View Full Version : Re: global warming deniers find comfort would be presidents dilemma

January 4th 08, 03:40 AM
"marika" > wrote in message news:...
>I guess Chrissy Hynde is saying that natural pubic hair on women should be
> considered normal and OK, whereas unnatural implants, surgery, and
> cosmetics in the name of beauty are the real horrors.... in a
> leather-trimmed-coat kinda hypocritical way.
> My biggest "HUH?" about this whole flap with Chrissy Hynde and Peta is the
> anti-message the ad is
> actually presenting. By showing the hair and saying "Ick...fur", they
> are making a parallel that fur (which according to them is heinous) is
> as horrific as pubic hair showing. So in fact, the ad is saying that
> natural hair showing is really gross. So in fact they are saying the
> exact opposite of what their defenders and Chrissie Hynde are saying,
> which is "Show the lovely natural pubic hair ad!" Too bad they're all so
> dense and stupid that they can't even see that the ad IS a REVERSE
> offense to natural women. Duh.
> "marika" > wrote in message news:...
>> How come when newspapers first report this stuff, they always use words
>> like "amazing" and "breakthrough" and "science". Have seen it before,
>> lots of times- research on paralysis, diabetes, cancer- the first news
>> story always heralds these findings as "research/medical miracles". And
>> then people read it and use words like "Cool!" and "Neat" and "Wow" and
>> "Possible cure"..
>> Then as soon as PETA gets a hold of it, you suddenly start to hear words
>> like "cruel" and "torture" and "vivisection", and all the good
>> possibilities- cures and milestones- all flies out the window. And
>> everybody wants all the work stopped, dead in its tracks. Where did all
>> the "cures" and "miracles" go?
>> Where/When exactly is the turning point for these stories?
>>> > By BBC News Online Science Editor Dr David Whitehouse
>>> >
>>> > In what is bound to become a much debated and highly controversial
>> experiment,
>>> > a team of US scientists have wired a computer to a cat's brain and
>>> > created
>>> > videos of what the animal was seeing.
>>> >
>>> > According to a paper published in the Journal of Neuroscience, Yang
>> Dan, Garret
>>> > Stanley and Fei Li of the University of California at Berkeley have
>> been able
>>> > to "reconstruct natural scenes with recognizable moving objects."
>>> >
>>> > The researchers attached electrodes to 177 cells in the so-called
>>> > thalamus
>>> > region of the cat's brain and monitored their activity.
>>> >
>>> > The thalamus is connected directly to the cat's eyes via the optic
>> nerve. Each
>>> > of its cells is programmed to respond to certain features in the cat's
>> field of
>>> > view. Some cells "fire" when they record an edge in the cat's vision,
>> others
>>> > when they see lines at certain angles, etc. This way the cat's brain
>> acquires
>>> > the information it needs to reconstruct an image.
>>> >
>>> > The scientists recorded the patterns of firing from the cells in a
>> computer.
>>> > They then used a technique they describe as a "linear decoding
>> technique" to
>>> > reconstruct an image.
>>> >
>>> > To their amazement they say they saw natural scenes with recognisable
>> objects
>>> > such as people's faces. They had literally seen the world through
>>> > cat's
>> eyes.
>>> >
>>> > Other scientists have hailed this as an important step in our
>> understanding of
>>> > how signals are represented and processed in the brain.
>>> >
>>> > It is research that has enormous implications.
>>> >
>>> > It could prove a breakthrough in the hoped-for ability to wire
>> artificial limbs
>>> > directly into the brain. More amazingly, it could lead to artificial
>>> > brain
>>> > extensions.
>>> >
>>> > By understanding how information can be presented to the brain, some
>>> > day,
>>> > scientists may be able to build devices that interface directly with
>> the brain,
>>> > providing access to extra data storage or processing power or the
>> ability to
>>> > control devices just by thinking about them.
>>> >
>>> > One of the scientists behind this current breakthrough, Garret
>>> > Stanley,
>> now
>>> > working at Harvard University, has already predicted machines with
>>> > brain
>>> > interfaces.
>>> >
>>> > Such revolutionary devices should not be expected in the very near
>> future. They
>>> > will require decoding information from elsewhere in the brain looking
>>> > at
>>> > signals that are far more complicated than those decoded from the
>>> > cat's
>>> > thalamus but, in a way, the principle has been demonstrated.