Taking ocean acidification seriously

Oh. There's another link to this blog today (and praise) from Andrew Bolt, and now I'm going to deal with an issue that I expect may earn his scorn. Don't leave me, new readers! I try to be very reasonable about this, you know!

It's been quite a while since I explained why I decided it's a good idea to reduce CO2 production, and to do it with urgency. My position is that it doesn't matter whether or not the Earth is looking cooler for a year or two at the moment: the effect of ocean acidification is something that started being viewed with serious alarm by marine scientists over the last 5 years especially, and that concern is not going away.

For some easy to read primers on the problem, try these three Australian sites here, here and here. (Australia has special reason to be concerned, as will become apparent soon.) The lengthy Royal Society report of 2005 on this, which is actually pretty easy to read, is here.

I'll list a few key points so you don't even have to follow the links:

a. increased atmospheric CO2 levels have already increased the acidity level of the ocean by 30% over the last couple of hundred years;

b. the steep climb expected in further CO2 emissions on a "business as usual" scenario could lead to about a 300% increase in acidity, although even then it will be slightly alkaline. (If you want to, you can insist that the change be called a reduction in ocean alkalinity instead of an increase in acidity; it makes no difference to the life that lives there.)

c. even if all CO2 production stopped today, the ocean will continue getting more acid by at least the same amount as it already has, and it will take thousands of years for ocean chemistry to get it back to pre-industrial levels. (The chemistry of the earth means that even when the ocean has been much more acidic, it eventually comes back to something close to what we've currently had for a long time - see the next point.)

d. ocean pH is believed not to have been as low as its current level for a very long time (one article mentions 430,000 years; another mentions 40 million years, but I am not sure which pH level it is referring to.) One article indicates that if "business as usual" continued beyond 2100, the oceans will eventually get to a pH that hasn't been seen for 300 million years! In any case, it's the rate of current change that is a big part of the problem:

During the Ordovician, atmospheric carbon levels were much higher, but had risen gradually, allowing the oceans to remain saturated with calcium carbonate, and life had flourished.

But, 250 million years ago, the formation of the Siberian Traps through a massive volcanic eruption caused a sudden and massive shift in oceanic pH, and nearly 90 percent of oceanic species went extinct. He noted that the extinctions followed lines that were predictable; species we'd expect to be sensitive to carbonate concentrations died, while those that have finer control over their physiology largely made it through the extinctions.

e. Australians have good reason to worry: cold water takes in CO2 faster, and the large Southern Ocean waters should therefore become most acidic first, and the acidity levels are expected to spread north. Warm water coral reefs might already be being affected by sensitivity to even the current levels of increased acidity, although there are still uncertainties about this.

On the Science Show this week, some scientists express their deep concern.

Look, no one says that the oceans will go completely and utterly barren everywhere, but the concern is that the change from what they are like now could be very dramatic indeed, over a very short space of time. Most significantly here in Australia, is the possible absolute collapse of coral reefs as we know them. In that Science Show transcript, one American scientist notes:

Unfortunately the picture for acidification is much fuzzier but also much uglier, and that's because corals seem to have little in the way that they can escape from the effects of acidification. It's actually the case that corals can survive, at least in the laboratory, in highly acid waters, but they turn into little sea anemones, they stop building skeletons altogether. As a consequence what you will have is a world of coral reefs but coral reefs without skeletons, which really aren't reefs at all. So that these structures that we can see from space and which so many organisms depend upon in terms of the three-dimensional complexity will simply cease to exist.

Even if you view large scale changes to the reefs of the world as only an aesthetic loss, the other major concern noted in the various articles is that acidification affects many types of plankton, upon which much bigger things feed, which in turn are eaten by things on which humans like to feast. And these plankton also have a role in sinking CO2 to the bottom of the ocean, so if their population goes down, more CO2 is left to go into the ocean to make it more acid, etc.

Of course, the scientists are still working on it all, and the ecological effects of such large scale change are not entirely clear. But I think from a common sense point of view, massive changes in ocean ecology sound dangerous. And remember that it will take thousands of years for pH to drop. (Adding stuff to the oceans to make them less acidic would have to be on such a large and expensive scale it doesn't really seem feasible, although there are people coming up with ideas.)

In an earlier post about this, I mentioned that I would like to see any skeptical arguments about ocean acidification. (Andrew Bolt correctly points out that some predictions of the Great Barrier Reef's demise due to ocean warming have, at the very least, been very premature. But Andrew's hope today that a reef's ability to recover from a nuclear blast is a good sign doesn't exactly address the big picture of acidification. Acidification is a much more long term process, that is already well underway.)

Googling for "ocean acidification skeptics" doesn't bring up much. Some have taken recently to (rather conspiratorially) claiming that scientists are starting to "talk up" ocean acidification because they realise that recent cooler temperatures mean people will stop believing in global warming. (Of course, as even the articles listed here indicate, many marine scientists have been talking about it with alarm for the last few years in particular, ever since the Royal Society report of 2005 really gave the issue a lot of attention.)

The only site I have found (admittedly in a quick search) with a detailed attempt to rebut ocean acidification science is here, by one Dr Floor Anthoni of a New Zealand group called "Seafriends". Dr Anthoni appears to have no academic background in biology; his qualifications seem to be only in computer science and electronics.

He claims that some of his own discoveries mean that ocean acidification is not property understood, and it will not be as big disaster as predicated. (He claims the ocean will become "more productive", but also says "...there could be some unexpected and unforeseen surprises. The world has been changing and adapting to major changes since it came out of the last ice age, and the changes caused by fossil fuel will be relatively small.")

Well, I would be inclined to take Dr Anthoni more seriously if he actually had qualifications in a relevant field, and didn't come across as a generic contrarian on most things to do with the greenhouse gas issue.

It seems that, more so than with climate change due to greenhouse, it is extremely hard to find a scientist in the field who doubts the serious ecological consequences of large amounts of CO2 in the oceans.

Here's my concluding thought: at least with global warming, it is possible to argue there will some "upside". Fewer people in colder countries will die during winter, plants may grow faster to supply food, the residents of Greenland are already happier; that kind of thing. And to look at the really big picture, surely the world is better off being quite a few degrees hotter than having much of North American and Europe under hundreds of meters of ice. (That's the scenario of global warming preventing an overdue ice age.)

Ocean acidification on the other hand seems to have no upside at all. (I am discounting the credibility of Floor Anthoni on this.)

The only thing that may seem a vague "positive" is that some research noted in the Ocean Acidification blog seems to indicate that some algae may do better. But (from memory, without having time to Google this right now) algal blooms don't have a good reputation, especially in shallow coastal waters, where their decay sucks the oxygen out of the sea and makes it sterile of larger life. Algal blooms in the deep ocean might have some carbon sink effects, but the reason iron fertilization of the ocean is viewed with much scientific skepticism is due to the uncertainty as to whether the carbon taken in really does make it to the bottom of the sea for any length of time.

Overall, the change of all coral reefs into something with much, much less diverse life, and fewer carbon sinking plankton in the deep ocean, will surely be a bad thing, with food chain and other consequences that indeed sound worrying.

I also haven't even repeated here the point in my original post that past CO2 levels of just under 1,000 ppm (we're well over a third of the way there) were around when some scientists think that anoxic oceans made large amounts of hydrogen sulphide which killed land animals in mass extinctions.

It seems fully deserving of all the attention it can get, and as I said at the start, is of itself a compelling reason to take the need for urgent CO2 reduction very seriously.

Tell me where I am wrong...

UPDATES: I've been fiddling with this post all day, adding stuff mostly.

I actually have found a post by an academic who briefly mentions some reasons for thinking that coral reefs (and some plankton/algae) may be more adaptable to pH change than some fear. But he notes that the lab experiments are (so far) contradictory on the issue. It's not enough to relieve my concerns.

Jennifer Marohasy's blog contains lots of skeptical posts about coral reef danger, although a lot of them are on the issue of warming waters, not acidification.

Professor Ove Hoegh-Gulberg, who Andrew Bolt strongly criticised for exaggerating coral reef danger, has his own blog too. He admits his early predictions were too dire about the speed with which reefs could die, but I think he defends himself pretty well overall. Have a look at this thread in which he debates Peter Ridd.

A clarification: at one point I mention some types of plankton as having a role as carbon sinks, but later I mention the skepticism about whether algae is an efficient carbon sink. I think they are not contradictory statements because plankton and algae come in different varieties, only some of which use carbonate and are likely to be the best at being permanent carbon sinks. If that type doesn't grow so well in acidified oceans, the plankton/algae mix may swing towards the type which is not likely to be good at taking up carbon permanently, even if you do have more of them due to "fertilization" by CO2.

Correct me anyone if you think I have misread that from the articles.

Excuse me while I hold my applause

The announcement that current Queensland Governor Quentin Bryce will be the next Governor General has met almost universal acclaim. (Even Andrew Bolt and Tim Blair remain silent on the question of the merit of her appointment, apart from Bolt thinking it politically savvy.)

However, for a conservative like me, the appointment of a female lawyer with a background in academia, administrative law, human rights and a stint as Federal Sex Discrimination Commissioner, sets off my automatic cynicism neurons, even before checking what she has been doing lately. And unlike Bill Hayden, who came over all conservative as a result of his appointment, we've seen Quentin in the State equivalent role for some time, and can read her many speeches. It seems a safe bet that she will not be having the same conservative sentiments overcome her anytime soon.

A quick look around the internet gives some indication for at least fellow conservatives to exercise caution before praising her appointment to the high heavens:

1. This story by Courier Mail journo Des Houghton, mentioned briefly in the Australian's editorial, may have been based on the gossip of just one disgruntled Government House employee for all I know. But then again, maybe he/she/they was/were disgruntled for good reason:

....staff are leaving in droves with departures including three chefs, an under butler, a chauffeur, a personal assistant and a second footman.

Staff complain of unnecessary interference by Ms Bryce, who even insisted that gardens be torn up so purple and pink flowers could be planted for International Women's Day.

There has been an exodus of long-serving staff since Ms Bryce, an ardent feminist, was given the plum job in July 2003.

2. Des, who doesn't seem to be a fan, followed up with this story at the end of last year:

GOVERNOR Quentin Bryce, or Queen Bee as she is now known in vice-regal circles, has authorised spending in the order of $150,000 for a history of the Queensland governors.

In an echo of the Peter Beattie appointment of Ross Fitzgerald to write a state history, I'm told no tenders were called. The commission went to historian Peter Forrest and his wife Shirley, also a historian. Longreach-born Forrest has written six books including a history of Bryce's hometown, Ilfracombe. A history of Queensland governors may seem like a cure for insomnia, but Forrest tells me his work will be a "broad-brush history of Queensland through the prism of the governors' lives". The world through Quentin Bryce's eyes? I can't wait.

3. In many, though not all, of her speeches as Governor, she starts by either "acknowledging the traditional owners" of the land, or even in one or two odd cases, merely "gives thanks" to them. I understand it is quite the standard thing for our Premier Anna Bligh to "acknowledge" them. I am not entirely sure what Quentin is "thanking" them for, however. Not fighting too hard last century? Giving her permission to turn up (like Greer claims to seek.)

The habit can be harmless enough, if somewhat grating to conservatives who don't share a romantic view of indigenous culture, at least if there are aboriginals in the audience. But Bryce does tend to gush somewhat if they are the audience:

I give thanks to the indigenous peoples of the land: the Dreaming, the ancestors; the generations who survived and who remain with us.

We are grateful and proud to live beside you...

They always have a warm welcome for me. They share their stories with me. They inspire and teach me how to be an elder.

4. Going back to 1998, Green Left was happy to laud her contribution to a meeting to protest against a private abortion Bill that a conservative ACT local politician (Paul Osborne) was trying to get up to restrict abortion:

Quentin Bryce argued that women's control of their fertility is a basic human right. Osborne's bill violates the UN Declaration of Human Rights and international statutes to which the Australian government is a signatory.

Oh great, the Governor General to be is a lawyer who thinks that you can't succeed in even placing limitations on abortion because of a UN Treaty?

5. The Age reminds us of the nasty little note that tarnished her reputation as Sex Discrimination Commission (I had forgotten this until now; thanks Andrew Jaspan!):

In 1990 Alexander Proudfoot, a doctor with the federal Health Department's Therapeutic Goods Administration, complained to the Human Rights Commission that women's health centres in the ACT operated in breach of the Sex Discrimination Act. Under Freedom of Information, Dr Proudfoot had got a case file from Ms Bryce on which she had written a note, "another example of a male wasting our time with trivia". The 10 words grew into a mountain of legalese as the doctor pursued Ms Bryce through the system.

Finally, after four years and various hearings, the complaint was dismissed with Commissioner Robert Nettlefold, QC, saying her "unfortunate notation" was "an expression of frustration and annoyance".

6. In her recent International Women's Day Address, she makes this dubious point:

Each year, the number of women in our country who are subjected to physical, emotional and sexual assault is almost invisibly growing; while, insidiously, the number of convictions for rape is steadily declining.

Women are both being treated worse, and finding it harder to get a rape allegation believed? I'd like to see the figures and some decent analysis of them before I accept this argument of deteriorating conditions for modern Australian women. (From memory, such claims of increased violence against women usually come from surveys which define abuse very widely.)

And then back to the gush:

I adore International Women’s Day:
• all that it means and offers;
• its secure and valued place on the global stage;
• our local celebrations of its spirit and infinite promise.

Infinite promise, eh? And this:

In our own communities we need to re-engage and collaborate, to think harder about our obligations and connections, as women shaping our own futures.

Above all, we need to require more of ourselves.

Women are often accused of 'wanting it all.’

I think we should want more.

Forget the old orthodoxies.

Be outrageous in your desires, your list of wants:

Quentin forgets to mention this one: women should try and have a career that is almost exclusively in academia or government appointed positions. It tends to help in the "time off to have a family" department.

Having said all that, for all I know she may just be the loveliest, most hard working GG ever, who will charm absolutely everyone. Or not. (She certainly seems to have had a busy diary of speeches as Governor, I'll grant you that.) But excuse me if I see grounds for suspecting that she might not be warmly received by everyone in her future performance as GG.

Where your eyes don't go

There's a They Might be Giants song with the same title as this post which is a tuneful take on the horror of having an unconscious mind that could be getting up to anything. I've always liked this line:

Every jumbled pile of person has a thinking part that wonders
What the part that isn't thinking isn't thinking of

Brain scientists are still pondering this issue of when the conscious mind become aware of decisions the brain has already made, as a Nature News story tells us. (As usual, this will probably disappear soon, so I need to take out large extracts):

Your brain makes up its mind up to ten seconds before you realize it, according to researchers. By looking at brain activity while making a decision, the researchers could predict what choice people would make before they themselves were even aware of having made a decision....

Haynes and his colleagues imaged the brains of 14 volunteers while they performed a decision-making task. The volunteers were asked to press one of two buttons when they felt the urge to. Each button was operated by a different hand. At the same time, a stream of letters were presented on a screen at half-second intervals, and the volunteers had to remember which letter was showing when they decided to press their button.

When the researchers analysed the data, the earliest signal the team could pick up started seven seconds before the volunteers reported having made their decision. Because of there is a delay of a few seconds in the imaging, this means that the brain activity could have begun as much as ten seconds before the conscious decision. The signal came from a region called the frontopolar cortex, at the front of the brain, immediately behind the forehead.

If you think you heard about this type of experiment before, you'd be right. It is building on some (now) quite old results of Libet, whose experiment was quite similar in design, as the article explains:

Libet's study has been criticized in the intervening decades for its method of measuring time, and because the brain response might merely have been a general preparation for movement, rather than activity relating to a specific decision.

Haynes and his team improved the method by asking people to choose between two alternatives — left and right. Because moving the left and right hands generates distinct brain signals, the researchers could show that activity genuinely reflected one of the two decisions.

But all is not lost for free will yet:

...the experiment could limit how ‘free’ people’s choices really are, says Chris Frith, who studies consciousness and higher brain function at University College London. Although subjects are free to choose when and which button to press, the experimental set-up restricts them to only these actions and nothing more, he says. “The subjects hand over their freedom to the experimenter when they agree to enter the scanner," he says....

But results aren't enough to convince Frith that free will is an illusion. “We already know our decisions can be unconsciously primed,” he says. The brain activity could be part of this priming, as opposed to the decision process, he adds.

Part of the problem is defining what we mean by ‘free will’.

Personally, I like to look in the mirror every morning and say "stop making decisions without me" ten times while I shave.

Gratuitous political postscript: I hope they never include Brendan Nelson in these tests. No ten seconds for him: I reckon he must surely have about about a 10 hour gap between speaking and recognition of what his stream of consciousness has already come up with.

More money than sense

$5m in will for right-to-die campaign

Who knew that the late (Labor) Lord Mayor of Brisbane, Clem Jones, was worth $150 million? And that he still wanted to be in politics after his death by funding the cause of euthanasia law reform?

This bequest is so stupid, it's verging on the positively offensive. Who on earth thinks that euthanasia has (to date) failed as a political cause because it can't get enough media attention? It gets a huge amount of coverage, most of it written by a profession (journalism) with an undeniably soft-Left tendencies. Whenever it comes up as a media topic, there is a flood of letters tot he editor from euthanasia reform supporters.

Aren't the chances high that the Northern Territory or ACT will have a go at implementing it again, now that we have Labor at Federal level?

Frankly, it's hard to see how the executors are going to find useful ways to spend the money. If I were them I wouldn't touch Philip Nitschke with a barge pole: his inability to rouse himself with too much concern about the merely bored wanting to kill themselves make him his cause's own worst advocate.

Surely it would be better spent on work directly relieving the suffering of the dying who either can't, or don't want to, accept euthanasia as an option. I would have thought that $5 million could fund at least a few palliative care beds indefinitely, or pay for a facility to be built in a place that has none at all at the moment. It would then be used for some direct relief of suffering, rather than helping a movement that the media can't get enough of.

On the new Futurama

Matt Groening makes feature-length DVD of Futurama - Times Online

The odd thing is, I didn't care much for the first episode of Futurama I saw many years ago. But after a couple of more episodes I was hooked, and I am happy to see that it is making a return.

Bryan Appleyard likes it too, and his interview with creator Matt Groening is worth reading. I wonder when we can get the DVD in Australia...

LHC black hole coverage continues

New atom-smasher could fill gaps in scientific knowledge -- or open a black hole - Los Angeles Times

While we're sitting around waiting for CERN to release its revised safety assessment, there is still some detailed coverage in the press turning up.

Physicist M Mangano appears to be wearing the brunt of the effort to re-assure everyone that they won't accidentally end the Earth prematurely, and it's important to note the tone he takes here:

Michelangelo L. Mangano, a respected particle physicist who helped discover the top quark in 1995, now spends most days trying to convince people that his new machine won't destroy the world.

"If it were just crackpots, we could wave them away," the physicist said in an interview at the European Organization for Nuclear Research, known by its French acronym, CERN. "But some are real physicists."

It's not clear whether or not he is referring to someone other than Walter Wagner here; after all, Wagner's experience as a phyiscist has been called into question by some.

According to the article, Mangano himself is currently writing the updated assessment. Let's hope he finishes it in time for it to be properly considered by the rest of us before they power up the machine.

(As I said in an earlier post, the fact that the report has been somewhat delayed is not exactly comforting.)

Fisking incoherence

Rachel Cooke meets Middle East reporter Robert Fisk | Media | The Observer

Rachel Cooke interviews and talks about Robert Fisk in this rather interesting article. I get the strong feeling that Fisk would not like the picture painted of him. Try this long section:

We are talking - or, rather, he is talking. Luckily he has a loud, uncompromising kind of a voice and the balcony is tiny, so he is close to me, both of which ensure that I can hear him above the roar of cruising Mercedes below. It is the end of a long day - he picked me up at nine this morning for a drive south to the border with Israel, and I've been with him every minute since - but, if anything, Fisk's energy, unlike my own, increases with every word he utters. On he goes: unrelenting, furious, pernickety and labyrinthine in argument. Every anecdote involves three dusty side alleys, every explanation three historical examples. Worn down by these things, I ask - too casually, I see now - if he thinks that, once the Americans exit Iraq (he believes that they will do this soon; that the US media is already preparing the ground by running articles bemoaning - I paraphrase - the fact that the Iraqis simply don't deserve what the US has offered them), there will be a civil war. 'Do you CARE?' he shouts. Perhaps I look startled, because he now corrects himself. 'Do WE care? I don't think we do.'

It's at this point that I start to think longingly of my hotel room in the Holiday Inn; not the old Holiday Inn, which stood close to the green line during the Lebanese civil war and is a pockmarked, shelled-out monument to terror to this day, but a new one, above a smart shopping mall. But it's difficult to get away. For one thing, every time I open my mouth to make my excuses, either he interrupts - Bin Laden this, Noam Chomsky that - or he takes another mobile phone call (no call can be missed, no matter that those coming in tonight are not from top contacts but from groups wanting to book him for lectures). When I do finally lift my bottom from my seat, he takes it as an opportunity to show me his desk - on it, a set of Russian dolls decorated with the faces of Israeli prime ministers and a framed postcard of the Archduke Franz Ferdinand in the moments before his assassination in 1914 (Fisk's father fought in the trenches in the First World War, a fact that has had a profound influence on his own life). At last he puts me in a taxi, though not before he has reminded me that he'll pick me up at 5.30am so that we can travel to the airport together: he is off to Canada to lecture; I'm going home to sleep like the dead. It's kind of him to take such care of me, but I can't say I feel too grateful at this moment. Will he still be like this in the morning? Fisk's long-suffering driver, Abed, was right: one day with him is like a month with anyone else.

And how about this for an irritating habit:

But it is worrying that he refers to himself repeatedly in the third person. 'Have you read any Fisk?' he asks me on the telephone before I land in Beirut, a question that is insulting on so many levels. And now I'm here, he keeps calling himself 'Mr Bob'. Oh, well.

The actual sections on his analysis of the Middle East make him seem as incoherent and rambling as some of his efforts on ABC's Lateline. He actually seems to dislike or distrust just about everyone in the Middle East, even the Lebanese he has lived amongst for years, as well as most of the West.

Maybe he would have been happier on another planet.

Unpopular vicars

So, there was a vicar in England with some anger management issues (spitting on a parishioner was probably not a good way to keep on good terms with the Bishop.) Who knew that this sketch on That Webb and Mitchell Look was based on fact?:



Incidentally, the ABC has replaced Webb & Mitchell with another couple of Brits on "The Armstrong & Miller Show". They are rather hit and miss, as were W&M I suppose, and the style of the humour is often similar. But I find Webb & Mitchell much more likeable and overall significantly funnier.

I also see that Channel 7 has had big ratings with repeats of the Vicar of Dibley, with episodes from 1994! Years after it was shown on the ABC. This must drive ABC programmers nuts: knowing that the 'plebs would like a show if only they watched it.

However, I should hasten to add that personally, I can't stand Vicar of Dibley. Dawn French can be funny, but I find her acting way too hammy in this show. And it's not just her: everything about the attempted humour of the show fails for me.

Lurid crime reports of Inida (continued)

Youth kills grandmother for denying porn

There's no need for a court when you have The Times of India on your case:

Denied his daily staple of porn and horror films on his personal computer, a youth from an affluent family decided to get rid of what he thought was the root cause of his misery.....

On April 3, Abhishek smashed Shantabai's head with a stone pestle, killing her instantly. He also stabbed Viren to make it look like an outside job. During interrogation, he tried to mislead the police by saying that Shantabai's head had been smashed by an intruder. He claimed that he had tried in vain to catch the intruder.

However, the police found discrepancies in the statements given by Abhishek and other family members. Abhishek was picked up on April 5 and subjected to questioning.

On Tuesday, he finally cracked and admitted that he killed his grandmother and stabbed his brother.

(This is not a report from a court sentence: it is simply the report of the alleged confession.)

Your next car might be a hybrid

Hybrid cars aren't just for smug yuppies anymore. - Slate Magazine

An interesting article on how successful Toyota has been with their hybrids, and how they are only likely to get more popular in the near future.

Slate has also recently done some debunking of the anti-Prius comparison between a Hummer and the hybrid.

And in other pro-Prius news, they are capable of very substantial mileage on initial batteries. (410,000 km according to this story.)

Big picture time again

Here's a couple of Arxiv papers of interest:

The first one: a paper from January pointing out that finding a Higgs boson of just the right mass at the LHC could in fact confirm that the universe won't expand forever, but will undergo a "big crunch" in the distant future. (I would much prefer the universe to have a big crunch than accelerate into nothing. A big crunch leaves open Tipler's Omega Point, for which I retain a fondness.)

The second one: a recent paper talking at great complicated length about black holes as "fuzzballs". The thing is, black holes could hardly be described as well understood. Although there are astronomical objects which have the right weight and behaviour which would be expected of black holes, some still argue that they aren't "true" black holes at all, and there are questions about the exact nature of the horizon, etc of any black hole. When you get down to Planck size, I think the uncertainty is worse.

Anyway, although the paper seems to indicate that they still expect "fuzzball" model black holes to radiate with something like Hawking Radiation, I am not clear as to how they think this solves the information loss issue. (I have only skimmed this paper quickly.)

As for the relevance to the LHC and micro black holes, I would like the CERN safety review to take into account alternative models for black holes, just to see if they raise any safety issues in terms of potential for no HR, or increased accretion rates, etc.

Reads like fiction

Man with suicide victim's heart kills self - Life- msnbc.com

This is one of those real life stories that might strain credibility if you read it as fiction. (More remarkable than the fact that the heart recipient shot himself, as did the donor, is that the donor's young wife married the recipient!)

A witty Katz column today

Praise be to the Lord our Jobs - Danny Katz - Opinion - theage.com.au

The daily carrot routine

Health - Life & Style Home - smh.com.au

See the link to a story about a new book on anorexia, and how difficult it can be on the families. The way it can manifest does sound truly bizarre:

It [the book] features Hannah, who would peel and steam one frozen carrot at a time, weigh it, have three mouthfuls, turn the plate 45 degrees and have another three mouthfuls. When the carrot was gone, she would repeat the same routine with the next carrot from the freezer.

"It nearly drive us bonkers," her mother said. "It would take her up to 2½ hours each night to eat … 200 calories. It was mind-blowingly annoying. And we'd have to have the exact products in the right part of the fridge or she'd throw a hysterical screaming fit."

Such behaviour was extraordinarily difficult for families to understand, Professor Halse said.

Yes, it's hard to overstate how annoying that would be for the parents. Honestly, the first time your teenager did that routine for dinner, wouldn't you want to shake her and yell "pull yourself together", or something similar. Not that it would help, of course.

It really is one of the strangest medical conditions, and why is it that (as far as I know) it is only a relatively modern illness? Did a teenager's inclination to obsessive/compulsive behaviour 50 years ago just get directed into some other aspect of life?

Skin derived stem cells showing some promise

Technology Review: Reprogrammed Stem Cells Work on Parkinson's

Further confirmation in this story that embryonic stem cells may be unnecessary for useful therapy after all. It also indicates that unwanted cancer as a result of stem cell therapy might be able to be avoided.

Can I order my brain rejuvenation upgrade for 2030 now?

Things that turn up in libraries

The Tablet reports that:

Six previously unknown sermons of St Augustine of Hippo have been discovered at Erfurt University in central Germany, a find that the head of the university's library department, Thomas Bouillon, has hailed as "most significant".

As St Augustine died in 430AD, these are pretty old records relating to a very important figure in religious history.

Augustine could be something of a spoilsport, though:

In another sermon about St Cyprian, who was martyred in 258, Augustine criticises the practice of holding drunken orgies on martyrs' feast days.

Dang.

Just how bad can a little nuclear war be?

Limited nuclear war would damage ozone layer

Pretty bad, it would seem:

Mills and colleagues found that a regional nuclear war in South Asia would deplete up to 40% of the ozone layer in the mid latitudes and up to 70% in the high northern latitudes.

"The models show this magnitude of ozone loss would persist for five years, and we would see substantial losses continuing for at least another five years," says Mills.

The scenario they looked at was for 100 Hiroshima size detonations between India and Pakistan. (Those two countries apparently have 110 warheads between them, so the figure is relatively realistic.)

On the other hand, it would cool global warming for quite a while. But those who sunbathe to get warm will all get skin cancer from no ozone.

On the whole, not a good idea. (Incidentally, what sort of early warning systems do both of these nations have? It wouldn't hurt to have international co-operation to make sure these countries can't launch by mistake.)

Screen your genes before lighting up?

Genetics and lung cancer | Smoking out the smoking gene | Economist.com

I'll step on Harry Clarke's territory now and link to an interesting article about genes and lung cancer. Two paragraphs give you the flavour:

Paul Brennan and Christopher Amos both agree that something significant is going on in the part of chromosome 15 studied by deCODE. But they have concluded that genetic variation there acts directly on a person's susceptibility to lung cancer, rather than acting indirectly by modifying his smoking behaviour. That does not mean the gene or genes in question actually cause lung cancer. Rather, it means that they amplify the effects of smoking instead of the amount of smoking....

DeCODE has already announced it will add rs1051730 to the standard screen it offers to those who wish to know their susceptibility to diseases. The day is not far off, therefore, when those who take the essentially irrational decision to start smoking tobacco will be able to find out in advance exactly how foolish they are being.

The Scientific American version of the story is here.

Hey, you! Pay attention!

On 3 April, I posted about an article in Nature which contained some strong criticism of the forecasts of the IPCC as being overly optimist in projections for the potential technological reduction in emissions of greenhouse gases. (Nature quotes someone as calling it a "bombshell".) Nature followed up with commentary from several global warming figures, some criticising, some agreeing with, the original commentary. (To get to the articles now, go to the John Tierney link below and follow his links. News@Nature's way of stuffing around with certain links only being available for 3 days irritates me no end.)

So why hasn't anyone in the Australian blogosphere picked up on this? I would've thought it was of great interest to many bloggers I read regularly: Catallaxy, Harry Clarke, Quiggin, even Robert Merkel at LP. One would have thought it might even be of interest to Tim Blair or Andrew Bolt from a greenhouse skeptic's point of view. (I even emailed to Bolt about it, as I thought it a story deserving publicity.)

So why have precisely none of the above (as far as I can see) noted the story? (Not my post; the story itself.)

For those of you interested (such tiny number that there seems to be!) there is more about the article in John Tierney's column in the New York Times of 3 April.

A Google news search indicates that no Australian media outlet has reported the story either. What's wrong with you all?

More "Uh-oh"

Iran Begins Installing More Centrifuges - New York Times

Back, and dreaming

Last night I slept the deep sleep of the just-returned-from-camping. Nothing makes you appreciate your own bed more than a couple of nights sleeping in a sleeping bag on inflatable mattress. The other thing about camping sleep that I could do without is the disruption caused by the 30 meter walk to go to the toilet at 2.30 am. Nice to see the stars at that time of morning, though.

I also had a very protracted (or so it seems) dream last night in which I was trying to find a building in the city, and realised suddenly that I was in Melbourne, not Brisbane, yet I had no idea how I had gotten there. I rang my office and tried to explain as best I could, I think coming up with the theory that I must have slept-walked onto a plane. But the other odd thing about the dream was that I kept thinking "well, if nothing else, this will make for a really interesting blog post."

Maybe that is a sign I have been blogging too much?

I think it also occurred to me in the me in the dream that it seemed like a dream, except I was sure it wasn't. Those dreams are usually good to wake up from, except for the series of "proof of flying" dreams" I had some years ago.

I will leave you all now to analyse my subconscious, while I catch up on a day's work and attempt to post something of interest tonight.

Some decent stuff about mini black holes

Before I go away for the weekend, I thought I would point out these developments.

At last, at least one physicists' blog goes into a lot of detail about what they think would happen if mini black holes from the LHC did not evaporate via Hawking Radiation. This is well worth reading, although my feeling is still that it a pretty complex question and may yet be the subject of some uncertainty.

It seems to me, for example, that Bee's explanation of a mini black hole passing through the earth and hitting a subatomic particle does not coincide exactly with Greg Landsberg's explanation in 2006:

They would each take about 100 hours to gobble up one proton. At that rate, even if one did not take into account the fact that each black hole would slow down every time it gobbled up a proton, and thus suck down matter at an even slower rate, "about 100 protons would be destroyed every year by such a black hole, so it would take much more than the age of universe to destroy even one milligram of Earth material....

Compare that to Backreaction:

Nobody knows exactly what will happen when a tiny black hole hits a nucleon. On the scale of the black hole, the nucleon is about 1000 times larger in diameter, and a very dilute cloud of a few quarks and gluons. It may be that the black hole hits one of these partons, as they are called, thus disrupting the nucleon and carrying away a fraction of its mass. There is no theory to describe this, and there are all kinds of problems involved, as to what happens to confinement, colour neutrality, and so on. But whatever happened, in the end, the black hole may have gained, in the most extreme case, the mass of a nucleon.

It may be that they are in complete agreement, if Landsberg's explanation was given in more detail. But it reads to me like there is some uncertainty.

That said, they both agree that very, very few mini black holes should have less than escape velocity. That's good, although again it appears to me that Backreaction's estimate and Landsberg are different.

Another physicist spends a lot of time pointing out that the very limited experience in physics of litigant Walter Wagner, and getting upset that the media does not report this clearly. But on the more important point of why Wagner is wrong (in detail), we haven't heard from Steinberg yet. (Maybe he will just agree with Backreaction's analysis.)

Really, if physicists are unhappy about Wagner getting publicity over this, why didn't they simply address the issue in detail when asked about it over the last couple of years by the likes of James Blodgett. Instead, the reaction was (by and large) very dismissive, especially once you asked "what if HR does not exist?" I know that Greg Landsberg did go into a fair amount of detail in answers to James Blodgett, but he was pretty much the exception, as far as I know. (And he eventually stopped taking questions anyway.)

Only now, it seems, are we getting the detail which indicates that it was never a completely stupid question.

Short holiday from saving the universe...

The longer Good King Kevin stays overseas, the more of a goose he looks. (The follow up video of how he reacted when questioned about it at a news conference suggested that he is simply not getting enough sleep.)

I'm not sure that any of his cabinet back here are a suitable Sheriff of Nottingham; perhaps Gillard could be the Sheriff of Altona, if she was actually game to say much without Kevin's minders' approval. (Gawd, can't she now afford a move down the road to Williamtown, at least.)

As I like to imagine that I look like a slightly older Jonas Armstrong (hahahahahaha), all of this Robin Hood talk is by way of explaining that my family (and another) is off to set up an outlaw campsite near the forests of Kilcoy over the weekend, from which we will seek to at least "rob" free wine from a few local wineries, and muck about in boats and tangle up fishing line, while figuring out ways to encourage Kevin to stay overseas.

I probably can't post until Monday. Come back here over the weekend anyway so my sitemeter doesn't get depressed.

Bob Ellis pines for low technology

Unleashed: The young and the restless

I don't know that Bob Ellis was being entirely serious in his latest "Unleashed" column. ("Unleashed", incidentally, seems to be a government run service where those ignored at their own websites can seek a larger audience.)

Anyhow, Bob thinks that youth today binge drink, do drugs and don't marry because - there jobs are all crap:

They have jobs that demean and shame them, jobs that offend their conscience and wound their pride, jobs out of which they have no clear hope in their lifetime of getting out of, into jobs that are any better.

Where once they might hope to get a university degree in Roman history or music composition or quantum physics and a job thereafter teaching it, they now find these things unavailable to them.

Well, I'm still waiting for Bob Ellis' definitive paper on quantum gravity to appear at Arxiv, but it has yet to appear. Too many red wine stains, I suspect.

When Bob was a youth:

....the jobs young people got in their teens were plentiful and most of them agreeable.

I would like to see people of Bob's age surveyed and see what they have to say about that. According to Bob:

Electronic robot slaves have taken over the nicer, unconflicted jobs, and all that are left for humans to do are the nasty, humiliating, shaming, lousy jobs.

Come on, I think Bob's having a lend of us, don't you think? How about this line:

And so it is and so it goes, with bad jobs everywhere, jobs from which you might be sacked at any point, and rents going through the roof and frequent foreign travel no longer an affordable option, that young people, yes, take drugs and hit the piss and go down on one another as if there's no tomorrow. I would too in their shoes.

Funny he should mention foreign travel: in Bob's youth that usually involved a one way sea trip to England to work and save up money for the return leg in 2 year's time. There was no way the average youth could afford return holiday travel to New Zealand, let alone the rest of the world.

Did Bob miss out on a seat at the 2020 Summit? What a pity!

The end of the earth, but at least there's less fermented shark

Melting ice caps may trigger more volcanic eruptions

The story is about Iceland. The speculation is that decreasing ice cover there will let some of the volcanoes on the island become more active. (The decreasing weight pressure of the ice cap lets more magna get closer to the surface is the idea.)

This may also happen in other parts of the world, including Antarctica.

As one of the comments following the story notes, this could arguably be somewhat of a mixed blessing. Just the right amount of extra volcanic activity would increase aerosols in the atmosphere which has a cooling effect that can last for years. On the other hand, too much volcanism and you can kill most life on earth.

If Iceland is at risk, at least it means less fermented shark in the world. While I am not a huge fan of his, I recently saw chef Anthony Bourdain's "No Reservations" episode in which he travelled to Iceland and described the food as the worst he has ever experienced: especially the fermented shark. Bourdain cannot be accused of not being adventurous in what he will eat on his travels. If he says fermented shark is vile, I would really take his word for it.

Someone has put the show up on Youtube. You can see the segment with the vilest Icelandic food here:

About the LHC

As I predicted, the great majority of commentary on the legal action concerning the Large Hadron Collider is snarky. Phil at Bad Astronomy, a prominient Skeptic, had an initial post which was fairly restrained, but then followed it with a post linking to others which definitely fall within the "snark" category. Daily Galaxy severely ridiculed the topic, but in the process misrepresented the case completely. Most of the "big" physics sites I visit regularly seem to have taken a view of "the less said the better". I suspect that they probably figure that the less publicity they to anything that could delay the start up, the better.

For a good natured humorous take on it, see Scott Adams' post about it at his Dilbert Blog.

One thing is perfectly clear: most of those who are ridiculing the issue, especially in comments sections, have not read the main websites which have been discussing the issue for the last couple of years.

As I said in my original post on this, I liked James Blodgett's work because he was willing to be shown that there clearly is no risk, taking into account all possibilities (including the failure of the never observed Hawking Radiation to actually exist.) It's true that very, very few physicists doubt Hawking Radiation, but a few reputable ones have speculated that maybe it doesn't. When the CERN risk assessment paper is based heavily on the assumption that it does exist, that's where a legitimate criticism lies.

Much is being made of the background of Walter Wagner, one of the litigants. To be honest, I have no idea about his general credibility; I note that he certainly does seem to have had a very varied career, and the fact that his website was inviting donations was always something that gave me some concern. However, in his posts on the web he generally has come across as pretty rational, and the ad hominem attacks do nothing to address the key issue.

In the New Scientist version of the story, the case is "complete nonsense" according to CERN spokesman James Gillies. He appears to be much more circumspect in the report of the New York Times. In fact, the NYT report emphasizes that CERN physicists have taken the question seriously, and have been looking at safety issues again since last year. One of the most curious parts of the report is that most of the members of the Safety Assessment Group are said to prefer to remain anonymous "for various reasons". I am curious as to why that would be. It doesn't fit entirely comfortably with their insistence that they are being completely open about all of the possibilities they are considering.

I expect that the revised safety assessment will still give the project a clean bill of health, and I hope it does it on the basis of a convincing explanation that under no foreseeable circumstances could thousands of non-evaporating mini black holes floating in and around the earth absorb atoms fast enough to ever be a problem.

I hope the strangelet issue can similarly be dealt with as well.

We will see.

As I suspected...

Climate challenge underestimated? : Nature News

This looks like a really important story on the economics of climate change. My suspicion has long been that the optimistic talk of countries being able to achieve huge changes in CO2 emissions with lots of "green" technologies and without too much economic pain was bunkum, and this report indicates my hunch may be right:

Climate policy expert Roger Pielke Jr, climatologist Tom Wigley, and economist Christopher Green lay out in a commentary article published in Nature ¹ today why they think that the emission scenarios the IPCC produced nearly a decade ago, which are still widely used, are overly optimistic. They note that most of the IPCC’s 'business as usual' emission scenarios assume a certain amount of 'spontaneous' technological change. The size of this assumed change is unrealistic, they argue, and deceives policy-makers and the public about the crucial role policy must have in encouraging the development of technologies to prevent dangerous climate change.

Such a large chunk of the needed energy-efficiency improvements is built in to these 'business as usual' scenarios that the degree of change requiring special effort seems artificially small, they argue. According to the authors' own calculations, IPCC scenarios make it seem as if the technical challenge of stabilizing greenhouse-gas emissions at around 500 parts per million — a concentration which scientists think will prevent average global temperatures from rising more than 2 °C — is a quarter of its true size.

Richard Tol, an energy and environmental economist at the Economic and Social Research Institute in Dublin, Ireland, also says that the IPCC has underestimated the cost of technology, and notes that the cost of mitigating against climate change increases as time goes on. If Pielke and colleagues are correct, the cost of controlling global warming could go up by a factor of 16, argues Tol.

I trust Professor Garnaut is reading this with interest.

A laugh a minute in Iraq

In Baghdad, Iraqis take their humor extra dark - International Herald Tribune

According to this story, Iraqis still enjoy a good April Fool's joke, but in current circumstances, most of the jokes are very black. For example:

Rawaa, 25, a manager's assistant, said that in 2004, when she was in college, a student persuaded the class on April Fools' Day that the poetry professor — a man they all disliked — had been assassinated.

"We felt sorry about him, but very happy at the same time, because there will be no more poetry lectures that day," Rawaa said. She would allow only her first name to be used, afraid of falling victim to the real violence in the capital, anything but a joke.

Actually, all of the jokes in the article just don't sound funny, which makes for a curious read.

Dangerous headline for humour

Kidney Extracted Through The Vagina, First Time In Europe, Second In World

Oh great...

BBC NEWS | Asia-Pacific | N Korea hits out at South leader

You can see more of the North's rant at the North Korean news agency here.

Meanwhile in China, they are probably tearing their hair out at the prospect of some sort of North Korean issue interfering with the Olympic Games.

Assud the Rabbit and the future of the Middle East

Hamas's harsh rhetoric against the Jews - International Herald Tribune

As this article notes, the outright incitement of young Palestinians against Jews is one of the biggest problems for finding a long term peace solution in the Middle East.

When you have prominent political parties (Hamas) still quoting the Protocols of the Elders of Zion as true, there is very little hope for the future. Not to mention Imams who like to sermonise that the Jews are doomed because of what the Koran says.

Assud the Rabbit, by the way, replaced Nahoul the bee, and vows "to get rid of the Jews, Allah willing."

God help us.

And how about a bit of concentration on this brainwashing as a problem from the likes of Ant Loewenstein? I note he says of the short film Fitna: "it’s vital to understand that this virulent strain of Islam-hatred is alive and well in the West."

Funny, Antony, how it is not being broadcast on local Israel TV to influence the kids. I reckon children's shows designed to instil hatred from an early age are more harmful, even if they don't show dead bodies, than a short bloody film on the internet which can actually be the subject of serious discussion by adults.

Robert Spencer's take on it is well worth reading by the way.

The Nazi children

Paddy Hitler, Max Mosley and the dilemma of Nazi children

This is a fascinating summary of what various "Nazi children" went on to do with their lives.

Under the entry for Paddy Hitler, you should follow the link to a story from the Times in December which I had missed. Wikipedia has an entry on him too. His story had until now escaped my attention.

(By the way, the Wikipedia entry notes that there have been a couple of fictional works in which Adolf travels to Liverpool to visit his nephew. What a neat idea for a movie.)

More curious Indian journalism

Mall mania grips city-Patna-Cities-The Times of India

Maybe I am just easily amused, but here's the introductory paragraph from the above story:

Built over the ruins of ancient Pataliputra, the age-old bazaars of modern Patna betray a flavour of yesteryear in its din and bustle, the bellowing of beasts, the salty language of traders and cattlemen and their shocking racy stories.

I am very curious as to the nature of the "shocking racy stories" that Indian cattleman tell at the market. Is it about what their cows got up to last night?

A comparison of interest to few readers

Inside the mind of the Archbishop of Canterbury David Bentley Hart TLS

This is a review of a collection of theological essays by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams.

The reviewer notes that the Archbishop is undoubtedly smart: he apparently can read 7 languages other than English, and lecture in five. He has an impressively large bibliography, including 3 books of poetry.

Still, it is a common criticism that his use of language is simply too opaque to understand his actual position.

The point of this post is simply to note that it occurred to me that he is the Barry Jones of the ecclesiastic world: both highly intelligent and well intentioned, but their verbosity and circuitous approach to topics makes people actually avoid trying to understand them.

Even the Arabs don't like Syria

BBC NEWS | Middle East | No Lebanon breakthrough for Arabs

It's hard to keep up with all the convoluted politics of the Middle East, but this short report is worth noting.

Funny money

Windfall that wasn't | The Australian

Glenn Milne explains how reports about an extra $1 billion to be paid to Victoria were never true, and the Rudd government did not seek to clarify the misreporting.

This also reminds me, when it was first announced by John Howard, there was some criticism from those on the Left that it was all a rushed and ill-considered program. Funny how that has all dropped away now that it is a Labor deal.

Things you didn't know about Julie Andrews

The actress Julie Andrews looks back on a rough childhood - International Herald Tribune

I like this section from the above review of Julie Andrew's autobiography:

The story starts in Walton-on-Thames, a village in the south of England, where she grew up. Her great-grandmother was a servant, her great-grandfather a gardener, and both grandparents on her mother's side died of syphilis, the only response to which is: blimey, they didn't put that in the press release for "Mary Poppins." (The book's tone addresses precisely this kind of joke and seems to implore, with weary finality, Enough already.)

In other movie news....

The pleasures of bad reviews are many, and sadly I had missed the outstanding collection of reviews that Paris Hilton's latest movie "The Hottie and the Nottie" garnered in February this year. (It only came to my attention now due to a brief recent mention in The Observer, where the reviewer noted "There is nothing to commend this disastrous film and not even a herd of wild horses, each laden with a Gucci saddlebag packed with doubloons, could induce me to see it again.")

Thinking I could find better bad reviews, I headed over to Rottentomatoes, where the film managed to get a 5% positive reading. However, it appears to be a real challenge to those trying to describe its awfulness. For example, (all of these taken from Rottentomatoes):

"It is excruciatingly, painfully, horribly, terribly awful." (Clear message, but lacks creativity.)

"Imagine the worst movie you've ever seen. Got it? Now try to think of something worse. That something is this movie -- wretched, embarrassing and a waste of the time and energy of everyone involved." (Slightly better.)

"I would like to tell you this gross-out-on-camera is every bit as bad as its title implies, but that would not be entirely true. It is much, much worse." (See what I mean; its awfulness seems to have transcended creative description.)

Just so you know what the plot is about, back to Mr French in The Observer:

The Hottie & the Nottie, produced by the vacuous, self-adoring socialite Paris Hilton and starring herself as the most beautiful, sought-after girl in Los Angeles. Paris is Cristabel Abbott, 'the hottie', who thinks that 'a life without orgasms would be like a world without flowers'. But would-be suitors can only approach her via her ugly, pustule-encrusted best friend, 'the nottie', who naturally ends up having a spectacular makeover.

Nearly every reviewer finds the film's message to be stunningly anti-feminist, and some note that it's a full length ad for the cosmetic surgery industry. As a way of summarising the anti-women aspects, I reckon the wittiest quote on Rottentomatoes goes to Suzanne Condie Lambert of the Arizona Republic:

'This movie hates women' is written over and over in my notebook, but that's not quite fair. This movie hates unattractive women.

Congratulations, Suzanne!

Kung Fu Kid

Continuing the current run here of videos and doodles, The Japan Times gives a new kids' movie a good review, and the trailer is up on Youtube. Looks fun to me; lucky I have the kids to see it with:

Cartoon

Kevin loves attention

G'day Kev, it's Russ - Opinion - theage.com.au

Just as you might expect, our PM is readily impressed when a celebrity wants to talk to him. Jason Koutsoukis is taking another job soon, which may be the reason he feels free to detail this rather embarrassing Rudd story. Go read it and cringe.

Black hole issue gets attention

Try this headline: Black Hole Eats Earth - International Herald Tribune

Well, what do you know. The New York Times (and IHT) give the issue of whether there is any potential danger from mini black holes that may be created at the LHC a respectful treatment.

This is, I expect, going to upset some of the science bloggers, when they get around to noticing.

The most interesting thing about the article is that it does confirm that there is a third "anonymous" safety review which is due to report soon. It was due to report earlier this year but seems to have been a bit delayed.

I would like to think that this shows that it is an issue that is being taken seriously, and hence it was reasonable for me to do likewise.

There has not been much around on Arxiv for quite a few months now that seems directly relevant to this issue. However, there was a somewhat useful answer to a question I asked given by Bee (physicist Sabine Hossenfelder) at her very worthwhile Backreaction blog. The comment is in the thread here, and is marked as being posted on March 11 at 10.32am. I don't think I can link to it directly.

While she clearly believes that Hawking Radiation is the answer (as indeed does virtually every other physicist), she does make the interesting point at the end as follows:

Besides this, I find it kind of funny that I occasionally come across this idea that these micro-black holes would 'sink' into the earth and collect at the earth's center. That most definitely wouldn't be the case - they would just go through and leave on the other side, even if 'slowly moving' or 'falling'. Why would they stop in the center of the earth?

Interesting point, as I had assumed they would end up there.

Dog fun

Here are two videos which raise the fun question: what are those dogs thinking?:

Peter Godwin on Zimbabwe

From prosperity to failed state: how one man destroyed a nation - Opinion

I mention this article, which is an good read in its own right, mainly because I want to recommend (what I think was) a "Conversation Hour" interview with Peter Godwin I heard earlier this week. However, there is no podcast of the interview on the ABC yet. Maybe it will up soon at that link.

However, there is a transcript of a Ramona Koval interview here.

He has a very interesting family story.

Uh oh

Rodents can learn to use tools: Japanese study

Six adult "degus" rodents, a kind of small rat, were trained at a laboratory at the Japanese government-funded RIKEN research institute and all of them were able to use a tiny T-shaped rake to retrieve food, it said.

In the final stage of the 60-day experiment, they were pulling the tool towards themselves to hold onto it and then moving it to obtain food, the study showed. ...

In one test they were given two tools -- a familiar functional rake and a non-functional tool that lacked a blade or had a raised blade. They chose the functional one without hesitation in most cases.

They chose the correct tool without being tricked by its colour or size, the study said.

First, I was wondering why Japan was doing this sort of research at all. But now I see. As soon as they can be taught to throw those little star knives, there will an army of hooded killer ninja rats sent out all over the world, hidden in the panels of exported Japanese cars, to do the evil bidding of the Emperor.

You have been warned.

Ross runs out of steam

Now for the shower without glory | smh.com.au

Don't you get the feeling that Ross Gittens ran out of inspiration for a column over Easter? His column today is about an "eye-opening" book that seems to have made him suddenly realise that some people may have more showers than they strictly need for hygiene purposes.

And maybe water shortages will make people critical of those who have too many, or too long, showers.

Well, d'uh, as they say in the classics. If Gittens lived in Brisbane, he would know that when a million plus people have their water supply heading towards 15%, it does tend to make one concentrate on shower times quite a lot.

Happily, our water levels are up to about 38% again, but still I think the city is not going to start to feel completely relaxed til we at least get over 50%.

International toilet news

Do city's troubled public toilets gotta go? | Seattle Times Newspaper

I have a vague feeling that somewhere in Australia a Council has tried these pod-like Germanic automated toilets. Certaily, Seattle has tried them, but what works in Europe obviously doesn't work there:

Seattle's $5 million experiment with self-cleaning public toilets could soon be over.

Citing drug use and prostitution in the silver pods, Seattle Public Utilities on Monday recommended removing the five restrooms, which were supposed to provide clean, safe facilities for tourists and homeless people....

After the automated restrooms opened in 2004, their floor-cleaning mechanisms became clogged by trash. Prostitutes and drug users sought cover in them. The Downtown Seattle Association reported that human waste on the streets increased, instead of decreasing, after they opened.

Talk about your cases of unintended consequences. I guess in Europe you go to your local brothel or cannabis coffee shop to partake in those habits.

Meanwhile, Salon recently ran an article about the sudden American interest in poo. (The book "What your poo is telling you" has been a surprise hit.) There is, as you might expect, a far amount of attempted poo humour in the article, but for my money, this quote has the funniest phrase:

Dillard also points to the current fad for "detoxing" the body by regularly getting high colonics as an obsessively unhealthy one. "This is a manifestation that a part of you is dirty," he says. "The colon has been around million of years and the wisdom of the colon predates us.

Try working that phrase unobtrusively into your workplace conversation tomorrow, and see if you can get away with it.

Whatever happened to...

John Hughes' imprint remains - Los Angeles Times

So, it turns out that John Hughes, who is a significant part of the reason I think the 1980's was actually a good decade for popular cinema, is highly regarded by many people trying to do movie comedy today. Quite a pity they don't follow his example and instead have plenty of swearing and too much graphic sex talk.

I had wondered from time to time what he was now doing. Nothing much, it seems, and he doesn't give interviews. Pity.

India: home of the novel position

Dirty dance racket busted in Delhi-Delhi-Cities-The Times of India

A dance party scandal in New Delhi:

The crime branch on Sunday night raided a hotel in Moti Nagar industrial area and arrested 10 scantily-clad girls gyrating to loud vulgar music. Out of job since the ban on dance bars in Mumbai, the girls, all aged between 18 and 25, were allegedly brought to Delhi by the kingpin of the dance racket, Dalbir Singh (25), who was also arrested from the spot.

According to the police, nine customers reportedly in uncompromising position with the girls and the hotel owner, Suresh Kumar (42), were also arrested.

Human rights fun and games in Canada

BBC NEWS | Americas | Speech row rocks multi-ethnic Canada

Of course, we have had the same stuff going on in Victoria too.

More soon

Spent the Easter weekend down the Gold Coast, without computer. Reasonable weather, for a change, but beaches a bit rough and lots of rips and strong sweeps. Couple of people drowned, one a tourist from England. This happens all the time in Australia: tourists who have never been in surf before jump in and get into trouble. It's an odd thought to most Australians that adults can get into the sea and not know how to avoid getting knocked over by a wave.

I wonder if Kevin Rudd has ever been to the beach much. Nambour is only a stone's throw from Maroochydore, where my family used to go beachside camping every Christmas when I was a young kiddie. He's a few years older than me, so it's not likely we ever built sandcastles together as toddlers. Anyway, I imagine he was always building models of Parliament and telling all the stick people how they have to clear everything through him first.

Back in Brisbane now, but with much to attend to. Some posts later today, I expect.

An Islamic story for Easter

I had missed the fact that Robert Spencer, the anti-Karen Armstrong when it comes to assessing the nature of Islam, has been "Blogging the Qur'an" for nearly a year now. (Karen Armstrong rubbished one of Spencer's books, but Spencer gave a spirited rebuttal.)

This is a very worthwhile exercise, since (as his introduction explains,) picking up and reading the Qur'an in translation is very heavy going due to its wildly disjointed nature.

I haven't read many of the entries yet, but the latest one is of particular interest. It tells the Qur'an-ic story of Moses and Khidr (the "Green Man"), about which I had not previously heard.

The exact nature of the Green Man is unclear, but he is meant to be good (a saint perhaps) and teaches Moses a lesson by doing some weird, apparently pointless, things, and only explaining the hidden "good" reasons for his actions at the end. The lesson to take from it is this:

“There are paradoxes in life: apparent loss may be real gain; apparent cruelty may be real mercy; returning good for evil may really be justice and not generosity (18:79-82). Allah’s wisdom transcends all human calculation.”

But, the part of the story that is disturbing is that one of Khidr's acts is this:

So they went on until, when they met a boy, he slew him. (Musa) said: Have you slain an innocent person otherwise than for manslaughter? Certainly you have done an evil thing.

The explanation Khidr later gives is:

As for the youth, his parents were people of Faith, and we feared that he would grieve them by obstinate rebellion and ingratitude (to Allah and man). So we desired that their Lord would give them in exchange (a son) better in purity (of conduct) and closer in affection.

As Robert Spencer notes, it's not hard to see how such a story can be used to support, at least psychologically, the awful practice of honour killings in Muslim society.

I've been trying to think of some biblical story which is as offensive to me in quite the same way. I don't think God telling the Jews to be ruthless in attacking their enemies is the same (and besides which, Islam has the same issue.) The lesson about the nature of God in the Book of Job is, I suppose, similar to the Green Man's lesson, but it is not God who directly inflicts the evil that befalls Job. And of course, although Jesus at times spoke not coming to soothe families, but to break them up, one of the best known parables is that of the Prodigal Son. Of course, it is mainly about humans who return to the path of God, but you could also read it as encouraging forgiveness of parents towards their children.

No, I just can't see how you can read as being an "acceptable" metaphor or lesson the precautionary killing of a young man because he will upset his parents in the future by being rebellious.

Oddly, Robert Spencer doesn't really dwell on this aspect very much; in fact, in the comments following the post he makes it clear that he actually meant to convey that he "loves" this "wild story". (The next comment questions this, as do I.)

For this Easter season, I will stick to Christianity as an "objectively" better religion, thank you very much.

Japanese binge kids

With all the recent talk of how to deal with youthful binge drinking, I thought it worth reminding people about cultural differences towards alcohol. Can you imagine the outcry, for example, if this ad ran in Australia?:



Yes, it's the Japanese fake beer for kids, and its been around for a while, as this 2005 post from Boing Boing shows. My son recently saw it on a DVD from Japan, and is very keen to try it when next there.

As the ad may suggest, Japanese society seems drenched in alcohol, yet per capita consumption is actually less than Australia. The legal drinking age is 20, and although it's not exactly a challenge for underage drinkers to get their hands on alcohol in a country where (at least in some places) vending machines sell beer and sake, there is not the concern about binge drinking and violence like there is in Australia, England and the States.

After-work drinking for adults is extremely common, but having the trains stop around midnight in large cities sets a de facto time limit for many to go home.

Lots of people make the same comment about European attitude to drinking - it's not just the quantities involved, it's the cultural attitude to alcohol that makes the difference.

In Australia, if binge drinking is causing problems on any inner city streets, I would have thought reducing opening hours for the bigger drinking establishments and clubs is an obvious response. (I have never quite understood the desire for large scale drinking after (say) 2 am at the latest.) However, widespread licencing of small establishments, especially if food is available, seems a very sensible idea if you want to encourage a culture of "paced" drinking amongst friends.

As to drinking as a undesireable aspect of sport club participation: well, having never belonged to a sporting club in my life, I am the last person to be able to judge how much of this is true. I have no idea how you would discourage excessive drinking in them, and doubt it is worth the effort of trying.

PS: one thing that clearly doesn't work in the "problem" countries is parents who allow their teenagers to drink at parties in the hope that they will exercise sensible self control and somehow get over the appeal of heavy drinking. It's a well intentioned but half-baked idea that doesn't bear scrutiny: if your culture already has too many binge drinking 18 year olds, how is allowing your 15 year old to also get drunk going to encourage responsible drinking 3 years later? In fact, is it possible that the increase in this practice over the last decade has led to the current binge drinking issue in young adults?

Crabb on Nelson

The Sydney Morning Herald Blogs: News Blog

Annabel Crabb's comments on Brendan Nelson's strange way of always having a tragic anecdote ready (whether or not it is relevant) bolster my belief that there is no conceivable way he will ever be elected Prime Minister.

As a seat warmer for the next, oh, 6 months or so, he has his uses. But he is not a serious contender for leadership of the country. Everyone knows it.

Vision

The consensus view among economists and commentators about what may happen next to the global economy appears to be a very definite “who knows.” This is not comforting. Nor is the fact that the full details of the way economies work now seems well and truly beyond any normal citizen’s grasp.

Anyway, assuming that we still have an economy in 2020, and have not been invaded by time travelling aliens from another universe (I like to worry about all possibilities,) here is the Opinion Dominion list of visionary things for the 2020 Summit. (Nearly all of these have been mentioned before here: use the search facility for more detail.)

1. The answer to Australia’s housing crisis: yurts! (I like the smell of canvas, but honestly, have a look at how nice and cheap these look.)

2. The partial answer to Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions: nuclear pebble bed reactors. Seriously.

3. Reinstate funding for small earth approaching asteroid search facilities in Australia, and make Peter McGauran live in a crater.

4. First step towards solving the health crisis: ban 90% of cosmetic surgery and send the newly out of work doctors to re-education camps to treat remote aboriginal communities.

5. An Australian led recovery in the use of airships. Don’t be a wuss and use rare and expensive helium; go back to cheap hydrogen and just design them better. (Non inflammable skin would be a start.)

6. Treat all schizophrenia sufferers for toxoplasma - you just might cure a non-negligible percent.

7. Legislate against Big Brother every re-appearing in any format whatever.

8. Parliamentarians to have a minimum age of 50. (They should have happy families first. Power can wait.) Oh - and ban anything with any name like "youth congress" or "youth parliament". It only encourages the immature to become parliamentarians.

9. Public executions of one horse every day until they confess.

10. Kevin Rudd to divorce and marry into a Chinese political family so as to have a son who will lead the new Sino-Australian empire. (OK, that one is mildly fanciful.)

Actually, it's kind of disturbing how quickly I ran out of ideas, isn't it?

How encouraging

Most Palestinians favor violence over talks, poll shows - International Herald Tribune

A new poll shows that an overwhelming majority of Palestinians support the attack this month on a Jewish seminary in Jerusalem that killed eight young men, most of them teenagers, an indication of the alarming level of Israeli-Palestinian tension in recent weeks.

The survey also shows unprecedented support for the firing of rockets on Israeli towns from the Gaza Strip and for the end of the peace negotiations between Palestinian and Israeli leaders.

Robot mule still getting around

Back in March 2006 I posted a link to a remarkable "robot mule" video. The device is still being developed, it would seem. Found via New Scientist, here's some new footage of the slightly creepy looking robot in action. (I always get the impression I am watching two humans who have got their pantomime horse costume on wrong.)



Actually, I would like to see someone riding on the back of it. It would be a spectacular way to make an entrance to, well, anything.

Go Novell! All praise to the Wordperfect!

WordPerfect antitrust case greenlighted by the Supreme Court

Good Lord. Wordperfect gets a mention in the news, as its old owner gets the right to continue an anti-trust case against Microsoft.

Actually, I didn't know that Wordperfect's downfall was partly blamed on Microsoft making it harder for it to work on Windows 95. Here I thought it was just crushing deals with government which forced it out. (I'm pretty sure Microsoft did deals with Australian Defence Department, at least, which required them to convert to Office and then run nothing but Office.)

Anyway, this a good excuse for me to sing the praises of Wordperfect again.

(And no, I don't mean DOS based 5.1. Wordperfect is now up to version 13, and a new version comes out from current owner Corel every 2 or so years.)

Unfortunately, increasingly government departments which publish forms are only supplying Word or .pdf documents, and I am forced to use Word more and more. (Wordperfect will open and convert them, but it's still not a perfect process, and trying to edit the documents makes the formatting issues worse.)

So, I have to use Word 2000 from time to time. Yeah, it's getting to be an old version now, but I find it hard to believe that newer versions have changed the basic problems I have with it.

You see, I consider it an absolute objective fact, that formatting a Wordperfect document is much, much easier than formatting anything in Word.

And you know what really annoys me: even when I ask for help from young employees who have only ever used Word, they usually still do not know how to fix a formatting problem. They just end up shrugging and suggesting some complicated work around, rather than a simple fix.

The attachment to Word is only because they know nothing better.

Here is my quick list of the ways in which Wordperfect is better:

1. it opens and saves in more formats than Word (in fact, I heard that this is the reason why some law firms keep it as an option, since you can open nearly everything from every year on it;)
2. it starts faster; it saves documents faster;
3. it saves to smaller sized files;
4. it has had built in conversion to .pdf for years (an extremely handy feature when you have to email documents);
5. it is not a heavy drain on the processor;
6. it's nicer to look at;
7. it has never been targeted for viruses in the same way Microsoft products have;
8. it does headers and footers, justification, indenting paragraphs, absolutely every formatting thing in a simpler, easier and more transparent way than Word. (As far as I know, with Word you still can't do "reveal codes" to work out a formatting error.)

Yes I know, the war is lost already. But I love Wordperfect nonetheless.

The Rudd Diversions

Mission complete: PM returns to his papers - Opinion - smh.com.au

Annabel Crabb explains Kevin Rudd's "make busy" tactics in Parliament. Now that they have been disclosed in detail, what's the bet that the PM will make some changes?