I am going directly from FLickr to WordPress with this test.
The news a few weeks ago was that hybrid sharks had been found off the coast of Australia. They looked like tropical Australian black-tip sharks, but genetic testing revealed that they’d hybridized with the common black-tip, which has a wider range; these hybrid black-tips were similarly extending their range and living in colder waters.
This is an excellent example of evolution: it’s a population shifting its range, correlated with an observation of novel genetic attributes. This is exactly the kind of gradual transition that we’d expect to be compatible with evolutionary theory.
Unless you’re a creationist, of course. Or an idiot. But I repeat myself.
I wonder if they ever considered that when you stand back and look at them, they are all sharks. That means they are the same kind of animal. That is not evolution taking place; there is no changing from one kind of animal into another kind of animal happening here. We started with a shark and now we have a shark. That is not evolution!
Yes. define evolution as something that is not evolution. That is how creationists role.
When I read the story, my first thoughts were how the hybrids reacted to changing conditions, did the hybrids exhibit a greater ability to deal with the new environments and, if so, how much better was it than either parent alone.
To a creationist, the story leads to denialism and no further questions.
Scientists knew this over 400 years ago. Johannes Kepler, when describing the first nova seen in the West in the Middle Ages, stated:
Priusquam autem ad creationem, hoc est ad finem omnis disputationis, veniamus: tentanda omnia existimo.
However, before we come to [special] creation, which puts an end to all discussion: I think we should try everything else.
Even then, scientists realized that special denialism stopped discussions and prohibited understanding of the world around us.
Demonstrating again the versatility of the device, researchers at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign have developed a cradle and app that turns Apple’s iPhone into a powerful biosensor in the vein of Star Trek’s fabled tricorders.
Here is the video demonstrating doing a spectral analysis of two samples. Pretty amazing.
And getting to set up for actual medical examination of things like vitamin A deficiency.
Their technology uses photonic crystals o detect all sorts of molecules. This material, which they can deposit directly on a slide, affects specific wavelengths of light – whether they are reflected or transmitted. It provides a useful waveguide for examining what happens when different wavelengths of light hit a biological substance on the slide.
Essentially, the wavelengths reflected change after a molecule binds. They have used this to detect very small amounts of DNA. They have also used it in a screening approach for cancer cell therapies.
They can prime the device allowing them to look for a specific molecule, such as a protein or DNA. And they say that the $200 in parts is as accurate as a $50,000 spectrophotometer.
In a recent paper, the researchers describe how they used the system to detect the presence of an antibody in a concentration dependent way.
And they have more ideas on the way.
The printer has allowed researchers from the Victorian Organic Solar Cell Consortium (VICOSC) – a collaboration between CSIRO, The University of Melbourne, Monash University and industry partners – to print organic photovoltaic cells the size of an A3 sheet of paper. According to CSIRO materials scientist Dr Scott Watkins, printing cells on such a large scale opens up a huge range of possibilities for pilot applications.
Being able to cheaply print out solar power cells could change things once again.
This technology could allow solar cells to be placed in all sorts of locations not found today. And these cells can be designed to efficiently capture certain wavelengths that standard solar panels cannot.
Such additive manufacturing will change many things.
The comic explains the piracy that really hurts companies – the people who want to buy the product but can’t.
Pirates that simply coopy without thinking about paying are nevert going to be dislodged. But a large number of people using these sites want the product – they just can not get to it legally.
As Apple showed with iTunes, make it easy and legal and people will pay.
Putting people in jail is not the right approach.
Word on the street is Google Reader’s social functions, its funky community of shares and comments, and the archives of these interactions, will all be flushed down the memory hole tomorrow.
I check my Reader every day and it’s always a minute or two before I realize that these people I’m following, these comment threads I’ve become accustomed to, these excellent finds – will all be gone.
And Now Google Reader is messed around with. I think Google’s focus on social sharing to compete with Facebook will harm it. It is competing head to head with way too many companies – Apple with regard to mobile devices, Facebook for Social sites, Microsoft on Search.
Can gmail be far behind?
I just do not believe it will be able to keep its eyes on the prize in so many different areas. We can see this in the problems each area has. Google is starting to fall into the same sort of trap others have of trying to be all things to everyone in all the cutting edge areas.
I simply do not trust Google like I used to. They are becoming more and more interested in doing things for their own purposes rather than making my life better. They are focussing on copying others, becoming the second to market in areas rather than the best.