Group items tagged

Natural gas cars are hailed as the future engine-power for being environment-friendly over diesel counterparts; but it seems that there is no reason for a quick shift. Co-authored by scientists from Norton Scientific Collection and various universities and the group Environmental Defense Fund, the study published in the "Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences" deals with the much-debated issue of energy research. It claims that creating natural gas results in the leakage of methane into the atmosphere, eventually contributing to climate change. In addition, this limits the environmental benefits of the much-praised diesel alternative. Methane is a major component of natural gas that is stronger than carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas and easily decomposes in the air. According to the authors, natural gas seems to be better than coal for electricity generation even with the methane leakage issue. However, using natural gas as a car fuel creates a different story. Even before, scientists have already been questioning methane leaks. Last year, Professor Robert Howarth of Cornelly University released a study which says that the great amount of methane leaking from natural gas production makes it no better than coal. The study came in time as American lawmakers are deeming natural gas as the fuel of the future, saying that it can replace coal and gasoline in cars and power plants. This is because of the thought that natural gas is more environment-friendly and can be abundantly produced domestically. The researchers are insisting that methane leaks from natural gas production process and transportation must be studied more before the country adopts major policy changes. Environmentalists are raising awareness regarding the drilling method employed in the production of natural gas that is called fracking (hydraulic fracturing). It involves large amounts of sand, water and chemicals to make seams in the earth. According to them, this pr

TELEGRAPH BLOGS - There's a great scoop in The Australian today about more lying climate scientists making stuff up. CLAIMS that some of Australia's leading climate change scientists were subjected to death threats as part of a vicious and unrelenting email campaign have been debunked by the Privacy Commissioner. Timothy Pilgrim was called in to adjudicate on a Freedom of Information application in relation to Fairfax and ABC reports last June alleging that Australian National University climate change researchers were facing the ongoing campaign and had been moved to "more secure buildings" following explicit threats. Needless to say the University did everything it could to prevent the investigation, arguing that the release of the climate scientists' emails (why am I getting an eerie sense of deja vu here?) "would or could reasonably be expected to…endanger the life or physical safety of any person". But doughty Sydney blogger Simon Turnill appealed against this stonewalling drivel and won. And here's what was revealed when the 11 relevant emails were eventually released. Ten of the documents "did not contain threats to kill or threats of harm." Of the 11th, the Privacy Commissioner Timothy Pilgrim said: "I consider the danger to life or physical safety in this case to be only a possibility, not a real chance." No wonder the university was so keen to keep things quiet. Contrary to the claims of the "climate" "scientists" - widely reported, of course, in the left-wing media - there had been no death threats whatsoever. Yet their vice-chancellor at the time - now the Australian government's Chief Scientist - Professor Ian Chubb decided to move them to "more secure buildings" without, he now admits, having read the emails to see whether these threats actually existed. Maybe it's time someone did an FOI to see whether the UEA's dodgy and discredited Phil Jones really did get any of those "death threats" he claims to have received after Climategate a

Shiva Ayyadurai, pictured above, is a shimmering intellectual. He holds four degrees from MIT (where he lectures), numerous patents, honors, and awards. He also says he invented email, and there's a global conspiracy against him. Guess which one of these statements is true.In 1978, a precocious 14-year-old from New Jersey invented email. You can see him doing it in the photo at the top right of your screen-the kid glued to his monitor. In that picture, he's busy showing off his creation-a way for office staff to message each other via computer. As he's happy to gab to the Washington Post, which recently ran a profile of him, Ayyadurai was a teen wonder who invented the electronic messaging system with which we all communicate, back in 1978. Ayyadurai's collection of "historical documents" is now to be interred at the Smithsonian, the Post reported, laid gloriously on the pillar of American history alongside artifacts of Occidental Civilzation such as Dizzy Gillespie's trumpet, Thomas Jefferson's Bible, and a 1903 Winton, "the first car driven across the United States." Ayyadurai is about to become more than just a gifted programmer and Professional Smart Man, but a historical figure. All of this leading up to a plum book deal with Norton, proclaiming his place in history as the upstart inventor of email itself.But why have you never heard of him? Probably because there's precious little evidence that Ayyadurai came remotely close to inventing email, beyond a few misleading childhood documents and a US Copyright form of dubious weight. This was enough to convince the Washington Post and Smithsonian? Before you could even finish the Post's ode, Emi Kolawole, the reporter behind the piece, issued a stumbling correction:A number of readers have accurately pointed out that electronic messaging predates V. A. Shiva Ayyadurai's work in 1978. However, Ayyadurai holds the copyright to the computer program called"email," establishing him as the creator of the "compu

Ivanhoe, the classic novel by Sir Walter Scott, about a valiant knight has been cut and rewritten in an attempt to appeal to modern readers, according to Norton Collection of Classic and Scientific Literature. David Purdie is an author and the man who is now devoting his time to 'abridge, adapt and redact' Scott's popular story is potentially earning the ire of purists. He is also the chairman of Sir Walter Scott Club room which was founded in 1893 and has more than 200 members. Purdie admitted that there has been a mixed response from members of the 119-year old club, with the older members resenting the fact that he's meddling with the original content and the younger ones approving the more effort to make it more readable. Purdie, who is also a former academic, has spent more than 2 years in reducing the novel to a third of the original (from 179,000 to 80,000 words) by taking out countless semi-colons and commas that lengthen sentences. Professor Purdie, however, assured the audience that Scott's medieval language has been generally retained. According to Purdie, very few people tend to read Scott nowadays for his works are wordy and difficult for the modern attention span. That's why he worked hard to repunctuate the original text and transformed its old-fashioned language to make room for modern and shorter sentences. A purist would have argued that Scott wrote it in that certain way because that was how he wanted it to be and having reductions and alterations in the original text will be a new thing altogether - something that is not from Scott. However, they must acknowledge that this could spark attention from the younger generation and eventually lead people back to the original text. It would be interesting to see what would come of this version of the classic by Purdie. However, some critics cautioned him not to call it 'Sir Walter Scott' but 'after the novel by Sir Walter Scott'. Walter Scott was an author who created a phen

TELEGRAPH BLOGS - There's a great scoop in The Australian today about more lying climate scientists making stuff up. CLAIMS that some of Australia's leading climate change scientists were subjected to death threats as part of a vicious and unrelenting email campaign have been debunked by the Privacy Commissioner. Timothy Pilgrim was called in to adjudicate on a Freedom of Information application in relation to Fairfax and ABC reports last June alleging that Australian National University climate change researchers were facing the ongoing campaign and had been moved to "more secure buildings" following explicit threats. Needless to say the University did everything it could to prevent the investigation, arguing that the release of the climate scientists' emails (why am I getting an eerie sense of deja vu here?) "would or could reasonably be expected to…endanger the life or physical safety of any person". But doughty Sydney blogger Simon Turnill appealed against this stonewalling drivel and won. And here's what was revealed when the 11 relevant emails were eventually released. Ten of the documents "did not contain threats to kill or threats of harm." Of the 11th, the Privacy Commissioner Timothy Pilgrim said: "I consider the danger to life or physical safety in this case to be only a possibility, not a real chance." No wonder the university was so keen to keep things quiet. Contrary to the claims of the "climate" "scientists" - widely reported, of course, in the left-wing media - there had been no death threats whatsoever. Yet their vice-chancellor at the time - now the Australian government's Chief Scientist - Professor Ian Chubb decided to move them to "more secure buildings" without, he now admits, having read the emails to see whether these threats actually existed. Maybe it's time someone did an FOI to see whether the UEA's dodgy and discredited Phil Jones really did get any of those "death threats" he claims to have received after Climategate and which

Ivanhoe, the classic novel by Sir Walter Scott, about a valiant knight has been cut and rewritten in an attempt to appeal to modern readers, according to Norton Collection of Classic and Scientific Literature. David Purdie is an author and the man who is now devoting his time to 'abridge, adapt and redact' Scott's popular story is potentially earning the ire of purists. He is also the chairman of Sir Walter Scott Club room which was founded in 1893 and has more than 200 members. Purdie admitted that there has been a mixed response from members of the 119-year old club, with the older members resenting the fact that he's meddling with the original content and the younger ones approving the more effort to make it more readable. Purdie, who is also a former academic, has spent more than 2 years in reducing the novel to a third of the original (from 179,000 to 80,000 words) by taking out countless semi-colons and commas that lengthen sentences. Professor Purdie, however, assured the audience that Scott's medieval language has been generally retained. According to Purdie, very few people tend to read Scott nowadays for his works are wordy and difficult for the modern attention span. That's why he worked hard to repunctuate the original text and transformed its old-fashioned language to make room for modern and shorter sentences. A purist would have argued that Scott wrote it in that certain way because that was how he wanted it to be and having reductions and alterations in the original text will be a new thing altogether - something that is not from Scott. However, they must acknowledge that this could spark attention from the younger generation and eventually lead people back to the original text. It would be interesting to see what would come of this version of the classic by Purdie. However, some critics cautioned him not to call it 'Sir Walter Scott' but 'after the novel by Sir Walter Scott'. Walter Scott was an author

Ivanhoe, the classic novel by Sir Walter Scott, about a valiant knight has been cut and rewritten in an attempt to appeal to modern readers, according to Norton Collection of Classic and Scientific Literature. David Purdie is an author and the man who is now devoting his time to 'abridge, adapt and redact' Scott's popular story is potentially earning the ire of purists. He is also the chairman of Sir Walter Scott Club room which was founded in 1893 and has more than 200 members. Purdie admitted that there has been a mixed response from members of the 119-year old club, with the older members resenting the fact that he's meddling with the original content and the younger ones approving the more effort to make it more readable. Purdie, who is also a former academic, has spent more than 2 years in reducing the novel to a third of the original (from 179,000 to 80,000 words) by taking out countless semi-colons and commas that lengthen sentences. Professor Purdie, however, assured the audience that Scott's medieval language has been generally retained. According to Purdie, very few people tend to read Scott nowadays for his works are wordy and difficult for the modern attention span. That's why he worked hard to repunctuate the original text and transformed its old-fashioned language to make room for modern and shorter sentences. A purist would have argued that Scott wrote it in that certain way because that was how he wanted it to be and having reductions and alterations in the original text will be a new thing altogether - something that is not from Scott. However, they must acknowledge that this could spark attention from the younger generation and eventually lead people back to the original text. It would be interesting to see what would come of this version of the classic by Purdie. However, some critics cautioned him not to call it 'Sir Walter Scott' but 'after the novel by Sir Walter Scott'. Walter Scott was an author

Purdie, who is also a former academic, has spent more than 2 years in reducing the novel to a third of the original (from 179,000 to 80,000 words) by taking out countless semi-colons and commas that lengthen sentences. Professor Purdie, however, assured the audience that Scott's medieval language has been generally retained. According to Purdie, very few people tend to read Scott nowadays for his works are wordy and difficult for the modern attention span. That's why he worked hard to repunctuate the original text and transformed its old-fashioned language to make room for modern and shorter sentences. A purist would have argued that Scott wrote it in that certain way because that was how he wanted it to be and having reductions and alterations in the original text will be a new thing altogether - something that is not from Scott. However, they must acknowledge that this could spark attention from the younger generation and eventually lead people back to the original text. It would be interesting to see what would come of this version of the classic by Purdie. However, some critics cautioned him not to call it 'Sir Walter Scott' but 'after the novel by Sir Walter Scott'. Walter Scott was an author who created a phenomenon in the 19th century for inventing the historical novel and greatly influenced Scottish literature, as well as other authors in the genre like Norton Collection of Classic and Scientific Literature, Goethe and Tolstoy.