Search
Recent comments
- 10 years later....
5 min 19 sec ago - a peculiar hairdo....
34 min 50 sec ago - the end is near.....
2 hours 12 min ago - friendly fire....
2 hours 20 min ago - enough is enough....
5 hours 40 min ago - well-groomed nails....
7 hours 45 min ago - dead boots.....
8 hours 34 min ago - warned....
8 hours 54 min ago - small mercies....
9 hours 59 min ago - sympathies...
10 hours 5 min ago
Democracy Links
Member's Off-site Blogs
professor rattus of porkie university...
Something is seriously amiss when the former prime minister, John Howard, asserts that parents should be concerned about "one-sided science" being taught in our schools.
Leave aside that Howard was endorsing a new children's book on climate change by Professor Ian Plimer, a geologist whose sceptical representations of climate science for adults seem driven more by a conservative ideology.
Of more concern is the misguided notion that science is somehow like politics or the law, with a left and right, or prosecution and defence. Scientific debate can be a bit like that at times when people differ on the interpretation of data but, as the saying goes, everyone is entitled to their own opinions but no one is entitled to their own facts.
It is entering dangerous territory to suggest that teachers should give equal time in science classes to the views of a minority when a vast, consistent and overwhelming body of evidence suggests otherwise. Creationism, for example, deserves no more than a passing mention in a science curriculum teaching evolution.
We should also avoid falling into the same snare that faces the media in reporting on climate science – by presenting ''both sides'' it gives and perpetuates a false balance that greatly distorts the relative merits of arguments put by a few loud and persistent naysayers.
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/science-is-about-facts-not-ideology-20111215-1ow85.html#ixzz1icwA12BX
- By Gus Leonisky at 6 Jan 2012 - 9:02am
- Gus Leonisky's blog
- Login or register to post comments
whatizname again?
A deterioration in the memory and thinking powers of the oldest volunteers might be expected, but in fact the researchers, led by Archana Singh-Manoux from the Centre for Research in Epidemiology and Population Health in France and University College London in the UK, found that the brains of even the youngest were already on the slide. Over the decade, there was a 3.6% decline in the mental reasoning of men and of women aged 45 to 49. The process appeared to have speeded up in the older age groups. Men aged 65 to 70 have a decline of 9.6% while women fared a little better, at 7.4%.
It matters, say the scientists, because those whose brains appear to deteriorate fastest may be more likely to develop dementia in later life – and because if there is any chance of slowing that process, those at highest risk may need to be detected and treated at an early stage, before Alzheimer's or another form of dementia becomes apparent.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/jan/06/memory-loss-begins-at-45-says-study
21st-century media and stone age minds'
A fascination with other people's lives is encoded in our DNA, writes LYNNE DWYER.
Did you stop to watch, even briefly, the Kardashian circus when it was in town? Or pick up on the tweets from Warnie about where he was taking Liz for breakfast? Such celebrity gossip is much more than a fascination with the rich and famous. It is an in-demand social skill that picks up on our intense curiosity about the lives of others, a trait evolutionary psychologists say is deeply encoded in our DNA.
The rise of social media taps in to our innate nosiness and creates an ersatz intimacy with people who are, in reality, strangers.
An American professor of evolutionary psychology, Frank McAndrew, says celebrity gossip is ''nothing more than the inevitable outcome of the collision between 21st-century media and Stone Age minds''.
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/celebrity/gossip-is-good-for-you-20120105-1plmu.html#ixzz1il4PyjLD
I spewed during the first five minutes of the Kardistonian circus and stopped the vacuous carnage — and I'm as interested in Warnie's sex life as much as that of the fruit flies that rots my apples and pears... I swat them with a wet towel when they're at it. The rich and famous are only there in the rich and famous media pages because journalists and media owners are too lazy to chase real news, so they spend a lot of ink dropping our nose in the fact we're not famous and rich... Ugly. And while our society as a whole is getting more and more obese, the media use the vehicle of beautiful rich bums to tell us which diet to fall for this week.
Idiots... I wouldn't be surprised if this "evolutionary psychologist" is pulling our leg to see how much it rings...
He is quite right on the the rock-age minds...
lying to young minds...
The Institute of Public Affairs, a lobby group funded by big business, miners and the tobacco industry, is sending schools misleading and inaccurate books about climate change. Frances Quinn from the UNE reports.
Two recently published books suggest that the public – and school children in particular – are being fed lies about environmental issues such as climate change. The books – “How to Get Expelled from School: A guide to climate change for pupils, parents & punters” by Ian Plimer and “Little Green Lies: An expose of twelve environmental myths” by Jeff Bennett – clearly demonstrate how important it is to have a scientifically literate Australia. The distorted and selectively reported science in these books highlights some of the challenges that Australian teachers face in teaching science, and how important it is that they are supported in this task.
The Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency (DCCEE) has condemned Plimer’s book as misleading and inaccurate. However the free market think tank the Institute of Public Affairs (IPA) isapparently sending copies of Plimer’s misleading fringe book to Australian schools. The Executive Director of the IPA John Roskam is, incidentally, on the editorial board of the publishing house of these two books.
Plimer’s book tells school students that they are being “conned” and “fed propaganda” if their teacher “waffles” on about issues such as human-induced global warming, sea level rise and the IPCC. He deplores this as “environmental activism”. This is despite the overwhelming evidence for human induced climate change accepted by a vast range of climate scientists and scientific organisations.
read more: http://www.independentaustralia.net/2012/environment/how-the-ipa-feeds-kids-lies-about-climate-change/