Thursday, March 10, 2011

Wonk Room » After Scopes Climate Trial, Republicans To Push Upton-Inhofe Bill On Thursday

After Scopes Climate Trial, Republicans To Push Upton-Inhofe Bill On Thursday


Rep. Jay Inslee (D-WA), with some of the climate science literature.

This morning, top representatives of the scientific community tried in vain to reach fossil-fueled Republicans with the facts about the threat of global warming. In a hearing convened by the energy committee’s subcommittee on energy and power, chaired by Rep. Ed Whitfield (R-KY), climate scientists clearly explained how years of research involving thousands of scientists in dozens of fields of expertise have come to the ineluctable conclusion that fossil-fuel pollution is threatening humanity.

Dr. Christopher Field, the co-chair of IPCC Working Group 2, detailed how observed increases in temperature and changes in climate have already begun to decrease crop yields, with much worse to come as temperatures rise. Dr. Richard Somerville, an IPCC coordinating lead author, explained that “urgent action is needed if global warming is to be limited to moderate levels.” Dr. Knute Nadelhoffer, director of the University of Michigan Biological Station, described the disturbing changes to the Great Lakes and Arctic regions that are happening now. Dr. Francis Zwiers, another IPCC coordinating lead author, explained that it is very likely that human influence has doubled risks in extreme flooding events.

The response from the majority party was an embarrassment to the institution of Congress and to the American people. As if the hearing were a drinking game of debunked global warming myths, the Republicans on the committee uniformly pretended they were wading into some grand scientific debate, whose proponents just wanted to take America’s energy away. Rep. Lee Terry (R-NE) took a brave stand against the secret plot to ban nitrogen. Whitfield cited the canards of the Minoan warming period, the Medieval warming period, and growing Antarctic ice. Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-VA) competed with Whitfield, spinning tales of Vikings, global warming on Mars, and global cooling.

Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA) baldly asserted, “There is dispute whether man is the cause of global warming.” However, not even the conservative climate scientists the Republicans called — Dr. John Christy and Dr. Roger Pielke, Sr. — dispute human influence on global warming. Their testimony consisted of misrepresenting the IPCC and making dire warnings of the economic consequences of reducing the United States’ dependence on coal and oil.

At the end of the hearing, Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) gave Whitfield a chance to go back from the precipice of science denial. He asked Whitfield to delay consideration of the Upton-Inhofe bill to overturn the EPA climate rules, including the scientific finding that global warming pollution is a threat to public health. Whitfield rejected Waxman’s offer, saying that his subcommittee will markup the science-prevention act on Thursday.

Is Islam the Problem? - NYTimes.com

March 5, 2011

Is Islam the Problem?

CAIRO

A wise visitor from outer space who dropped in on Earth a millennium ago might have assumed that the Americas would eventually be colonized not by primitive Europeans but by the more advanced Arab civilization — and that as a result we Americans would all be speaking Arabic today.

Yet after about 1200, the Middle East took a long break: it stagnated economically, and today it is marked by high levels of illiteracy and autocracy. So as the region erupts in protests seeking democracy, a basic question arises: What took so long? And, a politically incorrect question: Could the reason for the Middle East’s backwardness be Islam?

The sociologist Max Weber and other scholars have argued that Islam is inherently a poor foundation for capitalism, and some have pointed in particular to Islamic qualms about paying interest on loans.

But that doesn’t seem right. Other experts note that Islam in some ways is more pro-business than other major religions. The Prophet Muhammad was a successful merchant and much more sympathetic to the wealthy than Jesus was. And the Middle East was a global center of culture and commerce in, say, the 12th century: if Islam stifles business now, why didn’t it then?

As for hostility toward interest on loans, similar teachings are found in Jewish and Christian texts, and what the Koran bans isn’t interest as such but “riba,” an extreme form of usury that could lead to enslavement for failing to pay debts. Until the late 18th century, Muslims were as likely to be money-lenders in the Middle East as Christians or Jews. And today paying interest is routine even in the most conservative Muslim countries.

Many Arabs have an alternative theory about the reason for the region’s backwardness: Western colonialism. But that seems equally specious and has the sequencing wrong. “For all its discontents, the Middle East’s colonial period brought fundamental transformation, not stagnation; rising literacy and education, not spreading ignorance; and enrichment at unprecedented rates, not immiserization,” writes Timur Kuran, a Duke University economic historian, in a meticulously researched new book, “The Long Divergence: How Islamic Law Held Back the Middle East.”

Professor Kuran’s book offers the best explanation yet for why the Middle East has lagged. After poring over ancient business records, Professor Kuran persuasively argues that what held the Middle East back wasn’t Islam as such, or colonialism, but rather various secondary Islamic legal practices that are no longer relevant today.

It’s a sophisticated argument that a column can’t do justice to, but for example, one impediment was inheritance law. Western systems most commonly passed all property intact to the eldest son, thus preserving large estates. In contrast, Islamic law stipulated a much fairer division of assets (including some to daughters), but this meant that large estates fragmented. One upshot was that private capital accumulation faltered and couldn’t support major investments to usher in an industrial revolution.

Professor Kuran also focuses on the Islamic partnership, which tended to be the vehicle for businesses. Islamic partnerships dissolved whenever any member died, and so they tended to include only a few partners — making it difficult to compete with European industrial and financial corporations backed by hundreds of shareholders.

The emergence of banks in Europe led long-term British interest rates to drop by two-thirds leading up to the Industrial Revolution. No such drop occurred in the Arab world until the colonial period.

These traditional impediments are no longer a problem in the 21st century. Muslim countries now have banks, corporations, and stock and bond markets, and inheritance law now isn’t an obstacle to capital accumulation. So if Professor Kuran’s diagnosis is correct, that should bode well for the region — and Turkey’s boom in recent years underscores the potential for a renaissance.

Yet one challenge is psychological. Many Arabs blame outsiders for their backwardness, and cope by rejecting modernity and the outside world. It’s a disgrace that an area that once produced outstanding science and culture (giving us words like algebra) now is an educational underachiever, especially for girls.

The crisis in the Arab world provides a chance for a new start. I hope we’ll have some tough, honest conversations on all sides about what went wrong — as a starting point for a new and more hopeful trajectory.

The Muslim Brotherhood has often used the slogan, “Islam is the solution.” And to the West, the unstated feeling upon looking across the bleak Middle East landscape has often been: “Islam is the problem.” Professor Kuran’s research suggests that, at least looking forward, the more correct view is: Islam isn’t the problem and it isn’t the solution, it’s simply a religion — meaning that the break is over, there are no excuses, and it’s time to move forward again.

The Wage Struggles of Men - NYTimes.com

Economix - Explaining the Science of Everyday Life

March 4, 2011, 8:30 am — Updated: 11:41 am -->

The Struggles of Men

Postscript Appended

11:35 a.m. | Updated to correct percentage decline in median wages since 1969.

The Hamilton Project has produced a fairly stunning chart, suggesting that median real wages for men have dropped significantly more than is commonly understood:

Here’s www.mit.edu/faculty/mgreenst">Michael Greenstone, an M.I.T. economist and the director of the Hamilton Project, explaining:

The red line is the usual picture of median earnings for full-time men. The problem with this line is that the percentage of men working over time has been declining over time. This attrition or dropping out of the labor force is not random, though, as the decline in full-time work it is disproportionately concentrated among low-skill men. This means that the red line is being propped up by the fact that it is increasingly comprised of higher skilled men.

One sensible correction for this is to calculate the median wage for all men (not just the full-time workers). This is the blue line in the below graph.

Why is this important? The full-time sample (red line) suggests that median wages have been stagnant since 1969.

The Hamilton Project said the blue line or full sample of men (which accounts for reduced labor force participation) suggested that median wages had declined by 28 percent, or almost $13,000 (in constant dollars).


Postscript: March 4, 2011

After we posted this, the Hamilton Project sent an e-mail to say it should have said the median wages had declined by 28 percent, or almost $13,000 (not 32 percent, or $15,000, as Mr. Greenstone's original e-mail said). The larger decline, it said, is from the peak in 1973.

Ahh.. Parenthood | Shoe via gocomics.com

FDA Approves Benlysta, the First New Drug in 50 Years to Treat Lupus

For the first time in half a century, lupus sufferers have a new drug that could help control their disease, and it's the first medication that works directly on the immune cells responsible for the condition's worst symptoms. On Wednesday, the Food and Drug Administration approved belimumab, or Benlysta, which targets the production of certain immune cells in the body.

An estimated 1.5 million Americans and 5 million patients worldwide suffer from the autoimmune disease, which causes the body's virus- and bacteria-fighting cells to mistakenly see its own healthy cells as foreign and begin to attack them. The result is a lifetime of flareups and remissions that can lead to painful and swollen joints, fever, rashes, abnormal blood clotting and problems in the kidneys, lungs, heart and brain. Until Benlysta's approval, doctors treated lupus a variety of ways, from anti-inflammatory drugs, such as NSAIDs or aspirin, to strong steroids to dampen immune activity, to immune-suppressing medications and even antimalaria drugs to inhibit antibody production.

Benlysta operates on a population of immune cells known as B cells, which normally churn out the antibodies that bind and mark bacteria and viruses for destruction by other immune cells. In lupus patients, these B cells somehow get overstimulated and misguided, and are trained to target healthy body cells instead. Benlysta is designed to interfere with a protein critical to B cell activity, thus suppressing its search-and-destroy mission in the body.

"Benlysta is very much more targeted than the other therapies we have now for treating lupus," says Dr. Gary Gilkeson, chair of the medical and scientific advisory committee of the Lupus Foundation of America and a professor of medicine at the Medical University of South Carolina.

In approving the drug, which is administered intravenously, the FDA analyzed two trials involving 1,684 patients with lupus, some of whom were given the medication along with their current therapy, and others who were given a placebo infusion. The treated patients recorded fewer episodes of disease activity than those on placebo, and some were able to lower the does of steroids they needed to control their disease. These patients did, however, also show slightly higher rates of infections and death than the group that didn't receive Benlysta.

Patients and doctors welcomed the long-awaited addition to their treatment arsenal. As Dr. Anca Askanase of New York University told Reuters: "This is a major change, a new player in the field of lupus. I think it's extraordinary."

Despite the excitement over the approval, Gilkeson says that Benlysta likely will not be the first drug doctors use when they diagnose their patients with lupus. In order to do that, more studies will need to  show how Benlysta controls symptoms compared to steroids, anti-inflammatory medications, and other drugs that currently help some patients to treat their disease. Benlysta is also far more expensive than these therapies, with a predicted tally of about $35,000 a year compared to the several hundreds of dollars that patients now spend. But once patients become tolerant to their current drug regimen, and if they don't respond as well to their medication, Benlysta could provide a therapeutic boost and relieve them of some of their symptoms.

"This is an incredibly important milestone, not just because it's the first in class for a new agent, but it's also the first drug approved specifically for lupus," says Gilkeson, noting that current treatments were not designed initially to treat lupus, but turned out to have important benefits for lupus patients. Now, with Benlysta, lupus patients have a drug developed with their symptoms and disease in mind, and hopefully it won't be the last.

This post has been updated with comments from Dr. Gary Gilkeson of the Lupus Foundation of America.

Doctor Who series 6 start date revealed - Den of Geek

Doctor Who series 6 start date revealed

Simon Brew


Doctor Who returns to BBC One and BBC America in April – and we’ve got the date for the sixth series launch of new Who here!

Published on Mar 10, 2011

It's the news we've been waiting for since the end of the Christmas special. We've got the return date for Doctor Who!

The sixth series of the revived show will start on Saturday April 23rd, kicking off with a Steven Moffat-penned two-parter. That's the two-parter that's been partly filmed in the US, and it's indicative of the growing importance of the show on both sides of the channel that Doctor Who will apparently premiere on the same day in both the UK and US.

The news has been broken by Entertainment Weekly in the US, and Doctor Who Magazine in the UK. And if our sums are right, that'll put the planned mid-season break at 4th June, when the show will go off the air for the summer. Just in time for Torchwood: Miracle Day, with a bit of luck...

EW

Wednesday, March 09, 2011

ROI: The $200 Tablet Computer - WSJ.com

A lot of people are likely to stand in line to pay $500 or more for Apple's iPad 2 when it goes on sale Friday.

It's hardly a perfect comparison—more on this below—but the tablet is perfect for what I want. I'm not talking about one of those junk tablets from a Chinese website, either.

I bought a Barnes & Noble Nook Color tablet (for $190 plus tax from a temporary online promotion, down from the usual $250). And then I downloaded a very simple, perfectly legal software fix from the Internet that turned it into a fully functioning tablet running on Google's Android platform. The fix, known as a "rooting," unlocks Barnes & Noble's proprietary overlay. The instructions came via Ars Technica, a reputable site devoted to technology, and were pretty easy to follow.

I wasn't really expecting it to work. I tried it as an experiment. But the results were remarkable.

The Nook Color, which was designed mainly for reading books and magazines, is about half the size of an iPad or a Xoom. It weighs about 30% less. It runs on WiFi, but not 3G. It has an absolutely superb screen. And, once you've unlocked the software, it runs many Android applications, from email to news readers TweetDeck to, yes, Angry Birds.

It even, ironically, runs the Kindle app from Barnes & Noble's rival Amazon.com. So I can now use my Nook Color to read Kindle books.

Be aware that you perform this software hack entirely at your own risk. Barnes & Noble says it invalidates your warranty. The process ran smoothly for me, but when I read the Internet chat rooms, I found at least a few people had had problems. If it goes wrong, you're on your own.

Of course, it's hardly the same as an iPad or a Xoom or a Galaxy. It doesn't have any cameras. It has a slower processor. It's not for power users. The video support is pretty limited. A few Android programs still won't run on it. And dedicated gamers will doubtless find it frustrating.

But as a basic tablet, it's absolutely fine for me—and, I suspect, a lot of people. Indeed, I happen to prefer it to bigger rivals, because it actually slips into my overcoat pocket. (I hate having to carry things around.)

All this leads to three financial thoughts.

The first is that Barnes & Noble needs to get the lead out and let people run these applications on the Nook Color without having to jail-break it. Obviously they want to block Amazon's Kindle app, because they want customers to buy books from BarnesandNoble.com. But why block everything else? Why should I have to invalidate the warranty in order to make their product more attractive?

A slew of new and upgraded tablets and e-readers are on the market. See how the base models for the different devices stack up.

They'd sell a lot more of these babies if customers could run email and Facebook and so on out of the box. (The minute I catch myself playing games on this thing, it goes on eBay. But most people want to.) And once they get these Nook Colors into people's hands as an Android tablet, they would work pretty well as a Trojan horse to sell Barnes & Noble books and magazines as well. In other words, it would help the company's business model, not hinder it.

Barnes & Noble currently offers just a few applications, such as Pandora, the Internet music service. The company promises a full app store in due course. But it's been saying that since the product went on sale last fall. A company spokeswoman would only say yesterday that it is still "in the works."

Huh? Time is not this company's friend. It should be seizing the moment while it can. Barnes & Noble stock, which was north of $40 five years ago, closed Tuesday at $11.67, a 14-year low. Not even the travails of arch-rival Borders Group, which has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection and is closing many of its stores, is helping.

The second observation is that these tablets are probably going to become cheap, near-commodity items, and maybe sooner than you think.

Think about this. Barnes & Noble—a company that is, ahem, hardly in the forefront of technological innovation—has managed to put together a pretty good Android tablet from scratch in short order, and is selling it for $250 (and even less if, like me, you catch a promotion). It's not a top-of-the-range model, but it does include a superb screen—and analysts will tell you that's typically one of the most expensive parts of a tablet.

Investors in Apple, Motorola Mobility, Samsung, Hewlett-Packard, Research In Motion and others are hoping for great things from tablet computers. It's all anyone wants to talk about—the huge profits to come from all these tablets and the "cloud computing" services they use. Apple alone is the second-most-valuable company in the world, with an enterprise value of more than $300 billion.

Count me as deeply Missourian about the long-term profits likely to come from this entire industry. In the short run, there may be fantastic money to be made. In the long term, tablets will be a dime a dozen. Every platform will have all the apps you need. Any brand or model is going to have a tough challenge maintaining a competitive advantage over another. Someday we're going to look back and laugh at the day when people thought tablets—or smartphones—were exciting and profitable businesses to be in.

If Barnes & Noble can do it, anyone can.

The third financial thought? This tablet saved me $200 compared to the cheapest of its competitors. No, it's not a king's ransom. And it was mainly just an experiment. But this is real money nonetheless. And, critically, it's worth more than many people think.

How easily we overlook the math. Money I save today will compound enormously by the time I actually need it, which will be when I retire. We are likely to spend 20 to 30 years in retirement, and as we all know the entitlements system is struggling with rocketing costs.

If investments earn an average return of about 5% above inflation over the next 30 to 35 years, that $200 I saved will grow by a factor of five. I'll have an extra $1,000 or so, in today's dollars, in my 70s.

Not bad.

Write to Brett Arends at brett.arends@wsj.com

Tuesday, March 08, 2011

Scientists warn of 'dangerous over-reliance' on GPS | France24.com

Developed nations have become "dangerously over-reliant" on satellite navigation systems such as GPS, which could break down or be attacked with devastating results, British engineers said Tuesday.

The Royal Academy of Engineering said the application of the technology was now so broad -- from car sat-navs to the time stamp on financial transactions -- that without adequate backup, any disruption could have a major impact.

It cited a recent European Commission study showing that six to seven percent of economic growth in western countries -- about 800 billion euros ($1,100 billion) in the EU -- is already dependent on such navigation.

"Society may already be dangerously over-reliant on satellite radio navigation systems like GPS (the US's Global Positioning System)," it said.

Disruption could come from technological problems or from deliberate interference, by criminals using small-scale jammers to avoid road tolls or block the tracking of cargo, or terrorists seeking to attack entire systems.

The report also warns of political interference, such as when North Korea reportedly recently disrupted South Korean military communications.

"A significant failure of GPS could cause lots of services to fail at the same time, including many that are thought to be completely independent of each other," said Martyn Thomas, who led the academy's work on the issue.

The US-operated Global Positioning System is currently used for everything from commercial aircraft and the tracking of cargo to the opening of train doors at stations.

The report said all these are vulnerable, with consequences ranging from "the inconvenient -- such as passenger information system failures -- to possible loss of life -- such as interruptions to emergency services communications".

It urges greater awareness of the security risks by key services, tougher action on the sale of cheap jammers -- although they are already illegal in the EU -- and efforts to boost the resilience of antenna and receivers.

The expansion of alternative satellite navigation systems to GPS such as Europe's Galileo system or the Russian-developed GLONASS should help, Thomas said.

"But many of the vulnerabilities we have identified in this report will remain. No-one has a complete picture of the many ways in which we have become dependent on weak signals 12,000 miles above us," he added.

Study: Even “BPA-Free” Plastics Leach Endrocrine-Disrupting Chemicals - Ecocentric - TIME.com

Study: Even "BPA-Free" Plastics Leach Endrocrine-Disrupting Chemicals

Jill Greenberg for TIME

Cross posted from TIME's Healthland

Plastics. They seem so...inert. Slow to erode or decay, with a biodegradation time measured in the hundreds of years, plastics appear cut off from the organic environment in the way that no other product is, safe and secure and sterile. Yet scientists have begun to learn that plastics are anything but impermeable. Plastic containers and linings—especially those used in food containers that might end up being heated or washed—often leach chemicals into the surrounding environment. And some of those chemicals—like bisphenol-A (BPA) and phthalates—may do strange things to the body, mimicking and disrupting hormones in ways that haven't yet been fully understood.

While the science over such "endocrine disrupting" chemicals is still far from certain, enough researchers have raised worries that some parents have begun avoiding some plastics in an effort to shield children from toxins. (Pregnant women and infant children seem especially vulnerable to endocrine-disrupting chemicals.) Manufacturers have even begun advertising some products as "BPA-free."

Beijing might have the right idea, because it may turn out that endocrine-disrupting chemicals like BPA are even more common than we imagined. In a new study for the journal Environmental Health Perspectives, researchers found that most plastic products leach endocrine-disrupting chemicals—and that was true even for products labeled "BPA-free." Scientists led by George Bittner, a neurobiologist at the University of Texas, looked at 455 common plastic products and found that 70% tested positive for estrogenic activity. Once those products were subject to real-world conditions—microwaving or dishwashing—that proportion rose to 95%. As the study concluded:

Almost all commercially available plastic products we sampled, independent of the type of resin, product, or retail source, leached chemicals having reliably-detectable EA, including those advertised as BPA-free. In some cases, BPA-free products released chemicals having more EA [endocrine activity] than BPA-containing products.

BPA is particularly worrisome simply because it is so common. Nearly every American has some amount of BPA in their body, in part because plastics are so ubiquitous. (And the U.S. seems to be especially contaminated—a recent study found that Americans have twice as much BPA in their body as Canadians.) The Food and Drug Administration expressed "some concerns" last year about the potential impact of BPA on the brains of fetuses, infants and children—but no federal agency has yet said that BPA or any other potentially endocrine-disrupting chemicals are unsafe.

Washington may be reluctant to act, but other authorities are moving forward. Cities and states including Connecticut and Minnesota are working to restrict BPA in baby products, while even China—not exactly a country on the forefront of environmental protection—is reportedly planning to ban BPA in children's products. Even some corporations are moving faster than federal regulators on chemical safety—Wal-Mart announced last month that it had banned the polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDE), a class of flame retardants that has been linked to a number of health problems.

Just because some big companies are moving ahead on chemical safety doesn't mean that industry as a whole is ready to be a leader—a spokesman for the American Council on Science and Health, an industry-funded lobbying group, criticized Wal-Mart for giving into environmentalists. In any case, there should be no doubt that our chemical regulations lag far behind the science—the Toxic Substances Control Act, the decades-old law that governs chemical safety, doesn't give the government sufficient enforcement powers. Industry likes to talk about promoting "science-based" regulation. Based on the conclusions of studies like this one, I couldn't agree more.

Monday, March 07, 2011

Fox and Glenn Beck Stare Into a Dark Future - NYTimes.com

March 6, 2011

The Fading Power of Beck’s Alarms

Almost every time I flipped on television last week, there was a deeply angry guy on a running tirade about the conspiracies afoot, the enemies around all corners, and how he alone seemed to understand what was under way.

While it’s true that Charlie Sheen sucked up a lot of airtime last week, I’d been watching Glenn Beck, the Fox News host who invoked Hezbollah, socialists, the price of gas, Shariah law, George Soros, Planned Parenthood, and, yes, Charlie Sheen, as he predicted a coming apocalypse.

Mr. Beck, a conservative Jeremiah and talk-radio phenomenon, burst into television prominence in 2009 by taking the forsaken 5 p.m. slot on Fox News and turning it into a juggernaut. A conjurer of conspiracies who spotted sedition everywhere he looked, Mr. Beck struck a big chord and ended up on the cover of Time magazine and The New York Times Magazine, and held rallies all over the country that were mobbed with acolytes. He achieved unheard-of ratings, swamped the competition and at times seemed to threaten the dominion of Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity at Fox.

But a funny thing happened on the way from the revolution. Since last August, when he summoned more than 100,000 followers to the Washington mall for the “Restoring Honor” rally, Mr. Beck has lost over a third of his audience on Fox — a greater percentage drop than other hosts at Fox. True, he fell from the great heights of the health care debate in January 2010, but there has been worrisome erosion — more than one million viewers — especially in the younger demographic.

He still has numbers that just about any cable news host would envy and, with about two million viewers a night, outdraws all his competition combined. But the erosion is significant enough that Fox News officials are willing to say — anonymously, of course; they don’t want to be identified as criticizing the talent — that they are looking at the end of his contract in December and contemplating life without Mr. Beck.

On the other side, people who work for Mr. Beck point out that he could live without Fox News. Unlike some other cable hosts, Mr. Beck has a huge multiplatform presence: he has sold around four million books, is near the top of talk-radio ratings, has a growing Web site called The Blaze, along with a stage performance that still packs houses. Forbes estimated that his company, Mercury Radio Arts, had more than $30 million in revenue.

How could a breakup between Mr. Beck and Fox News — a bond that seemed made in pre-Apocalyptic heaven — come to pass? They were never great friends to start with: Mr. Beck came to Fox with a huge radio show and had been on CNN Headline News, so he did not owe his entire career to Fox and frequently went off-message. The sniping between Fox News executives and Mr. Beck’s team began soon after he went on the air in 2009.

Many on the news side of Fox have wondered whether his chronic outrageousness — he suggested that the president has “a deep-seated hatred for white people” — have made it difficult for Fox to hang onto its credibility as a news network. Some 300 advertisers fled the show, leaving sponsorship to a slew of gold bullion marketers whose message dovetails nicely with Mr. Beck’s end-of-times gospel. Both parties go to some lengths to point out that that the discussion has nothing to do with persistent criticism from the left.

But the partnership, which has been good for both parties, may yet be repaired. On Wednesday’s show, Mr. Beck went to some lengths to demonstrate gratitude and fealty to Fox News.

“Two years ago, I was on a cable channel that no one was watching at the time, doing a show that no one was watching, and I was about to leave television. And then I had the opportunity to come and work here,” he said. “If you’re going to do news or commentary, the only place, I think in the world, the only place that really makes an impact is Fox.”

William Kristol of The Weekly Standard suggested that Mr. Beck is “marginalizing himself” by arguing that socialists and leftists were working with Islamic radicals to sow worldwide chaos. But Mr. Beck has always marched to his own idiosyncratic music, and his ratings actually began dropping long before Egypt rose up against its leader.

The problem with “Glenn Beck” is that it has turned into a serial doomsday machine that’s a bummer to watch.

Mr. Beck, a more gifted entertainer than most cable hosts, can still bring it, lighting up with characters and voices. But much of the time, there is sense that the fatigue from always being on alert, tilting forward in the saddle against the next menace, is starting to wear him down.

What had been a fast and loose assault on all things liberal has grown darker and less entertaining, especially with the growing revolution in the Middle East, a phenomenon Mr. Beck sees as something of a beginning to some kind of end. He’s often alone in the studio with his chalkboards and obscure factoids, a setting that reminds me of an undergrad seminar on macroeconomics with an around-the-bend professor I didn’t particularly enjoy.

Last Wednesday, as he grabbed all the disparate strands from around the globe and tied them into a great, grand bow of doom, he ambled alone between various blackboards, each jammed with portentous bullet points. He often looked away from the camera into a middle distance as he spoke of a calamity that only he can see.

“He used to be a lot funnier,” said David Von Drehle, who wrote the article in Time magazine. “He was the befuddled everyman and something entirely new, but the longer people have listened to his ranting and raving, the wearier they become. Now you are just getting down to diehards. I mean, how many people were in the Waco compound at the end? A couple of hundred?”

Joel Cheatwood, a senior vice president of development for Fox News and the executive in charge of the show, thinks it’s silly to suggest that the American viewing public’s romance with Mr. Beck is on the wane — he’s trouncing his competition — but says that keeping the show upbeat is something he discusses with Mr. Beck.

“We have talked about that, at his instigation,” Mr. Cheatwood said. “It is really important that no matter how dire he thinks things are or what horrible direction things may be going from his perspective that the show maintains a sense of hope.”

“What you see on television with Glenn is the real guy,” he added, “and that is a double-edged sword. If he is upset about something, you see it.”

Part of Mr. Beck’s appeal is that he seems as if he is about to lose his marbles. But recently, he acts like he’s a little tired of the game. He can still draw a huge crowd, but he looks lonely in that studio all by himself.

“When I first came here,” he told his audience on Wednesday, “I had this pie-in-the-sky belief that if I told you the truth, if I verified all of my facts and double-checked, and we could make that compelling case with facts to back it up, the journalists in other places would get curious and they’d use their resources and they’d investigate and they’d prove it right and they’d show it too.” Then he shook his head and laughed bitterly.

Mr. Beck remains firm in his belief that something is going terribly wrong and it may be time to stock up on canned goods and head to the basement. The problem with predicting doomsday is that if you’re wrong, you have to figure out what to say the next day. And if you’re right ... well, the ratings will be terrific, for what that’s worth.

E-mail: carr@nytimes.com; twitter.com/carr2n

Friday, March 04, 2011

Cravendale - Cats with Thumbs

How to Kill a Recovery | NYT

The economic news has been better lately. New claims for unemployment insurance are down; business and consumer surveys suggest solid growth. We’re still near the bottom of a very deep hole, but at least we’re climbing.

It’s too bad that so many people, mainly on the political right, want to send us sliding right back down again.

Before we get to that, let’s talk about why economic recovery has been so long in coming.

Some economists expected a rapid bounce-back once we were past the acute phase of the financial crisis — what I think of as the oh-God-we’re-all-gonna-die period — which lasted roughly from September 2008 to March 2009. But that was never in the cards. The bubble economy of the Bush years left many Americans with too much debt; once the bubble burst, consumers were forced to cut back, and it was inevitably going to take them time to repair their finances. And business investment was bound to be depressed, too. Why add to capacity when consumer demand is weak and you aren’t using the factories and office buildings you have?

The only way we could have avoided a prolonged slump would have been for government spending to take up the slack. But that didn’t happen: growth in total government spending actually slowed after the recession hit, as an underpowered federal stimulus was swamped by cuts at the state and local level.

So we’ve gone through years of high unemployment and inadequate growth. Despite the pain, however, American families have gradually improved their financial position. And in the past few months there have been signs of an emerging virtuous circle. As families have repaired their finances, they have increased their spending; as consumer demand has started to revive, businesses have become more willing to invest; and all this has led to an expanding economy, which further improves families’ financial situation.

But it’s still a fragile process, especially given the effects of rising oil and food prices. These price rises have little to do with U.S. policy; they’re mainly because of growing demand from China and other emerging markets, on one side, and disruption of supply from political turmoil and terrible weather on the other. But they’re a hit to purchasing power at an especially awkward time. And things will be much worse if the Federal Reserve and other central banks mistakenly respond to higher headline inflation by raising interest rates.

The clear and present danger to recovery, however, comes from politics — specifically, the demand from House Republicans that the government immediately slash spending on infant nutrition, disease control, clean water and more. Quite aside from their negative long-run consequences, these cuts would lead, directly and indirectly, to the elimination of hundreds of thousands of jobs — and this could short-circuit the virtuous circle of rising incomes and improving finances.

Of course, Republicans believe, or at least pretend to believe, that the direct job-destroying effects of their proposals would be more than offset by a rise in business confidence. As I like to put it, they believe that the Confidence Fairy will make everything all right.

But there’s no reason for the rest of us to share that belief. For one thing, it’s hard to see how such an obviously irresponsible plan — since when does starving the I.R.S. for funds help reduce the deficit? — can improve confidence.

Beyond that, we have a lot of evidence from other countries about the prospects for “expansionary austerity” — and that evidence is all negative. Last October, a comprehensive study by the International Monetary Fund concluded that “the idea that fiscal austerity stimulates economic activity in the short term finds little support in the data.”

And do you remember the lavish praise heaped on Britain’s conservative government, which announced harsh austerity measures after it took office last May? How’s that going? Well, business confidence did not, in fact, rise when the plan was announced; it plunged, and has yet to recover. And recent surveys suggest that confidence has fallen even further among both businesses and consumers, indicating, as one report put it, that the private sector is “unprepared to fill the hole left by public sector cuts.”

Which brings us back to the U.S. budget debate.

Over the next few weeks, House Republicans will try to blackmail the Obama administration into accepting their proposed spending cuts, using the threat of a government shutdown. They’ll claim that those cuts would be good for America in both the short term and the long term.

But the truth is exactly the reverse: Republicans have managed to come up with spending cuts that would do double duty, both undermining America’s future and threatening to abort a nascent economic recovery.

Thursday, March 03, 2011

BBC News - 'Tractor beam' is possible with lasers, say scientists

BBC News Science & Environment

'Tractor beam' is possible with lasers, say scientists

Representation of Bessel beam The idea hinges on the use of a laser whose beam is of a specific shape

A laser can act as a "tractor beam", drawing small objects back toward the laser's source, scientists have said.

It is known that light can provide a "push", for example in solar sails that propel spacecraft on a "wind of light".

Now, in a paper on the Arxiv server, researchers from Hong Kong and China have calculated the conditions required to create a laser-based "pull".

Rather than a science fiction-style weapon, however, the approach would only work over small distances.

The effect is different from that employed in "optical tweezers" approaches, in which tiny objects can be trapped in the focus of a laser beam and moved around; this new force, the authors propose, would be one continuous pull toward the source.

And it relies on directly impinging on an object, making it distinct from an approach demonstrated in 2010 by Australian researchers whose trapping worked by heating air around a trapped particle.

The trick is not to use a standard laser beam, but rather one known as a Bessel beam, that has a precise pattern of peaks and troughs in its intensity.

Seen straight-on, a Bessel beam would look like the ripples surrounding a pebble dropped in a pond.

If such a Bessel beam were to encounter an object not head-on but at a glancing angle, the backward force can be stimulated.

As the atoms or molecules of the target absorb and re-radiate the incoming light, the fraction re-radiated forward along the beam direction can interfere and give the object a "push" back toward the source.

'Radical idea'

"Light can indeed pull a particle," the authors wrote, "...and this may open up new avenues for optical micromanipulation, of which typical examples include transporting a particle backward over a long distance and particle sorting."

Ortwin Hess at Imperial College London called the work - which has not yet been peer-reviewed - as "fascinating", saying that it "takes a radical idea forward".

"It's a bit like a boat moving through water," Professor Hess told BBC News. "In the eddies you generate as part of that forward movement, there are areas that literally seem to be pulling back.

"The ship has a shape, and you get these backward eddies at the side; in a similar way if you have a Bessel beam you have certain areas that do the same thing."

However, he remarked that the effect is only predicted to occur over a short distance - and that the effect first of all needs to be demonstrated in practice.

"It's a very good start," he said. "As always with theory, if one doesn't obtain a theoretical argument that things are impossible for some reason, then it can happen."

Mark Penn: Constitutional Amendment on Internet Freedom

It's time we added the first 21st Century amendment to the Constitution -- an amendment that parallels the First Amendment but explicitly prohibits the government from ever shutting down the Internet. Freedom of the Internet in today's world is just as important as freedom of the press, religion or speech.

As revolutions spread around the world questioning dictator after dictator, it is clear that the Internet has been the same kind of catalyst that a free press has been in past democratic revolutions -- it has given people an easy way to share their experiences, a tool for organizing, and served to publish atrocities in cases where the press was blocked.

Dictators and governments around the world are busy studying this phenomenon, trying to understand how they can control it. Governments refuse to give Blackberry contracts unless they have the ability to snoop on its traffic. Even in the U.S. the Internet has to be available for government monitoring and supervision -- justified quite fairly on the basis of the need to catch criminals and terrorists who use the Internet as they used the phone system in the past.

And the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has given a series of speeches on Internet freedom. She has said clearly that other countries should refrain from cutting off access to the Internet and social networks when besieged by protesters, noting that "those who clamp down on Internet freedom may be able to hold back the full expression of their people's yearnings for a while, but not forever."

But what if we were facing some significant discontent in the U.S. today or in the future? Imagine if anti-Vietnam protesters had the internet as a tool then and their marches had doubled and tripled in size -- would the U.S. have considered curbs on the internet? Imagine if during 9/11 the government became convinced of a wider operation and conspiracy in play. Would President Bush have considered shutting down the Internet? Would those presidents have pushed such a button if they had it? And what would have prevented them from doing it -- a constitutional amendment from 1789?

Right now all of our broadcast media are supposed to react to encoded government messages to play them to the exclusion of anything else in the event of an emergency. This is the successor to the Emergency Broadcast System I grew up with, listening to the endless sound of "just a test." It has been a given that there is nothing in the Constitution that would prevent the U.S. government from commandeering all communications in whatever they deemed an emergency. That emergency could be a threat from the outside or within.

So the question is whether we are prepared, as we tell others to keep their hands off the Internet, to live our values with an ironclad constitutional amendment committing to do the same. I'm not talking about an amendment that would weigh into the complex economic questions of net neutrality and tiers of Internet speed. Those are commercial issues that will surely be settled appropriately over time.

I mean the kind of amendment that would make it illegal for a state legislature, Congress, the president or the military to shut down or otherwise restrict access to the Internet for political or so-called national security reasons. You can see it developing in the future -- fear of attack -- shut it down. Out of control demonstrations, shut it down. You see it in country after country now, and always we think it could never happen here. And yet we did inter the Japanese, the CIA has had a string of abuses over the years, and Nixon did use the FBI and other government agencies for his own benefit -- and these things happened in the last 40 years.

In such national security questions, there are always difficult cases like the "ticking time bomb" scenario where it seems to make perfect sense to use extreme measures. And there could always be a cyber-attack that requires some action to prevent the spread of a virus that could destroy millions of computers or take over our power grid.

But despite these hard cases, it is time for the U.S. to take the lead with a model constitutional amendment on preserving and defending internet freedom. The First Amendment has withstood the test of time, but it does not explicitly cover social networking or the Internet any more than it covers shut downs of the phone system or TV broadcasting. And especially as agencies like the FBI and NSA are pushing to further their Internet oversight through stricter data retention laws and a more-efficient online wiretap system, it makes no sense to leave these things to chance.

Such amendments are rarely about today and their impact here and now -- they are about an unexpected situation and an unexpected president bending the law to the maximum to preserve their own power. Anything as powerful as the Internet is something that governments irresistibly will try to control over time -- they are at the heart of our communications here and abroad. We have urged others to say hands off -- how about committing the US to the same position for the next 200 years in the only ironclad way we have -- a 21st Century Constitutional Amendment on Freedom of the Internet.

How the Rich Soaked the Rest of Us | Common Dreams

How the Rich Soaked the Rest of Us

The astonishing story of the last few decades is a massive redistribution of wealth, as the rich have shifted the tax burden

Over the last half century, the richest Americans have shifted the burden of the federal individual income tax off themselves and onto everybody else. The three convenient and accurate Wikipedia graphs below show the details. The first graph compares the official tax rates paid by the top and bottom income earners. Note especially that from the end of the second world war into the early 1960s, the highest income earners paid a tax rate over 90% for many years. Today, the top earners pay a rate of only 35%. Note also how the gap between the rates paid by the richest and the poorest has narrowed. If we take into account the many loopholes the rich can and do use far more than the poor, the gap narrows even more.When the Cadillac Eldorado made its debut in the 1950s, wealthy Americans were paying a top rate of tax of 90%; today, the top rate of tax is 35%.

One conclusion is clear and obvious: the richest Americans have dramatically lowered their income tax burden since 1945, both absolutely and relative to the tax burdens of the middle income groups and the poor.

Consider two further points based on this graph: first, if the highest income earners today were required to pay the same rate that they paid for many years after 1945, the federal government would need far lower deficits to support the private economy through its current crisis; and second, those tax-the-rich years after 1945 experienced far lower unemployment and far faster economic growth than we have had for years.

Richard Wolff graph on tax ratesHistorical tax rates for the highest and lowest income earners

The lower taxes the rich got for themselves are one reason why they have become so much richer over the last half century. Just as their tax rates started to come down from their 1960s heights, so their shares of the total national income began their rise. As the two other Wikipedia graphs below show, we have now returned to the extreme inequality of income that characterised the US a century ago.

The graph above shows the portion/percentage of total national income taken by the top 1%, the top tenth of a percent, and the top 100th of a percent of individuals and families: the richest of the rich. The third graph compares what happened to the after-tax household incomes of Americans from 1979 to 2005 (adjusted for inflation). The bottom fifth of poorest citizens saw their income barely rise at all. The middle fifth of income earners saw their after-tax household income rise by less than 25%. Meanwhile, the top 1 % of households saw their after-tax household incomes rise by 175%.

In simplest terms, the richest Americans have done by far the best over the last 30 years, they are more able to pay taxes today than they have been in many decades, and they are more able to pay than other Americans by a far wider margin. At a time of national economic crisis, especially, they can and should contribute far more in taxes.

Instead, a rather vicious cycle has been at work for years. Reduced taxes on the rich leave them with more money to influence politicians and politics. Their influence wins them further tax reductions, which gives them still more money to put to political use. When the loss of tax revenue from the rich worsens already strained government budgets, the rich press politicians to cut public services and government jobs and not even debate a return to the higher taxes the rich used to pay. So it goes – from Washington, to Wisconsin, to New York City.

Richard Wolff economics graph 2Share of national income taken by top tranches of earners

How do the rich justify and excuse this record? They claim that they can invest the money they save from taxes and thereby create jobs, etc. But do they? In fact, cutting rich people's taxes is often very bad for the rest of us (beyond the worsening inequality and hobbled government it produces).

Several examples show this. First, a good part of the money the rich save from taxes is then lent by them to the government (in the form of buying US Treasury securities for their personal investment portfolios). It would obviously be better for the government to tax the rich to maintain its expenditures, and thereby avoid deficits and debts. Then the government would not need to tax the rest of us to pay interest on those debts to the rich.

Second, the richest Americans take the money they save from taxes and invest big parts of it in China, India and elsewhere. That often produces more jobs over there, fewer jobs here, and more imports of goods produced abroad. US dollars flow out to pay for those imports and so accumulate in the hands of foreign banks and foreign governments. They, in turn, lend from that wealth to the US government because it does not tax our rich, and so we get taxed to pay for the interest Washington has to give those foreign banks and governments. The largest single recipient of such interest payments today is the People's Republic of China.

Third, the richest Americans take the money they don't pay in taxes and invest it in hedge funds and with stockbrokers to make profitable investments. These days, that often means speculating in oil and food, which drives up their prices, undermines economic recovery for the mass of Americans, and produces acute suffering around the globe. Those hedge funds and brokers likewise use part of the money rich people save from taxes to speculate in the US stock markets. That has recently driven stock prices higher: hence, the stock market recovery. And that mostly helps – you guessed it – the richest Americans who own most of the stocks.

Richard Wolff economics graph 3Relative increases in net household incomes of Americans from 1979 to 2005

The one kind of significant wealth average Americans own, if they own any, is their individual home. And home values remain deeply depressed: no recovery there.

Cutting the taxes on the rich in no way guarantees social benefits from what they may choose to do with their money. Indeed, their choices can worsen economic conditions for the mass of people. These days, that is exactly what they are doing.

-->

3D Printer Plays With Its Food…and Makes A Miniature Space Shuttle | Discover Magazine

3D Printer Plays With Its Food…and Makes A Miniature Space Shuttle

Most people outgrow the days of carving rivulets in mashed potato mountains or castles out of seasoned squash—but  scientists aren’t “most people.” One ragtag team of researchers and culinary experts are harnessing the power of 3-D food printers to bring the science of playing-with-your-food to new levels, such as outer space.

In a project called fab@home, Cornell’s Computational Synthesis Laboratory and the French Culinary Institute have made a giant leap for mankind by fashioning a miniature space shuttle made of pureed scallops and cheese.

So what does it take to create such intricate food sculptures? Cornell graduate research student Jeffrey Lipton told CBC News:

“The process is pretty simple … Just as … your 2D printer puts droplets of ink onto a page to create an image, this draws lines of material on top of each other to create a 3D object.”

It’s the same technology as rapid prototyping machines, except you’re switching in food pastes for plastics and metal. Precisely-positioned nozzles squirt out edible creations of virtually every flavor, and so far, the lab has tackled various foodstuffs, including cheese, chocolate, hummus, and turkey.

But interesting shapes and flavors isn’t the only thing they’re interested in; the technique also opens up new possibilities for textures. Simply by having the machine print random squiggly lines, they’ve created new varieties of crispy corn snacks. And if you were to feed pureed meat into this 3-D printer, the researchers even think it’s possible to create a meatloaf-like substance that’s as absorbent as a sponge.

With the successful launch of miniature space ships, it appears that the future of 3-D food technology is wide open—paving the way for a future where parents actually encourage their kids to play with their food.

Cats Adore, Manipulate Women : Discovery News

The bond between cats and their owners turns out to be far more intense than imagined, especially for cat aficionado women and their affection reciprocating felines, suggests a new study.

Cats attach to humans, and particularly women, as social partners, and it's not just for the sake of obtaining food, according to the new research, which has been accepted for publication in the journal Behavioural Processes.

The study is the first to show in detail that the dynamics underlying cat-human relationships are nearly identical to human-only bonds, with cats sometimes even becoming a furry "child" in nurturing homes.

NEWS: Pets Vital to Human Evolution

"Food is often used as a token of affection, and the ways that cats and humans relate to food are similar in nature to the interactions seen between the human caregiver and the pre-verbal infant," co-author Jon Day, a Waltham Centre for Pet Nutrition researcher, told Discovery News. "Both cat and human infant are, at least in part, in control of when and what they are fed!"

For the study, led by Kurt Kotrschal of the Konrad Lorenz Research Station and the University of Vienna, the researchers videotaped and later analyzed interactions between 41 cats and their owners over lengthy four-part periods. Each and every behavior of both the cat and owner was noted. Owner and cat personalities were also assessed in a separate test. For the cat assessment, the authors placed a stuffed owl toy with large glass eyes on a floor so the feline would encounter it by surprise.

The researchers determined that cats and their owners strongly influenced each other, such that they were each often controlling the other's behaviors. Extroverted women with young, active cats enjoyed the greatest synchronicity, with cats in these relationships only having to use subtle cues, such as a single upright tail move, to signal desire for friendly contact.

NEWS: U.S. Pets Increasingly Pudgy

While cats have plenty of male admirers, and vice versa, this study and others reveal that women tend to interact with their cats -- be they male or female felines -- more than men do.

"In response, the cats approach female owners more frequently, and initiate contact more frequently (such as jumping on laps) than they do with male owners," co-author Manuela Wedl of the University of Vienna told Discovery News, adding that "female owners have more intense relationships with their cats than do male owners."

Cats also seem to remember kindness and return the favors later. If owners comply with their feline's wishes to interact, then the cat will often comply with the owner's wishes at other times. The cat may also "have an edge in this negotiation," since owners are usually already motivated to establish social contact.

DNEWS VIDEO: Find out why all tortoise shell cats are female and why white cats are deaf.

Although there are isolated instances of non-human animals, such as gorillas, bonding with other species, it seems to be mostly unique for humans to engage in social relationships with other animals. In this case with cats, it's for very good reason. Cats could very well be man's -- and woman's -- best friend.

"A relationship between a cat and a human can involve mutual attraction, personality compatibility, ease of interaction, play, affection and social support," co-author Dorothy Gracey of the University of Vienna explained. "A human and a cat can mutually develop complex ritualized interactions that show substantial mutual understanding of each other's inclinations and preferences."

Dennis Turner, a University of Zurich-Irchel animal behaviorist, told Discovery News the he's "very impressed with this study on human-cat interactions, in that it has taken our earlier findings a step higher, using more modern analytical techniques to get at the interplay between cat and human personalities."

Turner, who is also senior editor of The Domestic Cat: The Biology of Its Behaviour (Cambridge University Press), added that he and his colleagues "now have a new dimension to help us understand how these relationships function."

BLOG: Cats Get Sick When Routine Changes

Kotrschal's team is presently involved in a long-term study of man's other well-known animal best friend: dogs.

Wednesday, March 02, 2011

NASA - Researchers Crack the Mystery of the Spotless Sun

Researchers Crack the Mystery of the Spotless Sun
03.02.11

In 2008-2009, sunspots almost completely disappeared for two years. Solar activity dropped to hundred-year lows; Earth's upper atmosphere cooled and collapsed; the sun’s magnetic field weakened, allowing cosmic rays to penetrate the Solar System in record numbers. It was a big event, and solar physicists openly wondered, where have all the sunspots gone?

Now they know. An answer is being published in the March 3rd edition of Nature.

In this artistic cutaway view of the sun, the Great Conveyor Belt appears as a set of black loops connecting the stellar surface to the interior. Golden lines denote magnetic fields. › View larger
In this artistic cutaway view of the sun, the Great Conveyor Belt appears as a set of black loops connecting the stellar surface to the interior. Credit: Andrés Muñoz-Jaramillo of the Harvard CfA.
"Plasma currents deep inside the sun interfered with the formation of sunspots and prolonged solar minimum," says lead author Dibyendu Nandi of the Indian Institute of Science Education and Research in Kolkata. "Our conclusions are based on a new computer model of the sun's interior."

For years, solar physicists have recognized the importance of the sun's "Great Conveyor Belt." A vast system of plasma currents called ‘meridional flows’ (akin to ocean currents on Earth) travel along the sun's surface, plunge inward around the poles, and pop up again near the sun's equator. These looping currents play a key role in the 11-year solar cycle. When sunspots begin to decay, surface currents sweep up their magnetic remains and pull them down inside the star; 300,000 km below the surface, the sun’s magnetic dynamo amplifies the decaying magnetic fields. Re-animated sunspots become buoyant and bob up to the surface like a cork in water—voila! A new solar cycle is born.

For the first time, Nandi’s team believes they have developed a computer model that gets the physics right for all three aspects of this process--the magnetic dynamo, the conveyor belt, and the buoyant evolution of sunspot magnetic fields.

"According to our model, the trouble with sunspots actually began in back in the late 1990s during the upswing of Solar Cycle 23," says co-author Andrés Muñoz-Jaramillo of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics. "At that time, the conveyor belt sped up."

The fast-moving belt rapidly dragged sunspot corpses down to sun's inner dynamo for amplification. At first glance, this might seem to boost sunspot production, but no. When the remains of old sunspots reached the dynamo, they rode the belt through the amplification zone too hastily for full re-animation. Sunspot production was stunted.

Graph showing sunspot activity from 1900-2010.
› View larger
Sunspot cycles over the last century. The blue curve shows the cyclic variation in the number of sunspots. Red bars show the cumulative number of sunspot-less days. The minimum of sunspot cycle 23 was the longest in the space age with the largest number of spotless days. Credit: Dibyendu Nandi et al.

Later, in the 2000s, according to the model, the Conveyor Belt slowed down again, allowing magnetic fields to spend more time in the amplification zone, but the damage was already done. New sunspots were in short supply. Adding insult to injury, the slow moving belt did little to assist re-animated sunspots on their journey back to the surface, delaying the onset of Solar Cycle 24.

"The stage was set for the deepest solar minimum in a century," says co-author Petrus Martens of the Montana State University Department of Physics.

Colleagues and supporters of the team are calling the new model a significant advance.

"Understanding and predicting solar minimum is something we’ve never been able to do before---and it turns out to be very important," says Lika Guhathakurta of NASA’s Heliophysics Division in Washington, DC.

An image of the Sun taken with the Solar and Heliospheric Observatory during the minimum of solar cycle 23, showing a spotless Sun. › View larger
Three years ago on March 2, 2008, the face of the sun was featureless--no sunspots. Credit: SOHO/MDI
While Solar Max is relatively brief, lasting a few years punctuated by episodes of violent flaring, over and done in days, Solar Minimum can grind on for many years. The famous Maunder Minimum of the 17th century lasted 70 years and coincided with the deepest part of Europe's Little Ice Age. Researchers are still struggling to understand the connection.

One thing is clear: During long minima, strange things happen. In 2008-2009, the sun’s global magnetic field weakened and the solar wind subsided. Cosmic rays normally held at bay by the sun’s windy magnetism surged into the inner solar system. During the deepest solar minimum in a century, ironically, space became a more dangerous place to travel. At the same time, the heating action of UV rays normally provided by sunspots was absent, so Earth’s upper atmosphere began to cool and collapse. Space junk stopped decaying as rapidly as usual and started accumulating in Earth orbit. And so on….

Nandi notes that their new computer model explained not only the absence of sunspots but also the sun’s weakened magnetic field in 08-09. "It's confirmation that we’re on the right track."

Next step: NASA’s Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO) can measure the motions of the sun’s conveyor belt—not just on the surface but deep inside, too. The technique is called helioseismology; it reveals the sun’s interior in much the same way that an ultrasound works on a pregnant woman. By plugging SDO’s high-quality data into the computer model, the researchers might be able to predict how future solar minima will unfold. SDO is just getting started, however, so forecasts will have to wait.

Indeed, much work remains to be done, but, says Guhathakurta, "finally, we may be cracking the mystery of the spotless sun."

Credits: This research was funded by NASA’s Living With a Star Program and the Department of Science and Technology of the Government of India.

Dr. Tony Phillips
NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center

3 essential skills for IT professionals

Jonathan Reichental, Ph.D.

3 essential skills for IT professionals

Coordination, analysis and innovation provide an IT advantage.

by Jonathan Reichental, Ph.D. ; 2 March 2011

Whether you are preparing for a career in information technology (IT) or you are a seasoned professional, it's important to know what skill needs are emerging in the marketplace. As I review the technology and business landscape, I've made some observations about what I believe will be increasingly valuable proficiencies to bring to the table.

Demand for certain skills or an increased focus in specific areas is being motivated by drivers such as the commoditization of IT, which is moving many countries to more right-brained jobs economies; by the data deluge, which is presenting considerable opportunity to understand business in completely new ways; and by rigorous competition in the marketplace, which is forcing greater velocity in the generation of new service and product ideas.

Many roles within IT will continue to be valuable but may be more sensitive in the long run to the business landscape shifts we are experiencing. Rather than a decreasing need overall, I predict we'll continue to see a greater role for IT in the future as well as IT skills being an important part of almost every information worker's inventory of capabilities.

It's also fair to point out that we'll see new skills emerge that we can't even imagine right now. For example, in the mid-1990s it would have been near impossible to predict skills in search engine optimization (SEO) or the whole range of IT careers that have spawned from social media.

The following three skill areas will find high demand in the marketplace either as standalone careers or in combination with other skills.

1. Coordination

In the context of IT, coordination is a skill set that provides guidance and oversight for the smooth interaction of multiple activities and their positive outcomes. It certainly includes project management, but it's not limited to it. People who can bridge relationships between disparate participants, such as developers in an offshore location and testers at a local facility; accommodating cultural differences, advocating for collective success, and expediting answers to questions and concerns, offer significant value.

The IT coordination skills can equally live in the business, the IT organization, or in a third-party provider. In a world where achieving results can often require the participation of a multitude a loosely related resources, effective coordination skills are paramount.

Acquiring great coordination proficiency certainly comes with experience, but preparation should include focusing on negotiation skills and communications in general; problem solving techniques; understanding the fundamentals of project management; and acquiring time management and prioritization methods.

2. Analysis

Our digital world is creating mountains of new data. In fact, we are experiencing exponential growth in its volume. As an example, every two days now, we create as much information as we did from the dawn of civilization up until 2003. It's both a challenge and an opportunity. The challenge is clearly making sense of it. The opportunity is using findings in the data for competitive advantage.

It's becoming clear that large volumes of data can reveal new insights that were previously unknown. As examples, analysis performed on unstructured data scattered across the web can reveal sentiment on people and products. Examining the patterns within social network connections can tell us a lot about where authority resides.

It's within this new context that we see demand for people with skills to identify and extract valuable data; perform extensive analysis on it; discover patterns and hidden secrets contained within; and make sense of it for decision-making purposes.

To acquire these skills includes training in critical thinking, analysis tools, presenting quality communications through writing and visualization, and statistics.

3. Innovation

We've seen large parts of IT turn into commoditized products and services. As an example, email is not a competitive advantage and it's largely dominated by one vendor. Whether you keep that capability and its attendant skills in-house is largely a cost and risk decision. Many organizations are reviewing their internal IT capabilities and concluding, that unless they are creating new value and a distinctive advantage, they simply remain a necessary cost center.

IT leaders are being tasked to reduce the cost center component to a minimum while ramping up the competitive elements of technology. The c-suite is requiring the IT organization to commit the biggest percentage of their available capacity to partnership activities with the business in creating new opportunities. It's this driver that is increasing the demand for innovation skills.

Innovation is the most abstract of the three skill areas in this blog as it is often the hardest to quantify. But it does include a wide range of skills that contribute to the conversion of ideas into net new business value. These include research, applied research, product evaluation and recommendations, problem solving, championing a new idea, and building a business case for investment that includes cost-benefit analysis.

As you consider your IT career, you might conclude that none of these skills are central to your interest. That's okay, too. My view is that, should you choose another IT path, it's still worth considering whether any of these three areas can complement your core interest. Whether you want to be or continue to be a programmer, business analyst, system administrator, or quality assurance analyst, adding one or more of the skills above can only add to your advantage.

We're guaranteed that the needs of the IT jobs marketplace will continue to change, but if each of us is ready to acquire new skills, a career in IT will remain one of the most lucrative and exciting of the professions.