somehow seems reasonable. But it does not answer the question of why so many are so concerned about the public funding or access to embryonic stem cells in light of the advances with iPS cells. Like when do you plan on discontinuing embryonic stem cell research or is this all something of a ruse?

Here are some resources to help you decide for yourself.

Human Skin Cells Given Stem Cell Properties

Stem Cell Breakthrough Is Like ‘Turning Lead Into Gold’

Virus-free Embryonic-like Stem Cells Made From Skin Of Parkinson’s Disease Patients

Bypassing Stem Cells: Adult Skin Cells Turned Into Muscle Cells And Vice Versa

Scientists Shed Light On Inner Workings Of Human Embryonic Stem Cells

Professor comments on Obama’s stem cell executive action

Wisconsin, Morgridge scientists excise vector, exotic genes from induced stem cells

Are you convinced that iPS cells cannot achieve the same result as embryonic stem cells? Is the issue now whether or not embryonic stem cells are necessary to achieve the stated medical solutions? Are we being fooled about the need for embryonic stem cell research?

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

The first video may not be so impressive unless you are familiar with the history or background of the Messerschmidt Me 262 jet aircraft. That’s why the second video is presented. Although this story is not new bringing back something which barely missed extinction in the face of historic events is a good thing in this case.

The next video is by description a clip and ends rather abruptly but you’ll get the idea if you need some background information. The introduction of jet engine technology and jet powered flight was being developed around the time of WWII. This bird is certainly part of that chronology and history. An impressive early entry into this technology.

Just a little Sunday distraction the selection of which was influenced by the blog author’s personal bias and serious interest and participation in aviation. (and partly by chance)
Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

crossposted to:
Maggie’s Notebook
Conservative Thoughts

A resolution dated April 22, 2009 sponsored by Rep Nita Lowey (D-NY) and at the time of this writing co-sponsored by no one was presented at The Hill dot com’s Congress Blog by its author. Dismissing those who do not share her view on global warming as ‘deniers’ Lowey injects plenty of insulting rhetoric but appears to expect anyone reading her post (which is crossposted at HuffPo) to take her claim on faith. Lowey claims the evidence for global warming caused by humans is ‘conclusive’. But of course no details or links are provided to make her case.

The First Step is Admitting You Have a Problem (Rep. Nita Lowey)
April 22nd, 2009

In the past month, the House Minority Leader called the idea that carbon dioxide - a greenhouse gas and known carcinogen - is dangerous “almost comical,” and members of his party suggested that the planet is actually cooling and “carbon-starved” and invited a global warming denier as a public witness to a Congressional hearing on the topic.

As anyone with experience with recovery knows, the first step in addressing a crisis is to admit that you have a problem. Unfortunately, these displays and others make it increasingly clear that, despite conclusive scientific evidence on the existence of global warming and the human role, some elected officials refuse to take Step 1.
As Congress begins the process of legislating to protect humans and ecosystems from the effects of global warming, I believe we need a “temperature check.”

It is interesting that Rep Nita Lowey makes the statements above with such conviction. Yet the resolution she authored and introduced in Congress April 22nd in stark contrast has no such confidence. She offers seven ‘whereas’ statements which list her arguments supporting that human activity causes global warming. But twice she is only mildly hinting that such is the case with two statements. ‘Recognizing that the climate system of the Earth is warming and that most of the increase in global average temperatures is very likely due to the observed increase in human greenhouse gas emissions.’ And ‘Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the House of Representatives– (1) recognizes that the climate system of the Earth is warming and that most of the increase in global average temperatures is very likely due to the observed increase in human greenhouse gas emissions; and (2) recognizes legislation is needed to mitigate risks humans and ecosystems face from a warming climate system.’

Seven details in an effort to support her claim that we are causing global warming followed by two statements in her conclusion that this is ‘very likely’ rather than something reflecting she is convinced by her own argument. Maybe she missed arguments to the contrary or in her zeal to support her political party dismissed everyone that disagrees as a ‘denier’. There was an article in the Politico which offered the following last November.

Scientists urge caution on global warming
By: Erika Lovley
November 25, 2008 04:48 AM EST

Climate change skeptics on Capitol Hill are quietly watching a growing accumulation of global cooling science and other findings that could signal that the science behind global warming may still be too shaky to warrant cap-and-trade legislation.

There are scientists on both sides of this issue. Another excerpt from the same article points out one example.

Armed with statistics from the Goddard Institute for Space Studies and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Climate Data Center, D’Aleo reported in the 2009 Old Farmer’s Almanac that the U.S. annual mean temperature has fluctuated for decades and has only risen 0.21 degrees since 1930 — which he says is caused by fluctuating solar activity levels and ocean temperatures, not carbon emissions.

The article also stated ‘most’ scientific bodies support the notion of global warming and our involvement in it. Organizations may not reflect the opinion of everyone connected to their organizations. But over 30,000 scientists who signed the Petition Project since 1998 make an even stronger case than global warming or cooling. They have objected to the idea that the debate is over and the science is done. That presents an intelligent and reasonable conclusion. Science has always been about continuing the pursuit and regularly challenging theories and discoveries. Galileo risked his life for that pursuit as did others. Some people take science seriously. Here’s a snapshot of what the project and the signers are ‘about’.

The purpose of the Petition Project is to demonstrate that the claim of “settled science” and an overwhelming “consensus” in favor of the hypothesis of human-caused global warming and consequent climatological damage is wrong. No such consensus or settled science exists. As indicated by the petition text and signatory list, a very large number of American scientists reject this hypothesis.

In contrast to that and published in 1992 the Union of Concerned Scientists which boasts 250,000 members including scientists and ordinary citizens offered their National Call to Action on Global Warming which proposes essentially taking all sorts of steps to eliminate human causes of global warming. For an organization that gives at least some impression of being science related they have a troubling list of organizations supporting their position. That list may have a political agenda or at least be characterized as special interest. Or another way of putting it is lobbyists. Decide for yourself, here’s the list.

Organizations Endorsing the National Call to Action on Global Warming:

1Sky * ACORN * Alliance for Climate Protection * Audubon * Catholic Healthcare West * Center for International Environmental Law * Ceres * Clean Water Action * Climate Law and Policy Project * Climate Protection Campaign * Climate Solutions * Defenders of Wildlife * Democracia USA * Earthjustice * Eco-Equity * Ecology Center * Energize America * Energy Action Coalition * Environment America * Environment and Energy Study Institute * Environment Northeast * Environmental Law and Policy Center * Green for All * Greenpeace * Health Professionals for Clean Air * Hip Hop Caucus * ICLEI USA * Insitute for Agriculture and Trade Policy * Interfaith Power and Light * International Forum on Globalization * Kyoto USA * League of Conservation Voters * League of Women Voters * League of Young Voters * Massachusetts Climate Action Network * National Hispanic Environmental Council * National Teach-In on Global Warming Solutions * National Wildlife Federation * Oceana * Oxfam * Physicians for Social Responsibility * Progressive Future * Public Citizen * Religious Witness for the Earth * Rock the Vote * SEED Coalition * Sierra Club * Southern Alliance for Clean Energy * Teleosis Institute * The Humane Society of the United States * The Student Public Interest Research Groups * The Wilderness Society * Union of Concerned Scientists

This post does not suggest global warming does or does not exist. It does not even suggest whether humans are or are not responsible in whole or in part. But this is what it does suggest. Those who dismiss opposing viewpoints are ignoring scientific method. Just because you may want the argument resolved or that it would be expedient does not gurantee the science will support it or be available now.

As stated earlier in this post, Lowey is not even convinced it is real. That is why pursuing legislation based on the SWAG method is ridiculous. Check your politics and special interest agendas at the door. Causing panic to rush to legislation is a very good sign the proposal is flawed. That is what the science should help you avoid. Listen to the more than 30,000 scientists telling you the answer is not here yet.

Stanford Matthews
Morewhat.com