I am fed up with people’s unending numb-skull suggestions on education reform, and I’m about to offend some people in that regard.
Check your twitter feed, your facebook streams, your other snorking tools over a period of time and you’ll see the occasional comment on either what is wrong with our system of education, or what can be done to fix some problem or another. If you’ve got nothing along these lines in your recent snorking streams, try an experiment: Put up a facebook post, or send out to the twittosphere a tweet that brings up something about the education system. With that bait, you’ll see what is annoying me.
Continue reading I am fed up with all this talk about education reform. Coming from you.
Ð?Ð¾Ð²Ñ?Ð´Ð¾Ð¼Ð»ÐµÐ½Ð½Ñ Ñ? Ð±Ð»Ð¾Ð·Ñ? Ñ Ð½Ð°Ð¿Ð¸ÑÐ°Ð² Ð´Ð»Ñ 10 Ñ?Ð¸ÑÑÑ? Ð¿Ñ?Ð°Ñ?Ñ?Ð², Ð· Ð¿Ð¸Ñ?Ð°Ð½Ñ? Ð¼Ñ?Ð³Ñ?Ð°Ñ?Ñ?Ñ?, Ð±Ñ?Ð² Ð¿ÐµÑ?ÐµÐ²ÐµÐ´ÐµÐ½Ð¸Ð¹ Ð±ÐµÑ?ÐµÐ·Ð½Ñ Ruszkowski Ð½Ð° Ñ?ÐºÑ?Ð°Ñ?Ð½ÑÑ?ÐºÐ¸Ð¹ Langauge, Ñ? Ð´Ð¾ÑÑ?Ñ?Ð¿Ð½Ð¸Ð¹ Ð´Ð»Ñ Ð?Ð°Ñ, Ñ?Ð¾Ð± Ð¿Ñ?Ð¾Ñ?Ð¸Ñ?Ð°Ñ?Ð¸ Ñ?Ñ?Ñ?: Ð?Ð¸Ñ?Ð°Ð½Ð½Ñ Ð¿Ñ?Ð¾ Ð¼Ñ?Ð³Ñ?Ð°Ñ?Ñ?Ñ?
Ð¯ ÑÐ¿Ð¾Ð´Ñ?Ð²Ð°Ñ?ÑÑ, Ñ?Ð¾ Ð²Ð¸ Ð»Ñ?Ð±Ð¸Ñ?Ðµ Ñ?Ð¸Ñ?Ð°Ñ?Ð¸ Ð¹Ð¾Ð³Ð¾ ÑÑ?Ñ?Ð»Ñ?ÐºÐ¸, ÑÐºÑ?Ð»Ñ?ÐºÐ¸ Ñ ÑÐ¿Ð¾Ð´Ð¾Ð±Ð°Ð»Ð¾ÑÑ Ð¿Ð¸ÑÐ°Ñ?Ð¸ Ð¹Ð¾Ð³Ð¾! Ð¯ Ð½Ðµ Ð·Ð½Ð°Ñ?, ÑÐºÑ?Ð»Ñ?ÐºÐ¸ Ð·Ð°Ð´Ð¾Ð²Ð¾Ð»ÐµÐ½Ð½Ñ Ð¿ÐµÑ?ÐµÐºÐ»Ð°Ð´Ñ? Ñ?Ðµ Ð±Ñ?Ð»Ð¾, Ð¾Ð´Ð½Ð°Ñ?Ðµ! Ð?ÑÐºÑ?Ñ?Ð¼Ð¾ Ð?ÐµÑ?ÐµÐ·Ð½Ñ.
This is important, please have a look:
Climate researchers are in need of immediate legal assistance to prevent their private correspondence from being exposed to Chris Horner and the American Tradition Institute who are using Freedom of Information (FOI) to harass researchers. (For context please see: http://wapo.st/pQg0JC and http://wapo.st/oiua7V) The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) has recently stated: “the sharing of research data is vastly different from unreasonable, excessive Freedom of Information Act requests for personal information and voluminous data that are then used to harass and intimidate scientists.” The complete AAAS statement is available at http://bit.ly/p04sIq
Many scientists do not enjoy the institutional support necessary to fight attacks from well-funded science-denying groups. We need to help scientists to defend themselves. If ATI succeeds in this case, it would set a terrible precedent for scientists at public institutions across the country. But if they are turned back here, it will send a clear message to climate deniers that scientists are willing to stand up to them and fight for their rights.
A donation button has been set up at http://profmandia.wordpress.com/2011/09/09/donation/ So far we have collected almost $2000 of the $10,000 needed to file the legal papers. This fundraising will be an ongoing effort so the $10,000 is our immediate short-term goal. A gift of $25, $100, or more will go a long way to ensure that our top scientists can continue their important work without the constant harassment designed to slow them down.
I also strongly encourage you to share this information with your colleagues or others who would be interested in contributing . Any questions can be directed to me by phone or email. I will be keeping a private record of contributors.
Scott A. Mandia, Professor – Physical Sciences
T-202 Smithtown Sciences Bldg.
Suffolk County Community College
533 College Rd.
Selden, NY 11784
CLICK HERE TO SEE THE ORIGINAL AND TO HELP!!!
And please pass this information around. Thanks.
Please read and pass on.
Climate researchers are in need of immediate legal assistance to prevent their private correspondence from being exposed to Chris Horner and the American Tradition Institute who are using Freedom of Information (FOI) to harass researchers. (For context please see: http://wapo.st/pQg0JC and http://wapo.st/oiua7V) The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) has recently stated: â€œthe sharing of research data is vastly different from unreasonable, excessive Freedom of Information Act requests for personal information and voluminous data that are then used to harass and intimidate scientists.â€ The complete AAAS statement is available at http://bit.ly/p04sIq
Please visit the site Scott A. Mandia has set up and donate a few bucks after you read his post.
The latest film by Emmy Award-winning filmmaker Greta Schiller â€œNo Dinosaurs in Heavenâ€ will be screened September 26 at 6:30 pm at the Black Box Theater on the Healdsburg High School campus.
Schillerâ€™s film explores the issue of creationists who earn science degrees in order to present their anti-evolution beliefs in the classroom. Schiller is also a science educator and came up with the idea for this film when one of her graduate school biology professors commented that evolution was a â€œtheoryâ€ he didnâ€™t believe in.
The movie will be shown in conjunction with the National Center for Science Education in Oakland, a non-profit organization whose stated goal is â€œpromoting and defending the teaching of evolution in our public schools,â€ said Robert Luhn, the groupâ€™s director of communications.
If you get to see the play, write write up a short review and we’ll post it here!
Andrea Kuszewski is a behavior therapist and researcher who has written an interesting guest post on The Intersection.
Can neuroscience provide evidence for a liberal and conservative thinking style?
It may seem like a stretch to say that one could predict whether you lean left or right by looking at a brain scanâ€”no questions asked, no opinions voicedâ€”purely based on your neuroanatomy. However, this might not be too far from realityâ€”at least insofar as predicting thinking style, which has been shown to be somewhat distinct based on party association.
And no, neuroscience determining something about your politics or other ways of thinking does not mean that genes determine how you vote!
Anyway, have a look at the original.
Dan Satterfield further analyzes the recent Yale survey which shows a) if you remove Teabaggers form the Republican Party you get a more sensible group of Republicans and b) if you look just at the teabaggers you get, well, something rather scary.
Read about it here. The bottom line is this: When asked, in reference to evaluating relevant policy and science and stuff, if you “need any more information” to make an informed choice, the teabaggers say “no” in the majority, while other groups, even Republicans, are much more likely to desire to know more.
That’s my story and I’m sticking to it.
I know these are three totally unconnected items but I wanted to point you towards them quick before Huxley and I head off for the park:
Continue reading American Cancer Society Suks; Female Orgasms are Fer Real; Fox News Bites
Why is it so hard to understand a commonplace thing like orgasms?
I think I know why science does not understand the female orgasm. It is because science excels when it breaks free of context, history, human complexities and anthropology, but when a topic requires one to grasp context, history, human complexities and anthropology, then science, especially the hard sciences, can fall short. Also, the nature of the female orgasm is a comparative question, but human sexuality is highly (but not entirely) derived; It is difficult to make a sensible graph or table comparing aspects of sexuality across mammals that usefully includes humans. It is not as impossible as making such a graph or table with “language” (which is entirely unique to humans) but still, it is difficult.
There is another problem as well. Female orgasm is actually a lot like male orgasm, and probably serves the same evolutionary role with one small but important difference. But, that one small but important difference, the ejaculation of seminal fluid by males, blinds researchers to any other function of male orgasms. Seminal fluid is distracting. Male ejaculation and female ovulation are rough homologues, but entirely different in their physiology and timing. Were it the case that female ovulation could only happen together with orgasm … well, the human world would be a very different place but at least science would not be fumbling around in search of an answer for this enigma.
Recent research on female orgasm
The reason I bring any of this up is because of a paper1, just published, that makes the claim that the “byproduct” theory of female orgasms is unsupported. So, I’d like to take a moment to explain the byproduct theory, to explain why this paper does not really address it let alone refute it, and then we’ll get back to the question of what female orgasms really are for. The byproduct theory will not survive this discussion.
The byproduct theory originates with the following observations:
Continue reading Coming to terms with the female orgasm