Customer Discussions > Science forum

Useful Real Science stuff


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-25 of 372 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Oct 4, 2012 6:13:14 PM PDT
noman says:
As an antidote to the pervasive pseudo-science I thought it might be useful to post links to useful real science. Here are two to get started.

1) How to read scientific abstracts
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/noah-gray/abstract-science_b_1923214.html

2) Duke University Online Course
Introduction to Genetics and Evolution
Mohamed Noor

A whirlwind introduction to evolution and genetics, from basic principles to current applications, including how disease genes are mapped and how we leverage evolutionary concepts to aid humanity.

https://www.coursera.org/course/geneticsevolution

Posted on Oct 4, 2012 6:19:57 PM PDT
tom kriske says:
good show brother, i would also suggest ned wrights cosmology page -

http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmolog.htm

as well as john baez' page -

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 4, 2012 6:36:07 PM PDT
Hmm -- # 2 sounds like something that Largo might want to ignore (have you thought of posting it on the Evolution forum?).

Here's also a couple of excellent blogs about matters relating to vertebrate anatomy and paleontology

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/tetrapod-zoology/

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/laelaps/

Posted on Oct 4, 2012 7:48:39 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Oct 5, 2012 6:24:21 AM PDT
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 5, 2012 5:29:16 AM PDT
Ambulocetus says:
CH,

So all scientists are morons, and you're here to rescue us from their nonsense. Thank God?

What do you use instead of science to make sense of reality? What is your replacement? If the scientific community is a scam, what community should we be paying attention to instead?

Posted on Oct 5, 2012 6:36:12 AM PDT
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

Posted on Oct 5, 2012 9:50:52 AM PDT
Brian Curtis says:
Still running and hiding from the question you're too scared to answer, eh Haynes? Too bad it's not going to work. Here it is again:

"So basically, every sighting of a UFO, dragon, ghost, Superman, sharks with lasers, or any other outrageous claim made by someone actually DID happen because, after all, they observed it happening, right?"

Creationist hicks resist any effort to expose them to actual science they might understand--it would threaten their faith!

Posted on Oct 5, 2012 4:15:42 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Oct 5, 2012 4:20:42 PM PDT
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 5, 2012 5:00:45 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Oct 5, 2012 5:04:00 PM PDT
Legendary Christopher Haynes wrote:
.......
I mentioned Jesus he turned water into wine.
....
Our very President Obama, he is a winner of the Nobel Prize .."
====================================

I am trying to figure out whether Haynes believes that Obama drunk wine to win Nobel Prize by following Jesus' wine creativity.

As a Muslim myself, wine is a sinful destructive poison in old religions and prophets need not cloud their minds with liquor when they should guide humanity to sobriety.

Prophet Muhammad for example was described to have been asked by a holy spirit of Gabriel to choose between milk and wine, he chose milk, and followed up by banning wine gradually, but surely. Hence the bitter animosity between Muslims and Christians (while Mormons prohibit wine and coffee) regarding poisoning the minds of society by trading in liquor.

Yet, exactly why would Jesus' clownish biochemical genius should convince others to believe in the hoaxes of Christianity?

Our body easily converts many chemicals to others in thousands of pathways, we could easily trust our own cells over any fictional Christ.

Mohamed F. El-Hewie

Posted on Oct 7, 2012 1:51:38 PM PDT
noman says:
An Institution for the Do-It-Yourself Biologist
http://diybio.org/

DIYbio.org is an organization dedicated to making biology an accessible pursuit for citizen scientists, amateur biologists and biological engineers who value openness and safety. This will require mechanisms for amateurs to increase their knowledge and skills, access to a community of experts, the development of a code of ethics, responsible oversight, and leadership on issues that are unique to doing biology outside of traditional professional settings.
Join the global discussion
Find people and events near you
Read the diybio blog
Use and contribute to our safety resources
Subscribe to the quarterly postcard update
See the pulse of diybio at the news dashboard
Browse the library of DIY lab hardware
Get the diybio logo and diybio.org contact info

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 8, 2012 6:41:42 AM PDT
Brian Curtis says:
Still running and hiding from the question you're scared to answer, eh Haynes? Too bad it's not going to work. Here it is again:

"So basically, every sighting of a UFO, dragon, ghost, Superman, sharks with lasers, or any other outrageous claim made by someone actually DID happen because, after all, they observed it happening, right?"

Creationists aren't just sadly ignorant... they're cowards, too.

Posted on Oct 8, 2012 8:30:14 AM PDT
noman says:
Becoming Human
http://www.becominghuman.org/

Evolution Lab
http://biologyinmotion.com/evol/

PBS Evolution Library
http://nhscience.lonestar.edu/biol/evolve.htm

Human Evolution
http://www.learner.org/courses/biology/units/humev/images.html

Leaky Foundation Timeline of Discovery
http://leakeyfoundation.org/education/timeline-of-discoveries/

BBC Prehistoric Life
http://www.bbc.co.uk/nature/prehistoric

Origin of Modern Humans
http://www.hhmi.org/biointeractive/click/index.html

Genographic Project
https://genographic.nationalgeographic.com/

Genetic Drift
http://highered.mcgraw-hill.com/sites/dl/free/0072835125/126997/animation45.html

Posted on Oct 8, 2012 2:12:02 PM PDT
noman says:
Deep Web Search Engines

Intute (sadly no longer maintained or updated but still useful)
http://www.intute.ac.uk/

Explorit (trial versions)
http://www.deepwebtech.com/product-trial/try-it-now/

SCIRUS is the most comprehensive scientific research tool on the web. With over 460 million scientific items indexed at last count, it allows researchers to search for not only journal content but also scientists' homepages, courseware, pre-print server material, patents and institutional repository and website information.
http://www.scirus.com/

Deep Peep
From Wiki: "DeepPeep is a search engine that aims to crawl and index every database on the public Web.[1][2] Unlike traditional search engines, which crawl existing webpages and their hyperlinks, DeepPeep aims to allow access to the so-called Deep Web, World Wide Web content only available via for instance typed queries into databases.[3] The project started at the University of Utah and is overseen by Juliana Freire, an associate professor at the university's School of Computing WebDB group..."

http://www.deeppeep.org/

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 8, 2012 10:06:27 PM PDT
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 9, 2012 7:46:14 AM PDT
noman says:
No. I'm not replying to any particular post. I simply thought that something resembling actual science on the science forum, rather than a reprisal of King Sisyphus in the underworld in the eternal pointless arguments with the Ignorati as exemplified by RK, BAM, Forests, et al.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 9, 2012 9:37:16 AM PDT
Re noman, above: Okay -- but it would have been helpful for you to have explained this at the outset. Cheers!

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 9, 2012 2:12:25 PM PDT
noman says:
RE: "Robert A. Saunders says:
Re noman, above: Okay -- but it would have been helpful for you to have explained this at the outset. Cheers!"

**I did (I thought)..."As an antidote to the pervasive pseudo-science I thought it might be useful to post links to useful real science. Here are two to get started."

**Two new ones:

Biology I & II, Human A& P I & II,Microbiology
http://nhscience.lonestar.edu/biol/index.html

chemguide

Helping you to understand Chemistry
http://www.chemguide.co.uk/

Posted on Oct 10, 2012 5:46:50 AM PDT
Bubba says:
I find it amazing that a North Carolina University (Duke) has an online course in evolution, NC is a nest of creationists.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 10, 2012 6:08:23 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Oct 10, 2012 6:16:39 AM PDT
noman says:
what makes you think NC is different from anyplace else?

The New York Creation Battle
http://ncse.com/cej/1/2/new-york-creation-battle

PLUS...some science blogs and stuff

Good Math, Bad Math
http://scienceblogs.com/goodmath/

Atomic Rockets
http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/index.php

SCIENCE FICTION - FANTASY - HISTORY - SPACE - AND OTHER SPECULATIONS
Rocketpunk Manifesto

Days of Future Past
http://www.rocketpunk-manifesto.com/

TED talks
http://www.ted.com/talks

Posted on Oct 10, 2012 6:43:28 AM PDT
Brian Curtis says:
Interestingly, a Duke professor just won the Nobel Prize for Chemistry:

http://www.citizen-times.com/viewart/20121010/NEWS/310100048/Duke-Stanford-scientists-win-Nobel-chemistry-prize?odyssey=mod%7Cnewswell%7Ctext%7CFrontpage%7Cs

Posted on Oct 10, 2012 7:08:39 AM PDT
Bubba says:
I wonder when somebody from the NC government is going to crack down on Duke University for doing godless and even blasphemous science.

Posted on Oct 10, 2012 5:38:01 PM PDT
noman says:
The NASA Scientist Who Answers Your 2012 Apocalypse Emails
http://www.theawl.com/2012/09/nasa-apocalypse-expert

Posted on Oct 11, 2012 11:47:20 AM PDT
noman says:
Remember arsenic life? In 2010 NASA researchers thought they'd found evidence that certain bacteria could use arsenic in their DNA where all other forms of life on Earth use phosphate. Then it turned out their research was really flawed. Then it turned out they were wrong. In general, there was a to-do.

Fast forward to this month, when scientists from the Weizmann Institute of Science in Rehovot, Israel published a study in which they were trying to figure out how bacteria can tell the difference between phosphate and arsenate and "know" to prefer the phosphate. They used phosphate-collecting proteins from four different species of bacteria in their research, including the one that had been at the center of the arsenic life controversy. And along the way, they discovered a fun twist to that story.

This new study suggests that "arsenic life" bacteria is, indeed, able to survive in arsenate-heavy solutions where other bacteria fail. But, the Weizmann researchers say their data shows that success isn't due to a preference for arsenic, or even an ability to use it. Instead, "arsenic life" is probably just much, much, much, much better at collecting and using every tiny trace of phosphate it can get its metaphorical paws on.
http://boingboing.net/2012/10/11/new-study-suggests-arsenic-l.html#more-186766

******
Nature | News
`Arsenic-life' bacterium prefers phosphorus after all

Transport proteins show 4,000-fold preference for phosphate over arsenate.
Daniel Cressey
03 October 2012
http://www.nature.com/news/arsenic-life-bacterium-prefers-phosphorus-after-all-1.11520

Posted on Oct 11, 2012 6:31:28 PM PDT
noman says:
"The Marshmallow Study Revisited

For the past four decades, the "marshmallow test" has served as a classic experimental measure of children's self-control: will a preschooler eat one of the fluffy white confections now or hold out for two later?

Now a new study demonstrates that being able to delay gratification is influenced as much by the environment as by innate ability. Children who experienced reliable interactions immediately before the marshmallow task waited on average four times longer-12 versus three minutes-than youngsters in similar but unreliable situations...."
http://www.rochester.edu/news/show.php?id=4622

Posted on Oct 17, 2012 5:52:30 AM PDT
noman says:
List of quotes out of context

It seems that creationists and other prevaricators and goofballs think quoting the statements of scientists counts as research. The problem is that often when quotations are taken out of context they will appear to have a meaning which is different from or, especially, the opposite of their originally intended meaning.

This page is for quotes of scientists, by creationists and other specious idiots, which are taken out of context and presented in a manner such that they imply the opposite meaning of that intended by their authors. There is an excellent assemblage of such quotes on Talk Origins [1], and it is the purpose of this page to complement that compilation rather than to duplicate it.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/List_of_quotes_out_of_context

[1]The Quote Mine Project
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/quotes/mine/contents.html
‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 15 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Science forum
Participants:  44
Total posts:  372
Initial post:  Oct 4, 2012
Latest post:  Jun 13, 2014

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 3 customers

Search Customer Discussions