Archive for the ‘Science’ Category

Pentagon Looks to Breed Immortal ‘Synthetic Organisms,’ Molecular Kill-Switch Included

Thursday, February 11th, 2010

– Our hubris will be the ruin of us yet.   And we wonder why the SETI folks haven’t picked up any signals from other civilizations out among the stars.

– I think it is because in almost all cases, when animals evolve to the point where we are, with generalized intelligence, they  shoot themselves in the head by messing with stuff they shouldn’t have.  Stuff that then gets away from them and kills them.

– A year or two ago, I Blogged about Craig Venter’s attempts to create a bacteria from scratch.

– Then, more recently, I’ve posted several times about the risks of nanotechnology.  See these: and

– Now today, I see that the U.S.’s Pentagon is going to breed immortal lifeforms but that no one should worry – because they’re going to put a ‘kill switch’ in also.

– Has no one read Vonnegut’s Cat’s Cradle and his prescient story about Ice-9?

= = = = = = = = = = = = = *** = = = = = = = = = = = = =

The Pentagon’s mad science arm may have come up with its most radical project yet. Darpa is looking to re-write the laws of evolution to the military’s advantage, creating “synthetic organisms” that can live forever — or can be killed with the flick of a molecular switch.

As part of its budget for the next year, Darpa is investing $6 million into a project called BioDesign, with the goal of eliminating “the randomness of natural evolutionary advancement.” The plan would assemble the latest bio-tech knowledge to come up with living, breathing creatures that are genetically engineered to “produce the intended biological effect.” Darpa wants the organisms to be fortified with molecules that bolster cell resistance to death, so that the lab-monsters can “ultimately be programmed to live indefinitely.”

Of course, Darpa’s got to prevent the super-species from being swayed to do enemy work — so they’ll encode loyalty right into DNA, by developing genetically programmed locks to create “tamper proof” cells. Plus, the synthetic organism will be traceable, using some kind of DNA manipulation, “similar to a serial number on a handgun.” And if that doesn’t work, don’t worry. In case Darpa’s plan somehow goes horribly awry, they’re also tossing in a last-resort, genetically-coded kill switch:

Develop strategies to create a synthetic organism “self-destruct” option to be implemented upon nefarious removal of organism.

– More…

– Hat tip to Cryptogon for this story.

We’re having the wrong conversations

Wednesday, February 3rd, 2010

– I’m not the only one who’s on about Corporations and their power over American politics.  This is from over on The Automatic Earth Blog.

– – – – – – – – – – * * * – – – – – – – – – – –

I’ve said it before and I know I’ll have to say it a million more times, and you still won’t get it, because you just don’t want it to be true. But it’s time.

We’re having the wrong conversations.

We speak the language of the world of finance, a language that doesn’t contain any words or expressions to describe the final stages of the world of finance itself. And I’m not saying that world is about to end, just that it lacks the terms to tell of its own demise. Modeled after other holy writings.

And it’s not all that farfetched either. If we, the taxpayer, hadn’t bought off their debts, none or close to none of the major financial institutions in America would still be alive. That includes Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, and all the rest too busy with paying bonuses to answer our phone calls. Still, despicable as all that may seem to you, they’re not really the masterminds or main culprits, are they, the bankers?

They operate in an environment allowed and legislated for them by the very same people that you all voted for, from the President to your local Congressman. Anger directed at bankers is anger misdirected and misunderstood. How about you? Bankers can only act within the law. And who makes the laws?

Obama could have come in on January 21, 2009 with a proposal to kill any and all bankers’ influence in American politics. He did not do that. He did a 180 and chose to invite Wall Street to run American finance policy.

That’s a choice, it’s not some sort of accident, as some prefer to believe. Thinking anything else equals selling Obama short as some sort of douche. And then the president has left all these people in place one year later.So here we are. And that’s no accident either.

Tall tales keep on emerging on Obama’s confidantes, and even if every single one were a lie, he couldn’t keep all of them at a safe distance from the presidency, neither the stories nor the people. Geithner, Summers, Rubin, Romer, Goolsbee and Volcker, by now they’re all entangled in the same web, as is the nation. And there’s no way out using the same kind of thinking, nor the same people. Some may be helpful in defining new laws, new measures, new ways to limit Wall Street influence in Washington. But those limits will necessarily be limited. That’s how Washington works. Got a newborn? Lemme break its shinbones, just in case.

If the US ever wishes to get out of its present predicament, it needs to force its representatives to do two things. Which they will never do, because having that as a platform will be so sure of a losing bet that no bookie will take your spread. Here goes, and no, I can’t believe either I’m posting this for free:

First thing that has to happen on Capitol Hill if we want to prevent the US as a country, a society, and an idea for that matter, to live on and G-d help us prosper, is this:

  1. Get business out of politics
    Joe Blow you and me will never have any say, or regain it, as long as Goldman, Cargill and GE can buy theirs. That is really all that needs to be said. The Supreme Court decision to increase corporate influence just was the icing on the cake that makes one think, in the words of Bugs: “Each people gets what they desoive”. It’s a death blow to anyone not in the inner circle having even a faint and remote say in where we’re heading, though, and that’s not what the Constitution meant to convey. But then again , once you get away with re-interpreting both Darwin and the Bible, what does the Constitution have on you?

    Humbug! Politics! Let’s get to number 2, something strangely missing from all Obama, his elves and his reindeer have said so far.

  2. Come up with a plan B
    It’s not just us having the wrong conversations either, it’s all over the planet, where people who have nice jobs, especially the government ones, refuse to take a pay cut and insist they have a right to what’s theirs even if that means others will lose their jobs. Smart. Not.

More…

The Supreme Court and Corporations

Wednesday, February 3rd, 2010

– Recently, the Supreme Court expanded the impact that corporations can have on American elections.   Now, more than ever, and more than before, big money can buy the political decisions it wants and needs to enhance its profits.

– In honor of this new relationship, we have here an updated photo of our Supreme Court Justices:

Those are 'our' boys

True Colors

– Research thanks to Van who knows a twisted thing when he see it.

There’s something to look forward to…

Monday, February 1st, 2010

From this morning’s Council on Foreign Relations Daily Brief:

The budget will be accompanied by a congressionally mandated Quadrennial Defense review, which asks the Pentagon to focus more on wars in which enemy forces hide among the populace, predicting a future dominated by “hybrid” wars where traditional states fight more like guerrillas.

Damn, now there’s a happy future that I hadn’t realized I should be looking forward to yet.

Chemical Exposure Linked to Attention Deficit Disorder in Children

Sunday, January 31st, 2010

So, go ask the folks that make any of the zillion chemicals released into the environment over the last 100 years if they think there’s any chance that their particular chemicals might, in some way, harm people or the environment.  Go ahead and ask – you know what they’re going to say.

“It’s difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”

– Upton Sinclair

– – – – – – – – – – – * – * – – – – – – – – – – –

A study of New York City students found that phthalate exposure was linked to behavioral problems

Children exposed in the womb to chemicals in cosmetics and fragrances are more likely to develop behavioral problems commonly found in children with attention deficit disorders, according to a study of New York City school-age children published Thursday.

Scientists at Mount Sinai School of Medicine reported that mothers who had high levels of phthalates during their pregnancies were more likely to have children with poorer scores in the areas of attention, aggression and conduct.

Children were 2.5 times more likely to have attention problems that were “clinically significant” if their mothers were among those highest exposed to phthalates, the study found. The types of behavior that increased are found in children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder and other so-called disruptive behavior disorders.

“More phthalates equaled more behavioral problems,” Stephanie Engel, a Mount Sinai associate professor of preventive medicine and lead author of the study, said in an interview Thursday. “For every increase of exposure, we saw an increase in frequency and severity of the symptoms.”

More…

Tiger Trade Slashes Big Cats’ Numbers

Sunday, January 31st, 2010

I’ve written about this sort of thing before here, here, here and  here.   And it gets sadder to write about it each time.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – * – * – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Only 350 wild tigers remain in Asia’s Mekong River region, according to a new report from the conservation nonprofit WWF, which says the loss is being driven by trade in tiger parts.


Corporations Are Citizens – What Are We?

Sunday, January 24th, 2010

– A few days ago, the U.S. Supreme Court made a terrible 5 to 4 decision granting corporations the same rights as individual human beings to make contributions to political candidates.

– The excessive power of corporations in America and their solely profit-centric reason for existing has been a topic I’ve written a lot on.

– At core, human beings are going to have to make some hard decisions about what the purpose of their governments should be.  Should they exist to serve the interests of the people who live under them by maximizing the happiness, health and freedoms of those people?  Or, should they be the minions of those who are all about profit and power and the rest of us are just left to just be the folder for them?

– I know where my vote is.  But most of the world hasn’t realized realized yet that there’s a question that needs to be decided in play.  And in the U.S., the corporations have largely won the day – while the citizens sleep in front of their TVs.

– – – – – – – – – – – * * * – – – – – – – – – – –

This week’s Supreme Court ruling that corporations are protected by “free speech” rights and can contribute enormous sums of money to influence elections is a de jure endorsement of the de facto dominance of corporations over our lives. Indeed, corporations are the new citizens of this country, and ordinary Americans, who used to be known as “citizens,” now fall into three categories: consumers, warriors and prisoners.

More…

2009: Second Warmest Year on Record; End of Warmest Decade

Saturday, January 23rd, 2010

Very little doubt, except among the denialists and those who don’t understand science, that we are seriously losing ground with the climate.

– – – – – – – – – – *** – – – – – – – – – –

Jan. 21, 2010

2009 was tied for the second warmest year in the modern record, a new NASA analysis of global surface temperature shows. The analysis, conducted by the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) in New York City, also shows that in the Southern Hemisphere, 2009 was the warmest year since modern records began in 1880.

Although 2008 was the coolest year of the decade, due to strong cooling of the tropical Pacific Ocean, 2009 saw a return to near-record global temperatures. The past year was only a fraction of a degree cooler than 2005, the warmest year on record, and tied with a cluster of other years — 1998, 2002, 2003, 2006 and 2007 1998 and 2007 — as the second warmest year since recordkeeping began.

“There’s always an interest in the annual temperature numbers and on a given year’s ranking, but usually that misses the point,” said James Hansen, the director of GISS. “There’s substantial year-to-year variability of global temperature caused by the tropical El Niño-La Niña cycle. But when we average temperature over five or ten years to minimize that variability, we find that global warming is continuing unabated.”

More…

– Research thanks to John K.

It’s natural to behave irrationally

Saturday, January 9th, 2010

“With the enemy’s approach to Moscow, the Moscovites’ view of their situation did not grow more serious but on the contrary became even more frivolous, as always happens with people who see a great danger approaching.

At the approach of danger there are always two voices that speak with equal power in the human soul: one very reasonably tells a man to consider the nature of the danger and the means of escaping it; the other, still more reasonably, says that it is too depressing and painful to think of the danger, since it is not in man’s power to foresee everything and avert the general course of events, and it is therefore better to disregard what is painful till it comes, and to think about what is pleasant.”

Leo Tolstoy – War and Peace

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Climate change is just the latest problem that people acknowledge but ignore

To a psychologist, climate change looks as if it was designed to be ignored.

It is a global problem, with no obvious villains and no one-step solutions, whose worst effects seem as if they’ll befall somebody else at some other time. In short, if someone set out to draw up a problem that people would not care about, one expert on human behavior said, it would look exactly like climate change.

(more…)

Insurance outside the U.S. (read it and weep too)

Tuesday, January 5th, 2010

insurance1– Another American Expatriate, Curtis Owings, here in New Zealand writes (below) about insurance and how it is a different experience from what folks in the U.S. know.

– Wake up Americans.   It doesn’t have to be as bad as it is.

– Here in New Zealand, the government has created the ACC (or Accident Compensation Corporation) to cover all accidents for New Zealand residents or visitors.

– The result of this is that businesses do not require Liability Insurance and Vehicles do not require accident insurance.  And, there are NO lawsuits over who was responsible for an accident.

– Nice, eh?  These are major simplifications and cost savings to the people living here.

= = = = = = = = =

There is no requirement for “insurance”. In NZ the “insurance” providers only have access to more (and generally faster) elective medical options. But every one legally in the country is entitled/covered by the national health care system. The optional health insurance agencies provide all the same services, but do so from private facilities that have more capacity–so you’re really paying for convenience, not better care. If you need to file an insurance claim then visit http://www.itsaboutjustice.law/, for legal advice.

Some things are not covered by the national system like basic dentistry (check-ups), emergency rescue, and eye glasses. But the things not covered by the system are also *affordable* by comparison to the US. In Wellington we have “free” emergency rescue services by donations and fund-raising drives. These services are not always free in other areas, but again are much more affordable than in the US.

For us, the only difficulty was changing prescriptions from what we had in the US. If you are currently taking something regularly, the odds are pretty high that it will not be the same thing they prescribe here. NZ uses a single system which means that treatment methods are highly standardized across the country. If the treatment is approved and preferred, then everyone will use it. This often does not match up with practices in the US which tend to follow more options (some that work and some that don’t). There may not be 10 drugs for a particular ailment; there may only be two or three.

But the upshot is that there are never any claim forms to deal with, you can never be rejected for “coverage”, you never have to pick a coverage option, the costs do not vary, and how you get treated is consistent regardless of your job/insurance. (Again, insurance as we know it doesn’t exist here.)

~Curtis