: Science!
Now that they've thoroughly bombarded the Antarctic to get pictures of mountains buried beneath the ice, I'm sure we can expect whatever Great Old Ones and/or their servants that are living down there to arise and shroud the world in darkness any time now.
Some scientists think life might have developed more than once, which seems like a pretty reasonable thing to think. I'm just happy to see that this isn't totally rejected out of hand.
The Economist posted what I found to be a pretty disappointing review of some research on the psychology of power. They way they presented the research doesn't make it sound anywhere near definitive, and it just becomes another piece of propaganda to explain Why Things Need To Stay The Way They Already Are. But that's also the Economist's job, so...
Water is pretty cool and also complicated.
Look, give it up: nothing lasts forever, so stop hanging on to all that shit you don't need.
A draft of the new DSM will be revealed soon. That should get a bunch of people's panties in a bunch. I'm too lazy to find out how much of this has been funded by pharmaceutical companies or what sort of representation they have on the committee, and I'm also scared of what I might find. Oh well - insurance won't pay for any of it, anyway, right?
Abstinence-only sex ed programs can work, provided they're actually good sex ed and not just Christian propaganda. The people who fire back at the folks saying that this study doesn't validate all the bad programs that were in place pretty clearly don't address the concerns, only bothering to mention the "marriage" part. Oh, well.
As usual, I just steal all of this from American Scientist's Science in the News Weekly.
Now that they've thoroughly bombarded the Antarctic to get pictures of mountains buried beneath the ice, I'm sure we can expect whatever Great Old Ones and/or their servants that are living down there to arise and shroud the world in darkness any time now.
Some scientists think life might have developed more than once, which seems like a pretty reasonable thing to think. I'm just happy to see that this isn't totally rejected out of hand.
The Economist posted what I found to be a pretty disappointing review of some research on the psychology of power. They way they presented the research doesn't make it sound anywhere near definitive, and it just becomes another piece of propaganda to explain Why Things Need To Stay The Way They Already Are. But that's also the Economist's job, so...
Water is pretty cool and also complicated.
Look, give it up: nothing lasts forever, so stop hanging on to all that shit you don't need.
A draft of the new DSM will be revealed soon. That should get a bunch of people's panties in a bunch. I'm too lazy to find out how much of this has been funded by pharmaceutical companies or what sort of representation they have on the committee, and I'm also scared of what I might find. Oh well - insurance won't pay for any of it, anyway, right?
Abstinence-only sex ed programs can work, provided they're actually good sex ed and not just Christian propaganda. The people who fire back at the folks saying that this study doesn't validate all the bad programs that were in place pretty clearly don't address the concerns, only bothering to mention the "marriage" part. Oh, well.
As usual, I just steal all of this from American Scientist's Science in the News Weekly.
