More than you needed to know

Pedophiles, Hebephiles, and Ephebophiles, Oh My: Erotic Age Orientation: Scientific American

Well, Michael Jackson would presumably not be pleased to see that his death has led to a detailed discussion of pedophilia in Scientific American.

The column is by Jesse Bering, who is gay and tends to spend a lot of time writing on issues of sexuality, always with a gay sympathetic viewpoint, of course.

I for one did not know there were so many possible names for sexual interest in those of certain ages:

If Jackson did fall outside the norm in his “erotic age orientation”—and we may never know if he did—he was almost certainly what’s called a hebephile, a newly proposed diagnostic classification in which people display a sexual preference for children at the cusp of puberty, between the ages of, roughly, 11 to 14 years of age. Pedophiles, in contrast, show a sexual preference for clearly prepubescent children. There are also ephebophiles (from ephebos, meaning “one arrived at puberty” in Greek), who are mostly attracted to 15- to 16-year-olds; teleiophiles (from teleios, meaning, “full grown” in Greek), who prefer those 17 years of age or older); and even the very rare gerontophile (from gerontos, meaning “old man” in Greek), someone whose sexual preference is for the elderly. So although child sex offenders are often lumped into the single classification of pedophilia, biologically speaking it’s a rather complicated affair. Some have even proposed an additional subcategory of pedophilia, “infantophilia,” to distinguish those individuals most intensely attracted to children below six years of age.

The column is of interest, as it notes there is currently controversy in the psychiatric profession as to whether hebephilia should be counted as a medical disorder.

In that context it talks about one of those studies where the male subjects' sexual response to certain stimuli is tested by "phallometric testing":

Because this technique measures penile blood volume changes, it’s seen as being a fairly objective index of sexual arousal to what’s being shown on the screen—which, for those attracted to children and young adolescents, the participant might verbally deny being attracted to.

I don't know: this type of study has always sounded to me like it could have a very large "false positive" rate. At least for younger men, there's going to be some instances during the test of "increased blood volume changes" which are not necessarily related to the particular stimulus.

Anyway, according to the research:

...it’s possible to distinguish empirically between a “true pedophile” and a hebephile using this technique, in terms of the age ranges for which men exhibited their strongest arousal. They also conclude that, based on the findings from this study, hebephilia “is relatively common compared with other forms of erotic interest in children.”

Bering makes the point that it probably makes evolutionary sense that older men should have some attraction to pubescent teenage girls. Yet, he does admit that the reason some older gay men are attracted to teenage boys is harder to fathom.

Anyhow, some comments following the article think that Bering is setting up excuses for those with an interest in sex with youngsters. I don't think he necessarily is, even when he points out that it seems that society will forgive the artistic type for their sexual activities with youth more readily than they will if the guy is an unkempt lower class loser with the same interests.

All interesting reading, in any event.

UPDATE: readers wishing to conduct their own phallometric test are recommended to visit here.

Not convinced

Technology Review: Carbon Trading on the Cheap

This article about the inadequacies in the US carbon trading scheme (yet to pass the Senate) probably doesn't make any new points that haven't been canvassed elsewhere, but it's not a bad summary.

I remain somewhat puzzled as to why so many economists think it's a great idea when the system in its trial European version showed so many problems.

Yet everyone from John Quiggin, Harry Clarke and even Monbiot (sorry, no time to provide the links yet) have come out saying it's a good thing overall. Monbiot's attitude is perhaps the oddest, as he spends the first half of the article completely rubbishing its ineffectiveness.

Still, the attitude seems to be "it's better to have at least the bones of a system in place, it can always be improved in the future". In other words, they think it is good to have the gesture, even if everyone knows it won't make a real difference. But what is the evidence that such improvements will ever be politically "do-able".

I am not convinced at all. As the Technology Review article says:

Surveys of business leaders suggest that they will not seriously reconsider the way they use energy until the price of carbon exceeds 30 euros per ton. The late Dennis Anderson, a professor of energy and environmental studies at London's Imperial College, concluded in 2007 that significant change will come only when carbon prices "move to the upper end" of a range that he put at 40 to 80 euros per ton. Anderson estimated that the 40-euro threshold would have to be met to make onshore wind farms and nuclear power a better investment than natural-gas or coal-fired power plants, while prices would have to approach 80 euros to make carbon capture and storage worthwhile. Even higher prices would be needed to make solar and offshore wind economical.

Economists at the International Energy Agency have recently calculated that holding global warming to a reasonable level would require an annual investment of $1.1 trillion per year. And it would require a $200 per ton price on carbon, said the IEA, to drive the necessary innovation.

And the current price:

Global recession is now undermining the second phase of the trading system, which started last year. The European Union set the cap for the 2008-2012 period at 6.5 percent lower than the cap for the trial period. Trading volumes initially exploded, according to Point Carbon. But the rally proved short-lived. The EUA price slid to an average of just 11 euros in the first quarter of 2009, as manufacturing slowed in the face of the recession.

The faltering trading scheme may be doing real harm.

11 euros is about $15 US dollars.

I know the ability of the market to determine the price depending on economic circumstances is sold as a benefit. But it's a funny kind of market if you have to keep fiddling with how it works to get it to realistically reflect the price that is really needed to drive investment in new power production.

As I said, not convinced...

Newly revealed hazard

In an Online Opinion article today, which is mainly a complaint about Catholic attitudes towards the Gardasil vaccine, this interesting bit of information appears:

Research presented this month at the American Society of Clinical Oncology has confirmed that HPV-16 does not only cause cervical cancer. It also causes throat cancer in both men and women. This means that Gardasil may play an important role in preventing cancer in male populations.

Researchers led by Farshid Dayyani at the MD Anderson Cancer Centre in Houston, Texas, found that people who tested positive to HPV-16 were 58 times more likely to have throat cancer compared to those who had no history of having the virus.

Research has also shown that the virus is transmitted through fellatio and cunnilingus, and that both men and women who have performed oral sex on five or more partners (of either sex) are at a significantly higher risk of developing throat cancer. So much so, that they are considered to be at more risk than those who smoke or drink heavily.

I'm surprised I haven't read this elsewhere. I need to use Google alerts more, although it would be slightly embarrassing to set one up for the terms needed to catch this story.

Slate ponders Japan

Why does Japan, the world's most efficient economy, have so many elevator operators and gas station attendants?

This article talks about one contradictory thing (amongst several, I suppose) that is very noticeable about Japan.

I like this joke in particular:

Late last week, I visited Toyota's astonishing Tsutsumi auto plant, near the car company's headquarters in Toyoda City. With a capacity of 400,000 vehicles per year—this is where the Prius is made—it's clean, bright, full of erector-set conveyer belts, and thinly staffed. The welding shop is like a scene from The Terminator—a thicket of robots extend their arms, moving large pieces of metal and blasting them with shots of heat. (The section where robots stamp "Obama '08" and "NPR" bumper stickers on the hybrid vehicles must have been around the corner.)

Plimer's oceans (and why salmon matter more than you think)

When it first came out, I was led to believe by a radio interview that Ian Plimer's "Heaven + Earth" did not address ocean acidification in detail.

It turns out that was a mistake. Someone at Marohasy's blog, where I occasionally enter the fray, pointed out that Plimer had a section of about 8 pages (from memory) on the topic.

Over the weekend, I was in Adelaide (travelogue post to come) and was able to browse quickly through Plimer's book in the Museum of South Australia bookshop. (!) Indeed, he does address the topic, but from my quick look, I am certain that a very thorough Fisking of that section could easily be done by anyone who has actually read things such as the Royal Society 2005 paper.

However, there's no way I am forking out $40 for the privilege of doing that.

If anyone knows how I could get my hands of those pages from the book, I would be happy to hear from you.

[Now for my attempt to be "fair and balanced", just like my favourite TV news network. (Well, I do like quite a lot of it.) It is definitely the case that popular media reporting of ocean acidification is increasingly using terms which suggest that the ocean will actually become acid in future. This is completely misleading and inaccurate, but it gives Plimer a straw man to complain about. (By the way, I could see from my quick browse of his book that Plimer spends a lot of time repeating what he briefly says in that link, namely, that the oceans can't go acidic. Yes, Ian, we know that.)

The scientific concern has never been that humans burning carbon can turn the oceans' .pH from the alkaline side of the scale into acid. Rather, the reduced alkalinity alone has sufficient effect on the ocean's carbonate chemistry to have effects on its ecology. There's no way the ocean is going to go completely sterile, but the worry is that pretty damned big changes are underway, as has happened in the past.*

I can understand Plimer and the skeptics being annoyed at the way the media is reporting it, but by the same token, it is disingenuous of him to spend time arguing how the oceans cannot "turn into acid" when that was never the issue.]

* I heard for the first time, in a recent nature documentary on the ABC about the salmon breeding cycle in North America, about how the massive number of salmon that die far inland after spawning are now believed to provide a lot of the nitrogen that the huge conifers there need to grow. So, it would seem a reasonable assumption that, if future acidification reduces salmon food and decreases that population, the coastal forests of North America are going to suffer in the long run too. It's a good example of why it is prudent not to just take the attitude that the ocean ecology will sort itself out and we don't have to worry about it.

Back, but....

I'm back, but slowly circling the blog, waiting for inspiration.

There seems to be a fair bit of blogging abandonment by conservative Aussies lately, but my own idiosyncratic corner of opinion (conservative yet taking CO2 seriously, an abiding distrust of horses and cats but a fondness for rats, making sure that the LHC really isn't going to blow up Switzerland) is so certain never to be replicated anywhere else, I feel an obligation to protect this endangered cyber-thing.

End of financial year madness

I get busy this time of year. Back on about 30 June.

First there was the Urban Sombrero, now..

Urban Camping by import.export

This would have to be the silliest design concept I have seen in a long time.

(And imagine being in the top ten during a thunderstorm. Lightning, please hit me.)

Another dint in the "aborigines lived in harmony with nature for 40,000 years" story

New evidence in giant roo extinction

Researchers have found more evidence that hunting by humans may have caused the extinction of the giant kangaroo.

The giant kangaroo measured two metres in height and was wiped out about 40,000 years ago.

It was previously thought that climate change and land burn-off led to the extinction of the mammal, but researchers at Flinders University say this is not so.

Comparisons noted

AIDS denial: A lethal delusion - health - 22 June 2009 - New Scientist

Here's an interesting article on the history of HIV/AIDS denialism.

The story does have some parallels to global warming skepticism: there are a few scientists out of thousands who believe they have identified the truth, and that everyone else is wrong and just won't admit it because of self interest. Their work is not usually directly in the field of HIV research, rather they critique the work of the "believers".

As I have also said in the past, skeptics should remember the number of engineers and other science types who are 9/11 conspiracists.

And I make this post with my usual reminder that my position is that, even if warming is not proceeding at a dangerous pace, ocean acidification alone is reason to reduce CO2.

Puffed up outrage, indeed

OK, so Malcolm Turnbull over-reached. But, after seeing Kevin Rudd and him on 7.30 Report last night, I still come away thinking that Rudd's counter over-reach does his image no great help either.

What is wrong with Rudd? Annabel Crabb called his performance "puffed up outrage", as indeed was, but it did seem to me that Rudd was also taking it excessively personally. (Maybe that is an artefact of repeated performances during the day: pretend something long enough and you can really start to believe it.) It had something of a "glass jaw" air about it to me: how dare Turnbull call for my resignation [left unsaid: just because a public servant felt he was under pressure from my office to help someone special to me.]

Turnbull, on the other hand, did not seem to me to be deathly worried about it killing his leadership. He even managed to smile once or twice. (I take it from Turnbull's demeanour that he is not worried about the prospect that his own former adviser created the email, which was the rumour reported yesterday.)

Turnbull clearly comes across as having a barrister's style, which can be off putting at times, but elements of a likeable character seem to come through occasionally. As for Rudd, I still don't think anyone outside of his family likes him. (I guess people could say that Howard did not have seem to have a big circle of friends either, but I would still put him down as having a much more genuine public persona than Rudd.)

I think it was clear that even Kerry O'Brien knew Rudd was over-reacting, and for once, Kerry seemed a tad sharp in his handling of him.

Michelle Grattan's commentary on this seems pretty reasonable. (Short version: Turnbull's attack was not without justification as of 3 days ago.)

Of course, Turnbull's future probably does depend on more revelations about the origin of the email, and whether there were any grounds on the face of it to indicate fraud.

UPDATE: I saw Skynews Agenda program on this last night, with its regular commentators Grahame Morris (old Howard chief of staff) and Bruce Hawker (don't know who he worked for, but he's the Labor guy.)

I am sure it is not just my conservative bias that leads me to say this, but I have always found that Bruce Hawker is a complete bore as a commentator as he only ever recites the current Labor spin. You know exactly what he will say, and he will never, ever, concede harm to Labor in anything they do.

Morris, on the other hand, does show independence of thought, and is always much more open to admitting harm to his side of politics. He comes across as much more than a mere mouthpiece for the party he used to work for.

Late night wars

Who will have the final say in the clash of America’s TV chat kings?

According to The Independent, Conan O'Brien has lost ratings badly on The Tonight Show.

I haven't seen much of it, but from what I did see, I thought he was making the transition pretty well. Certainly much better than Jimmy Fallon, who I think is hopeless in the O'Briens former, later night, role.

I thought this segment from a couple of weeks ago was pretty funny. (Part 2 is here.)

Oh....

Economist puts dent in optimism: bigger crash is coming - ABC News

I must admit, while I understand little about economics in detail, my common sense take on it all makes me share this guy's skepticism that the worst is over.

Interesting photo

U.S. Fortifies Hawaii to Meet Threat From Korea - WSJ.com

Have a look at the photo in the article of a Boeing floating radar. Looks very suitable as a Bond villain's lair, I think.

Swiss suicide service - open for all

Suicide clinic challenged over patients who could have lived 'for decades' | Society | The Guardian

Questionable fashion

In Venice, Peter Greenaway Takes Veronese’s Figures Out to Play - NYTimes.com

Well what d'ya know, Peter Greenaway is still working, although now (thank heavens) it's only on an arty video installation, and not a movie. The article is perhaps most notable, however, for the photo of Greenaway wearing what appears to be a large pink towel as a scarf or something. Very odd.

While we're talking fashion (and, quite possibly, this is the first time this blog has ever done so,) the NYT also has an article on "innovative" men's fashion from Korea, yet it has no photos. (It does mention a blog called "Your boyhood", which seems a good name to look up at work if you want to be suspected as a pedophile.)

Well that's odd, I just looked at that blog for you, and it features more women than men. Well, I think they are women, anyway.

Finally, David Mitchell has some funny things to say about fashion (and controversy in England over wheelie bins - of all things) in his piece in The Guardian.

Cool space suit

Space Suits Past and Future | Space Exploration | Air & Space Magazine

If you want relief from politics, and you're a secret space geek, you could much worse than read the above interview with an 80 year old space suit designer who is still working. (Make sure you go to the video gallery link too and watch him put his 1960's design super flexible suit through its paces. Unfortunately, the suit never flew.)

The ute, the car dealer, his pals and an email

Tim Blair has all the details covered, but here are some questions unanswered:

* what exactly are the Federal Police going to be investigating if there is no "hard copy" of an email to produce? That someone told News Limited and/or Turnbull that there was an email? Why would the journalist even co-operate in identifying his source? Seems to me to another clear case of a dead-end investigation before it even starts.

* If it is a fake email, what are the odds that it would be faked and then have its existence supported by Godwin? Very peculiar.

* will it come out that (when poor old Godwin Grech is questioned by the Auditor General or the AFP) that he may have mistaken a fax for an email?

* where's the outrage from those like the Larvatus Prodeo crowd over the clear obstructionism of Godwin's boss in the Senate hearing? (See Insiders for compilation of that when they get their video up.) If that had happened under Howard, we would be hearing about corruption of the public service for weeks.

Instead, most LP commenters are running completely with the Rudd line that it is Turnbull who must resign. No curiosity about Godwin's recollection lining up with a "fake" document at all.

* I still suspect that Rudd's overly intense denial in Parliament when this originally came up is due to him knowing that he office may have made unofficial queries regarding Grant, and his relief when they confirmed they had not done it in writing.

Good news for men

Prostate cancer victims cured with ipilimumab - Times Online

TWO men with advanced, inoperable prostate cancer have dramatically recovered after being treated with an experimental drug. Both are cancer-free and have returned to normal life.

The patients, Rodger Nelson and Fructuoso Solano-Revuelta, took part in US trials of a drug called ipilimumab. The researchers were so excited by the men’s recovery that they released details before completion of the tests, which involved 108 men in all.

Before treatment at the Mayo Clinic, Minnesota, both men had aggressive tumours and neither was expected to survive.

How to make your guests sick

US couple to have world's first weightless wedding - New Scientist

I guess we'll be seeing footage of this on the news soon.

UPDATE: the wedding photo can be seen here.