Check out yesterday’s “PhD Comic” comparing the average salaries of University administrators, professors, grad students and football coaches.
Here’s a different graphic, focusing on the professors and coaches
(sort of my own mini cartoon-off, like between Randall Monroe and Farley Katz)
When I was in Dulles airport the other day, I noticed a few of the airport stores had full-size cutouts of Obama, McCain and Palin outside their stores. No Biden. Either he was being stiffed for some reason, or there’s someone out there with a Biden fetish, stealing the figures.
That thought creeps me out.
I’m sorry, this is abuse. You want 12A, next door.
Day of reckoning for doomsday lawsuit
Basically the decision came down to an issue of jurisdiction: Wagner and a co-plantiff made their claim under the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA). But NEPA only applies to “major federal actions,” and the judge said that the US contribution to the LHC (US$531 million or about 10% of the overall cost) was too small to constitute a major federal project.
Why government MUST invest in fundamental research
Basic research is not a place where “the market” tends to show interest.
Problem number one is that it typically takes 20-30 years – in best case scenario to see “returns” on fundamental discoveries. Often discoveries pave the way to other discoveries, and so forth, which eventually trickle down to technological applications – often unintended or unforeseen.
Find me a company that is willing to invest in a project with no hope of return for 20-30 years and I have a bridge in Alaska I want to sell you.
Physics for Future Presidents apparently doesn’t include reflections.
I’ve made only a few few political posts, and most of those that touched on the upcoming elections have either been tongue-in-cheek or nonpartisan. But (to quote Tom Lehrer) I will digress, momentarily, from the mainstream of this evening’s symposium.
I can’t vote for the McCain-Palin ticket. If you don’t care why this is, then just go to the next post, because it won’t be about politics. If you do, I’m a bit puzzled, because I don’t think I’m going to sway anyone’s vote, nor are you going to sway mine. I’m venting. This is purely the lifting of the pressure-relief valve.
It’s not that I’m all that enamored of Obama; I can’t tell where the true policy ends and the pandering begins (for either candidate), and that bothers me. But I’m seeing out-and-out lies in recent political ads and speeches, and the worst of it seems to be coming from McCain. (Though this may be a function of my location with targeted ads). Is this the same man who decried such behavior in the last election?
I recall conversations I had when the primaries were starting up that McCain was somebody I could have voted for. But I was remembering the McCain of 2000, and this is not the same candidate. He’s not a maverick anymore. It occurs to me now that the more moderate candidate of 2000 might have been because Bush already had the far right locked up, and there was no ground to be gained by moving in that direction. Without that dynamic in play this time around, I see a candidate who has changed his stance on several issues, moving to the right, and gone out of alignment with me.
If there were any questions about that, the choice of Palin as a running mate answered them. Anti-science, anti-choice; someone who was promoting banning of books, choosing aides based on personal loyalty rather than qualifications, and conducting government business using private email to avoid having exposure subject to freedom-of-information laws that apply to government communications. I’m sick of crap like that.
And via nanoscale views I read that McCain will freeze science research funding the first year should he be elected.
“The purpose of the freeze is to evaluate each and every program, looking at which ones are worthwhile and which are a waste of taxpayer dollars,” Ike Brannon, an economist and senior policy adviser to McCain, told the Task Force on the Future of American Innovation at a private gathering in Washington, D.C.
Oh, joy. Politicians reviewing research programs to decide which ones are worthwhile and which ones are a waste.
So, circle gets the square, by default. (Even though you aren’t supposed to win that way)
Voting in the US presidential election? Can’t make up your mind? Match-o-Matic II
Choose which quote you agree with most on several topics, and find out which candidate is your dream date ideological match.
Or take my strategy of maximizing the number of holidays I will get from presidential funerals.
It is illegal to make false claims in a TV or radio commercial unless you are running for political office.
If you’re selling toothpaste, your claims must be vetted by legal and medical professionals. But not if you’re selling a candidate.
If you’re selling a candidate, not only can you lie about his record, but more to the point, you can lie about his opponent.
Not a bad idea — forcing candidates airing political ads to substantiate their claims. We’d get rid of the “my opponent molests collies” ads. (Unless your opponent is Judge Smails and Ty Webb has some real proof)
While I was watching the political convention last week (and the week before as well, actually), it astounded me at how often the speakers would resort to obvious logical fallacies. I counted five false dichotomies and four straw men within the Sarah Palin speech alone. Now, just to not be political: I’m sure Joe Biden also committed a whole bunch of logical fallacies, I just didn’t think about it until I heard Sarah Palin ‘poison the well‘ against Barack Obama.
Just discovering this, are we? That’s one reason that I dislike politics, and I was under the general assumption that others capable of spotting such arguments (e.g. scientists) felt the same way.
McCain’s Voice Mail to Palin Leaked to Press
(To aide) I can’t hear you. Will you grow a pair?