« | »

Reader Selected News For Week Mar 29 – Apr 4

This thread is for the busy bees of S&L to post news articles that might not warrant their own thread.

Posting Guidelines

To make the articles as readable as possible, please:

  • Only post news from established news media outlets.
  • Avoid editorials or opinion pieces unless they are truly newsworthy.
  • Avoid items that most people most likely have seen elsewhere.
  • Post articles that fit under the topic of a recent thread as a comment there.
  • Always spell out the name of the source and post a link to it.
  • Always post less than one quarter of the original article.

Posts of articles that do not follow these guidelines may be edited or deleted.

Thank you.

This article was posted by Steve on Friday, March 28th, 2014. Comments are currently closed.

9 Responses to “Reader Selected News For Week Mar 29 – Apr 4”

  1. captstubby says:

    Search for potential ‘planet X’ far from over
    By Nola Taylor Redd March 28, 2014
    The hunt for the hypothetical “Planet X” has been fruitless so far, but that doesn’t mean astronomers are calling it off.
    A new analysis of data collected by NASA’s Wide-Field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE) spacecraft revealed no sign of the mysterious Planet X hypothesized to exist in the outer solar system. But scientists are keeping up the search for a planet or dim star far from the sun.
    “We have a natural desire to better determine the contents of our solar system,” Luhman said. “There’s a vast volume of space in the outer solar system, and we would like to know what’s out there.”
    And a recent find may give a boost to the hunt for Planet X. On Wednesday, March 26, researchers announced they had discovered a dwarf planet orbiting the sun in a distant, largely unexplored region known as the inner Oort Cloud.
    For more than a century, astronomers have considered the possibility that another massive body exists in the outer solar system.
    Percival Lowell coined the term “Planet X” at the turn of the 20th century to refer to an undiscovered large planet that could be responsible for perturbing the orbits of Uranus and Neptune. More recently, the idea grew to incorporate a possible dwarf-star companion to the sun, nicknamed ” Nemesis.”…
    A companion could also have escaped detection by WISE if it has a relatively small mass and lies extremely far away. The smaller and dimmer an object is, the harder it becomes to spot as it draws farther away.
    “I think people are amazed by the fact that we can detect galaxies billions of light-years away, and yet there are parts of our own solar system that remain uncharted and unexplored,” Luhman said.
    i sort of noticed that myself…
    but the Planet X reminds me of…

    On September 23, 1846, astronomers Galle and d’Arrest, both from Berlin, announced the discovery of a new planet, which was later named Neptune. The remarkable thing about this discovery was that the astronomers made their discovery by aiming their telescope at a location in the sky based on the mathematical calculations of the French astronomer Urbain Jean Joseph Leverrier. Leverrier had become interested in the problem of the orbit of the recently discovered planet Uranus. The perceived sightings of Uranus seemed to deviate somewhat from the orbit calculated from Newtonian mechanics…

    • captstubby says:

      breaking news update!
      I was told that Spock’s Planet Vulcan is cloaked.
      I will rely on someone to verify .
      and does Maxwell Smart “the cone of silence” count?
      Could a Planet Be ‘Cloaked’?
      Dec 11, 2011 07:09 AM ET // by Jennifer Ouellette
      The latest research on this comes from the University of Michigan, where engineering professor L. Jay Guo has developed a “perfect black” type of cloth that can render a 3D object “invisible.” Guo’s work is described in a new paper in Applied Physics Letters.
      It’s basically a black carpet made out of carbon nanotubes (CNT), capable of absorbing 99.9 percent of the light that hits it. “It’s not cloaking, as the object can still cast a shadow,” Guo cautioned. “But if you put an object on a black background, then with this coating, it could really become invisible.”
      Combine that with the fact that CNTs are near-perfect absorbers of light — if any light does scatter or reflect, it gets absorbed before it reaches our eyes — and you’ve got a recipe for at least a kind of “invisibility”: making 3D objects appear 2D, and vanishing from view when placed against a black background.
      Unlike metamaterials, which usually only work within limited spectrums of light — microwaves, for example — the CNT coating works across a much broader range.
      Guo also speculates that a similar type of substance might be found in the universe, effectively hiding entire planets or stars from our telescopes’ probing eyes.
      “Since deep space itself is a perfect dark background, if a planet or star were surrounded by a thick, sooty atmosphere of light-absorbing carbon nanomaterial gases, it would become invisible due to the same principle,”…

    • GetBackJack says:

      “ .. Christians will not immediately need to renounce their faith in God simply on
the basis of the reception of [this] new, unexpected information of a religious
character from extraterrestrial civilizations. However, once the religious
content originating from outside the earth has been verified they will have
to conduct a re-reading [of the Gospel] inclusive of the new data…”

      Vatican Astronomer, Eminent Theologian, Full Professor of Fundamental Theology, 
Pontificia Università della Santa Croce in Rome
      Father Giuseppe Tanzella-Nitti

      Vatican Astronomer, Mount Graham, Arizona

    • canary says:

      Scientists recently found 3 more planets and said they believed they were ice with earth the ice broke because they appeared reddish in color.

      Anyways, they said it also meant the skies reached far further than they ever believed.

      I was watching where the US has hidden places where they experiment with animals. There’s no telling what’s out there.

      Now scientists are saying they can make synthetic DNA their first development was yeast.

      Reminds me of that South Korean Scientist that became so famous lying about his findings and not only did he have to pay 160 million dollars back, but was sent to prison for a long time, maybe for life.

      Scientists that commit fraud need to go to prison more.

      Much of what they said about stem cells has turned out to be wrong and misleading, and it’s been determined for that stem cells from embryos are of no benefit.

      We have not scratched the surface.

      I don’t know of anything in the Bible that rules out extraterrestrial civilizations on other planets, whether they appear like flying scorpions with stings of death or they are man-made flying objects that sting with death. Like drones.

  2. captstubby says:

    Obama considers new climate regulations for oil, gas sector
    By Roberta Rampton and Timothy Gardner | Reuters

    The White House said on Friday it will take a hard look at whether new regulations are needed to cut emissions of methane from the oil and gas industry, part of President Barack Obama’s plan to address climate change.

    The suggestion drew a sharp rebuke from the main oil and gas lobby group. The American Petroleum Institute said its members were already taking steps that will cut emissions and expressed concern that more regulations could put a damper on natural gas drilling by raising costs.

    But environmental groups said regulations are needed to make sure all players take action to reduce methane emissions. The greenhouse gas is 84 times more effective than carbon dioxide at trapping heat in the first 20 years after being released, according to the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

    The White House said regulators will propose new rules later this year to reduce venting and flaring from oil and gas wells on public lands, one way to begin cutting emissions of methane.

    However, most oil and gas production takes place on privately owned land. So the Environmental Protection Agency is going to study this year whether additional, broader regulations are needed for methane emissions under the Clean Air Act, said Dan Utech, Obama’s top energy and climate aide.

    If the agency deems more regulations are needed, they will be completed before Obama leaves the White House at the end of 2016, Utech said.

    Obama has said he wants to cut U.S. greenhouse gas emissions to 17 percent below 2005 levels by the year 2020.

    Methane is the main component of natural gas. It is also released by dairy farms, landfills and coal mines.

    The EPA will propose additional regulations for methane produced by new landfills in coming months, and will consider updating rules for existing landfills, the White House said.

    Next month, regulators will gather comment on developing a program to curb methane emissions from coal mines on land leased from the federal government.

    The government will also work with the dairy industry on voluntary measures to cut emissions from their barns, the White House said.

    But the biggest part of its strategy looks at how to stop leaks of methane from natural gas wells and pipelines, which the White House said was responsible for 28 percent of U.S. methane emissions in 2012.

    Recent studies have found that U.S. methane emissions have been higher than estimated by the EPA. A study led by Stanford University last month said emissions of the gas from the U.S. natural gas supply chain were nearly two times higher than current estimates.

    this comment was posted by” Dahun ”
    “The following is a brief description of the questions on the UN IPCC AR7 Report posed by the APS (American Physical Society) which consists of 50,000 physicists. The APS has been a staunch supporter of the Global Warming Theory. It seems that has changed as the theory has become more and more impossible.
    – Neither the 4th or 5th report predicts the Pause we have experienced for the last 17 years. What do you attribute the pause to. If the causes have overridden the warming isn’t it possible that these same forces caused the previous warming.
    – What affect does the pause have on your stated confidence. Can the diminished warming be caused by the lower solar activity we are experiencing?
    – You say the pause may have been caused by ocean heat. What causes the heat to turn on and off and could this hidden heat been the cause of past warming. Explain this.
    – You say that the pause is caused by internal variability, but this is very rare and since it is chaotic and unpredictable how can you be confident in predicting climate?
    – What are the gaps in your knowledge of climate and exactly what has caused your 5% increase in confidence.
    – Your calculations for forcing have been off by a factor of three for the last 30 years. Why would we spend trillions on something about which you have been so wrong about. Once again how does this increase your confidence?
    – You base your predictions on 40 models and pick the few that come closest to actuals. How effective are your models taken as a whole and how is it possible to rely on data provided in such a cherry picking way?
    – The APS notes that the 5th IPCC report acknowledged model overestimates of climate sensitivity to C02 increases, both in transient and equilibrium modes:
    “As the observational value of TCR [transient climate response] is simply estimated to be approximately 1.3degC, it appears that the models overestimate this crucial climate parameter by almost 50%.”
    Please comment on the above assessment.
    Box 12.2 of AR5 Working Group 1 states: ‘Unlike ECS [equilibrium climate sensitivity], the ranges of TCS [transient climate sensitivity] estimated from the observed warming and from AOGCMs [ Atmosphere-Ocean General Circulation Model] agree well, increasing our confidence in the assessment of uncertainties in projections over the 21st century.’ Please comment on that statement in light of the discussion above.
    – Solar and thermal warming of the atmosphere is 500 watts per square meter, if the carbon dioxide levels leaped by 150 PPM this would mean the warming (by your calculations) would be 4 watts per square meter. How is it possible that this would cause dangerous warming? Your calculations are simply not possible.
    – Why do you report the decrease of ice in the Arctic and ignore the increase in Antarctica? The rise in ocean levels would require ten times the warming you claim is possible, how do you explain this?

    It seems that the position of the APS is that the AR7 Report from the UN IPCC has been written by Flat Earthers. This also dispels the often repeated lie that 97% of scientists support the Global Warming theory.”

    • canary says:

      good one.

      I was reading they decide the sea level rising by studying the Arctic with sateites that take images. And the problem is the satelites move around and may get kicked over for miles and miles. I guess that’s why man they put all those digital color markings of different colors.

      For instance some of the images they show looking for the plane, you can clearly see waves in the Indian Ocean, but the material they show in the images have no depth, and their shapes all long oblong with sharp corners.
      The first image I recall they thought might be a piece of the wreckage was shaped like boat or small ship.
      Now they images where you can clearly see the waves of the water, but with white spots that are oblong with sharp edges. And then they try and measure the pieces to the meaurements of the planes structure.
      Not once have I heard anyone say the tail is the weakest part of the plane.
      Point is man is marking his own images manually over the statelite images.
      The local news here of 3 channels all have different images on the screen and use different colors and patterns as to what the weatherman want’s it to look like. Maybe one will have the red color turning in circles, which from cast to cast might mean high winds, or might mean pouring rain.

      The news said Obama announced he is going to have the EPA test “landfills” for methane.

      Where is the landfill that will be tested located.
      How old is the landfill. (example. Was the landfill started 50 million years ago, or 50 years ago, or 5 years ago?
      How deep is the landfill.
      What items are in the landfill and how many of each item is in the landfill. (example: what food items, how much food items, paper items, plastic items, and what is the dates was each item produced and how long has each item been in the landfill. Is it just in the last year methane showed up and exactly why?

      How close to an urban area (and the size of the urban area), busy traveled street (number of SUV and diesal trucks) , factory, farm, or oil or natural gas was the landfill tested?

      What product did you use to put the air example in, or did you put a swab in the air and how close to the landfill,
      or how many feet deep did you drill landfill with the test and exactly what kind of drill did you use?
      Was there any collapsing of the ground or a “mudslide” in the landfill over the years.
      What is the estimate of trash that has moved downward from gravity or being knocked down by trash on top?
      Which way was the wind blowing.

      Forget that recycle bin your’e now paying for. Soon, curbs will have ten different bins as people will have to separate recycle items, but maybe not. After all, going through the trash creates jobs.

    • captstubby says:

      where are the the 50,000,000 to 200,000,000 climate refugees we were supposed to have by 2010.


      “SRGJAN KERIM, President of the General Assembly, opened the discussion by saying that 11 of the last 12 years had ranked among the 12 warmest since the keeping of global temperature records had begun in 1850. Two points were significant: that climate change was inherently a sustainable-development challenge; and that more efforts than ever before must be exerted to enable poor countries to prepare for impacts because it had been estimated that there would be between 50 million and 200 million environmental migrants by 2010.”

      The Claim: 50 million climate refugees will be produced by climate change by the year 2010. Especially hard hit will be river delta areas, and low lying islands in the Caribbean and Pacific. The UN 62nd General assembly in July 2008 said: …it had been estimated that there would be between 50 million and 200 million environmental migrants by 2010.

      The Test: Did population go down in these areas during that period, indicating climate refugees were on the move? The answer, no.

      The Proof: Population actually gained in some Caribbean Island for which 2010 census figures were available. Then when challenged on these figures, the UN tried to hide the original claim from view. See: The UN “disappears” 50 million climate refugees, then botches the disappearing attempt

      The Change in claim: Now it is claimed that it will be 10 years into the future, and there will be 50 million refugees by the year 2020.

      What Happens When Your Country Drowns?
      —By Rachel Morris
      November/December 2009 Issue66

      IN JUNE, I TRAVELED to the verdant, secluded campus of Columbia University’s Earth Institute, near the New York Palisades, to find out how global warming will reconfigure the world’s political geography. Earth Institute scientists, along with researchers from the United Nations University, have conducted a global study to chart how environmental change will affect vulnerable populations.

      Alex de Sherbinin, one of the project’s lead researchers, explained that the investigation was prompted by the realization that existing data about how many people could be uprooted by climate change had been “essentially grabbed from thin air.” The most commonly cited factoid, which pops up even in authoritative sources like the British government’s Stern Review on climate change, predicts 200 million “environmental refugees” by 2050—1 in every 34 people on Earth. But even the scholar who produced that number—Norman Myers, an Oxford ecologist—concedes that it required some “heroic extrapolations.” None of the existing figures uses a vetted scientific methodology, and most rely instead on crude estimations, like choosing the most sensitive regions and assuming that every single inhabitant will have to leave.

      De Sherbinin’s project takes a more fine-grained approach. “We found that livelihood would be the main factor in how people decide to stay or go,” he explained. The aim is to connect hard scientific data about glacier melt, precipitation, drought, and sea rise with knowledge of how people interact with their environment, obtained through extensive field interviews. The fieldwork is used to figure out whether there are ways to help, say, a farmer remain on his land as rainfall declines, or whether he will need to relocate to survive.

  3. canary says:

    Another terrorist loving article from the

    Christian Scientist Monitor: Iran’s pick for UN envoy has ties to ’79 hostage-taking. What should US do?

    State Department officials say the US is generally obligated to admit the chosen representatives of UN member states, but members of Congress are livid at Iran’s ‘slap in the face’ of the US.

    By Howard LaFranchi – April 2, 2014

    At the State Department, officials say that as “troubling” as Iran’s plans may be, the US is generally obligated to admit the chosen representatives of the UN’s 193 member countries. “We do take our obligations as host nation for the United Nations very seriously,” says Marie Harf, State Department deputy spokeswoman.

    Abutalebi, the choice of Iranian President Hassan Rouhani for the New York post, has a reputation these days as a moderate, according to some Iran diplomatic experts.

    But some UN experts say the fact remains that the US has no right to “pick and choose” other countries’ UN ambassador – and that it’s not up to the US to give a thumbs up or down based on a diplomat’s past.

    “Good heavens,” says Michael Doyle, a former UN official and now an expert in international and public affairs at Columbia University in New York. “It’s like discovering someone was in the SDS in the 1960’s.”

    One could question President Rouhani’s choice given the image the Iranian leader has tried to convey and the ties he has seemed to want to rebuild with the US, Mr. Doyle says, but that doesn’t change US obligations concerning the UN, he adds.

    “It may not have been the wisest choice for Iran to make given Rouhani’s efforts to make nice,” he says, “but it’s their choice.”


    Micheal Doyle should invite him for tea and biscuits. He should be fired.

« Front Page | To Top
« | »