Not a little change...not a change in routine...more of a lifestyle change...a whole lifestyle change. Hubby and I are leaving our outskirts-of-a-major-city-living for outskirts-of-a-minor-town-living.
Remember when I surprised Hubby by telling him I quit my job? Well, this time I really did it! One more month and the packing up begins.
Dot Earth with Andrew C. Revkin has inspirational music for choosing to change. Follow the link and make sure you PLAY to hear him sing his own composition entitled, "Liberated Carbon".
Sunday, June 27, 2010
Sunday, June 13, 2010
What Is Life Coming To?
Scientists May Have Created "The First Synthetic Cell."
ABC World News (5/20, story 4, 2:30, Sawyer) reported, "World renowned geneticist Craig Venter has been trying to unlock the mystery of life for 15 years." Now, it appears his team at the J. Craig Venter Institute has made "a major breakthrough in the quest" to harness that phenomenon: They've "created life from nonliving parts." That is, they developed "the first synthetic cell." Explaining that "astonishing" feat, Dr. Venter said, "Instead of having a genetic relative that it evolved from, the parent of this cell is a computer."
It is possible that one day, such cells "will make up designer organisms that can be programmed to do specific tasks like creating new biofuels or breaking down oil -- which would come in handy about now," CBS Evening News (5/20, story 3, 0:30, Couric) reported.
This week's breakthrough stems from a step that was taken some three years ago, when Dr. Venter was able to show that "the natural DNA from one bacterium could be inserted into another and that it would take over the host cell's operation," the New York Times (5/21, A17, Wade) reports. In 2009, "his team synthesized a piece of DNA with 1,080,000 bases." Now, according to the paper in Science, the team has found that the "synthetic DNA takes over a bacterial cell just as the natural DNA did, making the cell generate the proteins specified by the new DNA's genetic information in preference to those of its own genome."
In other words, the "donor genome reprogrammed the recipient cell, which went on to replicate and divide," the Washington Post (5/21, Brown) reports. "The result was new colonies of Mycoplasma mycoides." Notably, the "man-made copy of the genome that Mycoplasma mycoides produces naturally" was "not an exact duplicate," as 14 "of the bacterium's 850 genes were altered or deleted during the experiment -- 12 intentionally, two accidentally."
Nevertheless, Venter said the work "changes conceptually how I think about life." Other scientists, however, "characterize the experiment in less revolutionary terms," pointing out that "only the genome was synthetic; the recipient cell was equipped by nature and billions of years of evolution to make sense of the genes it received and turn them on."
What's more, "other researchers have made microorganisms that can achieve" certain remarkable "feats," the Los Angeles Times (5/21, Maugh, Roan) notes. But, a "purpose-designed organism created from scratch would presumably be much more efficient, and it should be easier to control its products." And, "most scientists overwhelmingly praised the achievement," with one calling it "a tour de force and a landmark paper...that is akin to Jurassic Park or Frankenstein."
Venter himself referred to the cells as "biological transformers," according to Time (5/20, Park). Already, through a collaboration "with Novartis, he is building a bank of man-made versions of every known influenza strain so that if a new strain, such as H1N1, begins to circulate during flu season, vaccine makers can simply pull the appropriate synthetic segments off the shelf and begin the vaccine making process." The "promising" field of synthetic biology, however, "raises as much concern as it does excitement."
In fact, just moments after briefing Congress, several federal agencies, and the White House, the Committee on Energy and Commerce scheduled a public hearing for next week to discuss the new technology, the Wall Street Journal (5/21, A1, Hotz) reports on its front page. Similarly, the paper prompted a quick response from environmental groups like Friends of the Earth, which asked the FDA and the EPA, in a statement, "to fully regulate all synthetic biology experiments and products."
Gregory Kaebnick, employed at "a bioethics think" tank, "says there are two basic concerns about what Venter and others in the new field of synthetic biology are doing," NPR (5/20, Palca) reported. "First, that one of these synthetic organisms will escape from the lab and run amok. And the other is whether this kind of work crosses a line where humans start playing God." Yet, "for the moment, Venter and his colleagues are the only ones with the money and techniques to do this kind of genomic manipulation," but "others are working in related areas, and a new world of synthetic microorganisms might not be far off."
ABC World News (5/20, story 4, 2:30, Sawyer) reported, "World renowned geneticist Craig Venter has been trying to unlock the mystery of life for 15 years." Now, it appears his team at the J. Craig Venter Institute has made "a major breakthrough in the quest" to harness that phenomenon: They've "created life from nonliving parts." That is, they developed "the first synthetic cell." Explaining that "astonishing" feat, Dr. Venter said, "Instead of having a genetic relative that it evolved from, the parent of this cell is a computer."
It is possible that one day, such cells "will make up designer organisms that can be programmed to do specific tasks like creating new biofuels or breaking down oil -- which would come in handy about now," CBS Evening News (5/20, story 3, 0:30, Couric) reported.
This week's breakthrough stems from a step that was taken some three years ago, when Dr. Venter was able to show that "the natural DNA from one bacterium could be inserted into another and that it would take over the host cell's operation," the New York Times (5/21, A17, Wade) reports. In 2009, "his team synthesized a piece of DNA with 1,080,000 bases." Now, according to the paper in Science, the team has found that the "synthetic DNA takes over a bacterial cell just as the natural DNA did, making the cell generate the proteins specified by the new DNA's genetic information in preference to those of its own genome."
In other words, the "donor genome reprogrammed the recipient cell, which went on to replicate and divide," the Washington Post (5/21, Brown) reports. "The result was new colonies of Mycoplasma mycoides." Notably, the "man-made copy of the genome that Mycoplasma mycoides produces naturally" was "not an exact duplicate," as 14 "of the bacterium's 850 genes were altered or deleted during the experiment -- 12 intentionally, two accidentally."
Nevertheless, Venter said the work "changes conceptually how I think about life." Other scientists, however, "characterize the experiment in less revolutionary terms," pointing out that "only the genome was synthetic; the recipient cell was equipped by nature and billions of years of evolution to make sense of the genes it received and turn them on."
What's more, "other researchers have made microorganisms that can achieve" certain remarkable "feats," the Los Angeles Times (5/21, Maugh, Roan) notes. But, a "purpose-designed organism created from scratch would presumably be much more efficient, and it should be easier to control its products." And, "most scientists overwhelmingly praised the achievement," with one calling it "a tour de force and a landmark paper...that is akin to Jurassic Park or Frankenstein."
Venter himself referred to the cells as "biological transformers," according to Time (5/20, Park). Already, through a collaboration "with Novartis, he is building a bank of man-made versions of every known influenza strain so that if a new strain, such as H1N1, begins to circulate during flu season, vaccine makers can simply pull the appropriate synthetic segments off the shelf and begin the vaccine making process." The "promising" field of synthetic biology, however, "raises as much concern as it does excitement."
In fact, just moments after briefing Congress, several federal agencies, and the White House, the Committee on Energy and Commerce scheduled a public hearing for next week to discuss the new technology, the Wall Street Journal (5/21, A1, Hotz) reports on its front page. Similarly, the paper prompted a quick response from environmental groups like Friends of the Earth, which asked the FDA and the EPA, in a statement, "to fully regulate all synthetic biology experiments and products."
Gregory Kaebnick, employed at "a bioethics think" tank, "says there are two basic concerns about what Venter and others in the new field of synthetic biology are doing," NPR (5/20, Palca) reported. "First, that one of these synthetic organisms will escape from the lab and run amok. And the other is whether this kind of work crosses a line where humans start playing God." Yet, "for the moment, Venter and his colleagues are the only ones with the money and techniques to do this kind of genomic manipulation," but "others are working in related areas, and a new world of synthetic microorganisms might not be far off."
Monday, June 7, 2010
Shorting Out the Situation
NASA reports in, As the Sun Awakens, NASA Keeps a Weary Eye on Space Weather, on the sun's recent solar activity. The following is taken from the article.
"2010 marks the 4th year in a row that policymakers, researchers, legislators and reporters have gathered in Washington DC to share ideas about space weather. This year, forum organizers plan to sharpen the focus on critical infrastructure protection. The ultimate goal is to improve the nation’s ability to prepare, mitigate, and respond to potentially devastating space weather events.
'I believe we're on the threshold of a new era in which space weather can be as influential in our daily lives as ordinary terrestrial weather." Fisher concludes. "We take this very seriously indeed.'"
SDO Observes Massive Eruption, Scorching Rain has a couple videos of the sun activity.
LESSON: If we can not control what we do, how do we expect to control the effect of the sun?
"2010 marks the 4th year in a row that policymakers, researchers, legislators and reporters have gathered in Washington DC to share ideas about space weather. This year, forum organizers plan to sharpen the focus on critical infrastructure protection. The ultimate goal is to improve the nation’s ability to prepare, mitigate, and respond to potentially devastating space weather events.
'I believe we're on the threshold of a new era in which space weather can be as influential in our daily lives as ordinary terrestrial weather." Fisher concludes. "We take this very seriously indeed.'"
SDO Observes Massive Eruption, Scorching Rain has a couple videos of the sun activity.
LESSON: If we can not control what we do, how do we expect to control the effect of the sun?
Saturday, June 5, 2010
Oil, oil everywhere, and not a drop to burn
Why didn't BP close the deep water oil well after the explosion? Why doesn't BP abandon the well. $$$$$$$$$$$. So far BP seems satisfied with recovering 10% of the gushing oil leak.
The tears we shed as we watch and read, are they sadness over the loss or remorse for our greed? Why is our focus on clean up rather than permanent shut down? Where will we put the millions of gallons of oil contaminating the Gulf of Mexico? Are we so addicted to oil that we will destroy to Earth to get it?
There is nothing natural about this disaster. It is all manmade.
LESSON: Turn to CREATOR LORD now. Only He can save us from ourselves.
The tears we shed as we watch and read, are they sadness over the loss or remorse for our greed? Why is our focus on clean up rather than permanent shut down? Where will we put the millions of gallons of oil contaminating the Gulf of Mexico? Are we so addicted to oil that we will destroy to Earth to get it?
There is nothing natural about this disaster. It is all manmade.
LESSON: Turn to CREATOR LORD now. Only He can save us from ourselves.
Monday, May 24, 2010
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
Irreversible Damage to the Earth
One on many articles, this one taken from Yahoo news.
UN fears 'irreversible' damage to natural environment
Mon May 10, 7:08 am ET
GENEVA (AFP) – The UN warned on Monday that "massive" loss in life-sustaining natural environments was likely to deepen to the point of being irreversible after global targets to cut the decline by this year were missed.
As a result of the degradation, the world is moving closer to several "tipping points" beyond which some ecosystems that play a part in natural processes such as climate or the food chain may be permanently damaged, a United Nations report said.
The third "Global Biodiversity Outlook" found that deforestation, pollution or overexploitation were damaging the productive capacity of the most vulnerable environments, including the Amazon rainforest, lakes and coral reefs.
"This report is saying that we are reaching the tipping point where the irreversible damage to the planet is going to be done unless we act urgently," Ahmed Djoghlaf, executive secretary of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity, told journalists.
Djoghlaf argued that extinction rates for some animal or plant species were at a historic high, up to 1,000 times those seen before, even affecting crops and livestock.
The UN report was partly based on 110 national reports on steps taken to meet a 2002 pledge to "significantly reduce" or reverse the loss in biodiversity.
Djoghlaf told journalists: "There is not a single country in the world that has achieved these targets, we continue to lose biodioversity at unprecedented rate."
Three potential tipping points were identified.
Global climate, regional rainfall and loss of plant and animal species were harmed by continued deforestation of the Amazon rainforest, the report said.
Many freshwater lakes and rivers were becoming contaminated by algae, starving them of oxygen and killing off fish, affecting local livelihoods and recreation for local populations.
And coral reefs were collapsing due to the combined blow of more acid and warming oceans, as well as overfishing, the UN found.
UN Environment Programme (UNEP) director general Achim Steiner underlined the economic value and returns of "natural capital" and its role in ensuring the health of soil, oceans and the atmosphere.
"Humanity has fabricated the illusion that somehow we can get by without biodiversity or that it is somehow peripheral to the contemporary world," Steiner said.
"The truth is we need it more than ever on a planet of six billion heading to over nine billion people by 2050."
The report argued that biodiversity was a core concern for society that would help tackle poverty and improve health, meriting as much attention as the economic crisis for only a fraction of the cost of recent financial bailouts.
It advocated a new strategy to tackle the loss alongside more traditional steps such as the expansion of protected natural areas and pollution control.
They included attempts to regulate land consumption, fishing, increased trade and population growth or shifts, partly through a halt to "harmful" or "perverse" subsidies.
The issues raised by the report are due to be discussed at a UN biodiversity meeting in Japan in October.
UNEP report
Mon May 10, 7:08 am ET
GENEVA (AFP) – The UN warned on Monday that "massive" loss in life-sustaining natural environments was likely to deepen to the point of being irreversible after global targets to cut the decline by this year were missed.
As a result of the degradation, the world is moving closer to several "tipping points" beyond which some ecosystems that play a part in natural processes such as climate or the food chain may be permanently damaged, a United Nations report said.
The third "Global Biodiversity Outlook" found that deforestation, pollution or overexploitation were damaging the productive capacity of the most vulnerable environments, including the Amazon rainforest, lakes and coral reefs.
"This report is saying that we are reaching the tipping point where the irreversible damage to the planet is going to be done unless we act urgently," Ahmed Djoghlaf, executive secretary of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity, told journalists.
Djoghlaf argued that extinction rates for some animal or plant species were at a historic high, up to 1,000 times those seen before, even affecting crops and livestock.
The UN report was partly based on 110 national reports on steps taken to meet a 2002 pledge to "significantly reduce" or reverse the loss in biodiversity.
Djoghlaf told journalists: "There is not a single country in the world that has achieved these targets, we continue to lose biodioversity at unprecedented rate."
Three potential tipping points were identified.
Global climate, regional rainfall and loss of plant and animal species were harmed by continued deforestation of the Amazon rainforest, the report said.
Many freshwater lakes and rivers were becoming contaminated by algae, starving them of oxygen and killing off fish, affecting local livelihoods and recreation for local populations.
And coral reefs were collapsing due to the combined blow of more acid and warming oceans, as well as overfishing, the UN found.
UN Environment Programme (UNEP) director general Achim Steiner underlined the economic value and returns of "natural capital" and its role in ensuring the health of soil, oceans and the atmosphere.
"Humanity has fabricated the illusion that somehow we can get by without biodiversity or that it is somehow peripheral to the contemporary world," Steiner said.
"The truth is we need it more than ever on a planet of six billion heading to over nine billion people by 2050."
The report argued that biodiversity was a core concern for society that would help tackle poverty and improve health, meriting as much attention as the economic crisis for only a fraction of the cost of recent financial bailouts.
It advocated a new strategy to tackle the loss alongside more traditional steps such as the expansion of protected natural areas and pollution control.
They included attempts to regulate land consumption, fishing, increased trade and population growth or shifts, partly through a halt to "harmful" or "perverse" subsidies.
The issues raised by the report are due to be discussed at a UN biodiversity meeting in Japan in October.
UNEP report
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)