Putting Some Skin in the Game

News from the science desk tells us that some intrepid researchers have developed a method of converting average skins cells into stem cells, which then have the potential benefits that have been argued possible only with human embryo cells. ...This is HUGE, if it proves out.

Evaporate would the debate about destroying humans to harvest their stem cells. Poof!

But perhaps the best part about the news, aside from the potential life-saving possibilities, is the fact that this research was, in some part, motivated by the insistence of our president not to invest federal funds to provide more lines of human embryo stem-cells. In other words, researches had to work the contingencies. And they came up with a process that is actually more simple and accessible than the one the president denied them.

So will Bush ever get an iota of credit for sticking to his principles, which contributed to this most amazing work? Will outspoken critics like Micheal J. Fox thank the president for causing scientists to pursue other avenues, which led to this incredible new future? Don't bet your skin on it.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is coming to town

Being an open and hospitable country can sometimes be a gut-wrenching thing. Case in point: the president of Iran is coming to visit. What's the right way to handle this situation? Some would argue that he should be turned back at his port of entry. However, his status as country VIP grants him undeniable access to the U.N., which is here in the U.S. And the rules also allow him access to anything else within a 25 mile radius, which includes Ground Zero.

What irony, that this man, one of the three legs of the "Axis Of Evil," will be able to stand on the edge of that sacred site, and feign his condolences to it victims, with cameras clicking and the images spread world wide. For the enemies of this country, those images will be grand trophies, and a great inspiration in their causes.

What's more, Columbia Univ has extended an invitation for M.A. to speak, risking even further the inflation of his status, and risking the outward appearance that anyone in the U.S. cares one wit what this fool has to say. ...C.U. also risks the reducing of their own status by this invitation.

But on further reflection, I've come to see C.U.'s way of thinking. Not that M.A. deserves any more microphone than he'll already have at the U.N., mind you. But if he is going to speak, why not give him all the rope he wants. Has this man ever said anything that can be rationalized or justified? Does he not always put his bloody foot in his mouth, without hesitation? Does he not always say things that are simply outrageous and undeniably mad?

So, let him come. Let him speak of the annihilation of Israel. Let him deny the Holocaust. Let him deny having any hand in Iraq. Let him deny any pursuit of nuclear weapons. Let the fool open his mouth and remove all doubt. ...But only if he must come anyway.

Abortion is "Safe"

The FDA today released details of a study that concludes the "Abortion Pill" (mifepristone) is "safe". ...In other words, the pill safely kills. Let us all rejoice in this astounding oxymoron.

Evolved from Africa

An article published at Nature.com settles a long-standing debate, concluding that the entire human race comes from a single, common ancestral home: Sub-Saharan Africa.

...I wonder how the NAACP will take this news --that all Americans are conclusively of African descent, and thereby qualify for recognition and representation by that organization.

Waste Water?

A dear (late) friend of mine had a favorite notion that he liked to mention, at opportune times, to invoke a debate that he was fascinated with. His notion was, "Businesses don't pay taxes." Inspired by his spirit, and in spite of every childhood scolding to the contrary, I've come up with my own controversy:

Water can't really be wasted.

The premise is: water, eventually, always finds its way back into the world supply, ready to be re-used.

So, kids, the next time mom or dad hollers at you to "turn off that garden hose, you're wasting water!", just tell 'em wasting water isn't really possible. ...And then RUN...like water off a duck's back!

Creation

Biology is the science of discovering how life functions, while evolution is the religion of explaining why.

Democrat Fruits

So what has come of the Democrats securing congress in the previous elections? Well, they've pushed forward an attempt to "de-authorize" the war in Iraq, a move for which there appears not only to be little support, but more importantly has no constitutional foundation. They pushed forward a non-binding resolution to withdraw from Iraq. They're proposing a no-confidence vote on AG Gonzales. They've unashamedly attempted war funding bills that presume to take over responsibilities to prosecute war which are exclusively granted to the President as Commander-in-Chief --unconstitutional. And now they're preparing an Immigration Bill that Speaker Pelosi says she won't bring forward unless she has supporting commitment by 70 members from the other side of the isle --far more than is necessary to exceed opposition.

So, what have the Dems done with their hard-fought return to power? A lot of things that are unconstitutional, or mean nothing, and one thing that would only count if it's something the opposition agrees to. Now that's leadership.

Weather Isn't Climate...

...unless the tempurature is going up, apparently.

Whenever anyone suggests that unusual snows and/or cold temps support an argument against global warming, members of the pro-GW crowd will quickly chastise that weather is not the same thing as climate. They'll explain that global warming doesn't mean we won't have harsh winters or unusual cold spells. They'll explain that it's the Earth's climates that are at risk of being changed, not the weather, per se. ...That is, unless the weather turns decidedly hot, to which these same will be the first to cite the weather as further evidence that GW is true.

Maturity

A young person is like a fruit tree in spring, blooming with many answers...and with proper care and time, those can eventually mature into good, ripe questions.

Put Your Green Where Your Mouth Is

OK, so the GW advocates --especially the Anthropogenic GW wing-- believe that we're all hurtling towards calamity, or worse, and that drastic steps must be taken now, by governmental mandate, if we're to have any hope of surviving the inevitability that looms before us. Then there are those who do not subscribe to any of it. Both sides claim the truth while chastizing the other. One problem is that there's no accountability, on either side. So, what if the members of both extremes were required to formally record their predictions regarding specific, measurable events? (Actually, many already have.) And what if the losers had to forfeit certain societal privileges, like free-speech or voting rights, as the cost of being wrong? What if there was a tangible risk to taking a position in the debate? ...What if?

It's Not Easy Being Green...

...but for some, it sure comes easy being a green-hypocrite! The Oprah is a prime example, hilariously highlighted for us by the Daily Show's awesome Lewis Black. On Earth Day, she awarded her live audience members with free compact flourescent lamp (CFL) bulbs, with which they are expected to go home and promptly retire their perfectly functional incandescents, thereby saving the planet from those awful devices. Furthest from her mind, surely, is the fact that each CFL contains enough mercury that, should it be dropped and broken, would require a HAZMAT team to clean up, at the expense of hundreds or thousands of dollars to the owner. The worst thing anyone likely received from a regular bulb is a finger cut. Ironically, this is the same benevolent and concerned giver who, months earlier, awarded each live audience member with a brand new car. ...A gas-powered, internal combustion, CO2-emitting car, by which each person massively increased their carbon foot-print...to say nothing of their tax liability!

...Say, you don't think she would stoop so low as to do these contradictory things just for the ratings of it all...do you?

Pro-Abortion is Anti-Science

Part of the argument from the pro-abortion crowd has been that the zygote/fetus is not a human, but is merely a lump of tissue --a mass. In their view, removing this from the womb is akin to having an unsightly mole removed. They also hold that humanhood is not achieved until some undetermined magical point later in the pregnancy term. For some extremists, that point doesn't arrive until the completion of birth, and some even deny that it's even human until then. However, these views fly in the face of undeniable science, from which we know that each human bears a unique genome, made up of the parental chromosomes joined at the moment of conception. A DNA test of a freshly fertizlied human egg would show that even the first single cell is both related and unique to the biological parents, and just as complete. No mere fleshy growth has different DNA than its host. And no fleshy growth can ever continue into a fully formed human when given only sufficient nutrition and time. From a scientific standpoint, there can be no argument against the "growth" being anything less than a unique and instant human. The problem is with the popular notion of "human." The proper definition must undeniably include the moment of conception. There was a time when blacks were denied human status. To deny a zygote its rightful status is to be just as dishonest.

Warming to Global Warming

I've been slowly coming to realize the good of the Global Warming controversy. Largely, that it has stirred debate (and no, there isn't concensus), and has highlighted troubling tactics committed by both sides of the debate. In the meantime, there is a fairer middle ground where honest and reasonable action is taking place. Who would argue that mankind is stewarding the Earth to his greatest ability? Surely there is room for improvement, as with all things we undertake. There is useful commerce occuring in that middle ground, as well as good conversation, and discovery of effective and non-burdensome steps we can all take. In fact, perhaps it's best not to bring too much attention to this good work. Let it be overshadowed by the warring extremes, so that it can continue along in its substantive work. I will remain a decided skeptic of man-caused global warming, of his ability to influence it, and of the foretold calamities to come. But I'm a firm believer that we can do things better than we have, and we should. Just don't tell me that CO2 is the biggest threat facing civilization, when in reality it is more likely those who try to tell us so.

Square Advice

Performer Sheryl Crow, via her Stop Global Warming College Tour, has handed down a couple choice examples of how we can all help in the fight. According to her deep considerations on the topic, we should all be using just a single square of toilet tissue per visit, except in those extreme instances where two or three squares are demanded. She also advises that we eschew the wasteful paper napkin and adopt her concept of a re-useable dining sleeve with which we're to wipe our messy, consumer-oriented faces.

...So now we can know a devoted Greenie by their doubly-soiled apparel, and aroma. We also know how seriously they are to be taken.

Bill O'Reilly Defends

Last night on his show, Bill provided his defense for why it's a good thing to run the V-Tech gunman's video, and states that he would do it again. He feels that it's a necessary part of drumming up sufficient public outrage to motivate us to pressure our leaders into making laws that would make this sort of tragedy harder to pull off. His position is that we don't value enough the grief and loss of the victims and their family; that only the lunacy of the killer will move us to action. He further explains that the risk of drawing out would-be copy-cats is outweighed by the greater good of a motivated public.

Perhaps Bill needs to ask himself how he will respond when a copy-cat does come forward and chooses to send his video to Bill instead of NBC, and in it states that he was motivated to his crime by seeing the prior broadcast on Bill's show. ...Would you run that video, Bill?

A Supreme Decision

Surely there will be much arguing over, boasting about, and railing against the Supremes' decision yesteday to uphold the constitutionality of banning "partial-birth" abortions. This is both a major and minor victory for the anti-abortion crowd. Major, in that this opinion cannot be appealed to a higher court, and is therefore law of the land. Major also in that it further curtails abortion practice. However, this is also only one finite step on a very long journey ahead in reversing Rowe v. Wade, making it a minor victory in that sense. It's minor also in the fact that it ceases what surely is one of the lesser practiced methods. The vast majority of abortions are still available to be employed. But, all storms begin with a first drop of rain.

One might see this as the greatest positive and lasting accomplishment of the current Whitehouse administration, even if the Iraq situation were to end up exceeding anyone's wildest hopes. As seen purely from a standpoint of lives saved, it would be interesting to see which would be the greater accomplishment.

VA Tech Gunman

Let us all agree that the deluded gunman deserves neither to have his face nor his opinions broadcast over our public airwaves. Let us all agree to change the channel, or turn off the receiver when either appear. Better yet, let your local broadcaster know that you don't want them to grant him these posthumous honors.

I don't want to know what he looked like. I don't want to know what he thought. I don't want to know his failings, nor his opinions about ours. Tell us about the victims, if you must, though there wasn't much interest in who they were when alive. Why do we value them so only now?

If this came in part through negligence, let those be investigated by the authorities. ...By the way, the Press are not them. Let's not allow this to become just another "more on this after a word from our sponsors..."

This was an awful tragedy. It was senseless, and should never happen anywhere. But it does, and with far greater frequency, in other parts of the world. Why do we not consider those events equally? Do we place our victims on a higher pedestal? Were ours less deserving; more valued?

VA Tech

The tragic events at VT will surely provide a launch pad for the anti-gun crowd. Much can and is being written/said on the topic, but the argument is really a non-starter, and doesn't require much to be said. The pertinent fact is that this crime occurred on gun-prohibited ground, where the victims had been stripped of their God-given and Constitution-affirmed right to self-protection. No gun law, written or conceived, can keep people from being gunned down. Laws can only define the penalties for non-compliance, and thereby attempt to be a deterent. Any attempts to leverage the given situation towards greater restrictions on gun acquisition and ownership can only be unwarranted, counter-logical, and motivated by raw emotion (i.e., standard M-O for the radical left).