Vox’s posts tagged planet

What We Need More of is SCIENCE

nobody@vox.com(Kirk) — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 17:38:09 +0000

And by the atoms of Einstein, I’m gonna give it to ya!

Along Came a Blackbird Showing What He Knows

I always knew crows were well above the average avian standards, but this is just insane.

Crows seem to be able to use causal reasoning to solve a problem, a feat previously undocumented in any other non-human animal, including chimps…
A choice morsel of food was placed in a horizontal Perspex tube, which also featured two round holes in the underside, with Perspex traps below.
For most of the tests, one of the holes was sealed, so the food could be dragged across it with a stick and out of the tube to be eaten. The other hole was left open, trapping the food if the crows moved it the wrong way.
Three of the crows solved the task consistently, even after the team modified the appearance of the equipment.

Birds smarter than primates. Sure didn’t see that one coming.

Click here for the Proceedings of the Royal Society report.

It’s Clearly the Planet Krypton

That's Young in Planet-Years

Some big brains over in Hawaii have discovered what could be a planet orbiting a star similar to the Sun. The star is 1RSX J160929.1-210524, but you just know none of his friends call him that. That’s the name he uses when he wants to know who’s selling his name to telemarketers.

Interestingly, even though scientists are convinced the object is about 5 million years old and has a mass of about eight times that of Jupiter, there is no way at this point to determine whether it is actually a planet or just another star waaaaaaaay in the distance. In order to know for sure, we need to track it across the sky over a long period of time.

Super-hip astronomer Phil Plait offers some fascinating insights than even a mathematically inept noob like me can understand:

The reason astronomers think this is a planet is because they took spectra… when you carefully examine the spectrum you can determine all sorts of things about the object emitting the light: how hot it is, what chemical composition it has, how old it is, even if it’s spinning!
The spectrum of the object matches that of an old, very low mass star. That might make you think it’s a star, but wait! The planet is young, and still hot. The light it gives off depends on its temperature, so a young low mass object, like a planet, can look just like a more massive object like a star. Since we know this object is young, we know it has a lower mass than its spectrum naively suggests…
But this is not confirmed! For example, it could be a low mass star that happens to be near the other star along our line-of-sight — in other words, it’s in the background. The best way to see if that’s true is to wait a year or two and take more images. If the object moves against the background stars along with the brighter star, then it must be physically associated with the star, and therefore it’s a planet.

For the record, Plait doesn’t think either scenario is likely, based solely on the available data. Go to his blog to find out why. It’s a great way to quickly add a few more bumps to your brain.

And now I must make a quick trip down the hall to expedite some decidedly less glamorous scientific processes.

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

Global Warming is a Hoax

nobody@vox.com(The Number A) — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 20:18:17 +0000

There are still some people out there who dispute that global warming is a bunch of lies. It's hard for me to understand how these people can say that we are not facing a crisis on a planetary scale. The Earth is becoming warmer everyday whether you want to admit it or not.

We as a species are facing a problem unlike any we have ever faced before. This isn't a disease that's affecting the people of a certain country. It certainly isn't a cancer that attacks certain people of a certain age either. This is a disease and a cancer that is affecting our planet; the only home we've ever known. And if we hesitate, then we are dooming ourselves to extinction. We may as well start counting the days until the end of all life. And in the end we'll have no one to blame but ourselves because we are the problem.

The time for fighting is over. War? It doesn't matter who wins and who loses anymore, we'll all be dead in time. Oil is what got us into this mess. Why are we fighting for something that will ultimately cause our demise? We should be looking forward to a future without it.

I'm not a religious man, but I was raised as one. I am a good fearing individual like many others out there, but no amount of crying or praying to whatever it is you worship will save us. In fact, nothing short of an ice age will save us if we don't stop now. If we can fix this problem, then it's only fair that we die. We kill the planet that nourishes us and gives us life, and she in turn takes the life she so gracefully gave us.

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

We Are Killing Ourselves But Not With Global Warming

nobody@vox.com(Builder) — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 22:50:48 +0000

It takes a certain maturity of mind to accept that nature works as steadily
in rust as in rose petals.
- Esther Warner Dendel, writer and artist (1910-2002)

Despite the fact that we are, each of us, part of nature, we understand almost nothing about it.

We have medical healers whose primary function is to make it possible for nature to heal itself within our own bodies. We have psychological healers whose objective is to keep us talking until we can figure out answers to our own problems.

We have those who would have us believe that we could live within nature comfortably if we would only stop destroying it. Not true. No living thing lives comfortably within nature. Living things within nature are all about struggle, not about comfort. Living things that are comfortable either become food for other living things or go extinct because they cannot change. Nature changes constantly.

We have those among us who would have us believe that we can alter nature on a global scale. Those people are either the victims of propaganda or its perpetrators. Take global warming for example. No one disputes the fact that the planet is warming. The dispute is over whether what we do can influence it irrevocably or whether what we experience is simply part of a natural cycle.

Should we believe climatologists whose income depends on our believing what they say so that they can continue to sell their fear mongering collections of "facts" to the media? These people can't even predict the weather. Where I live in eastern Canada, the government forecaster predicted a hot and dry summer for three months. The weather was so cool and wet until mid-August that the summer insects had not yet emerged and the trees had not changed from their late spring colour of light green.

We have scientists who believe they can make definitive statements about God, about the future of medical science, about how powerful humankind is that it can influence the very existence of nature, yet it can't tell me for certain if it will rain this afternoon. Or if a tornado will tear the roof off my house. Or if an earthquake will destroy the rest of my house.

We want so much for nature to not change. We want to know that we have not destroyed it and we would know that by the fact that nothing within nature would change. Yet if one thing we know for certain about nature it's that nature forever and constantly changes. New life continues to pop into existence and other life goes extinct. We don't even know how, for certain. Call it evolution or creativity, but we don't really know how it all comes about.

We know that about 65 million years ago a great percentage of land life went extinct as a result of an asteroid landing near the Yucatan in present day Mexico. Yet why did it take over 1500 years for the die-off to complete if the explosion created an instant global cloud? The age of the dinosaurs ended, for sure. But what the fear mongering scientists want us to believe is that it was the cloud that ended the dinos, not the fact that climate was changing naturally around the world and where the dinosaurs lived there was no longer sufficient vegetation to support the giant creatures. Not much vegetation for them in Alaska these days, for example, is there?

About 225 million years ago almost all life on our planet disappeared--about 97-98 percent. Nature seems to have recovered, as it did after the later asteroid collision. It will recover from us too.

If we should be concerned about anything related to human production, it's that we put half a million chemicals into our air--some of them poisonous and these have caused us health problems to an alarming degree--not that the planet is warming. Of course it's warming. There was a mini ice age lasting about 400 years that ended just over a century ago. What should we expect to happen when an ice age ends?

We know that air's ability to hold moisture doubles with each ten degrees increase in temperature. As the air warms, it has more ability to absorb moisture when it passes over the 75 percent of our planet that is covered with water. More water in the air equals, what? Clouds. Clouds block sunlight, which is the sole source of heat for our atmosphere. Less sunlight reaching earth's surface means a decrease in air temperature. And where are all those flooded coastal cities we were warned about 15 years ago when the climate models said that many low lying cities would be drowned in 15 years?

Get over it! We are not powerful enough to change nature. We aren't even powerful enough to save ourselves. How many millions of humans die each year of starvation while rich countries throw more than enough food away as waste? How many millions die of AIDS when we don't even have the will at an international level to teach methods of protection against HIV infection and to distribute drugs that could extend the lives of most HIV positive people for decades? That includes HIV infected parents who could support their children instead of dying and leaving them to starve as orphans.

Instead of huddling in fear of what we are doing to ourselves that most of us can't do anything about, let's stand up and tell our governments to do what is right to save the humans alive today from our own self destructive practices. I could count on one hand the number of countries that are in the process of doing positive things to help their people and others around the world to live better and healthier lives. One of them is Iceland, but how influential is that tiny island in the international community?

We only need be afraid of the future if we do nothing about improving it by our actions in the present.

No matter how much we fear the future, nothing will change by our fear. Nothing will improve because we are afraid.

Change only happens when someone does something.

Human rights took a huge leap forward after Adolf Hitler tried to take over the world and killed millions of people in the process. Do we require something that dramatic to recover from for us to make small changes ourselves and to encourage others to make small changes as well?

Even those of us who are not afraid will accomplish nothing to improve humanity and the condition that life on our planet exists in if we do nothing.

As Canadian rock singer Neil Young stated in one of his albums, rust never sleeps. Nature forever changes. If we don't want nature to change, too bad for us. If we do nothing about improving life on this planet as it is--including conditions that kill millions of our own--we have good reason to worry over things that happen naturally. Worry is the hiding place for those who do nothing.

Worry is the refuge of the terminally stupid. With emphasis on the "terminally."

Bill Allin
Turning It Around: Causes and Cures for Today's Epidemic Social Problems, a guidebook for parents, teachers, social leaders and ordinary folks who want a methodology for teaching children what they should know, not just what industry wants them to know as worker/consumers.
Learn more at http://billallin.com

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

What If You Couldn't Live Another Week?

nobody@vox.com(Builder) — Sat, 23 Aug 2008 22:12:06 +0000

Much misconstruction and bitterness are spared to him who thinks
naturally upon what he owes to others, rather than on what he ought
to expect from them.
- Elizabeth de Meulan Guizot, French author (1773-1827)

My first thought upon reading this quote was about how many people severe the primary relationship of their life because their partner isn't giving them what they want or need, without considering what they could do for themselves. That is, the partner may disappoint with what he or she gives, but do the disappointed ones do enough for themselves and do they do as much of what they should for the other partner that disappoints?

Before we think about how others disappoint us, let's consider how much we may fail ourselves and how much we may neglect to give to the others.

What should we give to others? What do we owe to others, especially to those to whom we are not committed?

There's the hitch. There is no reason why we should not be committed to every other person on the planet, to every other animal on the planet, to everything on the planet. If we do not commit to them, why would they take any interest in committing anything of themselves to us?

So we breathe the air they pollute. We drink the fresh water they poison. We read of how they kill each other, how they enslave each other, how they abuse each other in inhumane ways.

We can't do anything about that, can we? After all, they don't care about us, so why should we care about them?

We don't care about them. Only about what they do. Yet we don't give a fig about what they may think of what we do.

What do we do? Do we starve, as possibly 20 percent of the humans on the earth are doing today? Or at least their health is destroyed through malnutrition, a problem over which they have no control.

By what measure of ethics or morals is it correct that we allow anyone on this planet to starve or to be starved when more food exists than the world population can eat?

A study was done in the UK recently that showed that 25 percent of the starving people of the world could be saved and made fairly healthy on the nutrition in the food the British throw away as garbage. Every bit of food that is not consumed by customers in restaurants, for example, must be thrown into the garbage, by law.

We have no reason to believe that the amount of nutrition thrown away as garbage by the people of the United States, as another example, would be any different by percent than that in the UK. If the numbers for the US match those from the UK, then starvation could end on this planet if all the nutrition thrown away by Americans were fed to the starving people of the world. The United States is that big and has that amount of wealth that its people can throw away food that would save the lives of every starving person.

In some villages in Africa, almost no adults remain alive because they have all died of AIDS, leaving the remaining children to fend for themselves. Do those children deserve to die because their parents contracted AIDS and had the effrontery to die?

Do the people of Darfur deserve to starve to death (those that are not raped and killed by militias) because the government of Sudan is corrupt and keeps food aid from its own people? Decades ago we put men on the moon, can we not find ways to air drop food to those starving people?

Using a headset or VOIP phone I can speak to anyone anywhere on the planet that is connected by some telecommunications system. In the parts of the world with the fewest numbers of people with internet capability (excepting at the poles, on mountains and in deserts), at least some of their neighbours are starving. Lack of internet capability or minimal capability equals poverty beyond what most of us can imagine. Poverty always means that someone is starving. Always.

Our television networks, news services and NGOs tell us about places where people are starving and where medical assistance is impossible because they have no supplies. We Tsk! Tsk! and wonder why no one does anything to help them.

If there is one sin that every religion would agree on, it's letting people starve to death when there is more food on the planet than would be needed to feed everyone. The world's greatest and most widely agreed upon sin.

But those starving people do nothing to help us. They just selfishly keep on starving and dying.

What would you do if you had gone for over two weeks without a bite to eat? If that were true also of your neighbours and the rest of your community, would it turn quickly into something resembling Darfur? It would unless police kept control and others in your country felt compassion for you and your community, enough so to send food to save you. Remember how little police could help in the aftermath of Katrina, in New Orleans?

No matter what you may think that others owe to you, they may feel that they owe nothing or very little. If they are well fed and healthy, they may think that your starvation or extreme illness or disease means little to them unless you can do something for them. Those people include well fed and healthy elected politicians.

If you were starving or dying from some effect of malnutrition, what could you do for those who had the ability to save you?

Well, you aren't starving or dying. What are you prepared to do see that the people who are get what they need?

If you have what you need, but do not help others, you commit the world's greatest sin.

To expect those who are starving to save themselves and to reorganize their communities is unreasonable because you could not do it yourself. They may not be able to help themselves.

You can.

Figure out how.

Bill Allin
Turning It Around: Causes and Cures for Today's Epidemic Social Problems, a guidebook for parents and teachers who want to grow children who care as much about what they can give to others as what they can acquire from them.
Learn more at http://billallin.com

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

The Great American Think Out on October 2, 2008

nobody@vox.com(eurekamom) — Fri, 15 Aug 2008 05:40:16 +0000

Great American Think Out

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

And now, presenting the twenty-ﬁrst century

nobody@vox.com(Jack Yan) — Sat, 02 Aug 2008 14:43:13 +0000

[Cross-posted] Remember Xanadu? It’s become somewhat of a cult hit even though in 1980 it was considered Olivia Newton-John’s mega-turkey. Stylistically, it sits uncomfortably between the 1970s and 1980s, as though there was a vacuum in between the decades. In one scene, Michael Beck insists to Gene Kelly that ‘It’s the ’80s’, but you know that it must have been shot in 1979 and people had not rebelled against disco at the time.
Of course, reality tells us that you can’t mark off decades so clearly: elements of the 1970s necessarily continue into the 1980s, and some of what we regard as 1980s style had their roots in the decade before.
But by 1982 there’s no doubt that one was in the 1980s: Rick Dees poked fun at ‘Disco Duck’ on Solid Gold and even ABBA no longer could do number-one hits.
While there aren’t clear decade-dividers, there is a sense among us, as people, to want to bring new things into each era. Who can forget the sense of optimism we all faced as January 1, 2000 came around, even though it wasn’t technically the new millennium yet? We saw the year number beginning with 2 and it was a big deal. All those science-ﬁction ﬁlms predicting a new era in the twenty-ﬁrst century brought with them a sense of anticipation—and those that didn’t forecast the end of mankind in 1999 suggested that we might be a nicer bunch in the 2000s than we were in human history’s most violent, murderous 100 years.
Here we are in 2008 and not that much has changed. We deﬁnitely aren’t nicer; in western countries we might well be more paranoid. But these are, in my reckoning, not twenty-ﬁrst-century issues. This is leftover business from the twentieth century that we have not sufﬁciently dealt with, and we still have the opportunity to do something about it.
Terrorism and nutty red brigades were with us through much of my childhood but various western democracies thought they could turn their backs on them. Arafat’s PLO came to the fore in the 1970s, not the 1990s. The negative effects of globalization have been with us since the postwar period. As has communism in Red China, which has brought us the censorship that western media are only now, with days to go before the Beijing Olympics, making a song and dance about.
Just as a new decade does not begin to be “felt” till two years in, a new century won’t be felt till, I reckon, its second decade begins.
The twentieth might well have been marked by our arrogance and over-dependence on technology as the Titanic set sail. And as that century dawned, indeed we were bullish about globalization brought about by shipping routes and the British Empire. As the Titanic sank, we were reminded that we could never be over-conﬁdent about technology. We might have said a few years before that we had too much to lose from going to war, with the expansion of global trade, but humankind sank into the Great War with new innovations of aeroplanes and machine-guns.
Yet humans remain optimistic as we head into the 2010s. I would say there are more Americans hopeful about Sen. Obama’s race toward the White House than Sen. McCain’s at this stage, regardless of the latter’s attack advertising—because Obama has not deﬁned things well. There is a sense of casting off the twentieth century. You see the same in so many areas as people question the economic system, politics, and how we are exposed to global disasters through the media. You also see questioning of the media. All of this inquisitiveness seems to be happening on a wider scale, maybe sparked off by authors and thinkers writing in the last part of the twentieth century trying to lay some useful groundwork for the rest of us as their ideas got out.
What sort of century is emerging? We would like to think that we can solve all the world’s problems because we are blessed with the ability and desire; yet institutions seem to constantly thwart our collective wills. Various individuals take matters into their own hands, be they international philanthropists setting up funds for poorer countries or bloggers trying to break the mainstream media’s deadlock on what we are allowed to know.
Meanwhile, corporations try to feed consumers products as a substitute for Orwellian soma—not necessities which we should look at having, but unnecessary items that take us away from being true to ourselves.
I don’t have the answers to what sort of century we will face. I know what sort of century I would like to face. One where people from all walks of life can realize their dreams, where people can receive the education they want, and where deceit and avarice are shown to be harmful to the collective good. One where imagination and innovation drive forward human progress, rather than impeded by society or corporations because they view them as threats.
The answer might lie in examining the changes in style between decades. Were they the result of companies dictating fashion or some deeper change in the Zeitgeist, driven by many individuals?
I like to think it was the latter. When the end of 1999 came about, I certainly was not told to head into town to see how crowded or fun Wellington city was. I just went. Something drew me to it.
There is something to be said about people driving the mood of the planet, and how we still have a chance to shape the twenty-ﬁrst century’s destiny as we cast off the negative effects of the previous one.
We know where we goofed. We have seen it in the destruction of freedom or the greed of certain parties; we have seen it through a failure to understand other cultures or how institutions block aid from getting to the people. We know there must be solutions, and we now have a twentieth-century invention—the internet—where we can band together, make some noise and maybe generate real progress. We just need to wake up, realize what is useless in our lives, what we can do for ourselves and others, and get back to ﬁrst principles. Technology, for instance, is here to serve us, rather than direct us into buying the next little toy to waste away whatever precious seconds we have each day.
We might deﬁne the new century through new energies (hybrid cars are so last century—we can do better), through new ways of reaching people in need (which we are already doing through unprecedented dialogue), and through redeﬁning institutions to turn them into agents of change rather than stiﬂng collectives of people.
It’s through simplifying our lives and our directions that we can sense what we might want in the twenty-ﬁrst century. Have a think—and maybe we can just put something out there into that Zeitgeist as this century really begins unfolding.

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

Summer Vacation From Global Warming Begins at EPA

nobody@vox.com(TruthTeller998) — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 19:06:40 +0000

WASHINGTON, July 11, 2008 /PRNewswire-USNewswire via COMTEX/ -- Statement of David Moulton, Director of Climate Policy, The Wilderness Society

..."Today the EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency) is expected to make it official: our nation's protector of the environment has decided to take a summer vacation from global warming regulation, and instead has headed to the beach where it can spend a few more months ignoring science, the Supreme Court, and the damage to the planet being caused by global warming pollution.

"Despite all its efforts to appear responsible on the subject of global warming, this Administration is one of the only governments in the world that continues to argue that global warming pollution is not a danger to the public health and welfare of its people.

"EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson's decision not to decide is a tragic echo of President Bush's decision last week to punt global warming to the next administration. It is unforgivable that the agency charged with protecting the nation's environmental health and welfare has so little regard for its mission. More than a year has passed since the Supreme Court cleared up any question about EPA's obligation to regulate greenhouse gas pollution...

Full Statement Here

Send to a friend

Search Criteria

nobody@vox.com(database/pm) — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 00:24:23 +0000

Entering searches for online databases has led me to a wide array of options. I have been trying to narrow them down by 1)their accessability, 2) their practicallity and finally their interactive qualities. To date I have found more than I can count. I realized I had to be a little more specific in my search so I decided for this post to do only online database tools for businesses. Much better only 2000 or so sites to visit,explore and decide upon.

My first observation is simple. What are the needs of the database? There are literally hundreds of companys that develop and maintain the databases on thier site. This allows the consumer to free up precious storage space and have secure access at the same time. www.versara.com offers 2 variations of databases. I-share and I-gate, I was quite intrigued with the tutorial on I-share. According to the tutorial one can combine documents,reports, customer specifications and even get the status of each item and all of this is based on a project web portal. However, I was never able to actually access it and try it out.

www.Longjump.com is another database driven site. This site offers 360 degree customer manager. It keeps the history and details about each customer and the contracts associated with them. I think this would be great for building repeat business and clientele. The limitations I see are the initial data entry from all existing and previous customers. There is no mention of uploading or reverse engineering. This would definitely be worth while for a new business or one that could support all the data entry required.

I also visited www.acurity.com I found this site to be so-so. It's not really set up as a database tool. It is more of a scheduling program and for people who do that for a living, it looks like it would be useful. For the low price of $10.00 you can get the professional version and create every schedule imaginable to man.

As I began my focus on database tools and their abilities I was quite amazed to find how many sites incorporated both of my topics-databases and project management.Gantt charts, schedules,contracts, and specifications only touch the tip of the iceberg. It seems that no matter what the business is or what it entails one thing is certain. There is a vast number of sites to help accomplish any goal they could set.

My favorite three sites for any business or project team so far are www.projectkickstart.com, www.pmplanet.com and www.method123.com. Project kickstart allows you to begin at the projects conception, it gives you a step by step program, which includes timelines,e-mails,reports, everything in real time. I downloaded the free trial (it's only good for 20 days) but in the week I have used it, I have planned the renovation of my deck,and the building of steel panels with detailed percision and accuracy. Planetpm is a site devoted to all things project management. From the latest internet based training to e-books and the latest and greatest assistance tools. Methods 123 is just that it allows the user the opportunity to interact and set his or her own perimeters. I will continue exploring these sites and many others passing the information on as I obtain it.

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

What Kind Of World Do We Have Really?

nobody@vox.com(Builder) — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 00:28:25 +0000

People seem not to see that their opinion of the world is also a confession to their character.
- Ralph Waldo Emerson, American philosopher and poet (1803-1882)

Think about it. That person who is so negative about the world, isn't he also a pessimist about his own future and his place in the world?

The loving mother who dotes on her children also looks on the world as a loving place, with bad guys being the exceptions not the rule.

The happy person sees happy people around him and finds happy situations even when reading world news.

The violent person can cite not just violent experiences from his own family while growing up, he can show you violence all around his community and the world.

A trusting person believes that the world operates on trust, while untrustworthy people are few.

Is your opinion of the world a confession of your character, as Emerson claimed? While the two are related directly, I believe that the relationship goes the opposite way to what Emerson stated. We see in the world people like ourselves. Those who are not like us seem to be the exceptions. When we don't see people like ourselves in our immediate world, we look for them in other places. Sometimes that means a move, a change of job or a change of partner.

Even in the face of apparently overwhelming evidence to the contrary, people will believe about the world what they want to believe. An optimistic person will see the world as a positive place. Nothing will console a negative person about what a hell-on-earth we live in and how no one should bring up a child in the present conditions.

Is the world really a great place with enormous possibilities? Or is hell something we live through each day of our lives?

It depends on what kind of person you are.

If you don't care for the world as it is, change your attitude toward yourself and those around you. You world will gradually become a marvelous place.

You don't have to take Emerson's word for it. Think about what you think of the world in general and about what you think of your own life.

It's true that life is what we make of it. It's also true that your world is what you make of it.

Live the life you want your life to be. The world around you will follow your example.

Bill Allin
Turning It Around: Causes and Cures for Today's Epidemic Social Problems, a guidebook for parents and teachers who want to grow children with positive attitudes toward themselves and their world and need the tools to make it happen.
Learn more at http://billallin.com

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

First Three Steps

nobody@vox.com(Roxanne) — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 01:44:17 +0000

Hi. I am new to Vox. My name is Roxanne, and I'm 19 years old. I go to West Virginia University as a full time student. Right now I have the summer off and I'm spending it at home in New Jersey with my family. Recently, I read the book Skinny Bitch and became inspired to be a vegetarian. The two female authors really tell it like it is. Most of us Americans eat crap all day long and when one of our organs goes busted, we just replace it. But the key is to find a way of living that will allow you to be healthy, happy, and strong for your whole life. Shortly after, I was at the Barnes and Noble and saw a table covered with the book Gorgeously Green by Sophie Uliano. By now, I was already eating organic food and no more meat, which I found out was also good for the environment. I was very interested in the book so I picked it up, and low and behold, it changed my life. It taught me that being eco-friendly in little ways every day can make a dramatic difference in the future outcome of our planet.

Recently, I have made a few changes in my life that have not only been easy to make, but have also infected everyone around me. Environmentalism is contagious! Here are some of the changes I've made that are easy to get your family and friends involved in as well.

1) Start eating less meat. You don't have to give it up completely. But a lot of people tend to eat some form of meat at every meal, every day. Try to cut down to eating meat once a day during one meal. Then, if you are ready, cut down to eating meat once a week, or once every few days. Meat will become more special, almost like a delicacy.

2) Paper or plastic? Neither. When you go to the store, try to bring along a few plastic or paper bags that are already lying around the house. If you really want to be eco-friendlier, get a few canvas tote bags (which you can probably purchase for cheap at your local grocery store) and tote your groceries home in those instead of those insightly, annoying, breakable plastic and paper monsters. I know stores like Wegmans, Whole Foods, Genaurdi's, ShopRite, and possibly Acme carry tote bags that are available to you at the register, should you need more than you brought.

3) Buy recycled paper products. Instead of buying paper towels, napkins, paper cups, and toilet paper made from virgin trees, invest in ones that have been made from recycled materials. It may seem slightly more expensive, but all the money you're saving from not eating meat everyday will balance it out! Just think of it this way. By purchasing that roll of recycled paper towels, you are saving a tree from being chopped down at no cost to you. If you wish to take a step further and become eco-friendlier, purchase a few glass cups, ceramic mugs, cloth napkins, and dish towels. This way, you will no longer need to purchase any paper towels, paper cups, or napkins. Purchase a few of each so when some are in the wash, you'll still have others.

So. There are my three steps for today. I will add a few steps every day, until I've covered mostly everything. If you have any requests, need advice, or have any suggestions, please feel free to talk to me! Eventually, I'd like to write a book or post videos on Youtube. Your input could become a part of something! Have a great day everyone!

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

The Undertones - Mars Bars and Teenage Kicks

nobody@vox.com(W♥M) — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 11:19:21 +0000

06/20/2008 06:13:30 ♥ written by vu ()

The Undertones - Mars Bars

The Undertones

Mars-almond

I had another review that was scheduled to go up today, but inspired by a dream I had just now (I just woke up, it's 4am now), I'm going to write about something else... My dream involved a mobster about to kill a gay music director at a banquet. After I drove the drunken mobsters home, all that was left at the banquet were Mars Bars. Now I'm not sure if the technology exists now (it certain exists in Futurama), but I'll bet the Mars Bar people would love to advertise in people's dream!

Apparently, according to wikipedia, the US and UK had very different versions of Mars Bar. The UK version was a sweeter version of Milky Way (US version), while in the States, Mars Bar had notably almonds in it.

The US candy bar was discontinued in the US in 2002 and the branding changed to Snickers Almond Bar. This is sad, considering The Mars Rover could really use a snack with all that digging.

The Undertones - Teenage Kicks

Fortunately this all ties in to one of my favorite b-side, The Undertones' "Mars Bars" (off of the single Jimmy, Jimmy in 1979). They were probably better known for being a John Peel's favorite band from their first single "Teenage Kicks".

I love this song, it has all that garage inspired feel of 70s punk (think Ramones and Buzzcocks), yet it's very accessibly and poppy. Obviously, I'm not the only one that loves this song, it's become one of most-covered songs, including Peter Bjorn and John, The Raconteurs, Sahara Hotnights, Snow Patrol, Razorlight, Ash, Skunk Anansie, Busted, Groovie Ghoulies, The Saw Doctors, Therapy?, Nouvelle Vague, Green Day, Thee Headcoatees, Franz Ferdinand, The Coral, Violent Delight, Criminal Mischief, The Ukulele Orchestra of Great Britain, KT Tunstall, and Seabear.

Although I don't have all the cover songs, but here are five:

Sahara Hotnights - Teenage Kicks

Nouvelle Vague - Teenage Kicks

Ash - Teenage Kicks

Seabear - Teenage Kicks

The Raconteurs - Teenage Kicks

Another cover lover, at your service.

Mars Phoenix

http://twitter.co...

Whoohoo! Was keeping my eye on some chunks of bright stuff & they disappeared! Sublimated! So it...

Update: Mars Rover uncovered ice on Mars:

Are you ready to celebrate? Well, get ready: We have ICE!!!!! Yes, ICE, *WATER ICE* on Mars! w00t!!! Best day ever!! about 19 hours ago from web

Links: www.theundertones.com

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

Global Warming Getting Worse

nobody@vox.com(Owenskie) — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 06:15:12 +0000

I have been an avid reader of newspapers for the longest time already and I am bothered by the fact that for the past few weeks or even months, news about global warming getting worse could be seen on the spreadsheets every single day. I guess it is a problem that is getting out of hand because not too much people really care about it maybe because they do not see and feel the effects it is already bring to our mother earth.

One example here is the effect of global warming on the Great Lakes in Chicago. These lakes are starting to have water levels which also put to risk other stuff like its health and sanitation.

Effects

The three most common effects of global warming is rising of sea levels, arctic shrinkage and unpredictable patterns in agriculture. Keep in mind that these are only three of the very many effects of global warming. Secondary effects would already include incurable tropical diseases and changes in our seasonal patterns.

Action?

One big question that has always stuck to my mind is that how come government officials all over the world are not to keen doing their own actions to stop global warming. Are they not worried about the effects it could bring in the world they are living in? Yes, they may think that they have all the money and might in the world but they must know that global warming chooses no kind of people. People from all walks of life are affected by this and what is sad is more often than not. People from the lower classes are the ones who care more.

Campaigns

There are some non-government associations who do their part in spreading the word about global warming but the problem is they are getting very minimal support from the government. The funds they get are not enough to change the world but still they are doing the best that they can do.

Is It really hard for the government to focus on this problem? The answer should be know because what they could do is as easy paying a flyer printing company to print flyers that would raise awareness. This could be a small start but at least they would start with something.

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

In the stars and ourselves

nobody@vox.com(Armchair News) — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 03:44:49 +0000

Ringed thing

Reason No. 4298b that I love New York:

Went to see Shakespeare in the Park tonight at the Delacorte; the theater for those who don't know, is in the middle of Central Park. Tickets are free, you just have to line up for a long time -- or get invited to the gala, which is what happened to me.

Didn't care much for the performance; they actually made it kind of sarcastic/jokey in places, and the Hamlet was overwrought and kept reminding me of Joachim Phoenix (who I like but this was second rate), and Sam Waterston, I'm fairly sure, tripped up on his lines at one point.

No matter, after an hour and 45 minutes they recessed for intermission and my friend Kelly and I decided to take our leave. We headed off through the East Side of the park.

Now, I'm not one to stroll in Central Park after dark, although there were plenty of folks and their dogs who did. But it's safe enough that you can, should you want to; we didn't see anyone dodgy. Instead, here's what we did see: amateur astronomists with enormous, and enormously expensive, telescoping equipment taking in the night skies. The first guy invited us over to check out the luminous full moon, which didn't look a whole lot different than it did hanging up in the sky like, um, a pizza pie, or what have you.

But another guy had his set up to focus on something else entirely: Saturn. He called us over to check it out. And there it bloody well was! Looked like a little sticker he'd put on the telescope to fool people, just a tiny ringed yellow speck, but quite clearly what Saturn is supposed to look like. And you can look at every well-developed photo in the world of the planet, but there is truly something different about seeing it through a telescope. It's just another star in the night sky without it, so this was something you couldn't just do on your own without the right equipment.

We thanked them profusely and headed out to Fifth Avenue.

Stellar!

Read and post comments | Send to a friend