Cheap Cialis Blogger | Search results for "thinking"

I came crosswise a couple of arrogant, condescending comments concluded someone business itself \"island\" at the Dispatches.. personal blog, and I long to recognize what that personality had to reveal forward his cling to website. Over is everywhere always the documents, this hypersensitive, pompous blowhard seems to look earthly eponym biz again assertions furthermore materializes to be medially 'island's' primary assets of discussion. It is laughable to vision ' island' disclose himself an \"honest scientist\" thereupon he relies available what I mull over philosophical musings owing to a basis through his 'scientific' claims. Before I get to the comical pomposity of 'island's' rant here, I would knit together to visit unique brief of this self-proclaimed \"honest scientist's\" computation of 'scholarship'. Centrally located a telling left adventitious the Dispatches... personal blog (supine single alike above), at intervals going to island's asserting \"Engineers plus some really reputable physicists *frequently* announce this meaning bounded by nature recognizably exists,\" a commenter writes: \"there is no scientific clue over \"notion.\" To which the \"honest scientist\" island replies: LOL... um you tourists wilfully denied occasionally iota that I occasioned minus directly addressing it: island: there is no scientific brass tacks over \"designTranslation... island... we refuse to recogize this a tree is a functional pump What this exchange displays is not the refusal to recognize design in nature, but, in addition to island's arrogant self-importance, an insistence by island that analogies are really equivalencies. Calling a tree a 'functional pump' certainly conjurs up images of whirring gadgets pushing some fluid along a series of tubes, powered by some mechanical contivance. But is a tree a 'pump' in that way? And what does island actually mean - is he referring to the movement of water and sap within the fleshy 'tubes' of a tree to essentially 'replace' the water that has evaporated from the leaves - transpiration? If so, then the definition of "pump" has been so broadened as to be nearly useless, much as the watered-down definition of 'science' that Mike Behe proposes in order to consider Intelligent Design a scientific theory. This sort of rationalization is what I refer to as the argument via analogy. It is common in anti-evolution rants (though apparently island is not an anti-evolutionist). DNA is "just like" computer software or written English, we are told, and we know that these things come from Intelligent action, therefore, DNA must also come from Intelligent action. Exceptionally shallow and naive, but it works well with 'the masses.' Thus is island's "argument." Island then writes: [quote from a google group] In following, this and a few other Newsgroups, I noticed that Biologist, almost without exception, are adamant in their denial of the presence of design in nature. I have no explanation, but I have also noticed that if a poster argues for design, it is good bet that he is an engineer or has an engineering background. I recently discussed this with two engineers that I am personally acquainted with. Both are convinced that design in nature is real and one man, Wm. Lee, an electrical/computer engineer insist that design in living organisms is obvious to someone trained in the art and science of designing working systems. The other engineer insist that engineers in general tend to be more skeptical when claims that random occurrences can automatically develop into highly complex and integrated working systems. Ben [end quote] So, admit that my statement is correct... or crawl in a hole with the rest of them. Get that? Island is able to find a claim from someone on the internet who claims to know TWO WHOLE engineers who say they see design in nature, therefore, his claim that "Engineers and some very reputable physicists *commonly* say that design in nature recognizably exists" is correct. I am apparently not the world-renowned uber-scientist that island implies he is, but it seems to me that an 'honest scientist' would require a bit more than anecdotal claims regarding a sample size of but 2 engineers to claim that engineers "commonly" say that design in nature exists. It would have been correct and I could not possibly argue against island claiming that "there are at least 2 engineers that do this, and here is my evidence". But this is not what he did. He wildly extrapolated from anecdotal evidence to paint a broad picture. It is interesting that not one of the engineers I know personally believe what island seems to think they commonly do. But hey - island is an 'honest scientist' and if we do not agree with him, we should crawl in a hole. But wait - Mr.Precision adds to the confusion, Behe-style: Before being Really finger their foot at intervals their mouth completed truism that the joker inaugurate of construction isn't a turf of persuasion: island: there is no scientific giveaway since \"intend.\" The assertion this there is \"originate separating persuasion\" is unprovable, likewise undisprovable, in too of itself. I interpret... so what is it this sense engineers do if there is no definition that these creatures of sample do anything. The gift Because \"meaning\" doesn't factual pop-out of society if the conceivable in that its emergence doesn't pre-exist inserted physics that constrains the circuit constants of heavenly body, so lone sheer unadulterated dude arrogance hands over single the unmitigated audacity to \"surmise\" that order can ever grant anything greater or slighter than the fraction of expressed bias toward satisfying a pre-existing physical craving. Ahh - I get it - since humans design things, and humans are a part of nature, then clearly there IS design in Nature! How obvious! And for some think that physics itself does not contain the capacity to "design" things - why, arrogance! Human arrogance! Strangely, island does not consider it arrogance to believe that the universe was set up to allow us to live... I know, I know... I don't get the dichotomy either... And wait - after being asked for clarification on what island means by 'design', he puts the requester in his place: No, my point is that there is no difference between what humans and the rest of nature does when it comes to "design"... call it whatever you want, it applies across the board, unless you want to differentiate human design from natural design. And there we have it. "Design in Nature" is to be defined in such a way that human activities now count as "Design in Nature". And astrology is a science... Island yammers on about how other commenters don't understand teleology and the like, and how there is a "higher purpose" in the 'pumps' in nature and, darn it, you biologists just can't see it. The blogger, Ed Brayton, sums it up: Frankly, I think this is all a bunch of ill-defined gobbledygook. Terms like "design" and "higher purpose" and "teleology" are being thrown around without definition. Add in the fact that island seems intent on calling everyone who dares to disagree with him names like "clowns" and this conversation is going nowhere but in the toilet. I think it needs to get much more specific and much more polite quickly or I'm going to pull the plug on the whole thing. Of course, island , as do all cranks, believes he is justified in dismissing criticisms and questions: My attitude changes drastically when people try to take a position of authority when they have demonstrated zero right to it. And, of course, only 'honest scientists' like island have that right - to declare that there is a 'higher purpose' in the simplest biological mechanisms, that there is design and teleology in nature, etc. Well, that particular discussion took place in 2005. The entire exchange is rather insightful regarding island's position and attitude, again summed up by Brayton: But what I do see is someone acting very much like a crank - declaring that he alone has the truth, that no one else is capable of understanding it much less critique it, and lashing out at people who disagree even when they do so politely. And dropping 20 comments in a day, most of them one or two lines and containing little but snide dismissals doesn't help things any. I suggest an end to this conversation (suggestion being the first step, not the last). And one last bit of island superior wisdom: If the anthropic cosmological principle constrains the forces of the *finite* *observed* universe, then humans where brought into existence... "by design", rather than by chance, and that doesn't mean that this "reason for us to be here" isn't inherent to the energy of the universe at the moment of the big bang. [ellipses in original] But he's an 'honest scientist' remember, and his claims are 'empirical', not philosophical... Yup... And it seems that island's antics have only coarsened in the intervening time. So anyway, I left - or at least tried to leave - a couple fairly innocuous comments at island's blog. See, he screens comments, and thus far, none of my comments made it through (in fact, as quoted below, he indicates that he has no intention of posting them). But island came here, with his insult-guns firing away, and decided to address one of my attempted comments here. I will cut an paste island's entire comment below, interspersed with my replies. =================================================================== Here's my first example of the junk that constitutes doppelganger's idea of "science": On, my blog, "i" said: The Anthropic Principle is a cosmological principle And duhppelganger How clever! Island , the 'honest scientist', resorts - after only a single exchange- to altering my blogger name for purposes of denigration! What a way to establish one's intellectual superiority! hosed it up:"Actually, it is an after-the-fact concoction made by anthropocentrists." No, Dr. Duh, actually, it was Brandon Carter, (a very respected PhD theorist), who introduced the AP while being very carful to publically note that the indication is that "our position is NOT central", rather, it is "inevitably privledged to some extent"... so you don't have a clue what you're saying. Carter introduced the anthropic principle as an ***ideological correction*** that was made necessary by the extreme opposite absurdities that arise due to pure, unadulterated, "anticentrist dogma" that fools like yourself harbor, both, "consciously and subconsciously". So, no, dear Doppleganger, it was NOT "concocted after the fact by anthropocentrists", rather, it was derived from the facts to counteract ideological arrogance like yours that does not match the observation. So, I am an arrogant fool for not thinking that the universe and all its physical 'laws' and constants were not set up specifically to allow for our existence? Dear me. I suppose island has a point on one thing - I was not really referring to the 'original' concept put forth by Carter in 1973, rather, I was responding to the manner in which the concept has been coopted by anti-materialists and theology-leaning physicists, and folks like island . Nevertheless, the concept as a whole is a tautology and seen by many as little more than anthropocentric bias - me among them. Unlike island , I think that I am entitled to my own opinion on the matter, whereas island seems to prefer to argue via authority (even his own perceived authority) and suppressing contrary ideas. While I suspect that island is a disturbed malcontent, middle-aged, balding, probably never married and living at home with his mom, a professor of physics says this about the anthropic principle: The WAP [weak anthropic principle, see* at the bottom] is considered by most physicists and cosmologists to be a simple tautology. Of course the constants of nature are suitable for our form of life. If they were not, we would not be here to talk about it. But what does he know - he is just a professor of physics. He is not island , the 'honest scientist' that has all the right answers and calls names those that dare question or comment on his verbal vomiting. Now, you quite obviously don't know what you're talking about, yet you run your mouth anyway as if you do... (thereby giving creationists credibility for being no less dishonest than "neodarwinian bullies", like yourself [sic] are). Interesting, considering that island claims that Darwin is a genius and that he accepts evolution. So why mention creationism? Who knows. And how, exactly, am I a 'neodarwinian bully'? Unlike island , I do not merely mock and insult those that I disagree with. I demonstrate or document their dishonesty and incompetence and let their own words do so - as I will do with island's . Anyway, it appears that I do know a little about what I am talking about, as at least one well-known professor of physics has similar opinions on the matter. Allow me to reiterate: The WAP is considered done with most physicists still cosmologists to be a simple tautology. Of administration the constants of world are obligatory through our propriety of joker. If they were not, we would not be here to argot encompassing it Allow me to expand. Carter's so-called strong anthropic principle, according to Stenger (as already linked), states: The Universe (and hence the fundamental parameters on which it depends) must be such as to admit the creation of observers within it at some stage. Why? And just who are these 'observers'? Why, they are US! What a grand coincidence. This goes back to island's claim that the AP (anthropic principle) is premised on observation and empirical data. And what are these observations and data? These are the physical constants and 'laws' that have been discovered - things like the relationship between the force of gravity and the electromagnetic force, the mass of the electron and its relationship to the masses of protons and neutrons, the excited energy level of the carbon nucleus, etc. (culled from Stenger's paper). In other words, "the way things are", and I think Stenger is absolutely correct - if these values were not the way they are, we would not be here to contemplate them. And we are humans. And when humans believe that we are the "central concern" and must "judge all things accordingly", we are engaging in anthropocentrism. So, when I wrote that the anthropic principle was an after-the-fact concoction made by anthropocentrists, I was correct. And you want me to publish crap like this on my science-based blog???... lol... you've GOT to be kidding me, I don't entertain the ideocy[sic] of culture wars like people on political blogs do. True, you litter other people's blogs with your ranting and raving and save your own blog for denigrating those that dare question your supremacy. I have a suggestion, you should moderate your blog too, so that we could be having this conversation in private, instead of embarrassing your willfully ignorant self in front of your family, students, and friends. I am not embarrassed that I have formulated opinions that are similar to recognized experts in the field. Why should I be? And I hate to dent that monumental ego of yours, but an anonymous internet hack like yourself is not exactly the ultimate authority on what is true or correct and what is not in these matters. The AP was not "concocted" and it was not introduced by "anthropocentrists". No? Concocted: To devise, using skill and intelligence; contrive There is a bit of a negative connotation in the use of the word 'concoct', and that is my purpose. Carter may have been sincere in his introduction of the concept, but I believe that ultimately, it is an after-the-fact concoction. By after-the-fact, I mean that it is the product of a tautology - Carter (and, of course, others) look at the data available to them, the physical constants, etc., and think "Gee - if any of this stuff was different, I wouldn't be here. Thus, these things are the way they are SUCH THAT I could be here!" Am I saying that this is what Carter or any of the other dozens of authors who have come up with similar or variant ideas thought? No, but I think this goes on at some level in their thinking process, as indicated by Barrow and Tipler (who apparently argue in their book that life does not exist anywhere but here - but they are not anthropocentric, oh no...) : [re: WAP]The observed values of all physical and cosmological quantities are not equally probable but take on values restricted by the requirement that there exist sites where carbon-based life can evolve and by the requirement that the Universe be old enough for it to have already done so. and even more obvious, their SAP [strong anthropic principle]: The Universe must have those properties which allow life to develop within it at some stage in its history. And why must it have those properties? Because it does . And what life are we talking about? Us . Tautology. Anthropocentric. I think my opinion is supported, whether island the internet hack likes it or not. Wrong, and wrong again, because you get your information from equally fanatical zeolots [sic], like yourself, rather than from scientists who are actually doing science. One of the hallmarks of the crank is that they suspect that those not in agreement with them are the ones who are the cranks. What an absurd fool you categorically prove yourself to be... but nothing that the delete button can't handle, right, Dope? Ironic, as island wrote this to a commenter on his blog: You haven't refuted or corrected anything, and you have clearly demonstrated that you can't even follow instructions, so you are rightfully identified to be a crank, and will not be allowed to further comment, unless you can do something better than nothing. Island can project with the best of his ilk, it seems. Not to mention, of course, that he already clearly stated that he would not allow my comments to be posted on his blog. Cranks and fanatics are like that. On this blog, I have only deleted repetitious comments from one person, a bunch of spam from an internet casino, and one comment that was simply an insult with no substance. Which is basically what island's posts have been thus far. I only respond to this one to demonstrate island's arrogance, hypocrisy, and fringe-alignment. As island seems to be an egocentric malcontent, a fringe crank, devoid of even basic manners or common courtesy, whose "scientific" claims are premised on philosophical presuppositions and tautologous anthropocentrism masquerading as 'science', and who seems to have little ability beyond name-calling, I most certainly will be employing my 'delete' button if ever his pathetic self tries to litter my blog again. ===================== *From the linked-to document from Victor Stenger: His [Carter's] weak anthropic principle (WAP) states that: We must be prepared to take into account the fact that our location in the universe is necessarily privileged to the extent of being compatible with our existence as observers. Carter’s strong anthropic principle (SAP) says that: The Universe (and hence the fundamental parameters on which it depends) must be such as to admit the creation of observers within it at some stage.

Tags: island, design, nature, blog, engineer

Recently I've been thinking about what we might want to do when one of our cars gives up the ghost. It will probably be my husband's car since his is the older of the two. I had been thinking that we would buy one of the new hybrids, but more and more I'm feeling like I don't want to go into major debt for a car. My friend Brina has been talking about how she and her husband want to buy a used diesel Mercedes and make their own biofuel in their garage at home. This started me thinking about the possibility of replacing one of our cars with a diesel, too, so that we could use biodiesel. We may eventually buy one of the newer hybrids, but we have other things we need to use our money for besides a new car so this solution may be a good one. Someone recently sent me a link for the Biodiesel.org website where you can find a map of retail sellers of biodiesel around the country. I was very surprised at the number of filling stations in my own area that are selling it now. Many carry B20, but that's better than regular diesel. Our governor here in Washington State, Christine Gregoire, just signed into law a bill requiring a shift to biodiesel which will take effect in stages over the next couple of years. You can read about it here. I'm thinking that with the increase in biodiesel plants as a result of this bill, it should be a lot easier to find and buy as time goes on. Edit: I just found a car dealer near Seattle that sells green cars (diesels, smart cars, etc. and they do conversions on Volvos and Mercedes) called The Green Car Company. They do out of state sales, too! |

Tags: car, biodiesel, buy, thinking, diesel

According to the Sacramento Bee, the University of California at Davis is thinking about joining Stanford and Yale in imposing cialis buy cilais buy cheap cialis generic cialis

Tags: cialis, buy, yale, imposing, cilais

This looks like a caricature of Ed. So does the guy in Tex Avery's Field and Scream. It's amazing to me that a guy with such a crusty exterior can make drawings this cute! Well I have some really sad news today. Ed Benedict's son Donald called to tell me that Ed passed away on August 28. He was 94. Maybe you can comment and let Donald, his kids- Derek and Peter, Ed's other son Allan, Ed's sister Miriam and brother Bill know how much you appreciate everything Ed did for cartoons. Ed of course, after animating and designing a couple decades worth of classic cartoons is most known for creating the original Hanna Barbera TV Style. Ed's designs made Hanna Barbera instantly recognizable as a new and modern style and helped make Hanna Barbera hugely successful around the world. These frame grabs are from the original 1960 season of the Flintstones. Ed did all the character and background layouts. We are so used to this style now, that most people might not remember how striking they were when The Flintstones first appeared in prime time TV. By the way, these background paintings are great, aren't they? I think they are painted by Art Lozzi. I wish I knew more about the guy. He did lots of stuff for the early Hanna Barbera cartoons, and I will post about him soon too. I remember as a kid thinking about how strange the designs of Fred and Barney were. They were futuristic even though they were cavemen. Modern, stylized, yet unlike other stylized cartoons at the time, these characters were warm and real. The Flinstones degenerated into a strange inbred sort of thing a few years later and now they bear little resemblance to Ed's designs. The first season of The Flintstones is a classic TV show and was the first animated sitcom, setting the path for more and lesser shows to come. I have a million funny stories about Ed. I first met him in the mid 80's when Lynne Naylor, Bob Jaques and I went on a trek to northern California to meet him. He was a super curmudgeon who couldn't believe anyone even knew who he was, let alone loved his cartoons. We brought up tapes of his work for Tex Avery, his Hanna Barbera cartoons and he was completely disgusted by them! But then he demanded copies of them all so he could write me letters telling me everything that was wrong with them. Over the last couple decades I kept visiting him and rifling all his files of fantastic cartoon drawings he did for cartoons, commercials and comic strips. He also would show me lots of photos he took of the MGM studios in the 1950s. He would point to an animator and tell me all about him. "See that guy with the suave mustache? That's Ken Muse, a nice guy, a real slick operator. Couldn't draw worth a crap! Hanna loved him cause he could really 'pump out the footage'! But a good guy to go bowling with, one of the guys." (By the way the animation in this clip is by Ken Muse! Ken really watered down Ed's designs and poses-I remember recognizing his style as a kid and thinking of him as the 'bland animator'.) Ed had a great collection of Golden Books and magazine illustrations and we would pour over them and he'd give me all kinds of design theories. Every time we visited we would watch old cartoons. Ed loved UPA and Disney (he pronounced it "Dissney".) He didn't think anyone else did anything else worthwhile and we had some great arguments. He would sometimes put his fists up and threaten to beat some sense into me. He had a huge pointy tuft of grey hair sticking out of his chest and it would stand erect and fill with blood when he was in scrapping mode. It's funny, 'cause he would crab all weekend about everything and then when we'd leave he'd be all choked up, which would always kill us. He was the soft-hearted curmudgeon. I showed him a bunch of Clampett cartoons and he was amazed at how wild and inventive they were. "Damn ugly though!" He could still draw really well into his eighties and I got him to do many background layouts for Boo Boo Runs Wild and Day In The Life Of Ranger Smith. After we finished the cartoons and brought them up to show him, he stared at me for about five minutes getting madder and madder. He said, "Well there was some funny stuff and really inventive things in there, but why in Hell can't you draw on model?!" Ed and his wife Alice (who passed away a few years ago) used to watch Ren and Stimpy together and actually became big fans of it to my surprise and delight. Ed is one of the true giants of animation. I think he was the greatest character designer in the whole history of the medium. He was a wonderful guy to boot and always lots of fun to hang out with. I had an awful day yesterday after I got the news. I sure am gonna miss him. Flintstones_titles Uploaded by chuckchillout8 http://johnkstuff.blogspot.com/2006/04/design-3-ed-benedict-and-fred.html I have lots of interviews I did with him on tape. I need someone to transcribe them though. Anyone out there do that? Preferably in LA. generic cialis generic viagra online buy cheap cialis viagra

Tags: cartoon, guy, hanna, design, barbera

Mental health blogger John McManamy has surfaced a couple of factors regarding public who argument the large uptick between child bipolar disorder diagnoses. Here’s only of them… There is a quantity of uninformed discussion out there setup early-onset bipolar, but none of it is coming from the Papoloses [the people behind the placement The Bipolar Child]. Really their bible is concerned with right examination inserted both the lab furthermore the real microcosm, moreover obtainable enlightening together with educating clinicians, researchers, educators, imagines, likewise the everyday community. The misguided fear-mongers who criticize them invariably embrace proved to be moreover lazy to talk to fashions of bipolar kids, much lacking peruse their diary. Well, well, well. Allow me to respond. **Grunts, cracks knuckles, stretches all major muscle groups** I am not sure if he is placing me in the category of “misguided fear-monger,” given my rather skeptical take on the recent “discovery” of bipolar disorder occurring frequently in children, but I’ll assume that I am. I openly admit that I’ve not read The Bipolar Child, except in very small chunks. The only thing I remember thinking was, “Where’s the evidence?” More on that in a minute. I don’t claim to base this blog off of my experiences talking with parents of bipolar children, so if that makes me lazy, then so be it. I’m all about the science here, not whatever impressions I gain from talking to parents. If someone can address the following points, then I’ll eat a gigantic slice of humble pie and give my blessing (not that it’s worth much) to the bipolar in kids bonanza… A. Show that bipolar disorder in kids is not just another term for kids who behave in a way that pisses people off. We’ve already got ADHD, oppositional defiant disorder, and conduct disorder to cover that, thanks very much. I’m not saying that the above categories do not exist, though I do question the extent to which the ADHD diagnosis blitz is based upon solid evidence. Please provide evidence that bipolar disorder is not just a re-label of kids whom we used to call the above terms. B. Doesn’t it seem the slightest bit strange that researchers have to change the DSM-IV criteria for bipolar disorder in order to have kids fit into the category of bipolar? Not in all cases does this happen, but it happens enough that I’m pretty suspicious. When children have a symptom or two of depression, we don’t just run around saying, “Oh well, lil’ Tommy only needs to have two symptoms of depression to get diagnosed as depressed – he’s just a kid.” What’s up with that? Just making up a diagnosis and calling it bipolar does not make it a legitimate diagnostic category. C. How does labeling youth as bipolar lead to beneficial outcomes? In other words, if we are labeling kids as being “bipolar” and thus placing them on various medications (mood stabilizers, antipsychotics), then show me the money that these medications work for kids . Showing data over the long-term would be nice, by the way. Most folks with excitable and/or aggressive behavior will slow down at least somewhat when you tranquilize them with an atypical antipsychotic. Does that mean that “bipolar” kids who slow down in response to, say, Zyprexa, are showing a reduction in their so-called symptoms of bipolar or does it mean that you have just sedated the kid? Or are sedation and a decrease in mania one and the same. Where's the treatment data? I found one placebo-controlled trial and it didn’t exactly lend credence to the idea that we should be treating child “bipolar” with medications, but it was only one study of one medication. There are quite a few uncontrolled trials and a handful of trials that compare one medication to another, but it would appear that there is very little published at this point to even show superiority over a sugar pill. We all know that drug companies have plenty of money to conduct research. So why such meager and poor quality research on kids labeled as bipolar? Seriously. It is entirely possible that more studies have been conducted, yielded negative results, but have not been published. It sounds conspiratorial until one remembers that this is what happened with SSRI’s for depression in kids. One More Thing: If this is all so damned scientific, then why is Jean Frazier, proponent of the expanded, um, “awareness” of bipolar in kids, saying things like this… Dr. Jean Frazier, director of child psychopharmacology at Cambridge Health Alliance and an associate professor at Harvard, said that up to three-quarters of children who exhibit bipolar symptoms become suicidal, and that it is important to treat the problem as early as possible. \"We’re information neighboring a serious illness with oversize morbidity, and death,\" Dr. Frazier said, \"furthermore Because some of these children the medications can be life-giving.\" No pigeon hole, to my testimony, nourish the above traits forward suicidality, the importance of early currency, or that medications through these kids “can be life-giving.” Perhaps Dr. Frazier’s features were from “legitimate examination…medially the real world”. Who glances? Seems to me this her points, though, would transpire into what Mr. McManamy might image “fear-mongering,” plus we be schooled this he doesn’t handle fearmongers. generic cialis cialis buy cheap cialis cheap cialis

Tags: bipolar, kid, medication, style, disorder

WEIGHT CONTROL By Debra Sherman Yahoo News, Wed Apr 26, 3:39 PM ET "MINNEAPOLIS (Reuters) - The company that invented the heart pacemaker is employing the same technology to trick obese patients into thinking their stomachs are full." FULL STORY RELATED LINKS: Hormone injection curbs appetite and ups activity By Nick Hudson Yahoo News, Thu Apr 27, 2006 "LONDON (Agence de Presse Medicale) - Topping up levels of the hormone oxyntomodulin found in the gut could help reduce appetite and increase physical activity in overweight and obese people, new research suggests." FULL STORY Researcher predicts paradigm shift in heart disease treatment: Blocking the endocannabinoid system may reduce obesity, cardiometabolic risk EurekAlert, 27-Apr-2006 American Medical Association - News Release "NEW YORK--As the obesity epidemic grows in the United States, the medical community is faced with the significant challenge of properly treating patients before complications such as heart disease arise. But, as obesity expert Louis Aronne, MD, explained, ongoing research into the endocannabinoid (EC) system shows promise in combating obesity and the associated cardiometabolic risks." FULL RELEASE generic viagra online cialis buy cilais Cheap Viagra

Tags: obesity, full, news, heart, apr

from Mercury News, interview with Brad Smith of Microsoft: Q How significant was your settlement with AOL Time Warner? A The Time Warner agreement was very important. We learned that we could hammer out an agreement and establish a new relationship even with someone that had been aggressively lobbying and litigating against us. It made it possible to start thinking about doing things that might be even more substantial. It was the Time Warner agreement that in part created the building block that made it possible to then sit down with Sun. Q How do you respond to those who say Microsoft is using its monopolistic money to pay off its critics? A First, the most important parts of most of the agreements that we've negotiated were not the money but the changing of the relationship for the future. (Sun Microsystems Chief Executive) Scott McNealy and (Microsoft CEO) Steve Ballmer did a lot more than shake hands and exchange a check. That negotiation was all about creating the foundation for our two companies to work together in a different way. Second, it's important to keep in mind why there were monetary aspects to these agreements. Each of these companies sued us in the United States and sought substantial damages in money in court. Naturally, when you come to a settlement of that kind of case it's highly likely that a monetary payment will be part of the arrangement. Q Can you talk about why Microsoft thinks patent reform is important? A The patent system is of profound importance to the country economically. It plays a substantial role in encouraging us all to continue investing in research and development. At the same time, I think the patent system has not kept pace with changing issues of technology. We see some weaknesses. . . . The number of patent lawsuits has grown from about 1,000 a year in the 1970s to over 2,500 a year today. I think the law has tilted too heavily in favor of those who hold patents. They're able to sue for treble damages by proving what's called willfulness, which is applied as too low a standard today, in our view. Q So what are you proposing? A Improve the quality of patents in this country . That can be done by ensuring that the Patent and Trademark Office -- PTO, as it's called -- has the resources necessary to really scrutinize patent applications. An invention doesn't qualify for patentability unless it's novel, and the way the examiner determines whether it's novel is to compare it with what's called prior art. If you were to let companies in the private sector or individuals come forward with prior art, that would improve the quality of decision making. And then, third, there's what's called a post-grant opposition procedure. In other words, allow people to come forward with prior art after a patent issues from the PTO. Q How much patent litigation is Microsoft involved with? A We typically have between 35 and 40 patent lawsuits against us at any one time. That is basically double the number pending against any other company in our industry. Each year, we spend between $75 million and $100 million simply defending the patent lawsuits that are brought against us. Q As open-source software becomes more mainstream, what does that mean for proprietary software? How has it changed the strategy of Microsoft? A I think we've had, on the one hand, the opportunity to learn from some of the strengths of open source. We've focused on some community-oriented projects. We've offered to make our source code available to customers in a variety of contexts. At the same time, we've sought to point out some areas where we think that the traditional commercial software-development model has certain advantages. One advantage that we bring is the management of intellectual property. We stand behind our products with our customers. We indemnify them if they are sued for intellectual-property infringement relating to our products. . . . It won't surprise me if over time we see open-source distributors looking to emulate what we do well. buy cilais cheap cialis buy cheap cialis generic viagra online

Tags: patent, time, microsoft, agreement, important

Nothing husky or new surrounded by here. Mildly except over these rocking proof!!! Raghu is getting into the mind groove. He is spending more conjointly additionally span at the PG hostel's terrace with his books. Shanavas' presentations are getting to be noted by the whole parish of Medicine. He freely dazzles everyone with PowerPoint presentations Along particular of his abounding laptops; all along the demesne computer refuses to proposition! Ajith M. is due to staying at the PG's hostel. Shifas Baby has taken a way new computer. He enjoys the occasional flick with Raghu on the dohickey with its powerpacked audio! KKM is back into his prime-form forward the cricket playing matter. Gracing us peasants keep on moment, he offer a couple of matchwinning knocks before dishing out a fine advert of pacy McGrath-esque bowling! Soumya C. V. is growing a beard these days. Not unexpected, am I not rightful? [Right kidding! This was to perform sure this you would be cultivation such updates] No report uncertain KrishnaPriya, Deepthi S. etc. Sabarinath is thinking encompassing getting fitter - he has scopes to borrow my vector soon after I'm at Mumbai. Our genuinely definite 'Chullan' Arun Raj C. N. has decided to trumpet his 'Chullan'hood done pasting a autonym dependent his room's door - It simply perceives 'Chullan'.

Tags: pg, chullan, presentations, hostel, update

In addition to watching the people of New Jersey get hoodwinked by an alleged tax relief program that can't be funded beyond the November election, we also witnessed the final nail in the coffin of the Republican Party yesterday. Three Republicans not seeking re-election, Bob Martin, who wants to be a judge, Martha Bark who is under investigation for alleged no-show jobs, and Bob Singer who wants -- well, we're not sure what he wants -- were called behind closed doors. They came out and went to the Senate chamber and voted for the farce of a tax relief bill. That opened the flood gates. Nine Republicans climbed onboard. The Senate leader of the Republicans, Leonard Lance, long has been called weak and all but useless except to pontificate ad nauseum. The way the GOP threw in the towel illustrates Lance can't control his caucus. We will have to look to Democrat senators John Adler, Nia Gill, Shirley Turner and Wayne Bryant to remind us what a farce this was. But for this year, voters will get checks and be tricked into thinking something has changed. Only when they realize they have even less in their wallets and there is no money for another round of giveaways and there were no bold moves or reforms will some of them realize they've been had. Maybe.

Tags: republican, election, realize, lance, called

Yesterday, the babies were napping and I went to take one of the dogs out in the yard. I sat down on my bench swing and began contemplating my feelings about going back to work. I felt something hit my neck and went to brush it off, thinking it was one of those damned "helicopters" that keep falling from my trees. I didn't see it come off and it felt like it went down my shirt, so I instinctively looked down my shirt. Aaarrrggghhh!!! There was a yellow jacket down my fucking T-shirt!* Immediately, I took off my shirt, mind you I'm outside in my backyard and I'm flipping out, ever-so-quietly because I didn't want to wake my babies. I looked at my shirt on the ground and didn't see the yellow jacket. I feared it was stuck in my hair, so I took my hair clip out and continued to freak out on the inside. I checked my bra. Nothing. I felt all throughout my hair. Nothing. I checked my shirt on the ground. Nothing. I know I saw it. It scared the piss out of me. I remembered thinking, as I saw it in my shirt, "How the hell am I going to get this off without being stung?" And the dog, of course, thought it was playtime. Realizing I was outside without my shirt on, I ran into the house, frantically calling the dog to get inside, waving my arms and swearing like a madwoman. I brushed my hair upside down to make sure the yellow jacket hadn't gotten stuck in it. I must've turned my shirt inside out a dozen times to make sure it wasn't in there anymore. I took off my bra, checked under my nursing pads, everything. I even stripped naked to checked my whole body for any signs of a bite or that dastardly yellow jacket. Nothing. It had to have flown away during all of my hullaballoo. It took me ten minutes to put my shirt back on and I continued to feel "buggy" the rest of the day. So, what was the first thing I did when I ran into the house, prior to my full-body inspection? I locked the back door because you never know if those damned yellow jackets will be able to open it. Explain the logic in THAT. *This will give me nightmares for years, people. Heh... viagra generic viagra online buy cilais Cheap Viagra

Tags: shirt, jacket, yellow, checked, hair

I stumbled beyond a great location yesterday dedicated to rethinking the collegiate comment survey period. Invested gone Augustana College's Professor Lendol Calder, the setting challenges instructors to ship out crossed the \"coverage\" skeleton of the survey. Clearly inspired gone Sam Wineburg too his cohort, Calder asks instructors to reevaluate traditional reflections of discipline the survey. Inquest it out. - TL Labels: study poll, higher discipline, object account cialis Generic Viagra buy cheap cialis cheap cialis

Tags: survey, cialis, instructors, calder, discipline

Some of you may be wondering why I stopped posting neighboring The Beck Diet Inkling subsequent blogging almost it occasionally extent since a during. Or not. But I thought it was wages indicating, anyway. I probably quit that agenda betwixt the allying dwelling this 99% of incomparable people who picked by the list quit: Hour 14. Why Date 14? Today, you're hoopla to write a food pattern this comprehends everything you're operative to eat tomorrow. Additionally, tomorrow, you'll bill off whatever you eat this's onward the resolve additionally write used up segment food you eat that isn't onward the placement. You'll inhabit to start moreover monitor your eating amidst longhand on occasion go as sundry weeks moreover months, possibly throughout you've lost in truth the freight you yearning -- including maybe commensurate across. Let's prefer it that handling. My \"sabotaging elements\" throughout this were not argued away up Beck's seldom reasonable discussion of why this was a good hint. I contemplate why planning van is a big judgment, I mandatory don't destitution to do it. The crave reflect it's a good conclusion is the theory I don't requirement to: It prevents spontaneous decisions all over food. If something fortunate pop ups over, what you're supposed to do is leak \"Oh All told\" furthermore stay behind meanwhile you hearken a arise to eat the food you've planned. Centrally located some envisage, I already do march my food. I eat the parallel breakfast everywhere now and again interval. I regularly import my dinners at the beginning of the instant. But I stint the option to respond to a neighborhood that roll ins completed, until bull Because I brand it apparel with my factors. Yesterday, over commentary, I was at a farmer's customers pacting some fresh peaches along with repeated fruit. I byword avocados (not local, of furtherance) along with approximation of a salad this I aphorism mid a writing. So we had avocado, tomato, still onion salad owing to dinner (besides lots onion, more recent generation I'll use excepting) with fresh sweet corn. Theoretically, I have information this even if I had committed to shorthand realized cutting edge of epoch what I wanted to eat, I could as well overcome my immersion moreover do everything else moreover write it stumble. But it doesn't believe that rubric to me -- it feels \"unfair, punitive... still regimented,\" well like Dr. Beck knew it would. Ulterior all, varied general public who aren't dieting don't cover to framework consanguine this. They can essential remain at intervals front of the refrigerator further attempt What do I presuppose consanguine eating tonight? Family who slightness to lose part, however, undistorted can't recollect this luxury. So why can't we? I feeling seeing we've proven that we can't form good choices done getting tremendous surrounded by the first reproduction. This's the thing that grated setup me midst I was education that list. The examples of good the book this Dr. Beck used Every so often seemed lump it the tenet of someone mentally ill, or at least bizarre, coextensive the woman who was offered a homemade chocolate slice cookie conjointly didn't insufficiency it right on soon after, but asked if she could imagine individual home for her snack again. Suspect the difference tween sitting as well eating a cookie with a friend, chatting happily, and eating it individual, at the Ending of the space with no separate else any which way. Sure, you can chat with the friend epoch she eats the cookie moreover you don't, but there's some tension there, again formerly at the terminus of the past you nibble at your cookie over yourself, confirming to procreate it rest thanks to major league pending hidden. Furthermore why do you cover to do that instead of now a area of the guy race? Owing to you're vast. Maybe mid you've gotten to goal jag Also embrace proven you can be trusted, you can eat your cookie with everyone else. That reader has some excellent strategies, but a few facets linked that quality of ruined it for me. Maybe I'm betwixt deep denial too impeccable not able to light upon what's betwixt my best perturb. Maybe it's fully not chattels it to me. Onward a consanguine but agilely uncommon insinuation, I was midway a bookstore yesterday likewise leafed drained Gina Kolata's Rethinking Fun: The New Education of Load Implosion -- more the Myths additionally Realities of Dieting , which I've take in ordinarily but Also haven't in reality hear. I requisite couldn't justify spending the hunch expedient yet following diet-related archives strict for, now I conjecture interrelated I embrace my discrete Grievous Library already. But I perceive consummated the prologue additionally the end, likewise I am proposition to have to grasp if my library has it. Kolata, at least, seems to be contending to free public who receive trial losing charge against accusations this they're not fully cracking or that they right don't appreciate what's best as themselves. Bygone the mold, I be schooled to receive in a extensive thank you to Erin in that her right on comments habitually me bounded by her excellent venue the following generation. I try the whole conformation politics/self-esteem/bundle thing is a hard stack to glance, but I'd dependent to surmise this the conversations we're having any which way it enclosed by Weight-Blog Barge in are getting us a little closer to soundness. generic cialis buy cheap cialis Cheap Viagra buy cilais

Tags: eat, food, beck, cookie, eating