Think About It

Phoenix Space Probe to Explore for Life on Mars

If all goes according to plan, a $420 million Phoenix spacecraft will land around 7:53 p.m. (EDT) Sunday near the northern region of the Mars icecap.  The landing is a very tricky proposition; after traveling for nine months through space, the spacecraft will enter the Martian atmosphere at 13,000 miles per hour.  In the next seven minutes, it will have to slow its descent by using a combination of parachutes and thrusters to make a soft landing near the northern polar region.  Once the nearly half ton Phoenix makes its landing, it will send a safe arrival signal back to earth.  Two hours later, the first pictures will arrive at JPL headquarters in Pasadena, California.

The Phoenix is scheduled to work for three to four months in temperatures that will range between -27 and -99 degrees Fahrenheit.  Among its duties, the Phoenix will dig up samples of the permafrost and analyze them for signs of life.  "The Phoenix mission not only studies the northern permafrost region, but takes the next step in Mars exploration by determining whether this region, which may encompass as much as 25 percent of the Martian surface, is habitable," said Peter Smith, Phoenix principal investigator at the University of Arizona.  Smith continued, "The climate change for our planet is written into the ices in the Arctic region on the Earth...the Arctic regions are where the history of life, microbes, molecules and cells are preserved in their purest form."

The Mars landing is a risky one, because only about 50% of our previous probes, which began in 1970, have proved successful.
This is likely to renew the debate about funding future NASA projects.

Questions:

In light of the failure rate, should we be spending the $420 billion for this project?

Should our entire space program be put on hold until we are on better financial footing?

Are we spending too much on our space program?  Too little?

Should we concentrate solely on unmanned probes or should we go for more manned missions?

Will the Phoenix find signs of life?

Religion and Science - Are They Compatible?

A recent poll taken by the publisher of Skeptic magazine turned up some surprising results about how scientists view God.  The New Age people would have us believe all scientists are either atheists or agnostics.  Skeptic magazine sent a number of questionnaires to scientists with the question, "Does science make belief in God obsolete?"  A surprising 40% of those surveyed indicated that science has not made God obsolete, which probably come as big news to scientists, but it is a big surprise to those who rely on the mainstream views of science.

One scientist said, “God is neither dead nor about to die. There is still plenty of "space for a science-friendly God as well as for 'deeply religious non-believers' like Einstein ... Unsure of why they happen to exist, humans are likely to scour the heavens forever in search of meaning."

I too was somewhat surprised by this poll, because I had bought into the stereotype that all scientists are atheists, or agnostics at best.  Why does this stereotype exist?

Questions:

Have we been brainwashed by the mainstream media to believe religion is for the old, the dumb, or the gullible?

Is religion and science incompatible?

Does this cast a different light on school boards who are prohibiting “Intelligent Design” from being taught in the schools?

Are Oil Companies Responsible for the Food Shortages?

Well, who knew.  It seemed like a good idea at the time.  There is a good chance that Congress will have to repeal the ethanol bill that they passed just four months ago.   In an environmental epiphany, Congress passed the Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS) which requires suppliers to produce 36 billion gallons of ethanol by 2022.  Around 45% of the  ethanol would come from corn.  The bill was pushed by Democrats, but it also enjoyed the support of many Republicans, including President Bush.

Shortly after the bill passed, food shortages began to occur.  These shortages, in turn, caused increases in the price of food.

A coalition of grocers, oil companies, and livestock producers opposed the bill.   Environmentalists and farm groups supported the bill.

Many are now saying the food crisis is overblown.  There was a major tortilla shortage in Mexico, but tortillas are made primarily of white corn, not yellow corn which is used in making ethanol.  Brewers blamed corn shortages on the rising beer prices.  Only one problem, rice and barley are the main ingredients of beer, not corn.

A congressional subcommittee plans to hold a hearing next week on the RFS.

All of this brings us to some interesting questions:

If President Bush is in bed with the oil companies, as the liberals allege, then why did he openly support the bill?

Are the oil companies manipulating the price of corn in order to kill ethanol production?

Did Congress act too hastily when they passed the ethanol bill?

Will Congress be forced to repeal it?

The Unseen War with China

  The U.S. is at war, but not in the conventional sense.  Computer hacking, once the domain of geeky teenagers, has now moved into the shadowy world of foreign intelligence agencies.  Our government is reluctantly admitting that secret files within the Pentagon have been breached by unknown an unknown person or persons in China.  Recently, an innocent looking military shopping list from India was found to contain a deeply embedded computer code known as “Poison Ivy,” which allows the foreign agent to view each and every keystroke that is subsequently made on the recipient’s computer.  Poison Ivy also renders firewalls useless, and malware software isn’t detecting the embedded codes.  Last year, over 12,000 of these mysterious e-mails turned up in government agencies and defense contractors, and most of these intrusions can be traced back to the Internet address cybersyndrome.org, which is based in China.  Cybersyndrome is one of China’s largest Internet providers.  Other hacking has been traced back to Russia.  “It’s espionage on a massive scale,” said Paul Kurtz, a former high-ranking national security official.

   Often these foreign intruders route their electronic spying through one or more other countries, such as Saudi Arabia.  The detection is difficult because the foreign agents constantly change the coding, which means as soon as one is discovered and erradicated, another pops up.  This problem is not confined to the U.S.; Britain’s MI5 notified nearly 300 companies in 2007 that hackers from China were attempting to gain information. 

   The questions are:  How much sensitive information have they gotten?  How many of our intelligence agents are known to China and Russia?  How many trade secrets have they stolen?  How many Trojan Horses have they planted deep into our computer systems?  Will all of this render our missile defenses useless?    Think About It.

A Solution to Global Warming

  There is a school of thought that advances the theory that we will, in effect, save ourselves from the from the doomsday scenario of Global Warming -- because many scientists say we will run out of oil and gas long before the ice caps melt and searing temperatures envelop our planet.

  Geologists from the University of Uppsala in Sweden are saying we have overestimated the amount of oil reserves left in the world.  The Swedish scientists report their studies show there is up to 80 percent less than previously predicted.  Oil production levels will peak in 10-15 years.

  By 2010-2015, production levels will reach maximum levels and natural gas production will peak shortly afterwards.  Many earlier studies by other noted geologists predicted production levels would peak by 2050.  When peak production occurs, fuel prices will reach disastrous levels, which will result in much less fossil fuel being burned.

  With far less fossil fuels being burned, there will not be enough carbon dioxide (CO2) to affect climate change, so the doomsday scenario predicted by the proponents of the Global Warming theory are unlikely.

  The Swedish geologists aren’t the first to advance the “Peak Oil” theory.
The Peak Oil theory was first announced by Shell geologist Dr. Marion King Hubbert in 1956.

  Whether we start to run out of oil in 2010 or 2050, it will have a big impact on all facets of our life.  The real question is will this or has this affected our foreign policy with respect to the Middle-East?    Will alternative fuel sources be developed in time to effectively replace fossil fuels?  Is the “Peak Oil” theory viable?

Environmental Wackos or Domestic Terrorists?

"Ernie" has some views he would like to share regarding the environmental wackos who recently torched several multi-million-dollar homes in the Seattle area.  It's interesting to note that one or more of these homes had won "Green Awards" by using recycled lumber, solar heating, etc.

  "The following incident is certainly not the first criminal act perpetrated by wacko environmental or animal rights groups, but it is the first time I'd ever heard of ELF....the Environmental Liberation Front.  It seems this organization has some kind of disagreement with Seattle building codes, so to show their displeasure they totally destroyed a brand new luxury housing development just north of the city, then crawled back under a rock with the rest of the roaches and reptiles. Apparently this group isn't into protesting air pollution because they destroyed the development by burning it down.  The smoke, fire and ashes rained down on the surrounding area for several hours.  Also it wouldn't be fair to call them tree huggers because it seems they didn't have much concern for the thousands of nearby trees catching on fire. Of course, we can't rule out the fact that they are committed tree huggers, just not very smart ones.

 

It makes you wonder how these lunatic groups get started and how their off-the-wall opinions become so accepted by so many.  For example, why aren't we drilling for oil in Alaska and building refineries?  Is it because we like being held prisoner and extorted by OPEC or because oil companies can't afford it?  No, it's to appease the endless parade of wacko environmentalists.  How have they become so politically powerful?  Very simply it's because the loony liberals of the Democratic party have adopted their cause, given them a platform from which to express their preposterous views, and...God help us...given them a level of credibility.  This isn't just the libs in politics, it's actors, musicians, artists and main stream media types. Is their cause so just that they should be afforded all this clout?  I don't know, you tell me.  Isn't this the same group that blames America for all the ills of the world; who said (in the 70's) we're headed for another Ice Age;  who now says we're into Global Warming and New York will be flooded in a few short years from arctic melting ?   Sounds like a pretty credible group to me.

 

Whatever the reason for their political clout, one thing is blatantly obvious.  Anyone who overtly disagrees with them is immediately smeared and silenced.  Opponents have become afraid to express their opposing views for fear of losing their jobs, credibility and/or status within their chosen careers.  After all, the wackos are politically correct and we opponents are just uninformed boobs who probably own a bible and vote Republican.

 

Heaven help us if something isn't done to curb this misguided insanity.  Reason and facts needs to be brought to the front by opponents with credibility, knowledge and above all, courage. Environmental issues need to be openly debated by experts from both fronts.  That means civilized debate, not each group screaming at the other.  Since shouting down and out-talking the other group is the established tactic of environmentalists, I don't see a debate coming anytime in the near future."

 

If You Had to Do It All Over Again

This is the season for soul searching and general ruminating about one's life in general.  I assume most of us are pretty content with our career choices, but if you were handed the opportunity to have another "go at it," what career would you choose?  As for me, I think it would have to fall in the humanitarian category.  But what would one do to have the greatest impact in the span of one short life. 

I think I would dedicate my second career to energy and desalinization research.  IF, thats the big IF, one could figure out a way to make fresh water out of sea water, cheaply, then pump it into the arid regions of the world it would have an enormous impact on the world's food supply. 

Why hasn't this happened?