Big bang theory Rewrite

Big bang theory rewrite near:

Big bang theory rewrite near

Big bang theory rewrite near

Melbourne researchers believe they may be on the brink of rewriting the history of the universe. A paper being published in a US physics journal suggests it may be possible to view “cracks” in the universe that would support the theory of quantum graphity – considered to be the holy grail of physics. The team of researchers from the University of Melbourne and RMIT say that, instead of thinking of the start of the universe as being a big bang, we should imagine it as a cooling of water into ice. “Think of the early universe as being like a liquid,” Melbourne University theoretical physics researcher James Quach said. “Then as the universe cools, it ‘crystalises’. The reason we use the water analogy is water is without form. “In the beginning there wasn’t even space, space did not exist because there was no form.” Their research rests on a school of thought that has emerged recently to suggest space is made of indivisible building blocks, such as atoms, that can be thought of as similar to pixels that make up images on a computer screen. Quach said the standing model for the origins of the universe, the big bang, needed to be rewritten. He hoped experimentalists would be able to find evidence to support the theory put forward by the Melbourne team of researchers, that would replace it. “The biggest problem with the big bang model is the bang itself,” Quach said. “At the bang, physics breaks down. “The model cannot make any predictions at what occurs at the big bang. You can’t use any of the mathematics [or] any of the theories.” Quach and his fellow researchers theorise that if quantum graphity “cracks” do exist, they will bend or reflect light, which, if observed through a telescope would support their predictions. “If they prove my predictions that’s really good evidence for the condensed matter model of quantum graphity in which case you can throw out all the other attempts.”

3-D TV without any glasses

3D Movies Without Any Need of Glasses:

3d-glasses

3d-glasses

3D movies can be enjoyed on TV without any viewing glasses, thanks to a new German technology. The 3D movies currently available on Blu-ray are based on two different perspectives: two images, one for each eye. However, autostereoscopic displays need five to 10 views of the same scene (depending on the type). In the future, the number will probably be even more. This is because these displays have to present a 3D image in such a manner that it can be seen from different angles — indeed, there is more than one place to sit on a sofa, and you should be able to get the same three dimensional impressions from any position. Researchers at the Fraunhofer Institute for Telecommunications at Heinrich-Hertz Institute (HHI) in Berlin have developed a technology that converts a Blu-ray’s existing 3D content in a manner that enables them to be shown on autostereoscopic displays. “We take the existing two images and generate a depth map… a map that assigns a specific distance from the camera to each object,” says Christian Riechert, research fellow at HHI. Previous systems were only capable of generating such depth maps at a dramatically slower pace; sometimes they even required manual adaptation. Real-time conversion, by contrast, is like simultaneous interpretation: The viewer inserts a 3D Blu-ray disc, gets comfortable in front of the TV screen and enjoys the movie – without the glasses. Researchers have already finished the software that converts these data. In the next step, the scientists, working in collaboration with industry partners, intend to port it onto a hardware product so that it can be integrated into TV. Nevertheless, it will still take at least another calendar year before the technology hits store shelves. Researchers will unveil this technology in Berlin at this year’s IFA trade show from Aug 31 to Sep 5.

Neanderthals did not interbreed with humans

The genetic traits between humans and Neanderthals are more likely from a shared ancestry rather than interbreeding, a British study has suggested:

 Neanderthals did not interbreed with humans, scientists find


Neanderthals did not interbreed with humans, scientists find

Their analysis contradicts recent studies that found inter-species mating, known as hybridisation, probably occurred. Cambridge University researchers concluded that the DNA similarities were unlikely to be the result of human-Neanderthal sex during their 15,000-year coexistence in Europe. People living outside Africa share as much as four per cent of their DNA with Neanderthals, a cave-dwelling species with muscular short arms and legs and a brain slightly larger than ours. The Cambridge researchers examined demographic patterns suggesting that humans were far from intimate with the species they displaced in Europe almost 40,000 years ago. The study into the genomes of the two species, found a common ancestor 500,000 years ago would be enough to account for the shared DNA. Their analysis, published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), contradicts recent studies that found inter-species mating, known as hybridisation, probably occurred. Dr Andrea Manica, who led the study, said: “To me the interbreeding question is not whether there was hybridisation but whether there was any hybridisation that affected the subsequent evolution of humans. I think this is very, very unlikely. “Our work shows clearly the patterns currently seen in the Neanderthal genome are not exceptional, and are in line with our expectations of what we would see without hybridisation. “So, if any hybridisation happened then it would have been minimal and much less than what people are claiming now.” Evidence has shown that Neanderthals were driven into extinction by humans who were more efficient at finding food and multiplied at a faster rate. A previous study in 2010 suggested that interspecies liaisons near the Middle East resulted in Neanderthal genes first entering humans 70,000 years ago. Modern non-Africans share more with Neanderthals than Africans, supporting the claim that the mixing occurred when the first early humans left Africa to populate Europe and Asia. The existence of a 500,000-year-old shared ancestor that predates the origin of Neanderthals provides a better explanation for the genetic mix. Diversity within this ancestral species meant that northern Africans were more genetically similar to their European counterparts than southern Africans through geographic proximity. This likeness persisted over time to account for the overlap with the Neanderthal genome we see in modern people today. Differences between populations can be explained by common ancestry, Dr Manica said. “The idea is that our African ancestors would not have been a homogeneous, well-mixed population but made of several populations in Africa with some level of differentiation, in the way right now you can tell a northern and southern European from their looks,” she said. “Based on common ancestry and geographic differences among populations within each continent, we would predict out of Africa populations to be more similar to Neanderthals than their African counterparts – exactly the patterns that were observed when the Neanderthal genome was sequenced, but this pattern was attributed to hybridisation. “Hopefully, everyone will become more cautious before invoking hybridisation, and start taking into account that ancient populations differed from each other probably as much as modern populations do.” Northern Africans would be more similar to Europeans and ancient similarity stayed because there wasn’t enough mixing between northern and southern Africans. Population diversity, known as substructure, cant explain data on the shared genes, said David Reich, a professor of genetics at Harvard Medical School, in Boston who authored the 2010 study. We have ruled out the possibility that ancient substructure can explain all the evidence of greater relatedness of Neanderthals to non-Africans than to Africans, he added. Dr Manica said hybridisation between Neanderthals and humans can never be disproved entirely.

Engineering babies is a moral obligation

Genetically screening our offspring to make them better people is just ‘responsible parenting’, claims an eminent Oxford academic:

 engineering 'ethical' babies is a moral obligation

engineering ‘ethical’ babies is a moral obligation

Professor Julian Savulescu said that creating so-called designer babies could be considered a “moral obligation” as it makes them grow up into “ethically better children”. The expert in practical ethics said that we should actively give parents the choice to screen out personality flaws in their children as it meant they were then less likely to “harm themselves and others”. The academic, who is also editor-in-chief of the Journal of Medical Ethics, made his comments in an article in the latest edition of Reader’s Digest. He explained that we are now in the middle of a genetic revolution and that although screening, for all but a few conditions, remained illegal it should be welcomed. He said that science is increasingly discovering that genes have a significant influence on personality – with certain genetic markers in embryo suggesting future characteristics. By screening in and screening out certain genes in the embryos, it should be possible to influence how a child turns out. In the end, he said that “rational design” would help lead to a better, more intelligent and less violent society in the future. “Surely trying to ensure that your children have the best, or a good enough, opportunity for a great life is responsible parenting?” wrote Prof Savulescu, the Uehiro Professor in practical ethics. “So where genetic selection aims to bring out a trait that clearly benefits an individual and society, we should allow parents the choice. “To do otherwise is to consign those who come after us to the ball and chain of our squeamishness and irrationality. “Indeed, when it comes to screening out personality flaws, such as potential alcoholism, psychopathy and disposition to violence, you could argue that people have a moral obligation to select ethically better children. “They are, after all, less likely to harm themselves and others.” “If we have the power to intervene in the nature of our offspring, rather than consigning them to the natural lottery, then we should.” He said that we already routinely screen embryos and foetuses for conditions such as cystic fibrosis and Down’s syndrome and couples can test embryos for inherited bowel and breast cancer genes. Rational design is just a natural extension of this, he said. He said that unlike the eugenics movements, which fell out of favour when it was adopted by the Nazis, the system would be voluntary and allow parents to choose the characteristics of their children. “We’re routinely screening embryos and foetuses for conditions such as cystic fibrosis and Down’s syndrome, and there’s little public outcry,” he said. “What’s more, few people protested at the decisions in the mid- 2000s to allow couples to test embryos for inherited bowel and breast cancer genes, and this pushes us a lot close to creating designer humans.” “Whether we like it or not, the future of humanity is in our hands now. Rather than fearing genetics, we should embrace it. We can do better than chance.”

Hacking Brain For Under $300

Your Brain Can Now Be Hacked For Under $300:

Your Brain Can Now Be Hacked For Under $300

Your Brain Can Now Be Hacked For Under $300

Cyberpunk and sci-fi films like the Matrix and Brainstorm play around with the idea of gaining access to the human mind. It’s easy to hack a computer, but most people always thought that hacking the human brain was impossible. As it turns out, it’s entirely possible and really cheap to boot. Researchers at Usenix Security Conference have proven that it’s now possible to hack the human brain. What’s terrifying is that it doesn’t require any kind of expensive hardware or technical knowhow. In fact, you could hack somebody’s brain right now for a little under $300. The researchers used a brain computer interface which are commonly used in research that scans brain patterns. The technology has been in use for many years now, but only recently did it come down drastically in price. The current models allow users to control their computers with their thoughts, but the researchers have proven that it goes both ways. The team built a piece of custom software that can essentially read your mind. They were able to effectively use the software combined with the brain scanner to extract sensitive data including, but not limited to, credit card PINs, address, month of birth and more. Thankfully, they were only able to achieve a success rate of 10 to 40 percent. It’s pretty bad when they were successful though. They were able to easily work out private information that only you should know. Of course, you can easily guard against it by not thinking about it. The only problem is that we subconsciously think about a lot of things, including private matters. It’s quite different from what we see in sci-fi films, but the era of brain hacking may soon be upon us. The police and other authorities may be able to get confessions out of people far more easily if it goes into wide spread use. The researchers also warn that hackers could make brain controlled games that make it easier for them to extract sensitive data while you’re busy having fun.

CEO’s above the law

Studies Show CEOs Not Subject to Same Rule of Law as You:

Super Rich

Super Rich

Recent academic papers begin the formal work of proving that CEOs and giant corporations face a completely different legal system than the rest of us, one in which their vast resources are used to insure that they can safely ignore laws and rules applicable to small fry. One study looked at the influence of corporate lobbying on fraud detection. Corporate Lobbying And Fraud Detection, 46 Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis 1865 by Frank Yu of Barclays Global Investors and Xiaoyun Yu of Indiana University available here. From the abstract:

We find that firms’ lobbying activities make a significant difference in fraud detection: compared to non-lobbying firms, firms that lobby on average have a significantly lower hazard rate of being detected for fraud, evade fraud detection 117 days longer, and are 38% less likely to be detected by regulators. In addition, fraudulent firms on average spend 77% more on lobbying than non-fraudulent firms, and spend 29% more on lobbying during their fraudulent periods than during non-fraudulent periods. The delay in detection leads to a greater distortion in resource allocation during fraudulent periods. It also allows managers to sell more of their shares.

This quantifies earlier anecdotal data. For example, look at the collapse of Lincoln Savings and Loan. Five senators intervened to stop an investigation, and the business collapsed two years later at a cost of at least $3 billion. The delay sought by the Keating Five increased the losses, particularly to small savers who bought Lincoln Certificates of Deposit. Yu and Yu show that this hideous perversion never stopped, and not only includes direct campaign contributions but also lobbying. They show that firms increase their lobbying expenses after they commit fraud. During the time they are committing fraud, executives of lobbying firms sell their stock about four times more than firms that aren’t lobbying. Sarah Fulmer and April Knill of Florida State build on that study in their recent paper Political Contributions and the Severity of Government Enforcement, available here, with abstract. Fulmer and Knill examine data on PAC contributions by corporations and CEOs and SEC data on enforcement to show that

…accused executives whose firms have contributed to political campaigns via a PAC are banned as an officer for three fewer years, serve probation for five fewer years, prison for six fewer years and are 75% less likely to be given both prison time and an officer ban (the most severe form of criminal and civil penalties)…

Fulmer and Knill point to Judge Rakoff’s refusal to rubber-stamp the SEC settlement with Citigroup over cheating its investors in a late-stage RMBS deal. They also mention an earlier repulsive settlement between the SEC and Citigroup CFO Gary Crittenden. On an analysts conference call, Crittenden said Citi had reduced its subprime exposure by 45% to $13 billion, not mentioning the other $40 billion in super-senior tranches. Crittenden settled for a meaningless $100K and there was no discussion of the fraud on investors. The SEC Inspector General began an investigation to determine whether, as alleged by Senator Charles Grassley, Robert Khuzami, the SEC Chief of Enforcement, had a secret meeting with Crittenden’s lawyer and good friend of Khuzami, and subsequently told his staff to lighten up. The IG eventually cleared Khuzami. The reporter, Allison Frankel, said the IG report shows the cozy club approach to settlements at the SEC. Friends call friends, there are discussions about whether Crittenden would have to resign from his Church positions and the impact of a fraud settlement on Citi. Marcy Wheeler sees that club in action again in the efforts to cover up the Standard Chartered fraud.

First, you hire Sullivan and Cromwell and act contrite. Then, you pay a consultant to conduct a review and claim the violations involved just $14 million in transactions as opposed to $250 billion shown in your bank records. … Then you bury all the embarrassing details showing willful flouting of the rules, so the proles don’t learn how craven banks really are.

Then there is the latest whitewash of Goldman Sachs. The Department of Justice won’t prosecute for the allegations made in the report of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, and the SEC won’t file charges over its subprime mortgage portfolio. One channel for creating these relationships is the personal connections created as people rise through the ranks of government and move into white collar defense in the private sector. Political contributions and lobbying are another channel. Everyone knows that your rise to wealth is dependent on following the rules of connection, and eventually you get to the point where you can do the contributing and lobbying, and use those connections for your personal benefit and the benefit of your clients, which enables you to get even richer. That has now culminated in the capture of the Department of Justice by financial interests. Attorney General Eric Holder is a rich guy from Covington and Burling. He bundled contributions for Obama and served as a co-chair of the campaign. Three other top Justice Department officials played major roles in fundraising and came from white-collar defense firms. It’s worth noting that the right wing is all over these connections. No links from me, but google “holder west perrelli mason” and see for yourself. The prosecutors, the rich, the politicians: all buddies in the rarefied atmosphere of wealth and power. How could such great guys possibly be a lying cheat? And if there is a slip-up, they cover up.

Death at Sea World

Bestselling Author Blows Lid Off SeaWorld:

Bestselling Author Blows Lid Off SeaWorld

Bestselling Author Blows Lid Off SeaWorld

The latest must-read from investigative journalist and New York Times bestselling author David Kirby is Death at SeaWorld, which meticulously chronicles the miserable lives and deaths of captive orcas at the marine park, and how the park also puts employees at risk. From the tragic death of trainer Dawn Brancheau in 2010, to many other less-publicized violent incidents,  Kirby details the deeply rooted culture of cruelty and culpability at SeaWorld. Although not originally conceived as a slam of the theme park (multiple attempts by the author to get SeaWorld’s input were rebuffed), the book makes it clear that confining animals who have evolved over millions of years to swim the vast open oceans leads to aggression, depression and premature death. Kirby reports that while no serious attack by a wild orca on a human has ever been recorded, SeaWorld’s own corporate incident logs contain reports of more than 100 incidents at its parks. Orcas have pulled trainers into the water, held them at the bottom of the pool, head-butted them, slammed into them, and breached on top of them. As Ric O’Barry, who was part of PETA’s ground-breaking lawsuit against SeaWorld, puts it, “Death at SeaWorld outlines in grim detail just how bad captivity is for orcas and other marine mammals.”

Jews have control of US Department of Justice, Goldman Sachs

Anger as US prosecutors scrap probe of Goldman:

Anger as US prosecutors scrap probe of Goldman

Anger as US prosecutors scrap probe of Goldman

Goldman Sachs was let off the hook yesterday as the US Department of Justice dropped plans to bring criminal charges over claims the bank was betting against the same toxic subprime mortgage securities it sold to clients. In April last year senator Carl Levin demanded a criminal investigation after his sub-committee spent more than a year looking into Goldman. Chief executive Lloyd Blankfein faced a embarrassing grilling for hours from Mr Levin over whether it was morally correct for the firm to sell its clients products described internally as “crap”. The DoJ yesterday dropped plans to prosecute, saying: “the burden of proof to bring a criminal case could not be met based on the law and facts as they exist at this time”. The Securities and Exchange Commission also dropped a separate probe into the firm’s role in selling a different $1.3bn (£830m) subprime mortgage-related deal arranged in 2006. However, the regulator is still pursuing a civil complaint against Goldman vice-president Fabrice Tourre over its Abacus deal, which the bank settled for $550 million in 2010. Tourre was based in London while marketing the controversial investment, which saw Goldman sell loans selected by a hedge fund client it knew was betting against them. The failure to prosecute Goldman triggered frustration in some quarters. Neil Barofsky, a former watchdog for the US government’s 2008 bailout of the banks, said no individual or institution had been held accountable for the financial crisis. “Without such accountability, the unending parade of megabanks scandals will inevitably continue,” he said.

Drugs companies profiting from Innovation crisis

Drugs companies putting profit ahead of medical discoveries, warn scientists:

 Drugs companies putting profit ahead of medical discoveries, warn scientists


Drugs companies putting profit ahead of medical discoveries, warn scientists

The multi-billion pound pharmaceutical industry has spent the last decade developing new drugs which have produced little benefit and caused considerable harm, experts say today. The claim that there is an “innovation crisis” in pharmaceuticals because of the difficulty and expense of discovering new drugs is a myth fostered by an industry whose chief focus is on marketing, they add. Counter to drug industry claims that the pipeline of new drugs is running dry, the number of new drugs being licensed each year has remained at between 15 and 25. But most involve minor tweaks to existing drugs, designed to grab a slice of an existing market rather than offering genuine therapeutic innovation. Independent reviews suggest that 85 to 90 per cent provide little benefit over existing treatments with some, such as Vioxx the painkiller and Avandia, the diabetes drug, causing serious side effects which led to their withdrawal, the latter’s in Europe. Writing in the British Medical Journal, Professor Donald Light from the University of Medicine of New Jersey and Joel Lexchin from York University in Toronto say the situation has remained the same for 50 years. The incentives for drug development are wrong and have skewed the behaviour of the industry. “This is the real innovation crisis: pharmaceutical research and development turns out mostly minor variations on existing drugs and most new drugs are not superior on clinical measures. [They] have also produced an epidemic of serious adverse reactions that have added to national healthcare costs,” they say. More is spent on marketing (25 per cent of revenues) than on discovering new molecules (1.3 per cent). Drug industry claims that the cost of bringing a new drug to market is £1bn and is unsustainable are exaggerated, they claim. Research and development costs did rise substantially between 1995 and 2010 by $34.2bn (£21.9bn), they concluded, but revenues increased six times faster – by $200.4bn. Companies avoid mentioning this “extraordinary revenue return”, they said, adding that up to 80 per cent of drug spending is used by the industry on promotion. The authors call for licensing authorities around the world to stop approving new drugs of little therapeutic value. They suggest large cash prizes should be awarded for genuinely new therapeutic agents in lieu of patent protection. The European Medicines Agency, which licenses drugs in the UK and Europe, keeps certain data about their safety and efficacy secret. Yet 29 per cent of new biological agents approved by the EMA received safety warnings within the first 10 years. In a second paper, researchers from the London School of Economics in the UK argue that drug manufacturers should be made to demonstrate that their products are superior to existing treatments before being granted a licence, rather than, as now, superior only to a placebo. “Changing the nature of regulation could encourage manufacturers to concentrate on the development of new drugs in therapeutic areas with few alternatives,” they say. “Supplementing regulation with scientific advice and guidance can steer manufacturer’s interest and efforts into key research priorities.” Stephen Whitehead, chief executive of the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry, said: “We strongly disagree with the claims made in these papers. Medical research has always rested on iterative and gradual innovation rather than breakthrough advances which are very rare. If it were not for the incremental improvements made in the treatment of HIV, the disease would still be terminal rather than a manageable condition.”

Coca-Cola: Phosphoric Acid

Dark History of Coca Cola:
Coca-Cola Cocaine

Coca-Cola Cocaine

In the beginning, Coke was brewed by Dr. John Stith Pemberton in 1886, since then Coca-Cola has grown into the world’s best-selling soda brand. In all its successes, Coca-Cola has been singled out on numerous occasions for its negative health effects and addictions. Coke was manufactured using Cocaine – This is where it got its name. The main consumers of Coca-Cola were overseas troops, fighting in the war. Cocaine, of course, helped to keep them on their toes, but many unaware soldiers came home addicted. When they returned home, they found it hard to find treatment for their addiction, because it was not as big a problem, as it is today, and not many solutions existed. The fact that the military complex was responsible for creating cocaine addiction in U. S. forces overseas is bad enough. When Coca-Cola was discovered to produce adverse health effects, to the point that they had to change their “secret formula,” they had to find a replacement for cocaine that would still produce a comparable “zing.” Enter caffeine, an “acceptable substitute.” What made it acceptable was not that it no longer contained an addicting substance or that there were no longer any side effects that inhibit a desireable level of health, but that the use of caffeine instead of cocaine allowed them to continue to peddle addictive substances, without the appearance of not caring one iota about the health of American citizens. Today a 12-ounce service of Coca-Cola contains 64 mg of caffeine, according to “Neuroscience for Kids,” the website of a University of Washington professor, Dr. Erik Chudler’s. Dr. Chudler writes that caffeine takes effect when absorbed into the bloodstream by the stomach and small intestine, which can happen between 15 and 60 minutes after consumption. While many people rely on caffeine to keep them alert, caffeine can be dangerous as it constricts arteries and veins and boosts heart rates. Coke knew, from both a scientific and ethical perspective that they are engaged in producing a product that has adverse health effects, but the love of money, made from its sales, overrides any health concerns. Major health concerns range from Sugar content, to Sperm count, even changing stomach acid levels.  Other than Cocaine being used in its first conception, the second most disgusting fact about this beverage is the phosphoric acid in Coca-Cola. It actually keeps you from vomiting! The sugar levels in Coke are enough to make you physically chuck, if it wasn’t masked by this dangerous chemical. Wow, you don’t see that on Coke’s website!  I compiled an interesting list of attributes Coca-Cola has, Enjoy your Coke.  I mean, Coca-Cola…
Coca-Cola Cocaine

Coca-Cola Cocaine

1. In many states (in the USA) the highway patrol carries two gallons of Coke in the truck to remove blood from the highway after a car accident. 2. You can put a T-bone steak in a bowl of coke and it will be chewed in days. 3. To clean a toilet: Pour a can of Coca-Cola into the toilet bowl and ……Let the real thing sit for one hour, then flush clean. The acid in Coke removes stains from vitreous china. 4. To remove rust spots from chrome car bumpers: Rub the bumper with a crumpled-up piece of Reynolds Wrap aluminum foil dipped in Coca-Cola. 5. Pour a can of Coca-Cola over the terminals to bubble away the corrosion. 6. To loosen a rusted bolt: Applying a cloth soaked in Coca-Cola to the rusted bolt for several minutes.

 7. To bake a moist ham: Empty a can of Coca-Cola into the baking pan, wrap the ham in aluminum foil, and bake. Thirty minutes before the ham is finished, Remove the foil, allowing the drippings to mix with the Coke for a sumptuous brown gravy.

 8. To remove grease from clothes: Empty a can of coke into a load of greasy clothes, add detergent, And run through a regular cycle. The Coca-Cola will help loosen grease stains. It will also clean road haze from your windshield.

 9. A active ingredient in Coke is phosphoric acid.  pH is approx. 2.8.

10. To carry Coca-Cola syrup (the concentrate) the commercial truck must use the Hazardous material placard reserved for Highly corrosive materials.

 11. Some distributors of Coke have been using it to clean the engines of their trucks for about 20 years!

12. Phosphoric acid does contribute to the taste of Coke.

It makes you wonder if Coca-Cola’s advertisement that includes a graphic swoosh line, is actually a cocaine line disguised as the real thing? Well the Coke in Coca-Cola use to be real at one point in time. So don’t think that throwing an eight ball of Coke in your Coca-Cola is acceptable!  You’re only supposed to do that with Champagne…

Coca-Cola cocaine
Coca-Cola cocaine

Bill Gates funds Chemtrails threating food supplies and billions of people

 

Bill Gates Admits to Chemtrails:

Bill Gates Admits to Chemtrails

Bill Gates Admits to Chemtrails

Geo-engineers are finally coming out of the “chemtrail” closet, as reports are now emerging about deliberate plans in the works to dump untold tons of sulfate chemicals into the atmosphere for the purported purpose of fighting so-called “global warming.” The U.K.’s Guardian and others are reporting that a multi-million dollar research fund, which just so happens to have been started and funded by Microsoft founder and vaccine enthusiast Bill Gates, is being used to fund the project. A large balloon hovering at 80,000 feet over Fort Sumner, New Mexico, will release the sulfates into the atmosphere within the next year. The stated purpose for this massive release of toxic sulfate particles is that doing so will allegedly reflect sunlight back into the atmosphere, and thus cool the planet. But many environmental groups and advocates of common sense are decrying the idea as dangerous, and one that could result in permanent damage to ecosystems all across the globe. “Impacts include the potential for further damage to the ozone layer, and disruption of rainfall, particularly in tropical and subtropical regions, potentially threatening the food supplies of billions of people,” said Pat Mooney, Executive Director of the ETC Group, a Canadian environmental protection group. “It will do nothing to decrease levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere or halt ocean acidification. And solar geo-engineering is likely to increase the risk of climate-related international conflict, given that the modeling to date shows it poses greater risks to the global south.”

But the Gates-backed cohort is persistent in its efforts to geo-graffiti the world, as its scientists insist that governments are not doing enough to fight back against the supposed environment impacts of global warming. If governments refuse to implement high enough carbon taxes to eliminate greenhouse gases, in other words, then Gates and Co. believes it has no choice but to “save the planet” by polluting it with sulfate particles. Spraying the skies with sulfate particles will destroy the planet faster than ‘global warming’ ever could. Sulfate particles are toxic, though, and constitute the very same type of ambient particulate matter (PM) that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) considers to be a noxious air pollutant. Deliberately spraying the skies with tiny particles composed of any material, for that matter, is hazardous both to respiratory health in humans and animals, as well as to water sources, soils, and other delicate environmental resources. “Sulfate particles from acid rain can cause harm to the health of marine life in the rivers and lakes it contaminates, and can result in mortality,” says an online water pollution guide (http://www.water-pollution.org.uk/health.html). A University of Washington (UW) report also explains that sulfate particles “contribute to acid rain, cause lung irritation, and have been a main culprit in causing the haze that obscures a clear view of the Grand Canyon.” Blocking the sun with reflective particles will also deprive humans of natural sunlight exposure, which is a primary source for naturally generating health-promoting vitamin D in the body. So once again, Bill Gates is at the helms of a project that seeks to control the climate in artificial ways using toxic chemicals, an endeavor that is sure to create all sorts of potentially irreversible problems for humanity and the planet.

 

Fukushima tsunami threat data withheld from Tepco chairman

Tepco knew in 2006 of Fukushima tsunami threat:

 Tepco knew in 2006 of Fukushima tsunami threat


Tepco knew in 2006 of Fukushima tsunami threat

The Nuclear and Industrial Security Agency and Tokyo Electrical Power Co. had been mindful at least by 2006 that the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant was at threat of having its power knocked out by enormous tsunami, NISA officials mentioned Tuesday. According to the officials, the awareness was shared at a study session attended by a number of utilities that was held in response to the 2004 Sumatra quake and tsunami in Indonesia. A paper compiled in August 2006 indicated the participants acknowledged that “there is a chance that power gear could lose their functions if 14-meter tsunami hit the Fukushima plant, with seawater flowing inside the (reactor) turbine buildings.” The agency, nonetheless, did not confirm no matter whether the utilities disseminated this details internally, the officials said. Countermeasures against massive tsunami were not taken and the plant on the coast of Fukushima Prefecture lost most of its power sources and hence the capacity to keep its reactors and spent fuel pools cooled after enormous tsunami overwhelmed the complex minutes after the March 11, 2011, Great East Japan Earthquake. Tepco Chairman Tsunehisa Katsumata, who was the utility’s president in 2006, testified Monday just before a Diet plan-appointed panel investigating the crisis that he had not been presented the tsunami-threat data.

Immortality Offered To Billionaires

Russian Project Offers Immortality To Billionaires:

Russian Project Offers Immortality To Billionaires

Russian Project Offers Immortality To Billionaires

Interested in a second life as a robot? The goal is to achieve the ability to upload an individual’s mind into an artificial surrogate, and offer it as a service to the planet’s richest individuals in a decade or so. A Russian entrepreneur who heads a hi-tech research project called ‘Avatar’ has contacted billionaires to offer them immortality. Dmitry Itskov claims he will personally oversee their immortality process, in exchange for an undisclosed fee. Itskov, a media entrepreneur, claims to have hired 30 scientists to reach this goal – and aims to transplant a human brain into a robot body within 10 years. “You have the ability to finance the extension of your own life up to immortality. Our civilization has come very close to the creation of such technologies: it’s not a science fiction fantasy. It is in your power to make sure that this goal will be achieved in your lifetime,” says Itskov in a letter delivered to billionaires listed in Forbes magazine. The initiative is opening its San Francisco office this summer, and will be launching a social media project connecting scientists around the world. ‘The next effort of science will be to create a new body for the human being,’ says Itskov, speaking at the Global Future 2045 conference. ‘It will have a perfect brain-machine interface to allow control and a human brain life support system so the brain can survive outside the body.’

Self-healing protective coating

Scientists create self-healing protective coating, deliver killing blow to screen protectors:

Scientists create self-healing protective coating, deliver killing blow to screen protectors

Scientists create self-healing protective coating, deliver killing blow to screen protectors

 

Dutch researchers from the Eindhoven University of Technology have created a non-stick protective plastic coating that heals itself when scratched. As far as I can tell, as long as the new coating isn’t completely penetrated, it should continue to heal itself almost indefinitely. From non-stick frying pans to antibacterial coatings on clothes, and from anticorrosion coatings on cars to the oleophobic coating on the iPhone 4, coatings are a very important part of modern day life. The problem is, coatings also tend to be expensive, and so they’re usually applied very thinly. As a result, as soon as you sustain that first scratch, all bets are off — as your old, scratched, non-stick frying pan can attest. Now, the science behind this self-healing coating is fairly tricky, but here’s the basic gist. The Dutch material scientists came up with a coating formulation that separates itself into three layers: A top layer that repels water, a middle layer of polymer “stalks,” and a lower layer reservoir of the coating’s active ingredient. When the top layer is scratched, the active ingredient automatically climbs the stalks and self-heals, returning the non-stick surface to its former glory.

An oleophobic iPhone screen protectorWhat isn’t clear is whether this same approach can be used for other kinds of coating, but considering most coatings are polymer-based, and that the research paper explicitly sets out to find a way of producing self-healing coatings of different varieties, I would be cautiously optimistic. As far as gadgets are concerned, self-healing coatings could replace screen protectors on smartphones and tablets, and possibly provide better protection against dirt and fingerprint smudges. There is also interest in self-healing circuit boards, but micro metal capsules that break open and fill any cracks are a better solution in this case. Beyond gadgets, this self-healing coating will probably be used be on cars (never wash it again!), airplanes (less dirt, less air resistance), ships (less algae/barnacles, less water resistance), frying pans, and possibly plastic tools and appliances, such as self-healing contact lenses.

Money Ties to Industry Led Fracking Study

 

Report: UTexas Study Spun the Facts and Misled the Public

 Prof with Money Ties to Industry Led Fracking Study

Prof with Money Ties to Industry Led Fracking Study

A recent University of Texas study, which claims to prove that the natural gas extraction process known as fracking does not cause environmental damage or water contamination, was led by a gas industry insider who currently holds up to $1.6 million in stock at a large fracking company. The information was revealed in a new exposé released by the Public Accountability Initiative (PAI). Logo from PAI study: Contaminated Inquiry: How a University of Texas Fracking Study Led by a Gas Industry Insider Spun the Facts and Misled the Public The 400-page pro-fracking review in question was led by author Charles Groat of the University of Texas. Neither Groat nor the University openly reported that Groat himself is on the board of a fracking company, Plains Exploration and Production Company. As a board member, Groat receives 10,000 shares of restricted stock a year. His holdings as of July 19th were worth $1.6 million. He also receives an annual fee, which was $58,500 in 2011, according to filings. Groat did not reveal his position with the company when the report was released and told reporters that the university had turned down all industry funds for the study. Groat’s report, Fact-based Regulation for Environmental Protection in Shale Gas Development, said that it separated “fact from fiction” and gave policy makers a way forward in a major natural gas boom. The study was reported widely by major news outlets. On the contrary, the PAI maintains that Goat’s study contains unfounded facts and misinformation, misleading selective language, and includes inaccurate claims of peer review. Groat’s research covered fracking operations in Texas, Louisiana, and the Marcellus Shale area. His company, Plains Exploration, is currently fracking in shale formations in Texas. Following the PAI exposé, titled Contaminated Inquiry: How a University of Texas Fracking Study Led by a Gas Industry Insider Spun the Facts and Misled the Public, the university says it will assemble a group of independent experts to review the integrity of Goat’s study. PAI’s exposé is the second in a series of studies revealing rampant and widespread industry ties to pro-fracking reports.

 

MARGARINE: Healthy to eat gray plastic?

 

Plastic food

Plastic food

“It’s just like making margarine.” This was how, many years ago, a newspaper headline described the achievement of a group of Singapore scientists who developed a new type of plastic that had special properties. If you look at it the other way around, making margarine is “just like making plastic.” It is highly artificial. And in recent years, there has been plenty of new scientific evidence showing this artificial butter to be extremely harmful to health. It is a major cause of heart disease the very condition that it is supposed to prevent. It has also been linked with several types of cancers and various other diseases.
In spite of this, fake, artificial butter continues to be widely promoted as a healthy product. This urgently needs to be stopped! What we have today is entirely different from the original oleomargarine invented by a French scientist in 1870. That was done quite naturally. Today, we get a highly unnatural process called hydrogenation in which liquid vegetable oil is converted into a solid or semi-solid grease. In the jargon of the chemical industry, this process of turning a liquid oil into a solid or semi-solid is called plasticisation. The manufacturing process begins with cheap vegetable oils, which probably have already been rendered harmful by the extraction process involving high temperature and petrochemical solvents such as benzene. Some of these oils, such as cottonseed oil, are not even suitable for human (nor animal) consumption. The oil is then subjected again to extreme high temperature (about 500ºF) and pressure, and hydrogen is forced into the molecular structure to harden it. This process requires toxic substances, such as nickel oxide, which act as catalysts that enable the chemical change. The end result is a smelly, greasy substance. So it is deodorized, again using high heat and chemical additives. And do you know what is the color in its original, “natural” form? It is gray! Obviously, nobody would spread gray globs of grease over their bread. So the grease is bleached white and then dyed yellow. Finally, artificial flavors are mixed in to make it taste like butter. The fact that learned doctors, nutritionists, dieticians and other health experts can proclaim such a product to be healthy only goes to show how warped modern-day thinking has become. Dr Ancel Keys, this might have been forgivable 50 years ago. The exciting new scientific discovery at that time – by Dr Ansel Keys – was that saturated fats “cause” heart disease and so unsaturated fats such as vegetable oils became regarded as healthy. Today, there is growing realization that Dr Keys was badly mistaken. Humanity had been consuming predominantly saturated fats, such as butter, ghee, lard and coconut oil, for thousands of years. Yet heart disease became prevalent only after 1920 – following the Great Depression when people took to margarine on a large scale because it was much cheaper than butter. In fact, heart disease used to be so rare that the American doctor who introduced a German-invented Electro Cardio Graph (ECG, a device for checking heart rhythm) to the US was advised by his colleagues to look for better ways to earn a living! Heart disease was likewise rare in communities that take plenty of coconut oil and coconut products, even though coconut oil contains 92 percent saturated fats. In these communities, such as in South India, Southeast Asia and the Pacific Islands, heart disease began to rise only after the population switched from coconut oil to margarine and other vegetable oils. The “new” understanding – which has been around for some 30 years already – is that the real culprit in causing heart disease is not saturated fats, but unnatural trans fats formed during the process of hydrogenation. It has taken a long time for this new understanding to gain acceptance. Only in 2005 has the US Food and Drugs Administration (FDA) issued a recommendation to limit the intake of trans fats. And only in 2006 will the FDA requires food labels to state the amount of trans fats. Meanwhile, many health health “experts” remain out-moded in their thinking. On the Singapore Medical Association website, there is an article which states: “Margarine is preferred to butter… ” The KK Women’s and Children’s Hospital has, on its website, an article which advises: “Choose unsaturated margarine…” The Health Promotion Board’s website does have an article about the harm of trans fats, but it stops short of telling people not to take them. It merely recommends choosing soft margarine, which has less trans fats compared with the original, harder version. Meanwhile, the Health Promotion Board has awarded its “Healtheir Choice” label to several brands of margarine, which contains trans fats. All this is worrying. There is an urgent need for the HPB, other health authorities and the media to change their mindsets about margarine and trans fats. Otherwise, their misguided advice will only hasten people to their graves.