DISQUS

"Record jump attempt falls flat as daredevil's ride leaves without him."

hahaha... oops.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7421435.stm

Taylor - very cool! Hopefully these buildings are the way of the future.

From what you've described, I think LEED sounds like a pretty good standard for sustainable buildings, but you mentioned that there are criticisms. Can you point some of those out to us?

This is all extremely interesting - both the implications for normal humans as well as combating human disease.

For a long time, researchers thought that Alzheimer's Disease was caused by a buildup of amyloid beta plaques in the brain - essentially the brain making too much of one protein and clogging itself up. Recent research has called into question this hypothesis, since the plaques may be a corollary symptom of the disease, rather than the root cause. Either way, an Alzheimer's patient inhabits damaged (or dead) brain cells that no longer function both in retaining memories and recalling them. I'm no doctor (or Alzheimer's researcher for that matter - throw me a malaria question sometime!), so I don't know for sure, but I'm skeptical that computer augmented memory could actually help someone with this disease. If a patient don't have any more neurons in an area, then it would be hard to augment those neurons with a computer. For more information on Alzheimer's, see http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/alzheimers-dis....

However, I believe that a cure for Alzheimer's will come before we all implant computer chips in our brains.

It seems that Jacoby's "rise of dumbness claim" is chiefly supported by her assertion that "general knowledge," such as the names of other countries, is "eroding." But where's the data? Sure we may not know those countries now, but who said we ever did? Most Americans probably didn't know half the countries in the South Pacific until they were occupied by Japan in the 1940's; at any time in our past, when has the knowledge that she refers to been "general?"

Is it possible that the feared rise of ignorance in America is actually a rise in awareness of that ignorance, rather than people actually knowing less about the world with each subsequent generation?

Credit to Joel on this one; he gave me the impetus to search around. This is a Vauban fort, built in Bourtange, Netherlands.

Roomie cooperation in the house!

I first heard of mountaintop removal from a book written a couple of years ago by Eric Reese, called Lost Mountain. The book won the Sierra Club's award for environmental journalism for that year, and I would highly recommend it to anyone interested in learning more.

International Falls, Minnesota, made famous last week by having record low temperatures of 40 below zero. The town has trademarked the phrase, "Icebox of the Nation."

BOOYAH.

Ashish, thanks for the reply!

Although I am not a vegan, I think you make a compelling point about choosing the humane option when eating. But eating local meat can be just as humane. It is not the killing of animals that is offensive per se, it is the inhumane way in which they are treated that creates problems.

Consider the local farmer who does not own a slaughterhouse but raises chickens on his/her farm, treats them with respect, and provides them with enough space and a proper diet - would you buy meat from them? At my local Farmers' Market, many farmers sell meat raised from their farms, and I wouldn't consider it unethical to buy it.

So I think that, while choosing vegan is an option, it is not the only one. Vegans can still create a lot of carbon waste by buying vegetables from thousands of miles away instead of buying them at home.

I am guilty of buying meat (and most everything else) from the supermarket, like most. But I am learning, and my buying habits are changing every week.

I think the Chesapeake Climate Action Authority would agree with Arrington – when people ask, “What are 10 things I can do to stop global warming?” they have this posted on their website:

http://www.chesapeakeclimate.org/pages/page.cfm...

When we’re talking about the environmental movement, Mr. Gore has a point – governmental action will do much, much more than individual action.

I, however, am a firm believer that this way of thinking flies in the face of history – when is large scale change ever not instigated by a single person? The examples in the 20th century alone are significant – Gandhi, Rachael Carson, Karl Marx, Martin Luther King, Jr. – the world is full of individuals who have changed it without the aid of governments. Climate change might be The Issue of the 21st century to be tackled by governments, but today’s movement had a large part to do with one Mr. Gore himself.

So I do think the criticism of people that wear those wristbands is harsh – not all of us are great enough to be Gandhi, but we all like to aspire to such ideals.

Google Reader, but I just got into it, so I only have 16 subscriptions. But I get at least 200 shared items from Jrod every day, so that probably counts as about 25 extra subscriptions right there.

Got it:

Davos, Switzerland, site of the World Economic Forum held this month.

I'm lucky visitor 1,013, as well as the first to comment as such. Is that sufficient to get some free Rockland's BBQ??!?!?!?! Or a Tropophilia T-shirt would be cool, too.

I think there is a line that can be drawn: if Little Johnny plays high school baseball and idolizes Barry Bonds, but has poor eyesight, he could get lasik surgery and repair his eyes with little side effects (although lasik is not recommended for anyone under 18, since eyesight is normally changing during those years). But if Johnny idolizes Barry Bonds and takes steroids thanks to his role model, he could end up seriously hurting himself in the long run.

Gladwell is right, though, in that this point is not made clear enough: we're really trying to protect kids, not our home run records.

Hey! Great to hear about the blog, and I’m excited to read everything!

I’m definitely intrigued by this IBM survey – I think that it would be incredible if people chose against their economic self-interest to be responsible citizens. After examining other results in the survey, though, I am a little more dismayed. 65% of consumers surveyed would sacrifice cost for cleanliness, but over half of those (44% of the total number surveyed) would accept only a 5 percent increase in rates and no more. Although 71% of customers said that environmental impact was important when selecting power sources, many more (87%) said that cost-effectiveness was important as well. Finally, it is easier to care about the environment on a survey than it is to change one’s energy consumption plan. Out of those that knew that their power provider offered renewable energy (31% of those responding), 73% did not purchase that form of energy.

I think the data are interesting because they show that there is a great deal of environmental awareness in developed countries. Translating that awareness into change, unfortunately, will require more than being a good citizen. Consumer sacrifice is not the solution; the data show, in fact, that most do not sacrifice cost for their environment. Incentives, through government or otherwise, are the most promising steps toward a solution.

The original source data can be found here:
2007 IBM Energy and Utilities Global Residential/Small Business Consumer Survey Selected Results.
http://www-935.ibm.com/services/us/gbs/bus/pdf/...