Search This Blog

Thursday, December 19, 2013

Government Scientists Create Crude Oil from Algae in Minutes

By Adam Clark Estes at Gizmo magazine.  Original post at
http://gizmodo.com/government-scientists-created-crude-oil-from-algae-in-m-1485731339

Be excited, Earthlings, because science has a surprise for you. Engineers at the Department of Energy's Pacific Northwest National Laboratory have devised a way to turn algae into crude oil in less than an hour. That oil can then be refined into gasoline that can run engines.
 
Excited yet? Try wrapping your head around the implications of a breakthrough like this. As one of the most plentiful lifeforms on the planet, algae is a perfect candidate for conversion to biofuel. It's especially good because the energy is packed pretty tightly into that green sludge. To replace all of the petroleum in the United States with algae fuel, you'd need a farm that took up just 0.42 percent of the country's landmass. By comparison, it would take up half of the United States to grow enough soybeans to replace petroleum with biodiesel.
 
Algae fuel is not a new idea, of course, and this is not the first time scientists have turned algae into fossil fuel. It is the first time they've done it so effortlessly and so quickly, however. Other methods require too much time and energy for the conversion to make sense as a petroleum replacement. The new process solves that problem. "It's a bit like using a pressure cooker, only the pressures and temperatures we use are much higher," said Douglas Elliott, who led the research. "In a sense, we are duplicating the process in the Earth that converted algae into oil over the course of millions of years. We're just doing it much, much faster."
 
This magic gas could be coming to your local gas station sooner than you think. The Department of Energy already has a partner, Genifuel, working on commercializing the process and making the algae fuel competitive with what's already on the market. But, boy, is it going to be futuristic when you pull up to a gas station and pump your tank full of algae. Talk about going green.

Wednesday, December 18, 2013

Why Are Female Redheads Sexualized and Male Redheads Reviled?

 
187973212
Prince Harry: Heartthrob or mutant?
(Ben A. Pruchnie/Getty Images)
“Red hair is a woman's game,” Tom Robbins writes in his 1998 GQ essay “Ode to Redheads.” “The harsh truth is, most red-haired men look like blonds who've spoiled from lack of refrigeration,” Robbins says. “They look like brown-haired men who've been composted. Yet that same pigmentation that on a man can resemble leaf mold or junk yard rust, a woman wears like a tiara of rubies.” That’s a grim view of redheaded men—and it was coming from a fellow ginger.

This month, British photographer Thomas Knights—also a redhead—hopes to turn that stereotype on its head with “Red Hot,” a photo exhibition featuring “a cast of high profile and good-looking red headed males,” shot giving torrid looks in topless poses. Male redheads “are completely emasculated and desexualised in popular culture,” Knights told the Guardian. “The main thing for me is the huge polarisation between the way our society perceives ginger men and ginger women.”
Advertisement
Why do we see redheaded women as rubies and redheaded men as rusted? Perhaps because the rarity of the shade—redheads benefit (or suffer) from two doses of a recessive gene that causes a mutation in the protein that regulates melanin—has inspired a historical association with difference and deviance. In the Middle Ages, red hair was taken as a sign of witchcraft and vampirism; Elizabethan actors portrayed Jewish characters with false noses and red wigs; and Judas is often painted with a long, fiery mane. For women, the perception of deviance is often eroticized. The sins attributed to women are largely sexual ones. And the expression of this sexual deviance is often rooted in the follicles. "Hair itself is symbolically fraught,” University of Texas myth scholar Betty Sue Flowers told the Washington Post in 2002. “Hair equals sex. Why do women have to cover their hair in churches? There are more rules about hair than anything else except covering the genitals. It's so connected with spiritual and religious taboos." 

The result? Red is now the shade of choice for contemporary femme fatales, from Jessica Rabbit to Joan Holloway. Meanwhile, ginger boys are ridiculed and sexually marginalized; in 2011, a Danish-based international sperm bank stopped collecting donations from redheads, saying it was “drowning in semen” from unpopular ginger donors. Try to think of a famous redheaded man who isn’t Damian Lewis or a prince, and you get a lot of clowns: Conan O'Brien, Louis CK, Carrot Top.

The myth of the sexy redhead and her deviant brother was constructed by male apostles, playwrights, and painters. Some women buy that version of sexuality, too: Knights interviewed one woman who willingly dates a ginger man but still fears the consequences: "Of course I'm going to love it, but I don't want a ginger baby," she said. But projects like Knights' show how easy it is to revert that centuries-old idea by taking a few photos from a different perspective (and recruiting some exceptionally good-looking gingers to pose). “Someone recently asked me, ‘What’s so special about red hair?’ ” Knights told The Cut. “Well, nothing. It’s not special—it’s just equal. All I want is for ginger men to be on a level playing field.”
Amanda Hess is a freelance writer and DoubleX contributor. She lives in Los Angeles. Tweet at her @amandahess.

It’s a Christmas Miracle! New Study Shows That 1% of Women Claim to Have Virgin Births

It’s a Christmas Miracle! New Study Shows That 1% of Women Claim to Have Virgin Births

David Strumfels -- though probably a hoax, it isn't physiologically/biologically impossible and probably does happen at least on very rare occasions, just as it does with many other animals.

It’s a Christmas Miracle! New Study Shows That 1% of Women Claim to Have Virgin Births

***Update***: BMJ is known to write parody papers in their Christmas edition. So while the material below is plausible, take it with a grain of salt. It’s likely a hoax.
(In a related study, 1% of women lie to researchers.)

The headline’s serious, though it requires a little more explanation.

A new report published in the Christmas edition of BMJ shows that 0.8% of women who became pregnant also claimed, at the time when the child would have been conceived, that they were not having sexual intercourse:

Based on interviews with 7,870 women and girls ages 15-28, 45 of the 5,340 pregnancies in this group through the years — 0.8 per cent — occurred in women who reported that they conceived independent of men. The figure does not include pregnancies that result from in vitro fertilization or other assisted reproductive technology.

The girls were 12 to 18 years old when they entered the study in the 1994-95 school year and were interviewed periodically about their health and behaviour over 14 years, including via computer as a way to encourage them to be candid when answering questions about their sexual history.

The 45 women and girls who became pregnant despite, according to what they told interviewers, being virgins at the time of conception differed in several ways from peers who acknowledged that men had had a role in their procreation.

So why would they lie…?

Turns out nearly a third of them had signed pledges saying they wouldn’t have sex before marriage. Hell, they may have been wearing purity rings as they got it on.

They “Virgin Birthers” were also “more likely than non-virgins to say their parents never or rarely talked to them about sex and birth control.”

They were also less likely to know how to use a condom.

And, I’m assuming, they wanted to sound like they were chaste, even to the researchers who didn’t know them, and even though the evidence to the contrary was growing right inside of them. (It’s also possible they didn’t realize that they technically had sex.)

I love the conclusion:

The researchers found that although the mothers in question were more likely to have boys than girls and to be pregnant during the weeks leading up to Christmas, neither similarity to the Virgin Mary was statistically significant.

You’ll be interested in knowing there were a few “virgin fathers” as well.
(Thanks to Christopher for the link)

Pathogenic hypothesis on the possible role of CagA-positive strains in ischaemic heart disease. : Clinical effects of Helicobacter pylori outside the stomach : Nature Reviews Gastroenterology & Hepatology : Nature Publishing Group

Pathogenic hypothesis on the possible role of CagA-positive strains in ischaemic heart disease. : Clinical effects of Helicobacter pylori outside the stomach : Nature Reviews Gastroenterology & Hepatology : Nature Publishing Group

I've Been to VietNam But Never Saw This


I stole this from Google+.  It's in Vietnam, probably in the north somewhere.  Now I've been to VN, and saw some amazing things, but nothing like this.

Tuesday, December 17, 2013

The idea that recent mass shooters are mostly registered Democrats is a myth from Examinrer.com

Original article can be found at:
 
 
Based on the assertions of Roger Hedgecock a right-wing radio show host, the meme that the five worst recent mass shootings were committed by registered Democrats is making its way through e-mail chains and social media. Hedgecock asserts, without providing any evidence or sources, that the Ft. Hood shooter, the Virginia Tech shooter, the Aurora Theater shooter and Adam Lanza of Sandy Hook infamy were all “registered Democrats”. He acknowledges that Klebold and Harris (the Columbine Colorado shooters) were too young to be registered voters but asserts, again without providing any evidence, that Harris and Klebold’s parents were progressives or liberal Democrats. All of these charges are utterly baseless and perhaps do not even deserve a response. However, given the effectiveness of right-wing lies in saturating social media and duping the incurious (a far too numerous segment of the population), some more detailed debunking is in order.

To the best of my ability, I have attempted to research these claims with as much rigor as possible. If there is any evidence for or against my debunking, I welcome that evidence in the spirit of free inquiry. Let me also state that given that neither major political party condones mass shooter violence in any way, shape or form, and that all these acts are individual acts of violence that are not sanctioned by either elected Democrats or Republicans (at least not mainstream leaders in either party), the very notion that they are acting on behalf of a political party is itself problematic. This is not to say that mass shootings are apolitical acts, but rather it is to say that as political acts they may express an ideology (racism, misogyny, entitlement, psychosis, etc) but they do not in general express alignment with a political party or if they do it is not an association that the Democrats or Republicans would accept as legitimate (neither party wants to claim James Holmes or Adam Lanza as a member in good standing, no matter what Holmes or Lanza feels about them). In any case, we can categorically REJECT the notion that any of the shooters in question has been shown to be a registered Democrat on a case by case basis.

1. Nidal Hasan (the Ft. Hood shooter) lived in either Virginia (his state of residence prior to being sent to Ft. Hood) or Texas, neither of which has partisan registration. Therefore the claim that he was a "registered Democrat" is false. I do not know if he voted or how he voted, but I do know that unless he was registered in a state in which he did not reside, that the claim that he is a registered Democrat is FALSE.

2. Since Virginia does not have partisan registration there is also no way to tell whether Seung-Hui Cho was a Democrat, but again because there is no partisan registration in the state we can say that the claim that he is a registered Democrat is FALSE. (Update: A more obvious point is that Cho was a resident alien, not a US citizen, so he was not eligible to vote in the US)

3. The allegation that James Holmes was registered Democrat was based on a Breitbart blogger Joel B. Pollack, who found voter registration records for a DIFFERENT James Holmes who was about the same age. Alex Jones’ Infowars and other right-wing websites then dutifully repeated the lie without verifying it. It was later determined that the Colorado Theater Shooter James Holmes was NOT registered to vote, as evidenced by this retraction: {Newly-released information on the suspect’s birthdate (which, as indicated in our initial report, was a slight mismatch), combined with new details Breitbart News has obtained about the suspect’s likely addresses, together suggest that the suspect may, in fact, not have been registered to vote.}. However, most of right-wing media continued to promote the lie without printing Breitbart sites retraction. The claim that James Holmes was a registered Democrat is FALSE.

4. The claim that Adama Lanza is a registered Democrat has been suggested based not on any evidence that he was registered as one, but on the rather dubious claim that because Connecticut has almost 2 to 1 Democratic registration over Republicans, he was probably a Democrat. (Claim: "Adam Lanza, NewtownConn murderer. Registered Democrats outnumber Republicans by about a 2-1 ratio in Connecticut. The odds are therefore that the Lanza family are (sic) Democrats.") This of course is a bogus argument to begin with, but even if we were to make the claim that a mass shooter’s political affiliation must be the same as the majority of the people in his area, we can debunk this foolish idea by taking this shoddy analysis down to the local level. Yes, Connecticut voted for Barack Obama, BUT the city of Newtown voted for Mitt Romney. If we look at the results we find that Mitt Romney defeated Barack Obama in Newtown by 7451-6784 votes or 51.7 percent to 47 percent. Republican Senate candidate and Tea Party favorite Linda McMahon carried the city over Democrat Chris Murphy by an even larger margin. Add in the other information we have that Lanza’s mother was a “doomsday prepper” and a home schooler in a Republican-leaning city and we can pretty well dispense with the erroneous assumption that Lanza must have been a Democrat (UPDATE: According to at least one media source, Nancy Lanza was a registered Republican. The source does not provide a link, but the author of this article is seeking further confirmation). We can therefore claim that with no evidence to support the claim, the assertion that Lanza was a Democrat is not demonstrated and that in the absence of any evidence it is likely FALSE.

5. Klebold and Harris of course were not old enough to vote and they had no apparent political affiliation. Allegations that they came from families of Democrats or liberal progressives appear to have no sources to substantiate those claims. What little ideology the boys demonstrated owed mostly to an admiration for Timothy McVeigh not Ted Kennedy. Harris’ father was a retired Air Force pilot and Eric Harris wanted to join the Marine Corps. The boys lived in Littleton, Colorado a relatively conservative and affluent suburb of Denver. The claim that their parents were Democrats is UNSUBSTANTIATED. Any suggestion that the two boys were Democrats is demonstrably FALSE.

Interestingly, Hedgecock and those on the far right have conveniently overlooked a number of cases where ideology is clearly right-wing. The acts below are instances of right-wing violence that are unequivocally committed by people who are openly hostile to liberalism. While this does not mean these killers are Republicans, it is quite clear that they are RIGHT-WINGERS and that they have far more in common with Mr. Hedgecock, Alex Jones and the other gun-toting conspiracy nuts on the right than with any evils associated with the Democratic Party or liberalism. In addition, to the list below is the obvious case of Timothy McVeigh, who I have not included because his crime was not committed with firearms. It was however, committed by a right-winger and the carnage was on a massive scale.

For example, on July 18, 1984 James Oliver Huberty, who told his wife he hated “children, Mexicans and the United States” opened fire inside the McDonald’s Restaurant in San Ysidro, CA using a Browning P-35 Hi-Power 9mm pistol, Winchester 1200 pump-action 12-gauge shotgun, and an Israeli Military Industries 9mm Carbine (Uzi) – all legally acquired. He killed 21 and injured 19 before he was shot dead by police.

On Aug. 10, 1999 White supremacist Buford O. Furrow, Jr., fired 70 rounds with an Uzi-type submachine-gun inside the lobby of the Jewish Community Center in Granada Hills, CA wounding three children, a teenage counselor and an office worker. He then carjacked a woman’s Toyota at gunpoint, dumped it behind a motel and murdered US Postal Worker Joseph Santos with a Glock 9mm handgun.

On July 27, 2008 Former U.S. Army private, Jim David Atkinsson, who hated Democrats, liberals, African Americans and homosexuals, using a Remington Model 48 12-gauge shotgun, murdered two people and injured seven others inside the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church in Knoxville, TN.

The day after Obama’s inauguration, white supremacist Keith Luke went on a killing spree in Brockton, Massachusetts. His goal was to kill as many Jews, blacks and Hispanics as possible. When questioned by investigators, the deranged gunman who had stockpiled hundreds of rounds of ammunition, proclaimed that he was fighting the extinction of the white race.

A little over a month later, Donnie Baker, a former Republican campaign volunteer shot seven Chilean immigrants in Florida. Those who knew him said he was obsessed with the fear that illegal immigrants were taking over the country.

In April of 2009, Richard Popalowski, a white supremacist in Pittsburgh, shot and killed three police officers following a domestic disturbance call. He apparently thought that Obama was part of a government conspiracy to seize all guns, and he feared the government would take his guns away.
Later the same month, a Fort Walton Beach Florida man who thought the Obama administration was conspiring against him, shot and murdered two sheriff’s deputies.

On May 31, 2009 Dr. George Tiller was murdered in his own church by a right-wing “pro- life” gun man who decided to express his belief in the sanctity of human life by executing a medical doctor.

Eleven days later a right-wing white supremacist and Holocaust denier walked into the National Holocaust Museum and killed an African-American security guard. Two weeks later, three Neo-Nazis were arrested for bombing a diversity office in Scottsdale, Arizona.

On April 20, 2010 a member of the Sovereign Citizen movement was arrested after a failed attempt to take over a Tennessee county courthouse.

Exactly one month later, in West Memphis Arkansas, Sovereign citizens Jerry and Joe Kane murdered two police officers before they themselves were shot and killed in the ensuing shoot out with police.

On July 18, 2010 Byron Williams, an angry unemployed man, was arrested by police after they discovered a car full of weapons and ammunition that he had planned to use to kill progressives. He was on his way to the non-profit Tides Foundation Center, a favorite target of vitriol from Glenn Beck’s radio show.

On Jan. 8, 2011 22-year old Jarold Lee Laughner killed six people, including a judge and a nine-year old child, and wounded 13 others, including U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ), using a 9mm Glock 19 pistol during a public meeting in a supermarket parking lot near Tuscon, AZ.

On Aug. 5, 2012 Wade Michael Page, a 40-year old white supremacist and U.S. Army veteran murdered six people and wounded four others inside a Sikh Temple in Oak Creek, WI with a Springfield XD(M) semi-automatic pistol.

What the Insurance Industry Thinks About Climate Change - Slashdot

What the Insurance Industry Thinks About Climate Change - Slashdot

What the Insurance Industry Thinks About Climate Change 385
Posted by samzenpus
from the hedge-your-bets dept.
Hugh Pickens DOT Com writes

"Joseph Stromberg reports at the Smithsonian that if there's one group has an obvious and immediate financial stake in climate change, it's the insurance industry and in recent years, insurance industry researchers who attempt to determine the annual odds of catastrophic weather-related disasters say they're seeing something new. 'Our business depends on us being neutral. We simply try to make the best possible assessment of risk today, with no vested interest,' says Robert Muir-Wood, the chief scientist of Risk Management Solutions (RMS), a company that creates software models to allow insurance companies to calculate risk. Most insurers, including the reinsurance companies that bear much of the ultimate risk in the industry, have little time for the arguments heard in some right-wing circles that climate change isn't happening, and are quite comfortable with the scientific consensus that burning fossil fuels is the main culprit of global warming. 'Insurance is heavily dependent on scientific thought,' says Frank Nutter, president of the Reinsurance Association of America. 'It is not as amenable to politicized scientific thought.' A pronounced shift can be seen in extreme rainfall events, heat waves and wind storms and the underlying reason is climate change, says Muir-Wood, driven by rising greenhouse gas emissions. 'The first model in which we changed our perspective is on U.S. Atlantic hurricanes. Basically, after the 2004 and 2005 seasons, we determined that it was unsafe to simply assume that historical averages still applied,' he says. 'We've since seen that today's activity has changed in other particular areas as well—with extreme rainfall events, such as the recent flooding in Boulder, Colorado, and with heat waves in certain parts of the world.' Muir-Wood puts his money where his mouth is. 'I personally wouldn't invest in beachfront property anymore,' he says, noting the steady increase in sea level we're expecting to see worldwide in the coming century, on top of more extreme storms. 'And if you're thinking about it, I'd calculate quite carefully how far back you'd have to be in the event of a hurricane.'"

Introduction to entropy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introduct...