This is awesome. Apparently there are awards for "oddball but often surprisingly practical scientific achievements."

www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,432122,00.html

Deborah Anderson had heard the urban legends about the contraceptive effectiveness of Coca-Cola products for years.

So she and her colleagues decided to put the soft drink to the test. In the lab, that is.

For discovering that, yes indeed, Coke was a spermicide, Anderson and her team are among this year's winners of the Ig Nobel prize, the annual award given by the Annals of Improbable Research magazine to oddball but often surprisingly practical scientific achievements.

The ceremony at Harvard University, in which actual Nobel laureates bestow the awards, also honored a British psychologist who found foods that sound better taste better; a group of researchers who discovered exotic dancers make more money when they are at peak fertility; and a pair of Brazilian archaeologists who determined armadillos can change the course of history.

Apparently local radio personality Scott Cox is returnng to his time slot Monday morning after a whooping two days of suspension. I find this to be unacceptable. The man is a CONFIRMED liar and thief who also used his son to carry out these acts. He is still being investigated by the sheriffs department for his actions. Yet the powers that be determined he should be back on the air already?

I listened to part of the program on Thursday and Friday. I never heard Scott come on the air and ask Vegas to forgive him for doing such a stupid thing. Maybe I missed it. The on-air talent had insinuated that this was necessary for his return. But if you had to tell him to apologize, is it a sincere apology?

It is no secret that I never cared for Cox's shock jock approach. Especially at 6AM. The fact that there were people on this forum making excuses for him was silly. Just because he helps out his community doesn't mean he gets a free ride when he breaks our laws.

So from now on I will no longer listen to KERN 1410. As long as Scott Cox is on the air, I will listen to another station. The entire KERN staff is now a little less trustworthy by keeping this waste of space around. I realize I am just one person and I am not calling for a boycott. Make up your own minds.

Most people on here don't seem to care anyway because they agree with him about Chad Vegas.

http://www.teachertube.com/...

.....When they are older.

larger view

I've been off work now for a couple of weeks. I know a lot of people look forward to this, but I'm not really an extended vacation type of guy. During these few weeks I actually went back to work for a couple of days here and there (proctored some CAHSEE exams) and had some other family commitments. So we really didn't have time to go anywhere. Now, my federal jury duty started (though my number didn't get called today) and will last until the end of August. So my chances of getting away from home are slim before work starts again on Aug 12.

This might bum some people out, but not me. My idea of a great vacation is staying home. During my time off, I have landscaped my front yard, built a large shed in my backyard, work on lesson plans for my high school classes, worked on lesson plans for my adjunct college class, watched lots of Star Trek, saw some movies, played with the kids, played with the puppies, played video games, spent more time with Mrs. Witbee (though still not enough) and many other things.

What's your idea of a good vacation?

Australian doctors warn against 'designer vagina' craze 

Australian doctors have raised concerns about clinics offering vaginal cosmetic surgery, warning the trend towards so-called "designer vaginas" may be exploiting vulnerable women.

The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists said procedures being offered included "vaginal rejuvenation, revirgination, designer vaginoplasty and G-spot amplification".

"What is involved in these procedures is often unclear since recognised clinical nomenclature is not being used," it said in a position paper released this week.

The college labelled the procedures dangerous, expensive and unwarranted, and said it strongly discouraged surgery that was not backed by scientific evidence or clinical trials.

"The real risks of potential complications such as scarring, permanent disfigurement, infection, dyspareunia and altered sexual sensations should be discussed in detail with women seeking such treatments," it said.

The college said women should understand that there were a large number of variations in the appearance of normal female genitalia.

"The college is particularly concerned that such surgery may exploit vulnerable women," it said.

Ted Weaver, chairman of the college's women's health committee, said most of the operations cost at least 10,000 dollars (9,500 US), which he described as an "extraordinary amount of money".

"We feel these operations might prey on people with insecurities and fears who actually need psychological help," he told Australian Associated Press.

"They are also not very anatomically-based and have the potential to cause serious harm."

Doctors in the United States and Britain have raised similar concerns about the surgery.  

I just read the article on the good natured eco-grudge between Ed Begley and Bill Nye. http://www.bakersfield.com/... I remember the episode the article references where Ed went to visit Bill as his new panels were being installed. Ed was GREEN with envy (sorry about that). It made me think of a new word.

ECO-ENVY: the coveting of someone else's "greener-living" technology or techniques especially if it evokes a "I wish I had thought of that" moment.

Probably not a new concept, but I have many times been guilty of it. When I see a house with solar panels decked out I am envious. I imagine their electric meter running backwards and I get misty-eyed. I see someone's innovative drip irrigation set-up or a small wind turbine in their backyard and my mind starts racing. I see Ed Begley powering his toaster with his exercise bike and I think "wow, I need toast and exercise myself."

I think I am more of a Bill Nye kind of guy. Begley cares more about function, less about form. Bill wants both or all bets are off. I think that is what keeps me from doing a lot the green upgrades. I would probably make a heck of a mess and it would cost too much to have someone do it for me.

Oh well, baby steps I guess.

Wow, this whole thing posted with no text so now I am re-writing it from memory.

I'm sitting here on the last day of school as students are finishing up their finals and I'm pondering the merits of our current system of grading students. I can remember many of my teachers never explaining how we got graded. Some of them undoubtedly gave us whatever grade they "thought" we earned. They were probably right, too. But it is better that we have a set system in place for determining student achievement.

     A few years ago I had a student, repeating the class for the third time. He decided to show up only on the first day and for quarterly exams. At the end of the semester he was surprised to find out he was failing. He figured that if he could pass the test, he should pass the class. I told him to re-read his syllabus and see that passing the test was only a small part of passing the class. He finally accepted it, but was not convinced he shouldn't pass the class.

     There are many alternative methods to grading, but the old stand-by of "X% for tests, X% for classwork, X% for projects" is probably the best for our educational system. The nice thing about this is you can design a class so that is it is research-oriented, lecture-oriented or lab-oriented and still use the scheme. The bottom line is, you have to do the daily work.

    Each week I begin my class with a study of the weeks vocabulary. This work is a large part of the students grades since it is done every week. Still, in my lower level classes, many students choose either not to do it or not to turn it in. Why? They don't care about the daily work. Oh, they want to pass the class and they will study hard for the quiz on Friday, but the commitment to do their work every day is just not there.

     How do we make students "want" to do their work? How do we give them ambition and drive? You've seen he movies where a teacher goes into a tough classroom and the students all change to sweetness and light. Remember, those are movies based loosely on what really happened. The vast majority of the time, ambition comes from home, not school.

So, what do you think? Should students be graded on the end product (tests) or should they be graded on their daily work? Or do you have a better idea?

This week I began teaching a unit on sexual reproduction. It is the last new topic in my Biology class every year. And every year the level of ignorance about the human body displayed by my students seems to grow. This is why I teach the unit. Many of my fellow high school teachers stay away from the topic completely. The CA Life Science Standards for high school only mention sexual reproduction in terms of hormones, so the teachers feel justified in not teaching much else. Also, they believe it will be covered in Health (it's not).

But I feel I'm supposed to be readying these kids for college and life. Believe it or not, many young men believe "the baby comes from the same hole as they pee and poop." And many young girls believe "you can't get pregnant during the first two weeks after your period."

The best one, though. I covered all the vocabulary for the female reproductive system when a young girl raised her hand and said, in perfectly innocent deadpan, "what about the butthole?" I was speechless.

Man, your kids keep me on my toes.

This weekend, as you've probably heard, Rev. Wright went a little coocoo in front of some journalists. Nothing really new in what he said, but it apparently broke the camels back for Obama. He has now formally denounced his minister publicly.

We can and have debated the impact one's spiritual advisor has on their own beliefs, but I'm more interested in the possibility that this is all part of Obama's strategy. He is now formally separated from his #1 liability.

What do you think? Is it all a show?

I commute 45 minutes to Delano every morning. The nice thing about it was the ability to collect my thoughts for the coming day and be brought up to date on all the latest news and traffic info by Bill Curtis and Dawnelle Sullivan. Their witty banter and straightforward news delivery made for a pleasant drive.

Now someone decided to put Scott Cox on at 6AM. No offense to Mr. Cox, but his is the last voice I want to hear at 6AM. His style, if you can indeed call it that, is a disjointed ramble intermixed with name dropping of peole I have never heard of. He is abrasive and rude. He is a redneck Howard Stern with a few less fart jokes. And it seems the number of commercials has doubled.

Now some people undoubtedly like this form of crap-stick comedy, but at 6AM I just want the straight poop. I have often wondered how this guy is still on the air, but he must have some kind of audience. The target demographic seems to be truant 12-14 year old boys and they aren't awake at 6AM.

To the station manager at 1410: Please bring back Bill and Dawnelle. radio, KERE

I've been here for months now and every time I look at the Cool New People list on the right hand side of the screen, I'm never on it. Now, I don't claim to be the most popular nut on the branch, but how does one get on this list?

I noticed everyone on there has a pic, so I put one on mine.

Some of these people listed I have never seen posting here before.

BLT and Chico and Random are almost always there. That's fime because they are cool, but hardly new.

What's the deal with that?

If I Were The Devil

by Paul Harvey

Sun, Not Man, Main Cause of Climate Change, New Study Says
By Monisha Bansal
CNSNews.com Staff Writer
December 11, 2007

(CNSNews.com) - According to a new study on global warming, climate scientists at the University of Rochester, the University of Alabama, and the University of Virginia found that the climate change models based on human influence do not match observed warming.

That is contrary to the views held by former Vice President Al Gore, who accepted the Nobel Prize on Monday along with the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and who thinks that climate change is largely caused by human action.

Gore wants nations to tax carbon dioxide emissions and not build any new coal plants, among other steps. "It is time to make peace with the planet," Gore said in his Nobel speech, as reported by the Associated Press. "We must quickly mobilize our civilization with the urgency and resolve that has previously been seen only when nations mobilized for war."

The new report, which challenges the claims of Gore and the IPCC, was published in the December 2007 issue of the International Journal of Climatology of the Royal Meteorological Society.

The report was written by David Douglass at the University of Rochester, John Christy at the University of Alabama, and Benjamin Pearson and S. Fred Singer at the University of Virginia.

"Our findings basically are that fingerprints - that is to say the pattern of warming - that's predicted by greenhouse models does not match the fingerprints of observations, so there is a disconnect between greenhouse models and the actual reality of observations," Singer told Cybercast News Service.

"This means that the greenhouse effect - while real - is not very important in producing climate change," he said. "It's a lot smaller than what the models calculate."

Singer said the reason why the models "overestimate the effectiveness of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases is that the models ignore what are called negative feedbacks which occur in the atmosphere, such as clouds, which reduce the effect of the greenhouse gases."

"Their models just don't consider them properly," he said.

But Bracken Hendricks, a senior fellow at the liberal Center for American Progress, told Cybercast News Service, that the study is "radically out of step with the complete scientific consensus."

"The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is not just a report. It's not just a random gathering of scientists. It's the largest scientific body ever assembled," he said. "Their most recent assessment determined that there's 90 percent certainty that global climate change is happening and that it is caused by human beings."

But Singer said, "We have to remember that the climate has always been changing ever since we have records, and we have geologic records going back millions and millions of years. We know that there have been huge climate changes on the earth long before human beings actually came into existence.

"We are fairly sure that what's causing the warming are changes in the sun," he said. "These are very subtle changes that are very difficult to observe. The sun is really a quite variable star."

Hendricks, however, said because of the IPCC report, "the assertion that this is caused by increased solar activity or these sorts of things is out of step with the vast consensus."

"It's dangerous to get into a game of dueling science," he added. "We don't want to be gambling with the fate of the planet."

But Singer said because global warming is a natural event. "There is little point to try to control emission of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide, which means that all of this legislation and all of these efforts to find substitutes for fossil fuels are pointless, useless and very, very expensive," he said.

Hendricks countered, saying that alternative energy will be a multi-billion dollar industry and "an opportunity to revitalize our global competitiveness" through innovation and job creation.

http://www.cnsnews.com/View...

Gene makes fruit flies bisexual: study

A new study is providing insights into the genetics of homosexuality -- at least in fruit flies.

Researchers have discovered a gene involved in homosexual behavior in the tiny flies. They also found a way to turn homosexuality on and off with drugs.

Humans have a similar gene. But it's unclear what effect, if any, the gene has on homosexual behavior in people, said biologist David Featherstone of the University of Illinois at Chicago.

Featherstone and colleagues described their findings in the journal Nature Neuroscience.

After a century of study on fruit flies, researchers have accumulated a vast storehouse of genetic knowledge. UIC researchers were using fruit flies to study muscular dystrophy when they discovered a gene they call "gender blind," or GB.

Flies with a mutated form of the GB gene are bisexual. It appears they're unable to distinguish chemical smells, called pheromones, that tell whether other flies are male or female.

"The GB mutant males treated other males exactly the same way normal male flies would treat a female," Featherstone said. "They even attempted copulation."

The GB mutation appears to strengthen nerve cell junctions called synapses. This causes flies to over-react to pheromones. As a result, they "broaden their horizons and go for both males and females," Featherstone said.

Researchers tested this idea by adding a drug to the flies' apple juice. The drug weakened the synapses. So within a few hours, flies with the GB mutation stopped engaging in homosexual behavior.

Conversely, researchers gave heterosexual male flies a drug that strengthened their synapses. Sure enough, these male flies soon were courting males as well as females.

"It was amazing," Featherstone said. "I never thought we'd be able to do that sort of thing, because sexual orientation is supposed to be hard-wired. This fundamentally changes how we think about this behavior."

http://www.suntimes.com/lif...