From creolescience at yahoo.com Sun Aug 6 17:41:25 2006 From: creolescience at yahoo.com (j s) Date: Sun Aug 6 17:41:30 2006 Subject: [Mad-Scientists] 'Seeing shoes' offer help to blind Message-ID: <20060807004125.67825.qmail@web36104.mail.mud.yahoo.com> 'Seeing shoes' offer help to blind Sun Aug 6, 12:28 AM ET Guide dogs may soon be out of a job thanks to a high-tech pair of glasses and shoes invented by Hong Kong scientists that help blind people navigate the trickiest of terrain, a report said. The researchers at Hong Kong Polytechnic University say the glasses and shoes, which have a built-in computer, can detect objects within close proximity through echo location then send a vibrating warning signal to the wearer. "Ultrasonic waves are sent out and when they bounce back they are interpreted by a receiver. "Once an obstacle is detected the shoe will vibrate, perhaps increasing in intensity as the obstacle gets closer," Research Institute of Innovative Products and Technologies director Wallace Leung Woon-fong was quoted as telling the Sunday Morning Post. The shoes will use GPS (Global Positioning System) to tell the wearer where he is and which direction he is going in. "The shoe will be able to detect steps, holes in the road and obstacles within a five cm (two-inch) vertical distance," Leung said. The innovations are based on the award winning "electronic bat ears" sonic glasses developed by the university's Professor He Jufang, which use similar technology to relay to the wearer information such as size and distance of an object. But some blind people expressed reservations about the inventions. "There are so many bumps in Hong Kong's road. If I wear the shoes I will end up shaking and vibrating all day," the Post quoted Chow Wing-cheung as saying. --------------------------------- Yahoo! Music Unlimited - Access over 1 million songs.Try it free. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://Mad-Scientists.ORG/pipermail/mad-scientists/attachments/20060806/ca5ad1d3/attachment.html From mbest at triad.rr.com Sun Aug 6 20:41:24 2006 From: mbest at triad.rr.com (Michael Best) Date: Sun Aug 6 20:41:31 2006 Subject: [Mad-Scientists] The fallacy of biofuels is becoming apparent Message-ID: <00d401c6b9d3$5ca1e670$03c7bc41@mikey> The Times, London, August 07, 2006 Food prices would soar in biofuels switch, says Unilever By Carl Mortished, International Business Editor BRITAIN faces soaring food prices, a shortage of staple foods and declining public health if the Government pushes ahead with plans to promote the use of biofuels, the UK's biggest food producer has given warning. Unilever fears that Europe-wide plans for a huge increase in use of vegetable oils, such as rapeseed and palm oil, in the manufacture of road fuels will have dramatic consequences, driving up the cost of foods such as margarine and leading consumers to switch to less healthy animal fats. Huge efforts are being made to promote biodiesel amid concern over the rising cost of oil and reliance on the Middle East for supplies. The European Commission wants to increase the proportion of biofuel used in road transport from current levels of 0.8 per cent to 5.75 per cent by 2010. However, Alan Jope, Unilever vice-president, fears that the rush to convert food crops into transport fuel will have unintended consequences. He said: "The scale is dramatic. To meet current EU quotas would require between 50 and 80 per cent of rapeseed production. Ultimately, there could be supply shortages." http://business.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,9068-2302045,00.html From rhjuliano at yahoo.com Mon Aug 7 06:22:02 2006 From: rhjuliano at yahoo.com (Robert Juliano) Date: Mon Aug 7 06:23:02 2006 Subject: [Mad-Scientists] The fallacy of biofuels is becoming apparent In-Reply-To: <00d401c6b9d3$5ca1e670$03c7bc41@mikey> Message-ID: <20060807132202.50413.qmail@web51003.mail.yahoo.com> MB, with gas prices as they are, an alternative is needed. gas as fuel is no longer a viable long-term option. Bob PS sorry about not showing up in NC, but the conference got cancelled.) --- Michael Best wrote: > > > The Times, London, August 07, 2006 > > Food prices would soar in biofuels switch, says > Unilever > By Carl Mortished, International Business Editor > > BRITAIN faces soaring food prices, a shortage of > staple foods and > declining public health if the Government pushes > ahead with plans to > promote the use of biofuels, the UK's biggest food > producer has given > warning. > > Unilever fears that Europe-wide plans for a huge > increase in use of > vegetable oils, such as rapeseed and palm oil, in > the manufacture of > road fuels will have dramatic consequences, driving > up the cost of > foods such as margarine and leading consumers to > switch to less > healthy animal fats. > > Huge efforts are being made to promote biodiesel > amid concern over the > rising cost of oil and reliance on the Middle East > for supplies. The > European Commission wants to increase the proportion > of biofuel used > in road transport from current levels of 0.8 per > cent to 5.75 per cent > by 2010. > > However, Alan Jope, Unilever vice-president, fears > that the rush to > convert food crops into transport fuel will have > unintended > consequences. He said: "The scale is dramatic. To > meet current EU > quotas would require between 50 and 80 per cent of > rapeseed > production. Ultimately, there could be supply > shortages." > > > > http://business.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,9068-2302045,00.html > > > > _______________________________________________ > Mad-Scientists mailing list > Mad-Scientists@Mad-Scientists.ORG > http://www.mad-scientists.org/mailman/listinfo/mad-scientists > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From javilk at mall-net.com Mon Aug 7 11:15:02 2006 From: javilk at mall-net.com (javilk@mall-net.com) Date: Mon Aug 7 11:34:45 2006 Subject: [Mad-Scientists] The fallacy of biofuels is becoming apparent In-Reply-To: <20060807132202.50413.qmail@web51003.mail.yahoo.com> from "Robert Juliano" at Aug 07, 2006 06:22:02 AM Message-ID: <20060807181502.61477.qmail@mall-net.com> > > > MB, > > with gas prices as they are, an alternative is needed. > > gas as fuel is no longer a viable long-term option. Well, the option is NOT changing our food supply croplands over to fuel, as we'll starve to death as food prices skyrocket! The resulting tightness in money supply would kill a lot of the private experimentation and innovation that drives our technology cycles. In other words, we mad scientists would end up spending our lab budget on food, not equipment and supplies. --javilk@mall-net.com---------------------------------- Life is to be LIVED regardless of what is out there. Fear destroys life. Destroy your fear and live. ------------------------------------------------------- Not to be construed as psychological advice. Void where prohibited by law. Not available in all mental states. ------------------------------------------------------- Another Javilk (tm) brand post. Copyright (C) 2006, Javilk@mall-net.com Copyright retained. All rights reserved. From creolescience at yahoo.com Mon Aug 7 12:33:44 2006 From: creolescience at yahoo.com (j s) Date: Mon Aug 7 12:34:02 2006 Subject: [Mad-Scientists] re: biofuels Message-ID: <20060807193344.37840.qmail@web36112.mail.mud.yahoo.com> "Unilever fears that Europe-wide plans for a huge increase in use of vegetable oils, such as rapeseed and palm oil, in the manufacture of road fuels will have dramatic consequences, driving up the cost of foods such as margarine and leading consumers to switch to less healthy animal fats." Right because margarine with it's hydrogenated oil is so much better than animal fats! I think this guy is just scared about his own business, not concerned about the public. --------------------------------- How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger?s low PC-to-Phone call rates. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://Mad-Scientists.ORG/pipermail/mad-scientists/attachments/20060807/c812bde3/attachment.html From mbest at triad.rr.com Mon Aug 7 12:49:57 2006 From: mbest at triad.rr.com (Michael Best) Date: Mon Aug 7 12:50:07 2006 Subject: [Mad-Scientists] High oil prices? Not quite... Message-ID: <000501c6ba5a$ab6984c0$03c7bc41@mikey> I see so much BS regarding oil prices, and no one speaks of the real reason. There is no contrived shortage, there is plenty of oil. The oil suppliers aren't reaping windfall profits, despite the clamoring of the MSM. The reason for high oil prices is simple macroeconomics. It is all based on currency valuation. A century ago, the USA abandoned the gold standard, ostensibly "floating" the value of the US dollar on the international currency markets. Before this, when there was a defined ratio between bank notes ("currency") and "hard money" (precious metals), imbalances in international trade were corrected by transferring precious metal reserves between the central banks of the various nations who were trading partners. E.g., if the USA had a trade surplus of one million dollars with the Republic of Outer Slobovia, then the central bank of Outer Slobovia would transfer a million dollars' worth of gold to the gold reserves of the USA. This had the effect of making the US$ more valuable (as there was more gold backing it) while the Slobovian currency was devalued by a proportionate amount. When the USA abandoned the "gold standard," the true value of the US$ became equated with its purchasing power. No longer could one exchange currency for precious metals at the de jure rate; the exchange rate became the spot market price in the money markets. (Just look at the spot market prices of gold today!) Gold certificates, silver certificates, and United States notes were all supplanted with Federal Reserve notes, which have no par value. A Federal Reserve note is quite worthless; it has no intrinsic value! Its value comes from others' willingness to accept it in payment for "all debts, public and private." As a matter of strict fact, there is no legal requirement that the US$ be accepted for compensation when entering into a contract for goods or services to be provided at a future date (it cannot be a debt until delivery of the goods or services)! If you doubt this, I encourage you to go to your local FedEx office, and attempt to pay them in currency for delivery of an overnight letter. They will not accept currency. To manage this new system of currency valuation, a private consortium of bankers was created to control the value of the US$ using centralized control over interest rates. This is the Federal Reserve System. The Fed is *NOT* part of the US Treasury, not even part of the US Government! Today, currency exchange rates are determined in markets, using a variety of criteria. A trade deficit reduces the value of the currency. High central bank interest rates increase value. Deficit spending by the Government reduces value. Low personal savings rates reduce value, et cetera. But here is the rub! As the US$ is the world's preeminent currency, it is used for many transactions outside the environs of the US economy. Many smaller nations in the world base the valuation of their currency on the US$. US$ reserves are the "gold standard" of many nations! And the US Dollar does not truly "float." It has an underpinning of valuable "hard money" that very few recognize. The most important commodity in the world today is not gold, silver, or diamonds. It is energy, and energy means oil. OPEC uses the US$ as the currency of exchange for trading oil. So the value of the US Dollar is defined by how much oil it can purchase! A century ago, the US Dollar was linked to gold. Today, it is linked to oil. For example, please compare the purchasing power of "hard money" over time. In June of 2005, before the beginning of the current runup in oil prices, one ounce of gold would purchase 7.8 barrels of crude oil. At today's spot prices for both (NYMEX for the oil, and the London fix for the gold, on 8/7/2006), an ounce of gold will buy 8.5 barrels! OIL IS _*LESS*_ EXPENSIVE TODAY THAN A YEAR AGO!!! With this in mind, anyone can understand that the US$ price of a barrel of oil *must* increase when the value of the US$ decreases. When the trade deficit with China increases, the US$ loses value, and consequently, a barrel of oil costs more. When the US Government uses deficit spending to pay bills, the value of the US$ decreases, and the oil costs more. When the Fed reduces interest rates to place more currency in circulation, the value of the US$ decreases, and the oil costs more. Simple Econ101! There is no shortage of oil; it is a shortsightedness of America! Every dollar that the American Consumer sends to China by buying Chinese crap at Wal-Mart devalues the US$, and increases the cost of oil. Every job lost to Asia or Latin America reduces American personal income, and increases the cost of oil! Oil costs so much more because the United States Dollar is worth so much less!!! Period! But the piper has not yet come to be paid. There is a move afoot among some OPEC nations, led by the fundamentalist Islamic regime in Iran, to change the basis currency of OPEC to the Euro from the US Dollar. When this happens, the US$ will truly float, as there will be absolutely no valued commodity underpinning the worth of the US Dollar. On the day that happens, the Third Horseman, on his black horse, rules. Inflation will run rampant. The US Dollar will become worthless. You may well pay a day's wages for a loaf of bread, or a day's wages for three gallons of gas. Just be sure not to disturb the oil and wine! But, what the hey! We have been enjoying this walk down the primrose path for years. Who cares what world we leave to our children, so long as I get what I want at Wal-Mart? You want to see who is responsible for the high cost of filling the tank in your car? LOOK IN THE DAMN MIRROR! -MB From javilk at mall-net.com Mon Aug 7 14:50:05 2006 From: javilk at mall-net.com (javilk@mall-net.com) Date: Mon Aug 7 14:50:17 2006 Subject: [Mad-Scientists] High oil prices? Not quite... In-Reply-To: <000501c6ba5a$ab6984c0$03c7bc41@mikey> from "Michael Best" at Aug 07, 2006 03:49:57 PM Message-ID: <20060807215005.29563.qmail@mall-net.com> > > I see so much BS regarding oil prices, and no one speaks of the real > reason. There is no contrived shortage, there is plenty of oil. The > oil suppliers aren't reaping windfall profits, despite the clamoring > of the MSM. The reason for high oil prices is simple macroeconomics. Not completely. Yes, some effect, to be sure; but it is also driven by fear, the fear our religious opponents are using to manipulate the markets. The real war always boils down to economics. If you can break the opponent economic system, they fall over. That is, unless their economic system never really formed, and the people are so tough and hating that they will just kill anyone who gets in their way. But that kind of system has a problem with mounting a strategy; because economics pays for that strategy. As for the use of biofuels, bio-oils vs animal fats, remember that it takes a lot of grain to feed an animal to the point where it has fats you can use. A lot more grain than growing the oils directly. --javilk@mall-net.com---------------------------------- Life is to be LIVED regardless of what is out there. Fear destroys life. Destroy your fear and live. ------------------------------------------------------- Not to be construed as psychological advice. Void where prohibited by law. Not available in all mental states. ------------------------------------------------------- Another Javilk (tm) brand post. Copyright (C) 2006, Javilk@mall-net.com Copyright retained. All rights reserved. From creolescience at yahoo.com Mon Aug 7 16:48:40 2006 From: creolescience at yahoo.com (j s) Date: Mon Aug 7 16:48:48 2006 Subject: [Mad-Scientists] Scientists Reverse Evolution, Reconstruct Ancient Gene Message-ID: <20060807234841.31772.qmail@web36106.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Scientists Reverse Evolution, Reconstruct Ancient Gene Ker Than LiveScience Staff Writer LiveScience.comMon Aug 7, 12:00 PM ET It's not Jurassic Park, but scientists have reconstructed a 530-million-year-old gene by piecing together key portions of two modern genes descended from it. "We've shown some of the elements involved in the process of evolution by reversing this process and reconstructing a gene that later became two genes," said study team member Mario Capecchi of the University of Utah School of Medicine. The achievement, detailed in the Aug. 7 issue of the journal Developmental Cell, could lead to new types of gene therapy, in which a damaged gene could be restored by pairing parts of it with portions from a similar gene from another part of the body, the researcher say. Splitting up the job Genes are snippets of DNA that carry instructions for building a protein. The splitting of one gene into many genes has occurred many times throughout life's history. With two identical genes, one can continue doing its normal job while the other is free to mutate. Most mutations are harmful and disappear, but every once in a while one proves beneficial to the organism and is passed on to future generations. The researchers reconstructed an ancient control gene, called "Hox," which directs the actions of other genes during development of an animal embryo. Early animals had 13 Hox genes until about 500 million years ago. Those 13 Hox genes multiplied four times, but some were lost because they were redundant. Today, humans and other mammals today have 39 Hox genes. The modern descendent of one of those archaic genes, Hox1, are Hoxa1 and Hoxb1. Hoxa1 is important for breathing functions. When Hoxa1 is disabled in embryonic mice, they die shortly after birth. Hoxb1 orders the formation of nerve cells that ultimately control facial expressions in animals. When a mouse is born with a disabled Hoxb1 gene, it suffers facial paralysis and can't blink its eyes, wiggle its whiskers or pull back its ears. The researchers combined critical portions of Hoxa1 and Hoxb1 to recreate the original Hox1. The reconstructed gene performed the jobs of both genes. Mice born with Hox1 could breathe because they had the crucial part of Hoxa1, and they could move their facial muscles because they had a small bit of Hoxb1. "What we have done is essentially go back in time to when Hox1 did what Hoxa1 and Hoxb1 do today," Capecchi said. Gene substitutions The new hybrid gene is not an exact copy of the 530-million-year-old gene, the researcher say, but it does perform essentially all the functions of the ancient gene. The reconstructed gene lacks Hoxc1 and Hoxd1, two descendent genes that vanished during evolution because they were either redundant or played minor roles. The study could lead to new approaches to gene therapy, the researchers say. "It shows that genes are not as different as we thought, and that we can perhaps tweak and recruit one to do the job of another that is mutated and not as easy to fix," study team member Petr Tvrdik told LiveScience. If a gene duplicated into two and evolved separate functions in the body?for example, one gene works in the brain and the other in the liver?then if the brain version of the gene becomes mutated or deleted, parts of it could be combined with portions of the liver gene to reconstruct a gene similar to the normal brain gene. The Biggest Popular Myths Genes: The Instruction Manuals for Life Shark Fins and Human Arms Made from Same Genes Hundreds of Human Genes Still Evolving How Evolution Works Original Story: Scientists Reverse Evolution, Reconstruct Ancient Gene Visit LiveScience.com for more daily news, views and scientific inquiry with an original, provocative point of view. LiveScience reports amazing, real world breakthroughs, made simple and stimulating for people on the go. Check out our collection of Science, Animal and Dinosaur Pictures, Science Videos, Hot Topics, Trivia, Top 10s, Voting, Amazing Images, Reader Favorites, and more. Get cool gadgets at the new LiveScience Store, sign up for our free daily email newsletter and check out our RSS feeds today! --------------------------------- Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1?/min. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://Mad-Scientists.ORG/pipermail/mad-scientists/attachments/20060807/2fabc0b0/attachment.html From Vesta111 at aol.com Tue Aug 8 04:11:27 2006 From: Vesta111 at aol.com (Vesta111@aol.com) Date: Tue Aug 8 04:11:43 2006 Subject: [Mad-Scientists] Check out Strange but True- scientist-tests-anti-stupidity-pill - AOL News Message-ID: <4a0.3f4979a.3209cb5f@aol.com> _Strange but True- scientist-tests-anti-stupidity-pill - AOL News_ (http://news.aol.com/strange/story/_a/scientist-tests-anti-stupidity-pill/n2006080712510 9990003?cid=936) The greatest gift I was given as a child, was the love of the written word. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://Mad-Scientists.ORG/pipermail/mad-scientists/attachments/20060808/c1769bd2/attachment-0001.html From mbest at triad.rr.com Tue Aug 8 08:19:27 2006 From: mbest at triad.rr.com (Michael Best) Date: Tue Aug 8 08:19:35 2006 Subject: [Mad-Scientists] re: biofuels Message-ID: <002e01c6bafe$0b6621a0$03c7bc41@mikey> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2006 12:33:44 -0700 (PDT) From: j s "Unilever fears that Europe-wide plans for a huge increase in use of vegetable oils, such as rapeseed and palm oil, in the manufacture of road fuels will have dramatic consequences, driving up the cost of foods such as margarine and leading consumers to switch to less healthy animal fats." Right because margarine with it's hydrogenated oil is so much better than animal fats! I think this guy is just scared about his own business, not concerned about the public. ------------------------------ They are a business! What do you expect? But the issue isn't the wholesomeness of pasteurized-process-partially-hydrogenated-synthetic-butter-flavored-f oodlike-product; it is that using arable land to grow fuel crops reduces the human food supply. While we are still discovering new supplies of oil, I'm afraid that very little new land is being created. So with a fixed resource, would you prefer to use it to fuel your car, or your body? In reality, it would be a good idea to use starvation to reduce the human population by about three billion or so- this would eliminate most all of the evil impact we humans have on Earth. I fail to understand why the Liberal tree-huggers haven't embraced this idea yet- it is far more effective than anything else they suggest. -MB From mbest at triad.rr.com Tue Aug 8 08:25:31 2006 From: mbest at triad.rr.com (Michael Best) Date: Tue Aug 8 08:25:38 2006 Subject: [Mad-Scientists] High oil prices? Not quite... Message-ID: <002f01c6bafe$e45e90a0$03c7bc41@mikey> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 20*****:50:05 +0000 (GMT) From: javilk@mall-net.com > The reason for high oil prices is simple macroeconomics. Not completely. Yes, some effect, to be sure; but it is also driven by fear, the fear our religious opponents are using to manipulate the markets. The real war always boils down to economics. If you can break the opponent economic system, they fall over. That is, unless their economic system never really formed, and the people are so tough and hating that they will just kill anyone who gets in their way. But that kind of system has a problem with mounting a strategy; because economics pays for that strategy. ------------------ But is it not still better to have your enemy destroy his OWN economy? (Cf. Sun Tzu) Our enemies, with the aid, comfort, and support of the MSM and politicians, are doing exactly that. WE are destroying our OWN economy, at their behest. As I said, "LOOK IN THE DAMN MIRROR!" -MB From javilk at mall-net.com Tue Aug 8 12:41:12 2006 From: javilk at mall-net.com (javilk@mall-net.com) Date: Tue Aug 8 12:42:02 2006 Subject: [Mad-Scientists] re: biofuels In-Reply-To: <002e01c6bafe$0b6621a0$03c7bc41@mikey> from "Michael Best" at Aug 08, 2006 11:19:27 AM Message-ID: <20060808194114.76587.qmail@mall-net.com> >> "Unilever fears that Europe-wide plans for a huge increase in use of >> vegetable oils, such as rapeseed and palm oil, in the manufacture of >> road fuels will have dramatic consequences, driving up the cost of >> foods such as margarine and leading consumers to switch to less >> healthy animal fats." > They are a business! What do you expect? > > But the issue isn't the wholesomeness of > pasteurized-process-partially-hydrogenated-synthetic-butter-flavored-f > oodlike-product; it is that using arable land to grow fuel crops > reduces the human food supply. Yes. > In reality, it would be a good idea to use starvation to reduce the > human population by about three billion or so- this would eliminate > most all of the evil impact we humans have on Earth. There are several perfictly natural and cyclically occuring events which do this on a regular basis. Not to worry, it's going to happen all by its self! 1. War. We've gotten a little better at it these days; but the real problem is the land is unusable for a much longer time, and the chain of command that keeps it from happening has recently been shortened from the orthodox self-preserving militaries, to self propataging cultists wishig to leave this reality for a higher one. (As in, why do you think so many soviet generals were leaking informatin to the USA? They wanted to remain alive and employed!) 2. Plague. Sooner or later, something comes around that wipes out city dwellers. We still have rats and mice to spread bubonic plague, ducks spread the flu, and there are a whole lot of other possibilities that have periodically reduced out numbers. 3. Glacial cycles. Ice ages reduce arable land, play havoc with sea levels, etc. 4. Tunguska-like events, aka cosmic billiards. Eventually, even the most successfull creatures of all time, th edinosaurs, got wiped out. > I fail to understand why the Liberal tree-huggers haven't embraced > this idea yet- it is far more effective than anything else they > suggest. Oh, but their babbling nonsense often paves the way. Right now, all our eggs are in one basked, that basked called Earth. We desperately need to spread our eggs onto other self sufficient colonies in outer space so that when disaster comes, some may survive. --javilk@mall-net.com---------------------------------- Life is to be LIVED regardless of what is out there. Fear destroys life. Destroy your fear and live. ------------------------------------------------------- Not to be construed as psychological advice. Void where prohibited by law. Not available in all mental states. ------------------------------------------------------- Another Javilk (tm) brand post. Copyright (C) 2006, Javilk@mall-net.com Copyright retained. All rights reserved. From javilk at mall-net.com Tue Aug 8 16:03:54 2006 From: javilk at mall-net.com (javilk@mall-net.com) Date: Tue Aug 8 16:04:01 2006 Subject: [Mad-Scientists] re: biofuels and spelling! In-Reply-To: <20060808194114.76587.qmail@mall-net.com> from "javilk@mall-net.com" at Aug 08, 2006 07:41:12 PM Message-ID: <20060808230354.79224.qmail@mall-net.com> > Right now, all our eggs are in one basked, that basked called > Earth. We desperately need to spread our eggs onto other self > sufficient colonies in outer space so that when disaster comes, some may > survive. I blame what's his name... Clyde for subverting my spelling czecker with all his spelling errors. Wonder what happened to him. --javilk@mall-net.com---------------------------------- Life is to be LIVED regardless of what is out there. Fear destroys life. Destroy your fear and live. ------------------------------------------------------- Not to be construed as psychological advice. Void where prohibited by law. Not available in all mental states. ------------------------------------------------------- Another Javilk (tm) brand post. Copyright (C) 2006, Javilk@mall-net.com Copyright retained. All rights reserved. From mbest at triad.rr.com Wed Aug 16 12:14:12 2006 From: mbest at triad.rr.com (Michael Best) Date: Wed Aug 16 12:14:24 2006 Subject: [Mad-Scientists] Now we're playing with Mother Nature again! Message-ID: <005201c6c168$2a2587a0$3cf21c18@mikey> I just wonder what the downside is going to be? We have absolutely no idea! We could easily create holes in the ozone layer, Van Allen belts, etc. -MB -----Original Message----- From: ARRL Web site [mailto:memberlist@www.arrl.org] Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2006 9:31 AM To: mbest@triad.rr.com Cc: Subscribed ARRL Members: Subject: ARLP033 Propagation de K7RA SB PROP @ ARL $ARLP033 ARLP033 Propagation de K7RA ZCZC AP33 QST de W1AW Propagation Forecast Bulletin 33 ARLP033 >From Tad Cook, K7RA Seattle, WA August 15, 2006 To all radio amateurs SB PROP ARL ARLP033 ARLP033 Propagation de K7RA This is a special early edition of the propagation bulletin, three days before the regular Friday publication schedule. The regular bulletin will appear on Friday, August 18. A newspaper article on Monday out of New Zealand reported a proposed Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) project that could cause major worldwide disruptions to HF radio communication and GPS navigation. The ''Radiation Belt Remediation'' (RBR) system is envisaged as a method for protecting low earth orbit (LEO) satellites from damage caused by high altitude nuclear detonations or severe solar storms. Testing the system would use extremely high intensity very low frequency (VLF) radio waves to flush particles from radiation belts and dump them into the upper atmosphere. When I first heard of this on Monday morning, I thought it must be something from a fringe web site peddling dark conspiracy theories. But the newspaper reporting the news is real, and so is the team of scientists from New Zealand, the UK and Finland whose study of possible effects of the scheme is reported in a recent edition of Annales Geophysicae. You can find the article here: http://www.physics.otago.ac.nz/research/space/ag-24-2025.pdf A web page from the University of Otago describing the research is here: http://www.physics.otago.ac.nz/research/space/RBR_Media_release_8Aug06 .htm I contacted the lead researcher on the team reporting the possible effects of the project, Dr. Craig Rodger of the Physics Department at the University of Otago in Dunedin, New Zealand. He proved very cooperative, accessible and helpful, and told me RBR is a serious project, ''money is starting to appear to investigate it in more detail'', and ''U.S. scientists with military connections are treating it seriously''. It is feared that testing the system could shut down worldwide HF communications for several days to a week, rendering the ionosphere a giant sponge for RF. I sent Dr. Rodger a comment from Ward Silver, N0AX, who speculated ''the sheer energy needed to accomplish it would tend to rule it out from the start, and I don't know where they would erect the necessary antennas.'' Dr. Rodger responded, ''This would be true, but they are hoping to rely on some of the non-linear processes in space plasmas, stealing the energy from the radiation belts to get the wave-amplitudes high enough. We know this is possible (in theory), as it happens naturally already. We don't know how easy it will be to get it happening under our control''. ''Also, as for erecting the antenna, there are two plans. One is to fly VLF antenna in space. This could be a power problem. But for ground-based systems, you probably already know that most major naval powers have big VLF transmitters dotted over the globe. (Two of the US Navy transmitters radiate one megawatt). While these are designed to keep the signals mostly under the ionosphere, it shows the possibility for building big powerful antenna''. You can read Monday's article from the New Zealand Herald, here: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/story.cfm?c_id=1ObjectID=10396164 If you would like to make a comment or have a tip for our readers, email the author at, k7ra@arrl.net. For more information concerning radio propagation, see the ARRL Technical Information Service at http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/propagation.html. For a detailed explanation of the numbers used in this bulletin, see http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/k9la-prop.html. An archive of past propagation bulletins is at http://www.arrl.org/w1aw/prop/. Sunspot numbers for August 3 through 9 were 23, 0, 0, 0, 0, 12 and 25 with a mean of 8.6. 10.7 cm flux was 71.3, 69.6, 69.5, 69.5, 69.8, 71.4, and 74.1, with a mean of 70.7. Estimated planetary A indices were 6, 3, 4, 4, 32, 12 and 9 with a mean of 10. Estimated mid-latitude A indices were 5, 2, 2, 2, 19, 10 and 9, with a mean of 7. NNNN /EX From creolescience at yahoo.com Wed Aug 16 18:12:37 2006 From: creolescience at yahoo.com (j s) Date: Wed Aug 16 18:12:47 2006 Subject: [Mad-Scientists] Scientists find brain evolution gene Message-ID: <20060817011238.69087.qmail@web36105.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Scientists find brain evolution gene By SETH BORENSTEIN, AP Science Writer1 hour, 27 minutes ago Scientists believe they have found a key gene that helped the human brain evolve from our chimp-like ancestors. In just a few million years, one area of the human genome seems to have evolved about 70 times faster than the rest of our genetic code. It appears to have a role in a rapid tripling of the size of the brain's crucial cerebral cortex, according to an article published Thursday in the journal Nature. Study co-author David Haussler, director of the Center for Biomolecular Science and Engineering at the University of California, Santa Cruz, said his team found strong but still circumstantial evidence that a certain gene, called HAR1F, may provide an important answer to the question: "What makes humans brainier than other primates?" Human brains are triple the size of chimp brains. Looking at 49 areas that have changed the most between the human and chimpanzee genomes, Haussler zeroed in on an area with "a very dramatic change in a relatively short period of time." That one gene didn't exist until 300 million years ago and is present only in mammals and birds, not fish or animals without backbones. But then it didn't change much at all. There are only two differences in that one gene between a chimp and a chicken, Haussler said. But there are 18 differences in that one gene between human and chimp and they all seemed to occur in the development of man, he said. Andrew Clark, a Cornell University professor molecular biology who was not part of Haussler's team, said that if true, the change in genes would be fastest and most dramatic in humans and would be "terrifically exciting." However, the gene changed so fast that Clark said that he has a hard time believing it unless something unusual happened in a mutation. It's not part of normal evolution, he said. Haussler attributed the dramatic change to the stress of man getting out of trees and walking on two feet. And it's not just that this gene changed a lot. There is also its involvement with the cerebral cortex, which is responsible for some of the more complex brain functions, including language and information processing. "It looks like in fact it is important in the development of brain," said co-author Sofie Salama, a research biologist at Santa Cruz who led the efforts to identify where the gene is active in the body. The scientists still don't know specifically what the gene does. But they know that this same gene turns on in human fetuses at seven weeks after conception and then shuts down at 19 weeks, Haussler said. ___ --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://Mad-Scientists.ORG/pipermail/mad-scientists/attachments/20060816/d7171237/attachment.html From javilk at mall-net.com Thu Aug 17 00:38:29 2006 From: javilk at mall-net.com (javilk@mall-net.com) Date: Thu Aug 17 00:38:33 2006 Subject: [Mad-Scientists] Scientists find brain evolution gene In-Reply-To: <20060817011238.69087.qmail@web36105.mail.mud.yahoo.com> from "j s" at Aug 16, 2006 06:12:37 PM Message-ID: <20060817073829.25547.qmail@mall-net.com> > Andrew Clark, a Cornell University professor molecular biology who was > not part of Haussler's team, said that if true, the change in genes > would be fastest and most dramatic in humans and would be > "terrifically exciting." > However, the gene changed so fast that Clark said that he has a hard > time believing it unless something unusual happened in a mutation. > It's not part of normal evolution, he said. Haussler attributed the dramatic > change to the stress of man getting out of trees and walking on two > feet. "I knew we wuz defective! Dem's stable jeans, they is fer alligators." This would also explain why we have so many defectives -- evolution in action. We bumped up the mutation rate, so we have more defectives. Over one third of human fertilizations spontaneously abort, often before the woman knows she is pregnant. "Late periods". Something like the equivalent of a checksum error as some of the critical systems fail to turn on. That allows more experimentation without draining the resources of the mother with an actual birth. I did some experimentation with genetic algorithms using the fractal fern formulas, and cutting a fern for failure to perform at an early age saves a lot of cpu cycles! If anyone is interested, I could try to dredge up the old code. It's Borland C. --javilk@mall-net.com---------------------------------- Life is to be LIVED regardless of what is out there. Fear destroys life. Destroy your fear and live. ------------------------------------------------------- Not to be construed as psychological advice. Void where prohibited by law. Not available in all mental states. ------------------------------------------------------- Another Javilk (tm) brand post. Copyright (C) 2006, Javilk@mall-net.com Copyright retained. All rights reserved. From creolescience at yahoo.com Fri Aug 18 23:02:30 2006 From: creolescience at yahoo.com (j s) Date: Fri Aug 18 23:02:55 2006 Subject: [Mad-Scientists] Irish company challenges scientists to test 'free energy' technology Message-ID: <20060819060230.16421.qmail@web36105.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Irish company challenges scientists to test 'free energy' technology Fri Aug 18, 10:10 AM ET An Irish company has thrown down the gauntlet to the worldwide scientific community to test a technology it has developed that it claims produces free energy. The company, Steorn, says its discovery is based on the interaction of magnetic fields and allows the production of clean, free and constant energy -- a concept that challenges one of the basic rules of physics. It claims the technology can be used to supply energy for virtually all devices, from mobile phones to cars. Steorn issued its challenge through an advertisement in the Economist magazine this week quoting Ireland's Nobel prize-winning author George Bernard Shaw who said that "all great truths begin as blasphemies". Sean McCarthy, Steorn's chief executive officer, said they had issued the challenge for 12 physicists to rigorously test the technology so it can be developed. "What we have developed is a way to construct magnetic fields so that when you travel round the magnetic fields, starting and stopping at the same position, you have gained energy," McCarthy said. "The energy isn't being converted from any other source such as the energy within the magnet. It's literally created. Once the technology operates it provides a constant stream of clean energy," he told Ireland's RTE radio. McCarthy said Steorn had not set out to develop the technology, but "it actually fell out of another project we were working on". One of the basic principles of physics is that energy can neither be created nor destroyed, it can only change form. McCarthy said a big obstacle to overcome was the disbelief that what they had developed was even possible. "For the first six months that we looked at it we literally didn't believe it ourselves. Over the last three years it had been rigorously tested in our own laboratories, in independent laboratories and so on," he said. "But we have been unable to get significant scientific interest in it. We have had scientists come in, test it and, off the record, they are quite happy to admit that it works. "But for us to be able to commercialise this and put this into peoples' lives we need credible, academic validation in the public domain and hence the challenge," McCarthy said. --------------------------------- Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1?/min. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://Mad-Scientists.ORG/pipermail/mad-scientists/attachments/20060818/946baad9/attachment.html From creolescience at yahoo.com Sun Aug 20 17:35:54 2006 From: creolescience at yahoo.com (j s) Date: Sun Aug 20 17:36:08 2006 Subject: [Mad-Scientists] Ozone-friendly chemicals lead to warming Message-ID: <20060821003554.33491.qmail@web36105.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Ozone-friendly chemicals lead to warming By JOHN HEILPRIN, Associated Press Writer2 hours, 54 minutes ago Cool your home, warm the planet. When more than two dozen countries undertook in 1989 to fix the ozone hole over Antarctica, they began replacing chloroflourocarbons in refrigerators, air conditioners and hair spray. But they had little idea that using other gases that contain chlorine or fluorine instead also would contribute greatly to global warming. CFCs destroy ozone, the atmospheric layer that helps protect against the sun's most harmful rays, and trap the earth's heat, contributing to a rise in average surface temperatures. In theory, the ban should have helped both problems. But the countries that first signed the Montreal Protocol 17 years ago failed to recognize that CFC users would seek out the cheapest available alternative. The chemicals that replaced CFCs are better for the ozone layer, but do little to help global warming. These chemicals, too, act as a reflective layer in the atmosphere that traps heat like a greenhouse. That effect is at odds with the intent of a second treaty, drawn up in Kyoto, Japan, in 1997 by the same countries behind the Montreal pact. In fact, the volume of greenhouse gases created as a result of the Montreal agreement's phaseout of CFCs is two times to three times the amount of global-warming carbon dioxide the Kyoto agreement is supposed to eliminate. This unintended consequence now haunts the nations that signed both U.N. treaties. Switzerland first tried in 1990 to sound an alarm that the solution for plugging the ozone hole might contribute to another environmental problem. The reaction? "Nothing, or almost," said Blaise Horisberger, the Swiss representative to U.N.-backed Montreal treaty. "We have been permanently raising this issue. It has been really difficult." Horisberger, a biologist with the Swiss Agency for the Environment, Forests and Landscape, kept trying. Finally, the first formal, secret talks on the subject were held in Montreal last month. "Saving the ozone layer by reducing CFCs and at the same time promoting alternatives was an urgent crisis in the early years of the Montreal Protocol," said Marco Gonzalez, the treaty's executive secretary, in Nairobi, Kenya. "Now there is always a need to find new substances which are safe, energy-efficient and also have minimal impact across a range of environmental issues." The Montreal Protocol, which now has 189 member nations, is considered one of the most effective environmental treaties. Almost $2.1 billion has been spent through an affiliated fund to prod countries to stop making and using CFCs and other ozone-damaging chemicals in refrigerators, air conditioners, foams and other products. Scientists blame CFCs for poking a huge, seasonal hole in the stratospheric ozone layer about 7 miles to 14 miles over Antarctica. Last year, the ozone hole peaked at about 10 million square miles, or the size of North America. That was below the 2003 record size of about 11 million square miles. Scientists expect the hole will not heal until 2065. CFCs also are thinning the ozone layer over the Arctic and, to a lesser extent, globally. As the protective layer thins, more ultraviolet radiation gets through, increasing people's risk of skin cancer and cataracts and threatening more plants and animals with extinction. Some of the replacement chemicals whose use has grown because of the Montreal treaty ? hydrochloroflourocarbons, or HCFCs, and their byproducts, hydrofluorocarbons, or HFCs ? decompose faster than CFCs because they contain hydrogen. But, like CFCs, they are considered potent greenhouse gases that harm the climate ? up to 10,000 times worse than carbon dioxide emissions. The Kyoto treaty's goal is to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from power plants, motor vehicles and other sources that burn fossil fuels by about 1 billion tons by 2012. Use of HCFCs and HFCs is projected to add the equivalent of 2 billion to 3 billion tons of carbon dioxide emissions to the atmosphere by 2015, U.N. climate experts said in a recent report. The CFCs they replace also would have added that much. "But now the question is, who's going to ensure that the replacements are not going to cause global warming?" said Alexander von Bismarck, campaigns director for the Environmental Investigation Agency, a nonprofit watchdog group in London and Washington. "It's shocking that so far nobody's taking responsibility." "A massive opportunity to help stave off climate change is currently being cast aside," he said. The U.N. report says the atmosphere could be spared the equivalent of 1 billion tons of carbon dioxide emissions if countries used ammonia, hydrocarbons, carbon dioxide or other ozone-friendly chemicals, rather than HCFCs and HFCs, in foams and refrigerants. Such alternatives are more common in Europe. "This potential of not using greenhouse gases is not fully used," said Horisberger, the Swiss official. "It's because of many reasons ? technical, big commercial interests." Industry is split over how to replace CFCs and HCFCs. One of the biggest producers of fluorine-based refrigerants, Honeywell International Inc., says it is discontinuing its use of "the older technology, environmentally unfriendly CFC and HCFC refrigerants," and replacing those chlorine-containing chemicals with HFCs in retrofits and in new equipment. Industry representatives cite safety and energy efficiency problems with the use of ammonia and hydrocarbons, which mainly involves propane gas. "If there's a leak in a residential line, it can ignite ? you have a potential bomb," said Stephen Yurek, general counsel for the Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute. It represents North American makers of equipment for homes, businesses and transportation. Manufacturers also say they could not meet U.S. energy efficiency requirements that took effect this year if they used those chemicals. "The technology just isn't there," Yurek said. A 2002 study prepared for an industry coalition that encourages use of HCFCs and HFCs says the safety measures and higher energy bills required by some alternatives would cost U.S. consumers hundreds of millions of dollars a year. "We're saying efficiency is just as important as the refrigerant being used," Yurek said. "If it's going to increase the amount of energy used to operate a piece of equipment, you're actually worse off because you're going to be pumping more CO2 (carbon dioxide) into the atmosphere." The Montreal Protocol has been powered by a global fund run by the United Nations and the World Bank. On average, more than $150 million is spent a year to help developing nations comply with the treaty by phasing out CFCs. The fund pays the costs for companies to switch from CFCs to HCFCs, HFCs and other chemicals commonly used in air conditioners, semiconductors, foams, fire extinguishers, hair spray, and roof and wall insulation. The biggest beneficiaries are companies in seven countries: China, India, Venezuela, Argentina, Mexico, Romania and North Korea. Meanwhile, consumers in the U.S. and elsewhere continue to snap up products that would cost more if HCFCs and HFCs were already eliminated. Under the Montreal treaty, industrial countries have until 2030 and developing countries until 2040 to quit using HCFCs and HFCs. "It is true that there will be a significant growth over the next 10 years of HCFC production and consumption in the developing countries," said Lambert Kuijpers, a Dutch nuclear physicist and a lead author of the U.N. report. "This will also contribute to global warming in a so far unprecedented way, if it will occur as anticipated." That is a touchy subject for supporters of the Montreal agreement. Few want to acknowledge anything could be wrong with a treaty that is on track to fix at least one major environmental problem. "You have to put it into historical perspective. Hydrocarbon technology wasn't ready. ... It was still being tested in the early 1990s. And only gradually that technology became mature and became accepted," said Sheng Hsuo Lang, the fund's deputy chief officer. "In hindsight, you can say, 'Why didn't you wait?' Or you can take action right away." The United States signed the Montreal Protocol, but has not ratified the Kyoto Treaty. ___ On the Net: Montreal Protocol: http://ozone.unep.org/index.asp Multilateral Fund: http://www.multilateralfund.org By JOHN HEILPRIN, Associated Press Writer2 hours, 54 minutes ago Cool your home, warm the planet. When more than two dozen countries undertook in 1989 to fix the ozone hole over Antarctica, they began replacing chloroflourocarbons in refrigerators, air conditioners and hair spray. But they had little idea that using other gases that contain chlorine or fluorine instead also would contribute greatly to global warming. CFCs destroy ozone, the atmospheric layer that helps protect against the sun's most harmful rays, and trap the earth's heat, contributing to a rise in average surface temperatures. In theory, the ban should have helped both problems. But the countries that first signed the Montreal Protocol 17 years ago failed to recognize that CFC users would seek out the cheapest available alternative. The chemicals that replaced CFCs are better for the ozone layer, but do little to help global warming. These chemicals, too, act as a reflective layer in the atmosphere that traps heat like a greenhouse. That effect is at odds with the intent of a second treaty, drawn up in Kyoto, Japan, in 1997 by the same countries behind the Montreal pact. In fact, the volume of greenhouse gases created as a result of the Montreal agreement's phaseout of CFCs is two times to three times the amount of global-warming carbon dioxide the Kyoto agreement is supposed to eliminate. This unintended consequence now haunts the nations that signed both U.N. treaties. Switzerland first tried in 1990 to sound an alarm that the solution for plugging the ozone hole might contribute to another environmental problem. The reaction? "Nothing, or almost," said Blaise Horisberger, the Swiss representative to U.N.-backed Montreal treaty. "We have been permanently raising this issue. It has been really difficult." Horisberger, a biologist with the Swiss Agency for the Environment, Forests and Landscape, kept trying. Finally, the first formal, secret talks on the subject were held in Montreal last month. "Saving the ozone layer by reducing CFCs and at the same time promoting alternatives was an urgent crisis in the early years of the Montreal Protocol," said Marco Gonzalez, the treaty's executive secretary, in Nairobi, Kenya. "Now there is always a need to find new substances which are safe, energy-efficient and also have minimal impact across a range of environmental issues." The Montreal Protocol, which now has 189 member nations, is considered one of the most effective environmental treaties. Almost $2.1 billion has been spent through an affiliated fund to prod countries to stop making and using CFCs and other ozone-damaging chemicals in refrigerators, air conditioners, foams and other products. Scientists blame CFCs for poking a huge, seasonal hole in the stratospheric ozone layer about 7 miles to 14 miles over Antarctica. Last year, the ozone hole peaked at about 10 million square miles, or the size of North America. That was below the 2003 record size of about 11 million square miles. Scientists expect the hole will not heal until 2065. CFCs also are thinning the ozone layer over the Arctic and, to a lesser extent, globally. As the protective layer thins, more ultraviolet radiation gets through, increasing people's risk of skin cancer and cataracts and threatening more plants and animals with extinction. Some of the replacement chemicals whose use has grown because of the Montreal treaty ? hydrochloroflourocarbons, or HCFCs, and their byproducts, hydrofluorocarbons, or HFCs ? decompose faster than CFCs because they contain hydrogen. But, like CFCs, they are considered potent greenhouse gases that harm the climate ? up to 10,000 times worse than carbon dioxide emissions. The Kyoto treaty's goal is to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from power plants, motor vehicles and other sources that burn fossil fuels by about 1 billion tons by 2012. Use of HCFCs and HFCs is projected to add the equivalent of 2 billion to 3 billion tons of carbon dioxide emissions to the atmosphere by 2015, U.N. climate experts said in a recent report. The CFCs they replace also would have added that much. "But now the question is, who's going to ensure that the replacements are not going to cause global warming?" said Alexander von Bismarck, campaigns director for the Environmental Investigation Agency, a nonprofit watchdog group in London and Washington. "It's shocking that so far nobody's taking responsibility." "A massive opportunity to help stave off climate change is currently being cast aside," he said. The U.N. report says the atmosphere could be spared the equivalent of 1 billion tons of carbon dioxide emissions if countries used ammonia, hydrocarbons, carbon dioxide or other ozone-friendly chemicals, rather than HCFCs and HFCs, in foams and refrigerants. Such alternatives are more common in Europe. "This potential of not using greenhouse gases is not fully used," said Horisberger, the Swiss official. "It's because of many reasons ? technical, big commercial interests." Industry is split over how to replace CFCs and HCFCs. One of the biggest producers of fluorine-based refrigerants, Honeywell International Inc., says it is discontinuing its use of "the older technology, environmentally unfriendly CFC and HCFC refrigerants," and replacing those chlorine-containing chemicals with HFCs in retrofits and in new equipment. Industry representatives cite safety and energy efficiency problems with the use of ammonia and hydrocarbons, which mainly involves propane gas. "If there's a leak in a residential line, it can ignite ? you have a potential bomb," said Stephen Yurek, general counsel for the Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute. It represents North American makers of equipment for homes, businesses and transportation. Manufacturers also say they could not meet U.S. energy efficiency requirements that took effect this year if they used those chemicals. "The technology just isn't there," Yurek said. A 2002 study prepared for an industry coalition that encourages use of HCFCs and HFCs says the safety measures and higher energy bills required by some alternatives would cost U.S. consumers hundreds of millions of dollars a year. "We're saying efficiency is just as important as the refrigerant being used," Yurek said. "If it's going to increase the amount of energy used to operate a piece of equipment, you're actually worse off because you're going to be pumping more CO2 (carbon dioxide) into the atmosphere." The Montreal Protocol has been powered by a global fund run by the United Nations and the World Bank. On average, more than $150 million is spent a year to help developing nations comply with the treaty by phasing out CFCs. The fund pays the costs for companies to switch from CFCs to HCFCs, HFCs and other chemicals commonly used in air conditioners, semiconductors, foams, fire extinguishers, hair spray, and roof and wall insulation. The biggest beneficiaries are companies in seven countries: China, India, Venezuela, Argentina, Mexico, Romania and North Korea. Meanwhile, consumers in the U.S. and elsewhere continue to snap up products that would cost more if HCFCs and HFCs were already eliminated. Under the Montreal treaty, industrial countries have until 2030 and developing countries until 2040 to quit using HCFCs and HFCs. "It is true that there will be a significant growth over the next 10 years of HCFC production and consumption in the developing countries," said Lambert Kuijpers, a Dutch nuclear physicist and a lead author of the U.N. report. "This will also contribute to global warming in a so far unprecedented way, if it will occur as anticipated." That is a touchy subject for supporters of the Montreal agreement. Few want to acknowledge anything could be wrong with a treaty that is on track to fix at least one major environmental problem. "You have to put it into historical perspective. Hydrocarbon technology wasn't ready. ... It was still being tested in the early 1990s. And only gradually that technology became mature and became accepted," said Sheng Hsuo Lang, the fund's deputy chief officer. "In hindsight, you can say, 'Why didn't you wait?' Or you can take action right away." The United States signed the Montreal Protocol, but has not ratified the Kyoto Treaty. ___ On the Net: Montreal Protocol: http://ozone.unep.org/index.asp Multilateral Fund: http://www.multilateralfund.org --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://Mad-Scientists.ORG/pipermail/mad-scientists/attachments/20060820/484f82f2/attachment-0001.html From javilk at mall-net.com Tue Aug 22 11:48:09 2006 From: javilk at mall-net.com (javilk@mall-net.com) Date: Tue Aug 22 12:20:27 2006 Subject: [Mad-Scientists] New Members from Olimpia, Washington? In-Reply-To: <20060821003554.33491.qmail@web36105.mail.mud.yahoo.com> from "j s" at Aug 20, 2006 05:35:54 PM Message-ID: <20060822184809.32652.qmail@mall-net.com> I suspect there are some potential new members in Olympia, Washington. Someone a bit on the hirsute side should look into this article about Mad raccoons on the rampage: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/08/22/ap/strange/mainD8JLHKG81.shtml If we are truly scientists, why should we limit membership to those who are human? There are plenty of fascinating entities around us who share some of our traits. (The downside is, we may have to teach these creatures to type.) -J- (C) 2006, javilk@mall-net.com ------------------ www.mall-net.com/javilk --- Laugh at yourself, Our Creator loves company -- and You! --------------- --- After all, we wouldn't want our Creator to cancel the show, would we? -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Another Javilk (tm) brand post. Copyright retained. All rights reserved. Copyright (C) 2006, Javilk@mall-net.com http://www.mall-net.com/javilk/ From creolescience at yahoo.com Tue Aug 22 15:38:33 2006 From: creolescience at yahoo.com (j s) Date: Tue Aug 22 15:39:00 2006 Subject: [Mad-Scientists] "Dark matter" is real: scientists Message-ID: <20060822223833.32986.qmail@web36106.mail.mud.yahoo.com> "Dark matter" is real: scientists By Scott MaloneTue Aug 22, 2:50 PM ET A team of U.S. scientists has found the first direct evidence of the existence of "dark matter," a little-understood substance with a huge influence on gravity, the team's leader said on Tuesday. Scientists still do not know what exactly dark matter is, but have theorized it must exist to account for the amount of gravity needed to hold the universe together. They estimate that the substance accounts for 80 to 90 percent of the matter in the universe. The more familiar kind of matter, which can be seen and felt, makes up the rest. Now researchers led by University of Arizona astronomer Doug Clowe say they have evidence to back up their theories. Using orbiting telescopes, the researchers watched two giant gas clouds in outer space collide over a 100-hour period. As the clouds clashed, they said, the visible gas particles slowed, pulling away from the invisible dark matter particles. The researchers said they could detect the dark matter particles by their gravitational pull on the surrounding visible particles. "This is the first time we've been able to show that (dark matter) has to be out there, that you can't explain it away," Clowe told Reuters. "We haven't actually been able to see the dark matter particles themselves, but what we have been able to do is ... image the gravity that they're generating." Some skeptics have argued that dark matter does not exist. They assert that scientists err in assuming that gravity exerts the same pull whether holding a plate on a table or influencing the travel of stars. Revising the laws of gravity at the interstellar scale would better explain the universe's structure, they argue. "STRONGEST EVIDENCE" The research team also included scientists at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and used telescopes operated by NASA. Their research is scheduled to be published in an upcoming issue of The Astrophysical Journal Letters. Rachel Bean, a professor at Cornell University who specializes in dark matter and was not involved in the research, called the results convincing. "It is certainly the strongest evidence we've seen to date that actually solves this dark-matter problem," Bean said. She said the finding should encourage scientists to concentrate their efforts on determining what dark matter is, rather than developing revised rules of gravity. "It's very difficult to explain these observations with anything other than particle theory," Bean said. "The dark matter quandary to some extent is helped by these observations, because it helps target the theorists to try and look at particle physics, rather than gravity." --------------------------------- How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger?s low PC-to-Phone call rates. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://Mad-Scientists.ORG/pipermail/mad-scientists/attachments/20060822/e2b9143e/attachment.html From javilk at mall-net.com Sun Aug 27 23:17:36 2006 From: javilk at mall-net.com (javilk@mall-net.com) Date: Sun Aug 27 23:17:42 2006 Subject: [Mad-Scientists] Trans Plutonian Neptunoids Message-ID: <20060828061736.37796.qmail@mall-net.com> Poor Pluto, stuck in the dog house. Scuttlebutt is that Neptune, having failed to clear its orbit of objects like Pluto, may not be a valid planet either! And besides, only 400 of 1100 astronomical union scientists voted. Is that a rigged election? What are Al Gore's views on this plutonian debacle? And what of Warth? Are we a planet? We have all these objects crossing our path as well, and quite a few craters where they obviously didn't get their timing right. Worse, we're not that large compared to Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune. Of course, we can take comfort in calling them gas bags; but what of our own gas? Do we have enough? Are we leaking too much due to our weaker gravity? Are we doomed to follow Mars in it's atmospheric losses? Is Pluto a planet? -J- (C) 2006, javilk@mall-net.com ------------------ www.mall-net.com/javilk --- Laugh at yourself, Our Creator loves company -- and You! --------------- --- After all, we wouldn't want our Creator to cancel the show, would we? -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Another Javilk (tm) brand post. Copyright retained. All rights reserved. Copyright (C) 2006, Javilk@mall-net.com http://www.mall-net.com/javilk/ From ramiel01 at gmail.com Mon Aug 28 04:40:57 2006 From: ramiel01 at gmail.com (David Osborne) Date: Mon Aug 28 04:41:05 2006 Subject: [Mad-Scientists] Trans Plutonian Neptunoids In-Reply-To: <20060828061736.37796.qmail@mall-net.com> References: <20060828061736.37796.qmail@mall-net.com> Message-ID: <65810da40608280440h20e9a563lf63f0c9814b46f22@mail.gmail.com> I think the major decider was that Pluto isn't big enough to conform to a roughly spherical shape due to it's own gravity (that and it's moon is almost as large as it is! making it more of a binary dwarf system). Perhaps if Pluto and it's moon were to crash into each other (slowly!) and combine, there would be enough mass to make it a planet. Come to think of it, we should do just such a thing to end this discrimination. On 8/28/06, javilk@mall-net.com wrote: > > Poor Pluto, stuck in the dog house. > > Scuttlebutt is that Neptune, having failed to clear its orbit of > objects like Pluto, may not be a valid planet either! > > And besides, only 400 of 1100 astronomical union scientists voted. > Is that a rigged election? What are Al Gore's views on this plutonian > debacle? > > And what of Warth? Are we a planet? We have all these objects > crossing our path as well, and quite a few craters where they obviously > didn't get their timing right. Worse, we're not that large compared to > Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune. Of course, we can take comfort in calling > them gas bags; but what of our own gas? Do we have enough? Are we > leaking too much due to our weaker gravity? Are we doomed to follow Mars > in it's atmospheric losses? > > Is Pluto a planet? > > -J- (C) 2006, javilk@mall-net.com ------------------ > www.mall-net.com/javilk > --- Laugh at yourself, Our Creator loves company -- and You! > --------------- > --- After all, we wouldn't want our Creator to cancel the show, would we? > -- > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Another Javilk (tm) brand post. Copyright retained. All rights reserved. > Copyright (C) 2006, Javilk@mall-net.com http://www.mall-net.com/javilk/ > > > _______________________________________________ > Mad-Scientists mailing list > Mad-Scientists@Mad-Scientists.ORG > http://www.mad-scientists.org/mailman/listinfo/mad-scientists > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://Mad-Scientists.ORG/pipermail/mad-scientists/attachments/20060828/c58051c5/attachment.html From creolescience at yahoo.com Wed Aug 30 08:29:15 2006 From: creolescience at yahoo.com (j s) Date: Wed Aug 30 08:29:25 2006 Subject: [Mad-Scientists] now the problem is will our backs and ears be hairier? Message-ID: <20060830152915.34801.qmail@web36101.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Scientists report baldness breakthrough 1 hour, 18 minutes ago In a finding that could help treat an inherited form of baldness, a research team in Manchester claims to have discovered a protein "code" that instructs cells to sprout hair. By sending the code to more cells than usual, the scientists at the University of Manchester say they were able to breed mice with more fur -- a feat that could potentially be replicated in humans. "During human development, skin cells have the ability to turn into other types of cells to form hair follicles, sweat glands, teeth and nails," explained Denis Headon, who led the research. "Which cells are transformed into hair follicles is determined by three proteins that are produced by our genes," he said. "Our research has identified how one of these proteins working outside of the cell interacts at a molecular level to determine an individual's hair pattern as the embryonic skin spatially organises itself." The research was targeted at helping people with ectodermal dysplasia, an inherited condition that is characterised by the abnormal development of hair, skin, nails, teeth and sweat glands --------------------------------- Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2?/min or less. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://Mad-Scientists.ORG/pipermail/mad-scientists/attachments/20060830/6a60f0e4/attachment.html