Click here to support the Daily Grail for as little as $US1 per month on Patreon

News Briefs 10-12-2007

Another day’s ride… for your mind.

  • Anthropologists say Neanderthal-human hybrid is a myth.
  • Roman ruins cast surprising new light on a trip to the doctor.
  • Voyager 1 and Voyager 2 probes on greatest journeys yet.
  • Jeb Corliss wants to fly — not the way the Wright brothers wanted to fly, but the way we fly in our dreams.
  • Subliminal smells can play a key role in whether or not we like somebody.
  • What do dark chocolate, sex, counting in fives whilst brushing your teeth with your wrong hand and the Rolling Stones have in common?
  • Neurons in the frontal lobe may be responsible for rational decision-making.
  • Long-eared jerboa finally caught on camera.
  • Global warming already threatening world’s plants and animals.
  • Ancient flood brought Gulf Stream to a halt and triggered climate cooling.
  • Common antibacterial chemical in soaps alters hormonal activity in rats and in human cells in the lab – and does so by a previously unreported mechanism.
  • Mount Shasta is believed by some to be a frequent site of UFO landings, the doorway to another dimension, and prime Bigfoot territory.
  • On a mission to find Bigfoot near Lake Tahoe: Parts one and two.
  • Your best chance of spotting a UFO in the US may well be in North Bergen, Hudson County, NJ.
  • So what’s in the classified UFO stash?
  • We know who drew these giant shapes in Nasca’s desert — but why?
  • The ‘Bermuda Triangle’ started with a lost wing.
  • New Worlds of Shamanism.
  • Robots Among Us: If robotics technology now stands where computing did in the ’70s, what can we expect in the future?
  • First look: Whip cracks over new ‘Indiana Jones’ movie.
  • Who-whoo’s that stowaway?
  • Peyote, the hallucinogenic cactus which inspired gonzo journalist Hunter S. Thompson and an entire generation of hippies, is in danger of disappearing. A rare and unusual harvest.

Quote of the Day:

We live together, we act on, and react to, one another; but always and in all circumstances we are by ourselves. The martyrs go hand in hand into the arena; they are crucified alone. Embraced, the lovers desperately try to fuse their insulated ecstasies into a single self-transcendence; in vain. By its very nature every embodied spirit is doomed to suffer and enjoy in solitude. Sensations, feelings, insights, fancies – all these are private and, except through symbols and at second hand, incommunicable. We can pool information about experiences, but never the experiences themselves. From family to nation, every human group is a society of island universes.

Aldous Huxley, The Doors of Perception.

  1. Missed this one…
    http://icecap.us/index.php/go/joes-blog/southern_hemisphere_ice_cover_remains_well_above_normal

    In addition to this story, the U.S. has been settings several records for cold winter weather and snowfall already this year. Of course, such things are the fault of global warming. And Bush/Cheney.

    Italy, Spain and Japan were recently “fined” for not meeting the requirements of Kyoto, which they foolishly signed on to, for a total of 33 billion dollars. Welcome to socialist wealth redistribution, the purpose of Kyoto. Follow the money (if you can). Someone is getting VERY wealthy. I think I’ll start selling “credits” too.

    http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601101&sid=akEM_x0ximjk&refer=japan

    Australia, with their new Leftist PM, vowed to sign on to Kyoto. But the realities of actually being in charge and being accountable for his county’s economic well-being is giving him pause. Perhaps he’s seeing what a fiscal shakedown and scam it all is.

    http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2007%5C12%5C04%5Cstory_4-12-2007_pg4_7

    But then….

    http://www.news24.com/News24/World/News/0,,2-10-1462_2236186,00.html

    1. Missing articles
      As the article I linked to a couple of weeks ago said:

      “Predicting the average temperature of the Earth in a given number of years is, at least arguably, much easier than predicting the precise number of hurricanes next year, or for that matter, the precise temperature (in tenths of a degree) at 4:57 PM tomorrow. The reason: the planet’s average temperature over a long period of time is not impacted by short-period, butterfly-effect type variables in the way that shorter-term forecasts are.

      “Such arguments are unsound because they confuse climate, which is comprised of long-term trends, with weather, which chronicles individual events.

      “…a global-warming skeptic who claims today that 2007 disproves global warming is leaving himself open to the argument, if 2008 is an active season, that ‘08 proves global warming is real after all. The more honest (and strategically sound) course, for both sides, is to discuss global warming on its actual merits, and not obsess over minor year-to-year variations that tell us very little, if anything, about long-term trends.”

      Seems to me, global warming skeptics might better reinforce their arguments with material from articles like this one (for instance), and from this site’s comments as well.

      Your first link wouldn’t load for me. I finally got it to load by shortening the url, and adding 3 w’s – http://www.icecap.us/index.php/go/joes-blog – but with 6mb cable bb, loading still took over 4 minutes, and even then, the photos weren’t visible. If you visit there often, you must have one heckuva pipe. 😉

      >>”Italy, Spain and Japan were recently “fined” for not meeting the requirements of Kyoto, which they foolishly signed on to, for a total of 33 billion dollars. …Follow the money (if you can).”

      I’m also curious to know what organization these fines are paid to, and what that org. does with the money. Does anyone have time to do a search for that info?

      I have to admit, I’m far more curious as to who owns the Fed, and thus who’s been skimming that 5% cream (approximately) off the top of the whole US economy for the past 90 years or so. I’m sure their take makes that 33bn in Kyoto fines look like the chump change you’d typically find under someone’s sofa cushions.

      Kat

        1. Yes, Just sit on your ass Anonymous
          And let the world go to hell. Do nothing. That will really help Anonymous. Watch the world go bye, bye…
          Be it mankind or a natural cycle. Or both. We need to make changes is our lives. And how this planet is used and abused. As I’ve always said. its not how much you have, its how you use what you’ve got.

    2. And you missed what GW actually means
      [quote=Anonymous]
      Australia, with their new Leftist PM…
      [/quote]

      Kevin Rudd is on record as saying he’s not a socialist and never will be. For all your proselytizing about real science, Anonymous, you’re heavily biased. Might want to apply your scientific objectivity to politics.

      By the way, Global Warming produces more extreme weather patterns — hot and cold. A rise of just one or two degrees celsius will produce more extreme drought, floods, heatwaves and … yep, coldsnaps. That’s fact — whether it’s caused by human industrial activity, or is natural, is another argument. But saying that the recent blizzards across the USA disproves the world is getting warmer puts you at the same level of intellect as the Beavis & Buttheads at the local 24-hour convenience store. It’s an argument with no basis in fact and proves you don’t pay attention to what GW is about.

      Take the subtropical storm that has just hit Puerto Rico (the news hasn’t been updated on the ‘net, it’s happening as I type. Also, the link won’t give you a rash, Anon). It’s extremely rare in December because such storms need warm seas. So what does that tell you? Oceanographers have already shown that currents beginning in Antarctica and extending to the North Atlantic are almost one degree warmer than the average over the past decade. That’s enough to make weather more erratic. That is GW.

      1. Ah, to be of such faith and piety.
        Kevin Rudd is on record as saying he’s not a socialist

        Yep, Hillary says that too.

        and never will be. For all your proselytizing about real science, Anonymous, you’re heavily biased.

        Yep, I am. As are you. As is any thoughtful person with an opinion.

        Might want to apply your scientific objectivity to politics.

        Been there, done that. I’ve drawn my conclusions. Somehow I think you have too.

        By the way, Global Warming produces more extreme weather patterns — hot and cold.

        Sure it does. Convenient, huh?!?

        A rise of just one or two degrees celsius will produce more extreme drought, floods, heatwaves and … yep, coldsnaps. That’s fact — whether it’s caused by human industrial activity, or is natural, is another argument.

        Oh, now that’s just plain politcially incorrect. According to the GW faithful, it’s NOT another arguement. BTW, by all accounts the temp has risen 1-2 degress celsius in the last hundred years and the world has not come to an end. In fact, over a long term analysis global weather is no worse than it was two hundred, eight hundred or two thousand years ago.

        But saying that the recent blizzards across the USA disproves the world is getting warmer puts you at the same level of intellect as the Beavis & Buttheads at the local 24-hour convenience store.

        Colorful. Props to you for coming up with that one! What does Beavis & Butthead say about proving global warming based on inaccurate hurricane predictions, hot weather in July, cold weather in December or polor bears sitting on a melting ice berg (in summer)?

        It’s an argument with no basis in fact and proves you don’t pay attention to what GW is about.

        Actually, my point is that I, and others, are paying far more attention to what GW is really all about than most of the devoted faithful.

        Take the subtropical storm that has just hit Puerto Rico (the news hasn’t been updated on the ‘net, it’s happening as I type. Also, the link won’t give you a rash, Anon). It’s extremely rare in December because such storms need warm seas. So what does that tell you?

        Shall I consult Beavis & Butthead? I’ll tell them you sent me!

        Define “extemely rare”.

        Your side is desperatly hoping for another terrible storm to come along and destroy a city, just so you can claim some sort of victory. Sad. You should be happy that the season was mild, not disappointed. After all, by your logic this relatively weak hurricane year PROVES GW just as much as a really bad season would have!

        Oceanographers have already shown that currents beginning in Antarctica and extending to the North Atlantic are almost one degree warmer than the average over the past decade. That’s enough to make weather more erratic. That is GW.

        Actually, that’s a one degree increase in a decade. That proves that climate fluctuates. That’s all. Any school kid knows that the climate fluctuates when he learns the names of the seasons. It certiantly does not prove GW as the GW Brownshirts define it. Declaring a nanosecond in time of Earth’s climate history as proof of anything is religious fervor and nothing more.

        Try this link. And it’s supporting links.
        http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=c9554887-802a-23ad-4303-68f67ebd151c

        1. climate or weather?
          [quote=Anonymous]Actually, that’s a one degree increase in a decade. That proves that climate fluctuates. That’s all. Any school kid knows that the climate fluctuates when he learns the names of the seasons.[/quote]

          It may seem like pure semantics, but seasonal changes are not climate, that’s weather. Weather changes can fluctuate from day to day and are currently impossible to predict, while climate models describing changes from decade to decade or century to century are much more consistent, although of course, FAR from perfectly accurate.

          I agree that we should be tankful the hurricane season was a mild one, although that may not seem true to the people that suffered from a lot of really bad storms this year in some parts of the world.
          —–
          It’s not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me…
          It’s all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!

          Red Pill Junkie

        2. Head in the sand
          I really don’t see Hillary’s relevance, Anoymous.

          A subtropical storm hitting Puerto Rico in December is rare, they only occur when there are warm ocean temperatures in the region. They’re cold in December. So you do math. Climatologists all agree on that one, regardless of their belief in GW.

          Here’s my question to you, Anonymous. You don’t believe in GW, so do you think we can continue our industrial ways without having to worry it’s irrevocably harming the environment and ourselves?

          If you didn’t know how to quote my posts, I’d swear you were an Anti-GW Bot getting past TDG’s spam blocker.

      2. Don’t panic yet
        [quote=Rick MG]
        Take the subtropical storm that has just hit Puerto Rico (the news hasn’t been updated on the ‘net, it’s happening as I type. Also, the link won’t give you a rash, Anon). It’s extremely rare in December because such storms need warm seas. So what does that tell you? Oceanographers have already shown that currents beginning in Antarctica and extending to the North Atlantic are almost one degree warmer than the average over the past decade. That’s enough to make weather more erratic. That is GW.[/quote]

        That’s a big leap you’re taking there, Rick. I’ll let it go without a reference, but a rise in temperature in the North Atlantic doesn’t indicate Global-anything. Check-out Anon’s link to Antarctica. The temperature there is getting much colder and the ice-field is extending while growing thicker. What we have is variations in weather.

        Also, the tropical disturbance in Puerto Rico doesn’t prove much.
        December sees a named tropical system on average once every nine years, Franklin said. For instance, in 2005, Tropical Storm Zeta formed on Dec. 30. and survived through Jan. 6. In 2003, Tropical Storm Odette emerged on Dec. 4 and three days later Tropical Storm Peter developed.

        If the system currently in the Atlantic becomes a tropical storm, “it would be rare, but it certainly would not be unheard of,” he said.

        “He” is Barry Baxter of the National Weather Service in Miami quoted here.

        That tropical disturbance doesn’t have a name because it is not a tropical storm or a hurricane.

        Bill

        ************

        Popular opinion is the greatest lie in the world.
        Thomas Carlyle

        1. You might want to check your math.
          One every 9 years? Yet the three storms, plus this new one making 4, makes 4 storms in less then 5 years?
          Here in Oregon we were hit by the remains of 3 typhoons last week. Waves were some of the highest recorded. Over waves recorded last Nov of 06 storm, which was a hurricane , but there was not a way to name it (through federal agencies), but it was a hurricane(had an eye, and hurricane strength winds. Local called it Hurricanewhatchamecallit This shows increased warming in the Pacific too! Bill you are wrong again!

          1. Focus on comprehension
            Bladerunner, your lack of comprehension is truly amazing. The 9-years span was a quote from James Franklin of the National Hurricane Center in Miami-Dade County in Flordia. The quote was in the article that I linked but you didn’t understand. Find someone who can read and have them explain it to you.

            My point was that storms in December are rare but they do occur. Weather anomalies occur often. You just made my point for me. You need to concentrate on what you read.

            Bill

            ************

            Popular opinion is the greatest lie in the world.
            Thomas Carlyle

          2. Bill, was his average placed over the last 30-40+ years?
            Then it makes sense. But then he’s manipulating numbers too. Just as you’ve accused the GW people of doing. I did read what you wrote, the quote, and the link. And there have been more storms named in 2003-2007 then normal/average in the after season. And then there is the West Coast. Which does not have a naming system at all. And could have named 2-3 storms just in the last 2 seasons. Just because you claim a point made, does not make it made. Bill your so busy being right, you can’t see when you may be wrong. And may have be reading to much into the quote too…

          3. A Note
            There have been a couple of things said in this thread by different people which really aren’t acceptable. I would suggest people take the time to review their posts before hitting ‘Post Comment’ in future. As I’ve said previously, if you can’t talk with respect, don’t talk at all.

            Kind regards,
            Greg
            ——————————————-
            You monkeys only think you’re running things

  2. Common antibacterial chemical in soaps alters hormonal activity
    Ah! Now I can imagine a set of new one liners for hyper-hormonal persons:

    When the girl friend is prone to crying:
    – You see, its not good for your health to shower more than once a week.

    When the guy is becoming obnoxious:
    – I bet you use that strong man soap thing.

    and explains certain requests too:
    – Hey, go wash yourself first!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Mobile menu - fractal