Sunday, May 24, 2009
ASC and lung cancer
Interesting development using adult stem cells in mice, from Science Daily. Here adult stem cells from bone marrow are genetically modified to deliver killing proteins to tumors.
Saturday, May 23, 2009
Stellar Distances
I have long wanted to review the process of measuring distances in deep space. It is not as simple as might be believed...
On earth, we measure short distances with a glance. A baseball player knows just how far it is to first base, and how hard to throw the ball. A car driver has a little more trouble, dealing with greater distances and higher speeds.
Look at an airplane in the sky. Is it big, fast and far - or small, slow, and near? Look at a picture of two airplanes with only sky around. Are they about to collide? Or miles apart?
We can measure these things using triangulation. Taking two measurements a known distance apart, and calculating the differences in the angle and length.
What about when the object is in space?
The largest "known" distance we can use is the diameter of the Earth's orbit (2 AU). This is fairly small in the grand scheme of things, so our triangle collapses to a line.
There is an article on Science Daily discussing the standard method for measuring large distances in space - the "Type 1a Supernova".
This method is dependent on many assumptions. Namely, that our models of stellar evolution are correct (models which rely on undiscovered dark matter).
I'm not certain that these measurements are wrong, but they are open to interpretation and error. I will need to pull some data from star catalogs, where you can see the distance to stars shifts - due to revising the underlying calculations.
On earth, we measure short distances with a glance. A baseball player knows just how far it is to first base, and how hard to throw the ball. A car driver has a little more trouble, dealing with greater distances and higher speeds.
Look at an airplane in the sky. Is it big, fast and far - or small, slow, and near? Look at a picture of two airplanes with only sky around. Are they about to collide? Or miles apart?
We can measure these things using triangulation. Taking two measurements a known distance apart, and calculating the differences in the angle and length.
What about when the object is in space?
The largest "known" distance we can use is the diameter of the Earth's orbit (2 AU). This is fairly small in the grand scheme of things, so our triangle collapses to a line.
There is an article on Science Daily discussing the standard method for measuring large distances in space - the "Type 1a Supernova".
This method is dependent on many assumptions. Namely, that our models of stellar evolution are correct (models which rely on undiscovered dark matter).
I'm not certain that these measurements are wrong, but they are open to interpretation and error. I will need to pull some data from star catalogs, where you can see the distance to stars shifts - due to revising the underlying calculations.
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
Let's Talk About Sex
Albert Mohler has given me the opportunity to talk about a topic I have been meaning to get to for a long time.
I am going to focus more on a sermon by John Macarthur (which I, sadly, don't have a link for). John was talking about some statistics he had seen about sex.
There are some good stats from the US government, probably similar to what John was looking at.
An average couple has sex for a few hours a week. A really active couple might have sex for a few hours a day (7-14 hours per week).
Compare that with:
Now imagine that someone would reject the Good News of salvation, because it would interfere with their watching television. Or the way they drive to work. It would be ridiculous.
Sex is less of a percentage of our day than any of these things.
Yet, for sex, people would turn the world upside down. Reject Christianity, the Bible, hearing the Good News, even friendly relations with other people.
I am going to focus more on a sermon by John Macarthur (which I, sadly, don't have a link for). John was talking about some statistics he had seen about sex.
There are some good stats from the US government, probably similar to what John was looking at.
An average couple has sex for a few hours a week. A really active couple might have sex for a few hours a day (7-14 hours per week).
Compare that with:
- 56 hours per week sleeping (33%)
- 40 hours per week working (24%)
- more than 17 hours watching TV (5.1*.5*7)
- 8 hours eating and drinking
Now imagine that someone would reject the Good News of salvation, because it would interfere with their watching television. Or the way they drive to work. It would be ridiculous.
Sex is less of a percentage of our day than any of these things.
Yet, for sex, people would turn the world upside down. Reject Christianity, the Bible, hearing the Good News, even friendly relations with other people.
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
Constitutional Creationism
An interesting article on Science Daily. I am most interested in one comment:
The Supreme Court has found it unconstitutional for a state law to require the teaching of creationism.
It is not illegal for a teacher to teach whatever they feel is appropriate to their class (subject to their working agreement with the school administration).
"The studies say that more than 25 percent of biology teachers do not know it is unconstitutional to teach creationism."Apparently 100% of the editors of this article do not know it is not unconstitutional to teach creationism.
The Supreme Court has found it unconstitutional for a state law to require the teaching of creationism.
It is not illegal for a teacher to teach whatever they feel is appropriate to their class (subject to their working agreement with the school administration).
Sunday, May 3, 2009
Dinosaur Proteins
I've previously commented on the repeatability and falsifiable nature of evolution science. The claim of 65 million year old t-rex proteins has gone back and forth a couple of times (with some saying it is an error, and others supporting it).
Now, we have 80 million year old hadrosaur proteins.
Give me 80 million years, and we might be able to repeat the experiment (although no one is sure how to set up the experiment...)
Now, we have 80 million year old hadrosaur proteins.
Give me 80 million years, and we might be able to repeat the experiment (although no one is sure how to set up the experiment...)
Saturday, May 2, 2009
ASC and Blood Vessels 2
I posted previously on a clinical study using adult stem cells to rebuild blood vessels. There is another researcher advancing similar techniques in the Netherlands.
Friday, May 1, 2009
The Rationalist's Dilemma
The rationalist must be completely fair in his decision making. Otherwise, his notion of "truth" will be slanted towards his preconceptions (which I argue is true for all rationalists).
Science Daily has coverage of a scientific study showing this notion of "tabula rasa" is unfounded:
Science Daily has coverage of a scientific study showing this notion of "tabula rasa" is unfounded:
"The findings of this research show that risk preferences may be manipulated – while the person making those decisions is unaware of it."The Bible tells us that the mind of the unrepentant is unable to comprehend the things of God:
"because the mind of the flesh is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can it be" - Romans 8:7Not only that, but that their minds do not work correctly, at all, whatsoever:
"Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen." - Romans 1:25
"And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient" - Romans 1:28The Greek word translated "reprobate" means "worthless" or "rejected".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)