Rocketforger

Uncle Sam's Legal Eagle Spam

2011-05-24T08:34:00.000-07:00

The US District Court of Appeals has been upholding a bad policy since 2007. It's a bad policy because it's unrealistic. In short, the US gov is requiring all agencies that receive AIDS/HIV prevention funds to uphold the US position to prohibit prostitution and sex trafficking. Prostitution has been around for thousands of years if not more. Longer in fact, that any current government and probably longer than any extant religion. No proclamation of a 200 year old government is going to change it. It seems so elementary that I'm going back to the basics to answer it. We need a realistic policy that's rooted in the basic facts, to wit:

Look here, Uncle Sam,
and belay your legislative spam.
History shows us just what is true,
that people are people, and people do screw.

They'll bang behind bushes,
They'll bang on a bus,

unhindered by muss,
not heeding your fuss.

They'll lay who they like,
be they Suzie or Mike,
and ignore your objections,
and puritanical projections.

So teach people safety,
when getting it on.
Denial has gone on,
much, much, MUCH, too long.

Let all babies be wanted,

and trouser bugs be squashed.

Let people be safe and happy
when getting wacky in the sacky.

Begin with the facts,
when discussing the beast with two backs.
It's really important to get this right,
because we all know what all those people will be doing tonight.

Does this sash make my tail look big?

2011-04-08T09:50:00.000-07:00

“Why did you pick that body?” asked Klitik.

“It’s the only one I could find that fit,” Ekleat replied, still shuffling the limbs clumsily.

Klitik handed her a red sash with some letters printed on it. “I don't think this is gender appropriate.” she said, adjusting the sash in the mirror.

Klitik cringed. He was good at human gesture even if certain social customs evaded him. “I hadn’t thought of that. It was just the closest thing I could find to indicate your office.”

“Very well. Take me to the meeting.”

They exited the restroom, two men in business suits, one with the clumsy gait of a newborn fawn. A smartly dressed woman on her way in did a double take at the “Princess” sash on the limping man. They simply nodded politely per local custom. The princess wobbled across the hotel lobby, oblivious of the stares of the other hotel guests, and occasionally kicking her aide in the ankles. Three hours local time was not enough to acclimate to these legs.

A big hand drawn sign next to the door proclaimed the meeting of the Europa Exploration Society was open to members only. They walked into the banquet room to find a few dozen people gathered in small groups. At her entrance, they schooled together to greet her, then fell over each other to introduce themselves. She dismissed them and they scattered to the edges of the room. “My body needs food.” She snapped at Klitik.

“Right this way,” It took no time for Ekleat to recognize the improvised badges for the various offices they indicated. The goggles worn by some clearly indicated science officers, and the bigger the goggles, the higher the rank. She had to assume that the man with the telescope slung over his shoulder was the chief officer. The flowered garlands and floral printed shirts identified the anthropological officers. Masked people were obviously diplomats, and the conical, multicoloured hats made the military advisers stand out.

They approached the buffet, and Ekleat noticed the name tag of a young female standing behind the table. She tried to discern what office that indicated, then realized she was simply a member of the hotel staff. A human. Ekleat turned and hissed under her breath, “Is it wise to have our meeting in the open like this?”

“Oh yes,” Klitik replied. “They think we’re having something called a ‘Science Fiction Convention.’ It’s like...” he struggled for the words. “It’s like a speculation play, but they have many of them. And they gather in groups to... celebrate them. We won’t be noticed.”

She curled her tail uncomfortably and stretched inside her body. Klitik put a hand on her shoulder to soothe the spasms of her body and said “Ah... they might notice that.” The young attendant was clearly trying not to notice.

“Very well,” the princess snapped. “Just bring my food to the table. Proteins and electrolytes.”

She shambled across the room toward the head table, scattering lesser officers in her wake. “Section chiefs report to me now,” she spoke so the whole room could hear her. Even in their human bodies, their submissive curl was detectable, as the chiefs approached the seat she took.

“I feel compelled to remind you all the purpose of your mission here: Determining the nature and scope of the human threat. The reports you’ve sent back are very conflicting.”

Klitik sat down next to her, offering a plate of food. The princess barely glanced at it, picking up some orange cubes of food to consume while the officers gave their reports.

One of the birthday-hatted military men, who also wore an animal character bib indicating his rank spoke first. “The situation is dire your highness. The humans are already speculating about the possibilities of life on our planet, and they have plans to drill through the ice in order to reach our seas and discover our colonies.”

“Yeah, but they come in peace, man,” a be-flowered officer put in. His eyes were redder than most humans and his multicolored shirt smelled even funnier than most.

“I think his sample is tainted,” the military officer said under his breath.

“To be truthful your highness,” offered a diplomat, “Their intentions toward other intelligent species are hard to determine. Some of them willingly sacrifice their own safety and well being to protect unintelligent animals, while others are clearly bent on killing anything with a modicum of intelligence that doesn’t belong to their own particular group.”

Ekleat gobbled a round slice of animal flesh from her plate, then washed it down with liquid. “How long will it be before they attempt any landing on... what do they call our world?”

“Europa, your highness.”

“Silly name,” she spat. “Anyway, how long?”

“Probably 50 years or more,” someone offered. “No, they could do it in far less time...” someone objected. “Bah! They won’t get around to it for a hundred years!”

“Can’t you people make up your minds?” The princess demanded. They all hunched up again and twitched this time, clearly curling their tails inside their human hosts.

She picked up another piece of food but stopped in recognition. The pink curl in the pinch of her fingers was hauntingly familiar. “What abomination is this!?” she cried.

“Oh, it’s a shrimp,” Tiklit said, picking one up for himself. He bit the muscle off, leaving just the sad little tail.

“Ack! Tiklit, you’ve got to be kidding me!”

“Wha?” he smacked his lips. “It’s not like they’re intelligent. They don’ even registher o’ the scale.”

“That’s not the point,” Ekleat repressed another cringe and made her decision. “I know exactly what these humans will do if they ever do get to our planet. General, speed up the global warming process and flood this damned planet.”

Captain Obvious Strikes Again!

2011-01-13T07:17:00.000-08:00

Probably because I'm a visually oriented person with a long standing love of medieval art and the inherent symbolism it's laden with, I've always wanted some sort of symbol to wear that represents what I believe. Sadly, most of the choices seem hokey, or not quite on the mark. There's the red "A" of Atheism, which is combative and says more about what I don't believe, so that's not quite right. There's the anthropomorphized "H" of humanism, but that doesn't entirely suit me either.

Today, while looking at the Coalition for Reason website, I was suddenly struck by that one word, "Reason." The etymology of that word traces it's meaning back to the Greek word "Logos" or λόγος if you prefer. "Ah-Ha!" I thought, I could simply use the Greek letter Lambda, Λ, as a symbol!

Which is really a convoluted way of confirming what everyone already knew: I'm a nerd.

What the American People Want

2010-11-15T08:31:00.001-08:00

It never fails to unsettle me when politicians say things like, "That's what the American People want." I've heard politicians of every stripe say it, and a good share of time, they're saying exactly the opposite of what I want. And for every time they are actually saying something I like, I can find as many friends as not who DON'T like it.

And the key word there is friends. Amongst my own friends I count people of nearly every political and social bent. Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians, Independents and people who don't vote. I've talked politics with conservative Christians, agnostic Jews, liberal deists, pagans, atheists, and secularists. And those are just the people I've actually shared meals with in the last year. I know gay people, and people who think they shouldn't marry. I've had beers with hawks and doves. Every last one of these people is a born and raised citizen of the United states.

The American People are a highly varied group who want a lot of different things. Only a few of them overlap. So any the only time we should hear a politician say "That's what the American People want," is when he or she is talking about roads.

What if People Actually Treated Religion as Just a Metaphor (Like Trekkies and Secular Jews)? | Belief | AlterNet

2010-06-03T15:53:00.000-07:00

I don't often just repost an article, but I think this one is very worth while.

Secular Polyamory

2009-12-10T05:30:00.000-08:00

I've got at least three ideas why secularists should embrace polyamory. They're in no particular order of importance or seriousness. Feel free to add suggestions. Any document about polyamoroy should be a WIKI anyway, lest it be antithetical to it's own subject. Or, if you prefer, this idea has room for more love.

First and foremost there is the divorce rate amongst monogamous heterosexuals. Standard married people are dropping like flies, matrimonially speaking. Here in the US the divorce rate is close to half. Half of all marriages end in a discussion over who gets the house and the kids and who gets stuck with the broken down, mismatched bedroom furniture. Divorce takes down a larger percentage of married couples than the Black Plague folks.

So here's the thing: Polyamory makes you communicate. You think it's hard reading your spouses mind now? Try having two! Polyamory just doesn't happen without communication. Some churches make you take a little compatibility quiz before you can reserve the chapel for the big day. But when a polyamorist asks you on a date, it usually comes along with a handful of links to websites with dozens of ways to skin one under-fed cat named "Communication." The strong silent types will never make it in this game. These people may talk too damn much, but most relationship experts agree that communication is the best way to avoid having to decide who gets car, and who gets the cat. That's right buddy. Put on the kettle, give that poor cat some friskies, and let's talk.

Secondly there's the concept of economic velocity, something I first learned here. Now this is a concept that can work even for traditional families if you understand it, but it really takes off when there are more pay-checks under one roof. Put simply for the purposes of polyamory, when more people share expenses and family responsibilities, you get ahead. My own take on this idea is all about leftovers. I throw away a lot of leftovers. Oh, I mean well, and I do eat some of them. But inevitably, there comes a day when opening the refrigerator is accomanied by the Indian Jones theme song, and I have to go in with a pistol and bull whip to clean house. And here's the thing: I paid for that stuff that once was food. I also paid for that dish I just dropped because it seemed to contain a victim of one Kali's worshipers.

So if there are more people hanging around to pay for the food and eat the leftovers, we're all getting more out of our money. More people to help pay the mortgage; more people at home to eliminate day-care costs; more people at the dining room table means you buy in bulk and take better advantage of sales and so on. Since financial woes are also known to be a leading cause of divorce, this also ties back into our first item.

Lastly, there is strength in numbers my friends. Sure, multiple partners might seem like a wacky idea on the surface, but let's take a look at another wacky idea that took advantage of this principle and see where it got them. Yep, that's right, I'm talking about the Mormons. Don't get me wrong, I'm not knockin' 'em as a people. After all, they gave us Donnie, Marie, and Orgazmo, right? But Mormonism does contain some rather wacky ideas. Principally, the founding of the religion is based on a claim that one John Smith was shown some golden tablets by an angel named Moroni and used a couple of stones called the Urim and the Thummim to translate the Book of Mormon from said tablets, which only Smith's close friends and family ever saw.

Uh-huh.

Personally, I think Smith found a pair smooth river-bed stones that reminded him of his wife's ass, and she caught him having a religious moment which he explained away by calling it just that.* I suspect many religions have similar roots, but this is the only one I have a working theory for. So Smith goes about founding a religion and while he was at it, he decided to secure the opportunity to have the ass of that pretty young thing down the way by giving the green light to polygamy for his flock. (We've already established that he was a randy guy.) Then, after being chased out of two states ahead of angry mobs with guns, they ended up in Utah, and they now run the place. That's reproductive power that can't be denied people. Now I know many of you reading this will point to global populations and say we shouldn't be having so many babies, but I hasten to point out that those with much less ecological conscience than we happy few are out-breeding us like lemmings who can't wait to get to the cliff. Trouble is, they're going to take us over the edge with them!

Of course, all of these very well thought out arguments don't even scratch the surface of spicing up your sex life. Hey, Smith isn't the only randy guy with whacky ideas out there. So let's all pony up to the couples bars and get it together! Because together, we'll be unstoppable!

* Now before you insist I'm going out on a limb here, let's remember that internet porn wasn't widely available in Smith's time, and even now that it is, some folks are STILL fornicating with their livestock.

Cain and Able: POX NEWS with Wink and Nod

2009-12-09T08:05:00.001-08:00

Cain and Able - Art Show

2009-11-25T12:04:00.000-08:00

2009-11-17T07:46:00.000-08:00

2009-11-11T23:18:00.000-08:00

2009-11-08T08:09:00.000-08:00

2009-10-26T09:28:00.001-07:00

Music and More for a Geek Nation

2009-10-13T10:13:00.000-07:00

The album Flood by They Might Be Giants has long been one of my favourites. I'm happy to say that now, with Here Comes Science, my kids are fast becoming fans of TMBG as well. I've got Meet the Elements stuck in my head, and my daughter loves I am a Paleontologist. Like TMBGs "friend Danny," she thinks she is one, and might very well be one day.

More than just music, and a really fun DVD, this album underscores one of the best things going on these days: the blossoming of Geek Culture. On the one hand, this movement makes being a geek a lot more fun, but I suspect there may be more to it than that.

My mother doesn't really get it. But then, she's not a geek. My mother was mortified when my daughter proudly proclaimed, "I'm a geek!" She gave me that look, "Did you teach her to say that? That's a terrible thing to teach her! You shouldn't tell your kids that they're geeks." She simply doesn't understand what it means to live in the post Revenge of the Nerds world.

It's more than living in a world were people hang on the word of guys like Steve Jobs, or where Bill Gates is rich and powerful enough to be both revered and hated. It's also a world where geeks make up a big enough a socioeconomic group to justify things like Giant Microbe Plushies, and get a Holywood movie made with grass roots support.

In and of themselves, these things are no more important than the Bohemian Revolution of more than a century ago. It will certainly produce some lasting art and a fat stripe of material culture, mostly plastic and battery powered. But the question remains, will Geek Culture make a lasting impression on human culture as a whole?

If Geek Culture teaches us nothing else, it teaches us that we certainly can have an impact, if we play our cards right. The Geek love of role play is a perfect example. We've built whole cultures out of fandom for everything from Science Fiction to the Middle Ages. Simple customs sprout like weeds in these groups. Geeks make fertile ground for cultural change.

Now some will point to things like the internet, and insist that geeks are already changing the world. To some degree that's true, but let's face it, the changes fomented by the internet have more to do with economy at present than they do with any decided intent to change the way people live. That being said, Geek Culture is still relatively young. It's not too late to wonder, what would a world shaped by Geeks look like?

It's a question worth asking. It's a question we may yet answer with action, rather than just the fleeting words of the electronic ether. And that's what makes this such a great time to be a Geek.

Multipurpose Drool

2009-05-11T12:32:00.000-07:00

As any mortified parent who didn't vacuum yesterday can tell you, a drooling baby picks up dust-bunnies like nobodys business. Having had one to many occasions to contemplate this phenomenon, I've concluded that there's an evolutionary adaptation at work here.

First of all, there's camouflage. On a forest floor, that untended baby would be picking up leaves and small twigs, disguising it from predators whilst mommy and daddy are hunting, or gathering or making more siblings or what have you. Pretty hand really.

Next, when mommy and daddy catch their breath and notice the baby is beyond dirty, they are inspired to clean it. This is good for the baby. I'm sure there were parents who weren't moved to clean baby under those circumstances. Those babies probably didn't grow up to make more babies. You see how this evolution thing is working.

Finally, the mortification of the aforementioned parents at finding baby plastered with dirt inspires a few gray hairs, and shaves a few days off the lifespan, thus shortening the amount of time mom and dad will be around to hog up all the good food. This last element is a process that escalates as a child grows older, culminating in some cases in outright parricide. For examples, see the histories of pretty much any royal family, or spend a few minutes trying to talk to a teenager. Be careful, I'm told they bite.

(Neither the author of this blog nor any of his subsidiary contributors bears any responsibility for injuries sustained while trying to discuss the intricacies of baby drool and food supplies with teenagers.)

Something Old, Something New

2009-05-11T10:50:00.000-07:00

A few days ago, I took out a really old piece of family furniture to clean it up and see if I could give it a new life. It's a long low cabinet with an odd history. My great grandfather worked as a delivery man for a dry-goods warehouse back around the turn of the century. The turn of the twentieth century that is. He drove a wagon drawn by a team of horses.

The cabinet originally came out of the warehouse where he worked. It stayed in his basement for untold decades, a home for tools, half used cans of paint, and other odds and ends. After that, it made it's way to my dad's garage where it stayed for another few decades. I can distinctly recall the handful of tools, fishing tackle, paint, lawn jarts, car parts and motor oil living there when I was a kid. When my parents sold their old home, it ended up in a storage unit for years, and was nearly let go, but for my saying I wanted it.

When I set it down in my driveway to clean it up, it looked used up. Used hard. One end was stained where a pan of motor oil had spilled over the top of it. The doors were stuck closed or broken. Spray paint marred some of them. Another had a few slugs from a long forgotten pellet gun. The dark reddish-brown finish was covered in a century of grime and dust.

I took the doors off and set them aside. Then, with a bucket of soapy water and brush, I started scrubbing, inside and out. A few hours later, the rich grain of oak peered out from beneath the grime. The golden color of the wood looked happy to see the sun. The few stains and scars that remain are only smile lines.

A little polish and repair work took only a short time more. Now the open shelves are home to a colorful collection of children's toys and books. The television and a couple of houseplants sit on top. Sometimes recycling is a feel good exercise.

Will legalizing pot help the economy?

2009-05-07T06:44:00.000-07:00

Well duh.

It's remarkable that it's taken a recession of this magnitude to bring marijuana back to the table, but the Governator is finally talking about it. Beyond the legalization, regulation and taxation of the drug itself, there are the numerous applications for the plant fiber. The industry as a whole will more than offset any job-losses in the drug enforcement field. The fiber from the plant will be an ecologically sound boon to paper, clothing and other industries, which will give something of a loss of profit for the cotton industry, which may be the only reason we're having this discussion now, rather than 20 or 30 years ago.

Really Old Fashioned Values.

2009-05-06T13:06:00.000-07:00

I'd like to make a call for a return to some old traditional values. Really old. Two items from Reuter's last month have stuck in my mind, so now I'm sticking them in yours.

First is a report about research at the Max Planck Institute. In short, they've figured out that Bonobos will trade sex for tasty food. In fact, the bulk of research shows that for Bonobos, sex will lubricate just about any transaction.* All humorous analogies about male expectations regarding the value of dinner and movie aside, it's interesting to note this behaviour in our closest biological cousins.

Especially in light of a story that showed up two days later. It seems that a group representing prostitutes in Nevada, where prostitution is legal, suggested that a tax on their services might help the state with budget shortfalls. But a slim majority of state lawmakers turned them down for fear of further lagitamizing an industry they'd rather do away with.

For a group that tout's itself as favoring "traditional" values, their behaviour looks a lot more like self denial to me. The oldest profession in the world is not about to go away, just because we want to pretend that our fully opposable thumbs and penchant for hair loss somehow absolves us of our own biology. If the bonobos cared to give humanity a mesage at all, I think it would be a rather simple one. Make love, not war.

*If anyone would like to throw some rotting vegatables for that comment, I'll gladdly exchange an equal amount fresh fruit for any amount of affection that might be legal in this state or yours.

Darwin's 200th Birthday Dinner: Transitional Species a la carte!

2009-02-12T09:56:00.000-08:00

I usually try to steer clear of the Evolution vs. Creation debate. OK, I try to stay out of it on this blog. But the 200th Birthday of Charles Darwin seems to have generated at lease as much creationish flak as evolutionist jubilation. One argument that truly baffles me is the assertion that no transitional species are in evidence to support the idea of evolution.

I'm not sure what rock one would have to live under to suffer that affliction, er idea, but no matter. The power of Google shall set you free! Would you like those transitional species fossilized, or served live?

For species of the fossilized kind, we'll start with whales. There are a number of very good fossils representing a transition from land to sea for this magnificent mammal. Ranging from kutchicetus and ambulocetus to the more whale-like dorudon. Actually, there are a number of extinct species in the cetacean family that represent significant transition as you can see in this illustration by Carl Zimmer.

There are some wonderful articles available online about cetacean evolution at Wikipedia and Darwinia. But let's not get ahead of ourselves. A great deal of doubt about evolution centers on human evolution and the supposed lack of fossils. Again, I'm flummoxed. Ahem. And also, cough. Lots of fossils.

Anyway, I could go on, but maybe you like your transitional species alive and kicking. Or swimming, as the case may be. Now for me personally, lobe-finned-fishes are enough, and lung-fish plenty more.

But you may want some more visually persuasive examples. Consider for a moment the playful otter. Moreover, consider the otter together with the seal, the sea-lion, and the walrus, coo coo c'choo. Lets not forget those magnificent manatees, or hip hippos. Remember our friends the whales? Evolution isn't just a thing of the past. It's a thing of right now.

Just like the biosphere itself, evolutionary science is changing all the time. With each new fossil find, or scientific discovery we learn more, and the edges of the map recede. New ideas like punctuated equilibrium shed light on some of the puzzles left in the fossil record. But at this stage in the game, the fossil record looks a lot like the Colosseum. Bits of it may be missing, but it's form and purpose are easy to discern.

Lanugo Dreams

2008-12-21T06:04:00.000-08:00

Deep Magic of lanugo dreams written in patterns of soft hair.
They remember to me the tides of the womb, and the sea that was mother.
Still they long to rest at her shores.

Babies breath music carried on an ocean breeze.
Gentle waves of sighs on my senses.

For Daniel. For David. And for Arcadia.

Commonality

2008-09-20T09:21:00.000-07:00

It's odd how I'm reminded that I still have a lot in common with my Judeo-Christian roots.

A few days ago I picked up a fossil in the yard. No big deal. It's a bit of striated material that might be part of a plant, or maybe even a sea creature like a crinoid. It may be something else entirely. They're pretty common around here. I'm always picking up little pieces like that. This one was bit enough and complete enough to make it into the house to be rinsed off an placed in a curio cabinet next to the megaladon teeth and the trilobites. Treasured like a relic of some long dead saint, revered for being traces of the creatures that shaped the world where our ancestors evolved.

Just because it's the new oddity in the collection, I've looked at it several times over the last few days. tracing the rows of parallel lines like footsteps traced in a meditative maze inlaid on some cathedral floor. I am entranced by the incense of curiosity and the ancient.

And then we come to this morning's coffee. nursed slowly after my shower; I didn't sleep well. I have a big mug filled with creamy coffee that I'd half drained before getting into the shower. I stood in the kitchen taking long slow sips, allowing the incense of java sooth me, with my lip and nose ensconced in the mug.

The mug is one of clear glass, and so I can see that creamy sacred beverage quite well. The bottom of my mug is filled with a fine haze of black coffee-bean powder that has settled out of the coffee while I was in the shower. And as I tip the cup's contents up to my lip, and away, up to my lip and away, the black dust streams away from the bottom of the cup in a series of lines, just like the lines in my fossil. But they're moving. I've stopped drinking now and I'm just moving the coffee, back and forth, watch the lines move as they evoke in my mind an ancient sea. My movement continues in genuflection to this mirage, imagining delicate life forming in ancient tides.

At that point, my wife wanders into the room and asks the perfectly reasonable question, "What on EARTH are you doing?" I tried to explain, and of course failed miserably, then tried to show her, with coffee that was by then hopelessly mixed up. The vision was gone. I shrugged. "I just had the evolutionists' version of finding an image of Jesus in my toast."

Rube Goldberg Culture

2008-07-01T05:58:00.000-07:00

A Rube Goldberg Machine is defined as a device that is over-engineered to complete a simple task in too many steps. So as not to emulate, I'll get right to the point.

Our lives our filled with labor saving devices. We use them at home. We use them at work, and even at the grocery store. We use them to get to and from work and the grocery store. In fact, we use so many labor saving devices, we're headed for an energy crisis trying to power all of these labor saving devices. Then, we go to a gym to hop on a treadmill to work off the flab we've built up whilst saving all that labor. In all likelihood, that treadmill is also plugged in and using energy in order to make us work harder and beep at us when we've officially worked off enough flab for the day.

So we have a Rube Goldberg Culture. Too many steps to achieve a simple set of goals. I could go on, but I've got to go hop on the treadmill. Remember that term now; Rube Goldberg Culture.

Biotech Fusion

2008-03-02T07:44:00.000-08:00

I remember a futurist once predicting that human-made artificially intelligent robots, not humans, would be the "Earthlings" to colonize the universe beyond our solar system, and outlive our own sun. Now enter biotechnology, ala cyberpunk: the Digital Tattoo Interface, shown off at the recent Greener Gadgets Design Competition hints at a different outcome. By the time "Earthlings" leave this solar system, there may not be a difference.

It's a sub dermal GUI that works with your Bluetooth. The simple fact that this little piece of technology is powered by the user's own body instead of some sort of battery makes it attractive from an environmental standpoint. Even better, any risks associated with it are of direct consequence to the user, rather than to comparatively abstract future generations.

Of course, beyond the medical implications of being able to monitor things like your blood sugar or vitals, or the impending blood clot and cancer questions, there is a cultural slippery slope. Ad space, skins, pop-ups, and spam will take on whole new meanings when we're wearing the internet, as will nudity. "Ahem. Excuse me, but, you've left your personal skin up..." And for the incurable couch potatoes, the inevitable implant of view screens on our bellies will turn us all into Teletubbies, and give new meaning to the phrase "staring at your navel."

Science: It works, dummies.

2008-02-26T20:48:00.000-08:00

I'm glad to hear that scientists are actually discussing the problem of getting scientific ideas across to the public. But this article also underscores how much I miss people like Carl Sagan, and dare I say it, even C. Everett Koop.

An Automotive X-Prize Hopeful

2008-02-21T06:12:00.000-08:00

A German automaker out of Munich is scheduled to release a production model entry for the Automotive X-Prize in 2009. The company boasts their 2-cylinder turbodiesel model, lightweight and aerodynamic, will attain an impressive 130 to 150 mpg. The car looks to be a mixed bag of ingenuity, and small sacrifices to economy. Instead of side opening doors the front of the car, windshield, steering column and all, tilt upward allowing driver and passenger to step into the tight cockpit "like stepping into a bathtub." The base model LS and a somewhat more powerful 3-cylinder GT model will debut in Europe, with plans to hit the US market the following year. The reviews anticipating this car are mixed, but then, nobody thought much of the Beetle at first either. With a price-tag under $20K and fuel economy of 150mpg, pocketbooks might be making all the decisions about this one.

Common Ancestors

2008-02-14T07:17:00.000-08:00

At least once a day, I receive in my email one of those endlessly forwarded editions of one witticisms. They seem make their way from inbox to inbox like the common cold goes through an elementary school. I rarely take the time to read them anymore, and as a rule, I forward them only very selectively, when I have something to say about them. And though in some ways it will seem like a tired subject, I received one yesterday that I’m compelled to respond to, if only because it’s an idea I hear a little too often. What I read, partway through an otherwise innocuous list of queries about life, was this:

> If people evolved from apes, why are there still apes?

I can answer this one!

Because we didn't evolve from apes. We evolved from a common ancestor with apes, and subsequently filled differing, though overlapping ecological niches, both through a process of geographical isolation, and a process called punctuated evolution. Since humans have only been around for a few million years, it can hardly be said that that apes will survive our taking over of those ecological niches. We're competing directly with them for habitat, to say nothing of hunting them for meat or amusement, and we're winning on both counts. Neanderthals also evolved from those same common ancestors, and lived in competition with Homo Erectus (our ancestors), and Homo Sapiens (us). Neanderthals could probably offer you some insight into living in competition with Home Sapiens, but of course, they're extinct. In fact, at one time there may have been as many as five closely-related species of human in direct competition with each other. We are all that remain.

The process of evolution is neither as simple, nor as linear as the popular conception depicts. But if you take the time to study and understand it more fully, it's complexity is matched only by it's beauty.

Not in my Backyard!

2008-02-12T07:26:00.000-08:00

Torture is in the news a lot these days, and the news items often include such high ranking officials as Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. If it weren't downright scary, it would be laughable to hear a supreme court justice reference a fictional television show when discussing the constitutional merits of torture. But then, discussing should we be discussing the constitutionality of torture at all? I don't think the point of a governing document is to look for loopholes that allow us to do questionable things. I think we would be much better served if Justice Scalia were to stick to imagining one of his own nine children as the terror suspect to be interrogated. It's so much easier to ignore the torture of other people's kids.

In fact, it's becoming easier to ignore other people's children all the time. It might take a village to raise a child, but that village no longer includes some shopkeepers in England. First tested in Wales the Mosquito emits an annoying, high-frequency sound that for the most part, only younger people can hear. The device has proved successful at disbursing gangs of hoodlum teenagers from harassing people in front of shops with the device installed, so they can, I suppose, go harass people in front of shops that don't have such a device. Ironically, the shop owner where the device was tested had planned to install a system that would broadcast classical music in front of his store, a tactic also known to disperse teenage gangs, while also introducing them to the likes of Bach and Mozart. However, the shopkeeper had never gotten around to it, and in fact, did nothing until the maker of the Mosquito gave him a device in order to test it. So by doing nothing, he's found a way to continue ignoring these teens, now with technology on his side.

I wonder where those hoodlum teenagers are now? Perhaps they're busy becoming terror suspects.

Tow Truck Drivers and Three Legged Dogs

2008-02-01T20:28:00.000-08:00

It's snowed a lot here recently, and lucky me, the heater in my car broke. So I took it in to my mechanic this morning. He's a really friendly guy, and we joked around about the weather and all the automotive trouble thereto appertaining. He commented that "When people make that phone call to the wrecker or the shop, the car is no longer their problem," and told a story about a really beat wrecker driver who shoveled people's cars out of snowbanks while they stood and watched. We concluded that it was a question of empathy.

So on the way home, I saw a lady and her kids walking their three legged dog. Now there's empathy for you. The dog had clearly been in some sort of accident, I'm guessing with a car, and had to have one of his hind legs surgically removed at the hip. That must have been a considerable expense, to say nothing of all the extra care that dog must have needed through all that. Empathy, and lots of it. It’s odd that we can have so much empathy for our dogs, but fellow human beings are little harder for us to empathize with. It’s so much easier to see a person’s flaws if they don’t have fur and big eyes to compensate for them.

To put it another way, it's easy to see the good side of someone going out of their way to help an injured dog, but a lot more telling to see how someone treats a waitress who's having a really bad day.

The Looking Glass

2007-10-05T06:40:00.000-07:00

Some years ago I visited a zoo in Texas and spent a lot of time in front of the chimpanzee exhibit. There inside the cage sat an old chimp. He looked up at me when I first walked up, but then looked back at what he was doing and paid me no mind. I was, after all, just another of the endless stream of meaningless faces on the other side of the glass, and the bugs he was chasing with his nimble fingers were probably more interesting.

For my part how was struck by how alike we are. They way he used his hands, the expressions he used with other chimps, and the simple way he could ignore the people behind the glass. Knowing they were there staring at him, and carrying on just the same with chasing bugs. Living in such close proximity to human beings hadn’t taught him any empathy for the multitude of faces behind the glass.

I was also reminded of a comment I’d once heard about evolution: “How could anyone look at a monkey and think we’re related.”

So I stood there asking myself that same question. And I came up with one answer: Empathy.

Battle of the Fishes

2007-09-20T07:31:00.000-07:00

Driving my daughter to school in the morning, or on my way to work, everywhere I look, there are fish. I can’t help marveling at them; all those fish in silvery plastic schools. They’re the little plastic chromed fish you see on the tail ends of cars. There are plain fish, and fish that say “Jesus” or probably the same thing in Greek letters, but I don’t read enough Greek to know. There are “Darwin” fish with little legs on the bottom like lobe-fishes and a big fish proclaiming “Truth” eating little Darwin fish. There are still other fish standing upright, spearing the Truth Fish with tiny plastic harpoons. A veritable cosmological arms race is being played out before us with little metallic-colored plastic fish poised only inches away from trunk spaces carrying groceries from the same supermarkets.

There are flags and banners too, proclaiming the various “truths” precious to the people in front of these bumper battlegrounds. This one’s pro-choice, that one’s pro-life. This one thinks that as long as there are tests, there will be prayer in school, and that one kindly offers not to think in your church if you’ll not pray in their kids’ schools. One declares “TRUTH! NOT TOLERANCE!” and but for the little picture of the Bible and the cross, you couldn’t be sure which side they were on. But the battle over Evolution and Creationism is fought mostly by those little fish.

I won’t call it a “War” the way so many debates and struggles are labeled these days. This debate rarely wounds more than anyone’s pride, and the little fish don’t bleed, no matter how harsh their treatment by other fish, or well-aimed shopping carts in supermarket parking lots. But the tone of the debate often makes it seem that way, as if we’re in a desperate struggle for our survival in a total-war. They behave as if the adherents to one cause will at last prove their point beyond a shadow of a doubt with one last witty bumper sticker slogan too sage to refute, and the losers will somehow be as utterly destroyed as old Carthage, the ground salted so that nothing will ever grow in that soil again.

But we know better. The confrontation will never really be that fatalistic, and the debate will never come to so crisp an end. Evolution may take the place of Creationism in the popular imagination, as new knowledge so often displaces the old, but it won’t be the great coup that so many seem to fear. This conflict will have survivors on both sides, and we’re better prepared to handle the new paradigm than we know. The tools of reconstruction are already at hand.

It’s been suggested that some people resist the idea of evolution because they can’t accept the idea of being animals. But this isn’t really the case. We already acknowledge our evolutionary heritage in our daily conversation. After all, we all start out as ankle-biting rug-rats. We quickly grow into little monkeys. My own son learned to climb up the branches of dinning room chairs to forage for snacks on the table before he learned to walk upright, and with my children there’s no shortage of jumping on the bed. As they grow older their mother will regularly complain about how their rooms have turned into pig-sties, and at school field days, we’ll encourage them to run “fast as a race horse.”

As kids get older the animal descriptions grow with them. Some are kinder than others. A boy might one day call my daughter a “fox,” and she’ll probably appreciate it more than I will. I might think of him as a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Many of the names won’t be nice at all; skunk, porker, dog, male or otherwise. The class clown might be a real ham, who later in life will regret taunting that slightly overweight girl by calling her a cow, especially in college when he sees her again and finds out she was just a late bloomer, and she really did blossom, but by then, he’ll be too chicken to offer her an apology, let alone ask her on a date.

As we mature, we climb the evolutionary ladder just a bit, to become gangly apes, and if we’re lucky, Neanderthals. I’ve known two “Yetis” myself, much more at home with their animal monikers in adulthood than they probably were then they acquired them in their late teens. The modern cave man, reputedly obsessed with beer and football, and bereft of manners is the unremarkable resident of suburbs everywhere. And in a bit of what may be purposeful irony, proponents of Evolution often cite the brutish and superstitious picture of our hominid ancestry as the root cause of their Creationist opposition.

Perhaps Creationists fear that the end of creationism will mean the end of Gods and religious teachings. But this isn’t so either. Our culture is full of religious figures, icons and stories from religions that are out of style, and nothing more dramatic will happen with the religions of today. Many school children know the names of Zeus and Hera, Jupiter and Mars, and even the Mighty Thor. High school cheerleaders still invoke the name of Egyptian Gods in the name of the Home Team, “Ra! Ra! Ra!” OK, I’ll admit that’s probably a complete coincidence, but you understood the joke.

But God, Buddha, Jesus, Mohamed the Angels and others will probably enjoy a bigger role in our minds and culture than those relegated to the pages of mythology in earlier centuries. We’ll still see them more often than Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny, and they’ll probably continue to be better known than Socrates or Plato. The characters and stories are too well-known, and too comforting to be forgotten. The ancient texts are too full of fodder for creatures that enjoy metaphor as much as we do. Playgrounds will never run short of David and Goliath confrontations, and there are too many serpents offering forbidden fruit to let such stories go.

In all probability, the end of this controversy will probably be nothing more than the beginning of some other. The apes will finally become adults, and they’ll find they care about different things. When a friend asks about the little fish on the back of their old college beater-cars, they’ll say “Oh, I got the car from mom and dad. That was on there when they gave it to me.” And we’ll find the traces of both Evolution and Creationism are no easier to remove than peeling bumper stickers from an old car.

Rockets and Monkeys

2007-09-14T08:45:00.000-07:00

Yesterday I got a link from a friend about Google teaming up with the X Prize Foundation to sponsor a new Lunar X prize. The new prize sets a high goal for a privately funded organization to land a robotic rover on the moon, and have it perform a number of tasks on the surface. Perhaps more significant is the lineup of companies and organizations stepping up to form partnerships and participate.

It’s interesting to note how that spirit of cooperation contrasts with the days of the Space Race between the United States and the Soviet Union. It’s actually a lot more like the international cooperation among rocket societies in Europe and Asia before World War II. English, German, and Russian aerospace researchers where all freely sharing information before their respective governments drafted them into their weapons and military aircraft programs. Many of the German rocket scientists, and production engineers were “adopted” by the Americans and Russians to develop missile technology and space programs after the war. So it’s taken space exploration the better part of a century to come full circle and back into the non-governmental organizations where it started.

That same day, I also saw an article about recent updates to the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Apes are among those species with dangerously declining numbers, and quickly vanishing habitat. Gorillas and Chimpanzees are in danger not only for loss of habitat, but also because they are hunted for meat. In spite of the faint whiff of cannibalism, the Chimps probably wouldn’t find this idea too strange if they were given to abstract reasoning. They are known to hunt smaller monkeys for their meat as well.

But like so many humans, the chimps don’t waste a lot of time thinking about the ethereal implications of eating other simians. They’re hungry, and they like the taste of meat. They probably like the chase too. They’re animals. Just like us. OK, 98% like us. But understanding them, and our relationship with them, past and present, is important. It puts things in perspective. While many protest that they aren’t “a monkey’s uncle,” our continued habit of treating each other with suspicion and cruelty without ever considering our commonality demonstrates our animal nature.

But many of the comparisons between ourselves and the great apes are more positive. Apes, hairless and otherwise, can be tender and caring. We can work cooperatively to great advantage. We have an uncanny ability to make and use tools from the simplest things. And our ingenuity can astound. After all, we’re descended from monkeys and look what we can do; we landed a monkey’s nephew on the moon.

Chimps are from Mars, Bonobos are from Venus

2007-09-05T06:54:00.000-07:00

Next week a group of scientists from the Max Planck Institute will be traveling to the Congo to study our close cousins, the Bonobos. We're just as closely related to these great apes as we are to Common Chimpanzees, but a lot more behavioral study and comparison has been devoted to the later. The contrast between the patriarchal chimp social structure and the matriarchal bonobos is of particular interest. While chimps tend to be more aggressive or violent, Bonobos are generally more cooperative, and they are noted for their use of sexual behavior to ease tensions. The researchers will be trying to learn more about the thought processes behind their behavior.

The sad irony is, their work is made more difficult by the recent violence in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Maybe while we're learning more about bonobos, a little emulation wouldn't be out of order.

Science Live

2007-08-10T08:04:00.001-07:00

A friend recently sent me a link to an animation about Black Holes. For the most part, it’s pretty good textbook stuff. The description of the event horizon is a little weak. The reason it's called the "event" horizon is because it's the point where time, relative to surrounding space, starts to warp. Their description doesn't really emphasize that enough. I suspect that the "point of no return" is actually a bit farther out than the event horizon itself.

I’m not sure how many scientists take the wormhole theory seriously. I suspect most agree that we probably couldn't construct a ship strong enough to withstand the gravitational forces involved, rendering the idea useless even if it were true. But hey, it's a flashy idea, and someone took the time to make the math work, so why not play with it?

What I really do like here is the use of simple, episodic animations to teach science, and this is a pretty good example. It’s short, fun to look at, and presents one concept in a neat little package. I’m also encouraged by the increasing popularity of films, long and short, that teach various concepts of science. I'm guessing we're a long way from seeing "The Evolution Story" in claymation on Winter Solstice Eve, it’s still pretty cool.

The Eagle Has Landed

2007-07-20T22:05:00.001-07:00

Lunar Advent

2007-07-19T07:37:00.001-07:00

Sorry for the short entry. Busy drawing rockets and astronauts with my kids. This is our Lunar-Landing Advent Calendar. We're having oatmeal in plastic baggies and Tang for breakfast tomorrow!

Apollo 11 Launch Anniversary

2007-07-16T09:11:00.000-07:00

Today marks the 38^th anniversary of the Apollo 11 launch. That mission carried three astronauts, Neil Armstrong, Michael Collins and Edwin 'Buzz' Aldrin to the moon. When Armstrong stepped out onto the Lunar surface, he not only fulfilled the goal set forth by President John F. Kennedy, he realized the work of scientists and researchers stretching back nearly a century, and the dreams of humanity going back to some of our earliest fiction.

I mention this today for two reasons. First, it took the mission four days to get to the Moon and land safely, on July 20^th. That gives you a few days to put together a party for this coming Friday, invite some friends, get some rockets to launch, some Tang, and other astronaut food for your guests. The Lunar Landing really deserves celebration.

Second is what the Moon Landing demonstrated. We landed men on the moon on a handful of theories. The Apollo 11 capsule carried them over 200,000 miles through a vacuum to land on the surface of another planetary body with different gravity and no atmosphere to speak of. Then it carried them home again, making the perilous journey through the atmosphere where most objects burn up on entry.

Many people dismiss scientific theories because they define them in the common parlance as little more than opinions or guesses. “Well, it’s just a -theory- anyway.” As used in science, a theory is a logical and mathematical explanation that can be repeatedly demonstrated. The Apollo missions demonstrated that “theories” can be pretty powerful.

Freefall

2007-07-15T08:10:00.000-07:00

One of the roadblocks to human exploration of space is the effect of freefall on our muscles. We can only stand about six months in zero-G before our muscles start to irreversibly jellify. Since Mars and other popular destinations are considerably farther than we can travel in that short a time, NASA is working on the problem with carbon nanotube neural implants. Yep. You read the right.

Now this is a positively delicious idea for even the most casual sci-fi fan. Brain implants to facilitate space travel! It could pioneer all sorts of new technologies. This particular research is directed at transmitting impulses to the brain. But if that research could lead to receiving impulses, then the possibilities really open up. Imagine what a pilot could do if they didn’t have to rely on their physical reflexes to fly an air or space craft? OK, I know, I’ve seen too many movies.

There is another interesting question that rises out of this line of research. Exploring implant technology indicates that we’re willing to use them to achieve several months, or years in space. It’s not a stretch to assume that some might also endure other enhancements, from the cybernetic to the genetic, in order to travel to other worlds. If we adapt ourselves to space to travel to other planets, will we ultimately find ourselves more at home in the space between them?

An apple a day?

2007-07-11T09:42:00.000-07:00

It may take a little more than an apple a day to keep the doctor away, but apparently there are enough politicians around to keep the medicos at bay. Former Surgeon General Dr. Richard Carmona never got to release his report on global health issues, or promote comprehensive sex education. Sadly, it will probably require a groundswell of cultural change to keep the anti-scientific out of office, and culture of that kind changes slowly.

Deep Impact on the 4th of July

2007-07-04T07:15:00.000-07:00

Today, NASA's Deep Impact hit the comet Tempel 1 with a "smart" projectile to study the comet's composition, and the effects of the impact. Although this impact is not likely to divert the comet's path, it is exciting to think that 65 million years after the Yucatan impact, there are earthlings who might be able to prevent the next such threat to life on our little pale blue dot.

Family Pictures

2007-07-03T07:06:00.000-07:00

I have a relative who spends a lot of time researching our family genealogy. But sadly, she refuses to believe we evolved from a common ancestor with apes. "Why haven't they found any of the missing links?" she asks. I've got two people I'm going to ask her to add to our family tree: 3.2 million year old Lucy, and 3.3 million year old Lucy's Daughter.

A Culture of Science

2007-06-29T06:49:00.000-07:00

I've got a lot of reasons to promote a culture that embraces science. My father suffers from a terminal disease for which the treatment is still experimental. I like breathing and eating fish, so I'd like cleaner transportation and more responsible fishing practices. I'd like my kids to live in a better world. I'd like my great-grand children to live on another world. Some of my reasons are personal, others a bit farther reaching.

Thankfully, I'm not the only one thinking about the place of science in our larger culture. Discussion of a "two culture" split as originally proposed by CP Snow, can be found on sites like Serendip, like this one. It's all well and good to discuss the cultural divide between scientists and non-scientists, but I prefer a more engaged approach. When Alexander the Great defeated Persia, he not only allowed a lot of local autonomy, he encouraged his soldiers to marry the locals. Seems that newborn grandchildren have a way of quelling rebellious notions. No, I didn't change subjects.

If science is ever going to be embraced by culture, it has to be a cultural element in and of itself. Very little of any culture is defined by what happens in a lab or at an academic conference. (OK, maybe some of the culture is defined by what happens at the after-hours hotel party at a conference, but that's not the point) In order the thrive in our culture, science has to be a part of our culture.

Culture is expressed in the ways we interact. In restaurants, at company picnics, community fairs, and family birthday parties, we express our culture. Even the television shows we watch or the blogs we write in; active or passive, it's all about communicating culture. So what I find really encouraging is seeing science in things like the poetry and art of The Evolutionist's Prayer,
or the music of Emerald Rose in We Come From Monkeys.
I'm not forgetting the hazard of culture contaminating the objectivity of science. It's a concern that already colors research. I recently read an article about the problem with circumcised scientists researching the benefits of circumcision. But I'd rather risk the possibility of culture having a bit of influence in science than risk the theory of "intelligent design" having to much influence in public schools.

Let's outsource to Mars

2007-06-25T21:55:00.000-07:00

Noted physicist Lowell Wood recently outlined a bold plan to terraform Mars. He defines humanity as a terraforming species, pointing to the alterations of our own home planet over the last 10,000 years. He makes some really good points, but the real key phrase he uses when predicting our terraforming future is: "if-and-as" humanity becomes a truly space faring civilization.

A lot depends on whether humanity gets a foothold in space before we push Earth's biosphere past the point of being able to support human civilization. Building a space program, whether private or public, requires a complex infrastructure. If environmental change advances faster than our ability to adapt to the changes, we may no longer be able to mount a space program over and above our struggle to survive. Ironically, we still seem to lack an effective motivation. Even the promise of space tourism on the horizon isn't exactly taking off like a rocket. Maybe the real secret is to tell big business they can emit all the greenhouse gases they want on Mars.

Technorati here we come

2007-06-23T10:10:00.000-07:00

In the change or die spirit I do my best to embrace, it's high time I got with the program at Technorati...

Technorati Profile

Out of the petry dish and into irrelevance

2007-06-22T08:23:00.000-07:00

So once again, dear old George W. Bush has vetoed stem cell research. No big surprise there. Bush and his ilk seem content to allow our culture to sink into technological irrelevance. Or, maybe the Republican elite is simply content to outsource the research to other countries while pandering to the most conservative portion of their political base.

But he has left a small back door open. While he has denied researches access to important federal funding, he hasn't outlawed the research. The next best thing to federal funding might be a charitable organization like The Stem Cell Research Foundation to support stem cell research. This group provides public education and funds research. They also accept tax deductible charitable donations.

2007-05-23T05:39:00.000-07:00

I Don't Need 55

I live about 6 miles from where I work. The place I lived before that was about 10 miles from work. Most of the people I work with live less that 45 min away. The car I use to go back and forth is just a beater. It was my grandfather's last car. For the most part, it goes back and forth to where I work, and otherwise just takes up space in my driveway. You could replace it with a glassed-in golf cart, and I would barely notice. (Actually, a golf cart might ride smoother...) When I go out with my wife and kids on the weekend, we take the family car.

My point here is, the ongoing litanies about how hard it would be to reduce emissions by replacing gas-powered cars just doesn’t wash. We could replace quite a few gas-guzzlers by simply making affordable electrics available. The trick is, they don’t need to be high performance. I don't need a car that will do 0-60 in under a minute to get back and forth to work. In fact, the highest speed limit between work and home for me is 45mph.

Now I know this isn't the case for many other folks out there. I also know people who spend over an hour on the highway to get to work every day. But if these disparate groups represent thirds or even quarters of the driving population, there’s an opportunity to put a big dent in our carbon footprint. I don’t think the solution to these problems is one-size fits all. It’s obvious that we need more fuel-efficient cars, better public transport, and more emphasis on pedestrian traffic. Beyond that, we could reduce emissions with more careful city planning. Traffic circles would reduce commute time, and cut down on idling engines. And, incidentally, the only reason grandpa’s beater hasn’t been replaced with a bicycle is the lack of sidewalks or bike lanes on very busy roads between here and work.

2007-05-01T08:14:00.000-07:00

Got Roots? An update...
Back in March I suggested that gardening just might be the secret to sustainable, healthy living. Last weekend my wife and I took the kids outside and started our simple container garden. We started with blackberries, rhubarb, strawberries and mint. We'll probably add more before the summer. We spent the day working and playing in the yard. We even ate our dinner outside. It was the best night's sleep we'd had in a long time.

2007-04-28T08:53:00.000-07:00

Gliese 581 C

Astronomers at the Geneva Observatory recently announced the discovery of what might be a terrestrial planet in around the star Gliese 581 in the constellation, While there’s still some debate about just how much solid ground there might be up there, it is interesting to see the progress we’ve made in our picture of the universe.

Four centuries ago, Galileo Galilei ran afoul of the Catholic Church for upholding the idea of a heliocentrism. We’ve since learned that even our Sun isn’t the center of the universe. It’s not even the center of our own galaxy for that matter. Now we’re closer to finding evidence that our solar system isn’t wholly unique in having terrestrial planets.

The discovery of a terrestrial planet in another solar system, some 20 light years away, fills in the edges of our biggest map in some very important ways. And it wasn’t all that long ago that we had a hard time getting a reliable map of someplace right here on Earth! (Really, not long ago at all. The last time I downloaded driving directions to somewhere… but I digress.)

Physicist Steven Hawking has said that in order to survive, the human species must go into space. Finding terrestrial planets outside our own solar system is certainly a step in the right direction, but we shouldn’t get too excited about looking for a westward passage to China just yet. In order to seriously explore the challenges of interstellar travel, we've got to establish a foothold in space right here in our own solar system.

It's also been said that if we can get into orbit, we're halfway to anywhere. In this case, I think the "we" is most important. We need established and functioning bases in orbit or on the moon, and we need to test our legs on Mars. By the time we get those things accomplished, planet hunting astronomers should have a pretty good selection of interstellar destinations to choose from.

2007-04-03T08:40:00.002-07:00

The Automotive X Prize

On April 2, the X Prize Foundation announced the new Automotive X Prize http://auto.xprize.org/. Like the recently awarded Ansari X Prize for space flight, this prize will go to the first group to successfully demonstrate a car that gets 100mpg, or equivalent energy usage, and is an economically viable production model. The group has already been fielding inquiries from well-known and unknown automakers alike. The foundation was inspired by similar competitions in history, like the Orteig Prize. Charles Lindbergh won the Orteg in 1927 by being the first to fly non-stop from New York to Paris. Funds for the X prizes are supplied by a collection of forward thinking corporations and entrepreneurs.

Announcement of the new X prize came on the same day of the Supreme Court ruling in Massachusetts v. the Environmental Protection Agency. The lawsuit included a number of states and organizations frustrated with the Bush Administrations lack of action on global warming. The court’s 5-4 ruling asserts that the Clean Air Act gives the EPA the authority to regulate tailpipe emissions of greenhouse gases. This is in contrast not only the Bush Administration’s position, but to the stated position of the EPA as well. However the court has yet to rule on whether the Agency is in fact required to regulate emissions. Furthermore, a set of standards by which to regulate these emissions would also have to be agreed upon by Congress and the White House.

I’m struck by the contrast in these two announcements. Both reflect the growing concern in our culture over the environment, yet they each represent a very different approach, and pace of change. On the one hand we have the gears of bureaucratic democracy and judiciary slowly responding to public pressure, and on the other we have the enthusiasm of competition and the race to be first in something new.

The winner of the new Automotive X Prize is anybodies guess at this point. But another interesting contest is being played out here. The role of influencing change in our technology and even our culture for the betterment of our environment is in question. Historically, culture and especially market forces move much faster than legislation or justice. But in the end, it’s likely that both governments and the private sector will find some role to play. Maybe for once, the real winners will be consumers and the environment.

2007-03-06T08:12:00.000-08:00

Get in touch with your roots

I humbly offer you a seemingly unrelated set of questions that have been bugging me of late:

One: With all the discussion about our impact on the environment and our need to adopt more sustainable living practices, what does a sustainable culture really look like?

Two: How can we effectively combat the growing trend of obesity in youth in the developed countries?

Three: How can we effectively care for soldiers struggling with the emotional problems caused by the trauma of war?

I submit that all three of these questions are related by their answer: Plant vegetable gardens.

Tens of thousands of years of evolution shaped us to be successful as hunter-gatherers, and thousands more have molded our agrarian skills. For millions of years, we humans had our hands in the dirt. We worked, physically laboring with simple tools, working with the forces of nature and other living things. The force of natural selection demanded that we be good at these things. And yet, most of us no longer do any of them.

So lets get down to just what planting a vegetable garden will do to help with such diverse problems. The first one is simple. Food grown in your own yard doesn’t have to be shipped on a truck to your local grocery store. Now unless you can manage a really ambitious garden, you won’t be putting those folks out of work. You’ll still need to run down there for a few things you can’t grow where you live, or can’t grow enough of; but you’ll maybe buy a little less.

But on to the next problem: childhood obesity. Hey, for that matter, I could stand to eat better myself! Homegrown vegetables taste better. And kids who get to pick those veggies, (I know from first hand experience) are actually more excited about eating them. Imagine how much more excited they would be if they actually helped plant and cultivate them. Now we’re teaching work ethic AND good eating habits. This is all to say nothing of the fact that gardening is exercise.

Now maybe you’re with me so far, but how about those vets, you ask? As a veteran myself, this is a subject close to home. I can’t even imagine what some of those young men and women go through. And yet, for all our bumper stickers in support of the troops, it seems, those most in need are the easiest to forget. Many have to learn to walk, or talk or use prosthetics or just function on a daily basis, all over again. Imagine what it could mean for someone to take the time to teach him or her how to nurture a seed. To watch it grow. To nurture something with the same time and care they so desperately need themselves.

Now I’ve already been shopping for some new terra-cotta pots for the container garden I’ll start in the spring. I looked up the local Farmer’s Market, and I’ve even found someone at work who sells farm-fresh eggs. But if you’re still not sold, then I’ll give you one simple thing to do. This coming fall, get yourself a little bucket, or basket, even and old butter tub will do. Drive, or if you can, walk to the nearest clump of woods you can find. Look alongside farmer’s fields, or along the edges of tree-lines. Hunt for berries.

Raspberries, blackberries, or mulberries; they’re all delicious. Careful you don’t pick anything poisonous. If you don’t know, ask someone who does. You’ll get scratches from brush and thorns. Your fingers will be stained with juice, and your feet might even get wet. Your legs will ache from trudging around in the woods, using muscles you’d forgotten you had. But they will be the best tasting berries you’ve had. Sweeter. Brighter. Better.

2007-01-15T21:04:00.000-08:00

Yesterday I ran across this site, and would you believe, there are folks out there who think that a "Voluntary Human Extinction Movement" is the right way to go. And yes, they are serious. Just as the name implies, their basic philosophy is that human beings have such a negative impact on the "natural environment" of planet Earth, that we should voluntarily stop breeding and let the human race die out, so that the Earth can return to it's "natural state."

OK, I can sympathize with the notion that human civilization is overtaxing our environment to the point of disastrous consequence, but none-the-less, I find a few holes in their theory:

I've already addressed the notion that human beings are not so divorced from the "natural environment" as these folks seem to think. Nor would we be the first creatures to massively impact our environment to the point of causing other species, and even ourselves, to go extinct. So I won't dwell on that here.

I also find this idea more than just a little shortsighted. Sooner or later, this planet will become un-inhabitable through some very "natural" means. Near-Earth object, Gamma radiation, wandering black holes, or the end of our own sun, take your pick. Life on Earth is a limited engagement, even if we human beings do clean up our act. Human being actually represent the best chance for life on Earth being transplanted elsewhere in the Universe, and hence, averting that end to life as we know it. To let life simply be winked out would certainly be natural, but hardly desirable. I like being alive. So does my dog. So does that squirrel in my back yard.

If I had to choose between being tortured to death tomorrow, or never having been born, I'd take the torture. Better to live and die horribly, than not to live at all.

Thankfully, these folks do have a sense of humor. They realize the futility of trying to convince billions of human beings to stop breeding. But I can't help feeling that their effort might be better spent on another front. If human beings can come to dominate, irrevocably alter, and ultimately threaten the whole of the global environment without really trying to do so, what could we accomplish if we had our minds set on living sustainably within our environment? It's not as if the Environmental movement has been around long enough to really make an impact, either culturally, or environmentally. Both of those things take a great deal of time. And even if we are fumbling at this point, there are people working for change.

Al Gore's new book/movie "An Inconvenient Truth" may be bubbling with political overtones, but there’s also real substance there. The would-be president seems genuinely committed to educating people about the realities of climate change. And people are listening to him. If he changes the thinking of enough people, he may even swing enough votes to win in an electoral college.

At the same time, more and more hybrid and electric cars are reaching the market. There’ve been many to decry this as a false start. Hydrogen and electric power still use fossil fuels in their production, so these cars aren’t yet the cleanly fueled transport we hoped for. And yet, by purchasing these cars, consumers are sending a message to industry that consumers want ecologically sound products. Industry rarely misses a chance to exploit the fullest potential of a market.

2006-12-09T10:00:00.000-08:00

Tenure

In a recent talk, Steven Hawking expressed the need for humanity to colonize other worlds in order to avoid extinction. He spoke specifically about the eminent threats to human survival, like asteroid collisions and nuclear war, as well as the development of near light travel. He also spoke of his own determination to go into space.

It struck me while reading about this talk, that colonizing other worlds would involve a lot more than just the technology to get there. We would need to survive there. And even a planet that already supports life of some kind isn't likely to have everything on hand that human beings would need to survive. It's most likely that we would need to engineer environments on new worlds to make homes for ourselves. A biosphere transplant.

The leading Paleontologist Richard Leakey, in a speech at Cameron University in 2001, stressed the need to preserve genetic diversity of species "in order to ensure our tenure on this planet." I think he's right, and I would also take that a step further. We need to preserve genetic diversity of species in order to ensure our tenure in the universe. The worlds we may find to call home outside this solar system will almost certainly run the full spectrum of environments that can support life. To create viable biospheres on such worlds, we may need creatures as diverse as carrier pigeons and woolly mammoths. All the more reason for us to be careful with our environment.

2006-12-01T09:19:00.000-08:00

Family Ecology Lessons

When my daughter sees a spider, she runs to me or her mother and urgently whispers, “There’s a spider over there, but don’t kill it!” Without trying very hard, I’d impressed a simple ecological lesson on her. When a spider appeared in our house, I used to scoop it up and take it outside. “Spiders,” I explained to her, “eat mosquitoes, so they’re very helpful bugs.”

Like most little girls, my daughter thinks spiders are “yucky,” but she likes mosquito bites even less. So she’s learned to value something for which she has a very natural revulsion. She also knows not to touch the spiders herself, a lesson that didn’t need much reinforcement. So she has a balanced attitude toward spiders. She’s developing some good ecological attitudes.

More recently, I’ve learned that your average house-spider is actually not well adapted to the outdoors at all. They also eat a lot more than just mosquitoes. Fleas, bed bugs and other pesky little blood-sucking bugs are on the menu too. As it turns out, I needed to learn a few things about spiders myself. My own ecological views needed some work. But as a well-meaning person whose information was a little off, I’m hardly alone.

I once worked for a conservation district. The district’s managers had planted a small grove of trees specifically for harvest. The idea is, you plant a grove of trees in recovered farmland. The trees provide a habitat for the years they are in place, and help with the ecological recovery of the farmland. Eventually, you harvest some or all of these trees and plant more. This cycle is closer to what would happen in nature than clear-cutting, the trees provide some revenue to keep the conservation district going, and helps protect old growth forests from logging by providing a ready source of timber.

But many of their volunteers saw the conservation district as participating in the evils of the logging industry. To them, it was flat out wrong. They couldn’t see the environment as a dynamic thing, and they couldn’t imagine human beings as being able to play a mutually beneficial role in the environment. It was like the “leave only footprints” idea run-amok.

But nature won’t wait for us to get it. Nature won’t wait for us to adapt to it. It’s adapting to us all the time. Just have a look at the parking lot of your local grocery store. I bet you’ll find sea gulls. Even in Oklahoma. They are finding their niche in the human ecology. Right along side domesticated dogs and sewer rats, other animals are adapting to us. Its interesting that, even while some people are slow to catch on to the idea that human beings are shaping their environment, the rest of the natural world is wasting no time in adapting to us at all.

2006-11-22T07:20:00.000-08:00

I just read an article about some exciting new research into Panspermia; alien bacteria, and red rain, and the origins of life. The researchers claim that this phenomenon points to the possibility of life here on Earth having extraterrestrial origins. Well, I'm sorry to say it, but I'm here to rain on that parade...

This idea, like a number of others, smacks of a kind of neo-creationism. These ideas are gaining currency with some otherwise well-meaning folks who simply don't have a good foundation in the sciences. I'm guessing that they are more enamored by science that religion, but are still looking for that awe-inspiring revelation about the meaning of life. But even this idea is a bit far-fetched.

Take the whole pyramids-built-by-aliens-theory. They say that cultures all over the world were building pyramids at roughly the same time, so they must have been connected, or inspired by the same culture. Ever make a pile of
stones? High as you could make it? Was it cone or pyramid shaped? The similarity is just based on having to obey the same laws of physics with similar levels of technology.

Similarly, while it's theoretically possible that life evolved elswhere in the universe and somehow survived in space to germinate life here, it strikes me as VERY unlikely. Space is a highly volatile environment. Life is much more probable in a homeo-rythmic environment, like the ones found on planets or moons with relatively stable orbits. Read me carefully here, Those conditions may be extreme compared to what humans need, hot, cold or what-have-you, but they are almost always within a stable set of cyclic conditions. The odds are much greater that life on Earth evolved right here, in just such an environment.

More to the point, even if it were true, it doesn't change anything. The search for the origin of life, on Earth or in the Universe, will still be important for all the same reasons. Finding life on the moons of Jupiter or some other forbidding place in the galaxy will teach us about our own origins, and the potential for life elsewhere in the universe, whether we are related or not. Four billion years ago, when life first appeared on Earth, this planet was no more hospitable than Venus, Mars or any of a handful of Jovian moons. The same laws of physics apply. So anywhere we find life surviving, or thriving, teaches us about the parameters of life. So much of our planet's condition today is regulated by the presence of life, it's difficult to imagine it as just another planet.

In any event, the actual answers to the origin of life here will probably also remain equally elusive. We may find many clues, but never have a solid answer. So why does matter? That's easier to answer. In a world where science education is suffering the set-backs of budget-cuts and attacks by the proponents of Intelligent Design, I think it's important to have some focus. Popular science is a fantastic tool for educating and rallying support for research, but I think it works best when not watered down.

A Philosophy of Natural Humanism

2006-08-31T10:21:00.000-07:00

During my first years of college, I began to study things like ecology and evolution as a matter of personal curiosity. I found the interwoven layers of natural systems enchanting. I was pulled in by the exchange of breathable air between plant and animal; the evolutionary balance of population between predator and prey; migrations in tune with seasonal weather changes. I came under the spell of complex systems of energy exchange. Ecosystems became the cathedrals of my mind.

What I couldn’t understand was the reaction of most other people to those same things. They were either unimpressed by it, or they insisted on it being the creation of some otherworldly being. They needed something outside this already fantastical universe to be the focus of their sense of spiritual awe. The reasons for that are really complex themselves, but at the time, I just quipped to myself, “Maybe if mother nature could build her own rockets to go out into space, people would be impressed…” And that’s when I realized, she has.

Human beings are after all, a product of the same natural and evolutionary forces that shaped every other living thing on this planet. And just as a termite mound in Africa are thereby a product of evolution, so is the space shuttle. I’ll grant you that the orbital module is a bit more complex than a termite mound, but then, a termite mound is arguably more efficient and better organized than the average human dwelling, so let’s not get too high on our horse here. The point is, they are all products of nature.

So in spite of the imaginary lines we might draw between ourselves and the rest of nature, outside our domesticated sphere, human culture is a natural thing. Our hunting trails have become paved roads, our nests have become houses with windows and doors, and cooperative hunting and gathering have become a complex system of agriculture and divided labor. Human culture has evolved, but still, we are a product of nature.

So here we are, the hairless cousins of apes and we can build roads and rockets. So what? What does that mean? Scientific inquiry has provided us with a new cosmology, but unlike the religious traditions of our culture, it prescribes no direction. It offers no destiny. It gives us no meaning to it all. And that’s really the scary part. The truth will not set you free: There isn’t a meaning. We have to decide that for ourselves.

That’s no easy task, and one as likely to produce as much disagreement as religion. But if we are to decide the course of human culture based on this new cosmology, we should do so from within that perspective. We should learn what termite mounds and tudor cottages have in common. We should also look at the flight of birds, and the flight of rockets. If we live immersed in an understanding of our culture as a part of the natural world, we will be better equipped to give our culture a meaning that we can all share.

In the opinion of people who’s opinions count in such matters, natural philosophy begins with an Ionian Greek philosopher named Thales. In reference to this shcool of thought, a much younger naturalist, E. O. Wilson, coined the phrase, “Ionian Enchantment” to describe an enchantment with nature such I’ve shared above. And with that, I offer this:

The Ionian Garden

I’ve put Jehova to bed with all the other gods of childhood, like Old Saint Nick, and the monster in my closet. They are good for nostalgic stories, or maybe even a moral lesson or two. Mother Earth is the only one left to me now.

She is nothing like they say. She is Kali without a mind; all arms and legs, giving birth and devouring without reason. She is us and everything that lives. She loves without malice, and kills without lust. She is beautiful. She is you.

I could not paint her likeness or shape her form in clay. But we could plant a garden to echo her movement. A garden of Ionian Enchantment. We could make our home there. But we have a lot of planting to do.