Fear of Clowns

Demetri Martin,

Labels: science, YouTube

// posted by Erik @ 6/25/2008 10:02:00 PM
permalink | 0 comments | post comment | email post:

I'm growing flightless fruit flies to feed my pet plants. About a month ago I bought a culture of them from a pet store for $5.99 - I believe today I bought enough ingredients to make dozens of times more flies for about the same price. First, here is the store purchased culture.

Because millions of people without in-sink disposals unwittingly make fruit fly cultures every day I figure it's rather difficult to fail in the venture. I've read that using vinegar instead of water inhibits mold growth so I threw into the blender a small apple, half a package of potato buds, half a package of baking yeast and wet it down a bit with apple cider vinegar.

I kept the apple peels for springtail food. Or more accurately, food for springtail food. More on that tomorrow.

After blending everything down to a cookie dough consistency, I used a root beer bottle to mash the mush more or less evenly across the bottoms of a mason jar and pickle jar. I put one in the freezer for later.

I learned a new word today, excelsior,

wood shavings (thin curly wood shavings used for packing or stuffing)

In this case, the source of my excelsior - pods of a Northern Catalpa - proved the first positive about having a nearly all year mess of the foot-long woody pods in the yard. Those woody pods are perfect excelsior material for my pet flies to find a purchase.

I shook 30-40 flies from the original culture into their new breeding grounds and locked them in with a paper towel and rubber bands.

Labels: apples, blending, carnivorous plants, diy, pet food, poison dart frogs, recipes, science

// posted by Erik @ 5/15/2008 06:44:00 PM
permalink | 0 comments | post comment | email post:

Pictures from the 2008 Chaitén eruption. Before:

After:

Volcanic ash replenishes soil nutrients.

Labels: botany, climate change, photos, science

// posted by Erik @ 5/09/2008 01:36:00 AM
permalink | 0 comments | post comment | email post:

Continued from here, comments on a few more expert scientist global warming skeptics lauded by easily influenced Republican sympathizers.

• Dr. Nathan Paldor. Among the important body of research Dr. Palador has produced is the scientific study of God's parting of the Red Sea, as revealed by the Prophet Moses in Exodus 14.
• John McClean, cited by the document as an "Australian climate researcher" has a website where he describes himself as an "Computer consultant and occasional travel photographer".
• Dr. Eigil Friis-Christensen - a real scientist - is quoted in the offending document,
  
  
  The sun is the source of the energy that causes the motion of the atmosphere and thereby controls weather and climate.
  
  
  Here is a statement by Dr. Christensen in which he specifically objects to the use of of his data to imply solar variation is the only cause of climate change,
  
  
  Although solar variations seem to be a major cause of climate variations on centennial and millenial time scales in the pre-industrial era ... there are certainly other natural sources of climate change. For the industrialised period, ... results do not exclude an effect from man-made greenhouse gases.

Labels: climate change, Republicans, right wingers, science

// posted by Erik @ 3/27/2008 09:31:00 PM
permalink | 0 comments | post comment | email post:

In comments to a post over at 5ft3 referencing a report by Senate Republicans claiming there is no consensus on global warming between

Al Gore (who let us remember is NOT a scientist) and actual scientists

I mercifully pointed out that,

Seems to me you're chasing your own tail when you point out Gore is a politician not a scientist, then turn around and support your case by referencing a political document.

Beth responds,

It was from a Senate Report about 400 scientists who are coming out to say that the global warming alarmists are nuts, how is this not a commentary on scientific thought?

What would make me feel better is for you to address the content and not the source.

Among the leading scientific minds Beth is staking the future of her descendants upon are,

• Georgia D. Brown, an instructor at a technical college offering 2 year associate degrees and High School GEDs.
• "Dr." Hans HJ Labohm, who does not claim to be a "Dr." of anything. Indeed he doesn't claim he has a diploma in anything, only that he "studied Economics and Economic History at the University of Amsterdam". He is employed by NRSP, a Canadian lobbyist group that does not claim or deny whether it is funded by energy companies.
• Paavo Siitam doesn't claim a degree of any kind either, and describes himself as a "retired teacher of biology, chemistry, physics and general science". Sounds like a 7th grade general science teacher.

The fact is there are generously perhaps a dozen or so legitimate scientists in relevant fields who continue to challenge the consensus view on the anthropomorphic influence on climate change and several dozen more who's livelihoods depend on arguing against the consensus.

The last scientific association to officially challenge the consensus was the American Association of Petroleum Geologists which now appears neutrally agnostic ("Although the AAPG membership is divided on the degree of influence that anthropogenic CO2 has ... the AAPG believes that expansion of scientific climate research into the basic controls on climate is important") yet supports "reducing emissions from fossil fuel use as a worthy goal."

Still, there are the 400 or so deniers among high school teachers and college dropouts discovered by a Republican Senate aide using Google.

Labels: climate change, Republicans, right wingers, science

// posted by Erik @ 3/27/2008 08:29:00 PM
permalink | 0 comments | post comment | email post:

I failed horribly last December. The sinicuichi and oregano are the only survivors. I believe the pH of 5.0 was too acidic to allow most of the seeds to sprout. The kratom - the final and third species that did germinate out of the nine - was killed by death from a spray I intended to kill only fungus and mold.

This evening in peat-pellets, I sowed,

• Greek oregano
• French rosemary
• lemon basil
• Italian pesto basil
• Italian sage
• Teppin chilis

I saturated the peat pellets with R/O water with giberillin to 100 ppm. Two pellets per cultivar, one with seeds pressed into soil, one with seeds exposed on top.

In the same pHed giberillin solution, I began to soak seeds of,

• star apple
• miniature pink pomegranate
• Philippine lime
• cantaloupe
• Amy Mellon
• Roma tomato
• Kentucky Blue string bean

I recently performed an experiment on notoriously hard to germinate Sceletium tortuosum seeds by just letting them sit in a giberillin solution. It's about three weeks later and 80% of them have germinated so far while the control group (just in rockwool) has sprouted 20%. I don't have a control group this time, mostly because I'm lazy and take up enough space as it is but also because I had little more than 12 of many of the seeds, so it would be difficult to say which seed's germination was hastened or improved by the giberillin.

UPDATE 2/16: decided a 10 day soak in giberillin solution was a better idea than an experiment with no control that would give me sprouts I want to grow or drowned seeds. Placed all that batch of seeds in wet paper towels inside 1/2 cup plastic containers. Placed all of them in a paper towel on top of the refrigerator where it's a bit warmer.

Labels: gardening, science

// posted by Erik @ 2/06/2008 08:10:00 PM
permalink | 0 comments | post comment | email post:

Beth ends as agrily as she starts,

Okay, something else that bugs me. When scientists come up with a theory, it's like gospel truth for some people, but if other scientists who come up with opposing theories they are wrong. Why can't people accept that the opposing view could be the accurate one?

I've not a definate grasp on who exactly Beth means by "some people", but am confident she means "liberals".

Scientists don't ever "come up with a theory", they come up with hypotheses. Theories are hypotheses which have stood up to repeated scrutiny and best fit the observations.

Right-wingers such as Beth base their outrage, as we have seen, on imaginary people who hold imaginary opinions, although there may indeed be at least some people holding at once all the opinions they find foul. But in order to view themselves as the silent majority as they do, the imaginary segment becomes in their minds a monolithic force in which all of their grievances are encapsulated as one.

Here, I can imagine that Beth is thinking of scientists who believe Man's activities influence the increased greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and that evolution can produce divergent species no longer able to produce fertile offspring. But that is just a guess. But I really can't argue with her as the only certain assertion she makes is that she's pissed off.

Being pissed off that scientists can confidently say Man attributes to climate change is maybe something Beth could understand if she tried a bit, but it sadly seems that everything Beth sees as wrong with the world can be remedied by voting Republican. She knows that Republicans are angry with liberals, and and that's enough for her. Even if the next Democratic presidential candidate didn't fake a Purple Heart, she still has resons to vote for the opposition.

Labels: conservatism, right wingers, science

// posted by Erik @ 9/01/2007 11:34:00 PM
permalink | 8 comments | post comment | email post: