OT: Post Turtle

You should have been around to tell that to tell that to one of my fathers best mates, who died last year, after stem cell therapy had turned him back from death's door and got him out of bed for six months more quality life. I saw him during this period, out working in the garden, with great swathes of baby-new skin almost excluding the old-man's skin, and him looking as vigorous as you could ever hope from any 70yo.

You know as well as anyone they take ten+ years to come to market... that's ten+ *after* you start supporting the research properly.

Clifford Heath.

Tell us - what song is it you sing when you close your eyes and put your hands over your ears? I sit "La-la-la-la" or "der-der-der-der"?

He's cut off funding across the entire world? That's impressive.

John

Any good placebo can do that. Stem cell experiments have, so far, killed more people that they've helped. It's only such a holy grail for political reasons, not scientific ones.

John

OK, cite some successful stem cell therapies, fuel cell applications, and hydrogen-powered cars. These are "push" technologies, enthusiasms looking for realities.

John

You forgot nanotubes, John. :-)

You make many good points, but I think it's important to keep in mind that many technologies sat around in R&D labs for decades before there was enough funding or supporting technology to do anything hugely profitable in the private sector with them. Lasers are a good example... there must be billions of them in the world today, but the history was quite drawn out and largely funded by university research grants as well. Even after 1960 when the first laser was produced, several decades passed before anyone was making any real money on them.

You're a fan of the old Bell Labs research, right? Do you really think the folks researching stem cells, fuel cells, and nanotubes are really all that different than the folks back at Bell Labs?

---Joel

Gross omission! And neural networks! And string theory!

Research is fine, as long as winners and losers - from a funding standpoint - are selected by sensible criteria, and not by politics. Ethanol as a way to reduce global warming, for example, is wrong from every aspect. Hydrogen powered cars make no sense at all. Fuel cells have been hyped as the next big thing for 50 years or so now. Stem cell research is good, but no miracles so far, and it's really a moral dilemma; pro-stem-cell really means pro-choice.

The inventions that change the world tend to percolate up from nowhere; the big hyper-funded projects tend to fizzle. So research money should be as widely distributed as possible, in moderate chunks; the winners will emerge. That's the way Bell Labs worked.

John

They're probably at least a million dollar market these days, even if that only is some thousands of them produced per year commercially (grin). And at least fuel cells have some real science behind them (the problem is the same as, e.g., photovolatics -- they're just not economical at present), unlike the guys who think that using the alternator in your car to produce hydrogen via electrolysis is somehow a win!

Yeah, that is largely the case. And certainly some pro-stem cell advocates are guilty of exaggerating the potential benefit...

You're being way too logical here. :-) Well-put...

---Joel

I tend to disagree here. Ofcourse the individual misery is enormous, but if you look at the big picture, you'll find that in some area's of this world people fight because they simply don't know any better. Just look at Africa and the middle east. Offering help is only working if the people in need really want to change their way of life and put the past behind them.

behave

of cluster bombs, promoting a just peace in the

I'm not sure what you're referring to. Perhaps planting biofuels in preference to food crops. The first step is to admit that burning fossil fuels, and carbon generally, increases the atmospheric load of CO2 - and leads to increased temperatures, loss of ice, rising sealevels and increased flooding in vulnerable countries as well as other undesired effects. The second step is to do something about it - which I guess means more investment in wind, solar and wavepower, probably not nuclear fission reactors.

Well, then how about going along with the democratically expressed wishes of the people in Gaza instead of supporting the blockade and refusing to recognise or talk to Hamas ?

Honestly there's so much hypocracy here. Seems that ex President Carter has more nous than those in power in the US at the moment.

maybe, but then *they* should act intelligently - instead of following suit.

So, the moral dilemma is, should we force them to make peace and be productive? Or do we say "they simply don't know any better", and let them make their children and grandchildren - the fraction that survive

- the same?

Is our inaction, in the face of enormous suffering, moral?

Europe in particular had a lot to do with the way Africa and the middle east are today, and profited enormously along the way. Now is "hands-off, self-determination" just a cheap and easy way out of repairing all the damage?

John

behave

banning of cluster bombs, promoting a just peace in the

to food crops.

increases the atmospheric load of CO2 - and leads to

vulnerable countries as well as other undesired

investment in wind, solar and wavepower, probably not

the people in Gaza instead of supporting the

more nous than those in power in the US at the moment.

Mullens' typical bird-brain commentary.

...Jim Thompson

We should sell short-range weapons to both sides.

to food crops.

increases the atmospheric load of CO2 - and leads to

vulnerable countries as well as other undesired

Richard, John is referring to the present boondoggle of diverting corn from human and animal feed to producing Ethanol, which has raised the cost of corn and created shortages of food in third world countries. Farmers can make a lot of money taking the fed's cash incentives for creating a biofuel that at best, breaks even in an energy budget, so that congresscritters can say that 'they are doing something about the environment!'

Now, if they were promoting using hemp or other 'weed' crops to product methanol or biodiesel, they might be backing a winning horse, but they can't buy enough votes that way...

Charlie

Why Richard, haven't you donated some money to Hollywood recently and seen the film, "Ironman?" (Based on the comic book of the same name...)

behave

banning of cluster bombs, promoting a just peace in the

preference to food crops.

increases the atmospheric load of CO2 - and leads to

in vulnerable countries as well as other undesired

investment in wind, solar and wavepower, probably not

the people in Gaza instead of supporting the

more nous than those in power in the US at the moment.

Jim Thompson's typical addition to the sum of all human knowledge. ;-)

preference to food crops.

increases the atmospheric load of CO2 - and leads to

in vulnerable countries as well as other undesired

Charlie, Thanks. As you suggest, this doesn't seem so intelligent unless you're a corn farmer.

The black afghani I used to buy 40 years ago would burn well as I recollect.

should behave

banning of cluster bombs, promoting a just peace in the

preference to food crops.

increases the atmospheric load of CO2 - and leads to

in vulnerable countries as well as other undesired

investment in wind, solar and wavepower, probably not

the people in Gaza instead of supporting the

more nous than those in power in the US at the moment.

At least it's an addition... please move to Iran... save us some money ;-)

...Jim Thompson

should behave

banning of cluster bombs, promoting a just peace in the

preference to food crops.

increases the atmospheric load of CO2 - and leads to

in vulnerable countries as well as other undesired

investment in wind, solar and wavepower, probably not

the people in Gaza instead of supporting the

more nous than those in power in the US at the moment.

Don't fancy Iran - like the USA it's full of religeous nutters. But France or Spain (nice wines) or countries on the way up - China and Latin America - seem interesting. Somewhere perhaps with a tad more moisture than Arizona