Senior Women Web

Author: SeniorWomenWeb

  • CultureWatch Reviews: City of Fortune

    Canaletto (II)

    Reviewed by Julia Sneden

    CITY OF FORTUNE
    How Venice Ruled the Seas
    by Roger Crowley, ©2011
    Published by Random House Inc.,  New York; 464 pp

    Anyone who is interested in the history of the Mediterranean will find this book, with its detailed recounting of the political, economic, and religious  power struggles during a period of about five hundred years (c. 1000 AD to the 1500’s), quite fascinating. So will anyone who has ever fallen in love with Venice, and has wondered about the history of that amazing, improbable city.

    Roger Crowley describes its people as “… carriers and suppliers of other men’s needs.” Early on, he says, “[it] was a city grown hydroponically, conjured out of marsh, existing perilously on oak palings sunk in mud … Beyond the mullet and eels of the lagoon, and its salt pans, it produced nothing — no wheat, no timber, little meat … its sole skills were navigation and the carrying of goods. The quality of its ships was critical.”

    “… Without land, there could be no feudal system, no clear division between knight and serf. Without agriculture, money was its barter. Its nobles would be merchant princes who could command a fleet and calculate profit to the nearest grosso.”

    After a brief introduction, Crowley begins his history by clumping his chapters into three overlapping time periods:

    “Opportunity: Merchant Crusaders, 1000-1204”;   “Ascent: Princes of the Sea, 1200-1500”;  “Eclipse: the Rising Moor, 1400-1503”

    Each section has many chapters explaining the main events of the period. By the time period of the first section (the years 1000 to 1104 AD), Venice was already well-established as an accomplished trader and purveyor of supplies that linked the eastern Mediterranean and the Levant with countries to the west. “It lived,” as Crowley says, “between two worlds: the land and the sea, the East and the West, yet belonging to neither.” It dealt with the Byzantine Empire and the Christian world, as well as with Muslim traders in Syria. Various Popes excommunicated the entire city from time to time, for defying the various mandates of the Catholic Church which included constraints on trading with non-Christian peoples.

    By the 900’s AD, Venice was trading in anything of interest to the peoples of the Mediterranean, things like grain from the countries along the Black Sea or the Dalmatian coast; spices brought overland from the Orient; the rare purple cloth made in Syria; foodstuffs like lemons and oranges and sugar cane from the Levant; silks from Tripoli; and even rhubarb from the banks of the Volga. In turn, it traded out items like timber from Europe, furs from northern Europe and Russia, as well as slaves.

    Unlike most of its feudal contemporaries, Venice was a republic, headed by a doge (duke) who was apparently elected or chosen by successive lotteries within the City Council.

    The driving ethic of Venice was essentially just to make a profit, “without fear or favor,” and this purpose remained steady throughout the five hundred years covered by Crowley’s book.

    Painting: 1730:   Canaletto (II) La storia del Bucintoro: Bucintoro del 1727 [The History of the Bucentaur: The Bucentaur of 1727]; Wikipedia

  • Public Divided Over Birth Control Insurance Mandate

    Religious, Partisan and Gender Differences

    OVERVIEW

    About six-in-ten Americans (62%) have heard about the proposed federal rule that would require employers, including most religiously affiliated institutions, to cover birth control as part of their health care benefits. Among those aware of the issue, opinion is closely divided over whether these institutions should be given an exemption to the rule if they object to the use of contraceptives: 48% support an exemption and 44% say they should be required to cover contraceptives like other employers.

    The latest national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press and the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life, conducted Feb. 8-12 among 1,501 adults, finds sharp divisions on the issue by religious affiliation, party and ideology.

    The Obama administration announced Feb. 10 that it would modify the mandate in response to criticism that the rule would force religious organizations to violate their religious beliefs in providing contraception coverage. The survey shows little difference in opinions among people interviewed before the administration’s proposed modification on Feb. 10 and those interviewed afterwards.

    Among Catholics who have heard at least a little about the issue, 55% favor giving religious institutions that object to the use of contraceptives an exemption from the federal rule, while 39% oppose exempting those institutions. White evangelical Protestants, by an even larger margin (68% to 22%), favor giving religious institutions an exemption. White mainline Protestants are divided (44% favor an exemption, 46% are opposed). By contrast, a majority (55%) of the religiously unaffiliated who have heard about the issue say religious institutions that object to the use of contraceptives should be required to cover them like other institutions, while 39% favor giving an exemption to these institutions.

    There also are wide partisan and ideological divisions in opinions about the issue. Nearly three-quarters (73%) of Republicans, and 82% of Republican and Republican-leaning independents who agree with the Tea Party, favor giving religious institutions that object to contraceptives an exemption from the new federal rule. By about two-to-one (64% to 29%), Democrats say religious institutions should be required to cover contraceptives like other employers; liberal Democrats (72%) are more likely than conservative and moderate Democrats (58%) to favor this approach.

  • Rep. Maloney’s opening statement at Oversight Hearing on ‘Separation of Church and State’: Where are the women?

    Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney, senior member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, delivered the following opening remarks at today’s hearing titled *’Separation of Church and State’ on the Obama Administration’s recent contraception decision, where not a single woman was allowed at the witness table by the Committee’s majority.Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D)

    “Thank you, Ranking Member Cummings. I know you are a man of faith, and I know you place tremendous value on your faith and on open dialogue, so I appreciate your efforts to get a more balanced hearing today.

    “What I want to know is, where are the women?  I look at this panel, and I don’t see one single individual representing the tens of millions of women across the country who want and need insurance coverage for basic preventive health care services, including family planning. Where are the women?

    “Mr. Chairman, I was deeply disturbed that you rejected our request to hear from a woman, a third year student at Georgetown law school named Sandra Fluke.

    “She hoped to tell this Committee about a classmate of hers, who was diagnosed with a syndrome that causes ovarian cysts.  Her doctor prescribed the pill to treat this disease, but her student insurance didn’t cover it.  Over several months — she paid out hundreds of dollars in out-of-pocket costs, until  she could no longer afford her medication.  And she eventually ended up losing her ovary.

    “Your staff told us you personally rejected Ms. Fluke’s testimony, saying that, quote, ‘the hearing is not about reproductive rights and contraception.’

    “Of course this hearing is about rights — contraception and birth control.  It’s about the fact that women want to have access to basic health services family planning through their health insurance plan.  But some would prevent that from happening – by using lawsuits and ballot initiatives in dozens of states to roll back the fundamental rights of women to a time when the government thought what happened in the bedroom was their business and contraceptives were illegal  Tens of millions of us who are following these hearings lived through those times — and I can tell you with certainty — we will not be forced back to that dark and primitive era.

    “That is why — last week, the Administration announced a common-sense accommodation.  Churches do not have to provide insurance coverage for contraceptives. They do not have to approve them, prescribe them, dispense them or use them. But women will have the right to access them — women who work at non-profit religious entities, like hospitals and universities, will be able to obtain coverage directly from their insurance companies – not from religious organizations — but from insurance companies.

    “Medical and health experts support this policy, economists support this, and a host of Catholic groups that were conspicuously not invited today support this.

    “The vast majority of women — including women of faith —  use some form of birth control at some point in their lives, whether to plan the number or spacing of their children, or to address significant medical conditions.

  • Harvard’s Food Law Society, the Sugar Epidemic and Raw Milk Debated

    On Thursday, February 16th, Harvard Law School’s Food Law Society is hosting a debate about raw milk on Thursday from 7:15 to 8:45 p.m. (Eastern Standard Time). See below*

    “The Food Law Society provides students with hands on exposure to the numerous issues in law, policy, science and management that confront professionals in the fields of food law and food policy. Members participate in clinical projects and conferences, host speakers, take trips and collaborate with groups throughout the University and the world in their effort to address food issues.”

    The session noted below was recorded on YouTube as well a previous 2011 event titled Food and Mental Health with Emily Deans, M.D.

    The Sugar Epidemic and Dr. Robert Lustig, Professor of Pediatric Endocrinology at the University of California, San Francisco. Lustig argues that it is time for a paradigm shift in obesity science and policy, away from personal responsibility and toward public health. His presentation elaborates on his contention that sugar, like alcohol, should not be treated as an ordinary commodity on the open market.

    Raw Milk Debate, Langdell South, Harvard Law School, Open to the Public

    “At one time, everyone drank raw milk. But with the invention of pasteurization and its attendant safety benefits, consumption of raw milk in this country almost completely disappeared. In fact, in many states it is illegal to sell raw milk. But a growing segment of the population is clamoring for increased access to raw milk, citing its nutritional benefits. Opponents are skeptical of such nutritional claims and believe the safety risks of unpasteurized milk are simply too high.

    The Society invites the public to join the Food Law Society as they present a debate covering the legal, health, and nutritional merits of raw milk. The participants are:

    Fred Pritzker of the Pritzker & Olson Law Firm; Dr. Heidi Kassenborg, Director, Dairy & Food Inspection Division, Minnesota Dept. of Agriculture

    vs.

    Sally Fallon Morell, President, Weston A. Price Foundation; David Gumpert, Author, The Raw Milk Revolution

    Note: *This event will be streamed live. The stream will be viewable beginning at 6:15 PM EST on the livestream page . For more information, contact: jabrams@jd12.law.harvard.edu

  • ProgressVA Exposes the Influence of ALEC; House Allows A Bill’s Preliminary Approval for A Pre-abortion Ultrasound Bill

    [Editor’s Note: As we prepared to note Virginia’s challenge to the legislative process, we were alerted to this happening as outlined by the Richmond Times Dispatch: “The Virginia House of Delegates today gave preliminary approval to a measure requiring a woman to receive an ultrasound before having an abortion.”

    “Members advanced the bill to a final vote on Tuesday after rejecting an amendment proposed by Del. David L. Englin, D-Alexandria, to require a woman’s consent before undergoing a trans-vaginal ultrasound.” Read the rest of the story at the Dispatch or the AP’s article.]

    But back to the effort to reveal ALEC’s influence in Virgina:

    “It is no coincidence that so many state legislatures have spent the last year taking the same destructive actions: making it harder for minorities and other groups that support Democrats to vote, obstructing health care reform, weakening environmental regulations and breaking the spines of public- and private-sector unions. All of these efforts are being backed — in some cases, orchestrated — by a little-known conservative organization financed by millions of corporate dollars.”

    — The New York Times Editorial, 2/13/12

    “The American Legislative Exchange Council was founded in 1973 by the right-wing activist Paul Weyrich; its big funders include Exxon Mobil, the Olin and Scaife families and foundations tied to Koch Industries. Many of the largest corporations are represented on its board.”

    A new report released  details the disturbing level of influence exerted on Virginia’s legislature by a secretive, corporate front group. The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), which is funded by corporate contributions, has been writing bills that Virginia legislators are passing off as their own work on everything from education to health care to voting rights. The report, ALEC Exposed: Who is writing Virginia’s laws? was written and researched by ProgressVA, a progressive advocacy group.

    Key findings in the report include:

    • At least 50 bills introduced in the Virginia General Assembly that were drawn from ALEC model legislation
    • Over $230,000 in taxpayer money spent on sending legislators on junkets to ALEC conferences to meet with corporate lobbyists behind closed doors
    • Over 100 current and former legislators with ties to ALEC, including Speaker of the House of Delegates William Howell, Governor Bob McDonnell, and Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli

    “Simply put, a secretive, corporate front group is writing Virginia’s laws,” said Anna Scholl, Executive Director of ProgressVA. “Even worse, Virginia taxpayers have shelled out over $230,000 for the privilege of our representatives having exclusive access to corporate lobbyists behind closed doors. Our legislators were elected to represent Virginia families, not corporate bottom lines. Legislators who kowtow to a corporate agenda are nothing new in Virginia, but secretly copying and pasting legislation from corporate lobbyists is a step too far. This is an egregious violation of the public trust.  If our representatives are so desperate for legislative ideas, they should consult the people they were elected to represent. We’ll even give them the advice for free.”

    ProgressVA encourages Virginia citizens to access the online report to see if their legislator is working for their constituents or corporate lobbyists.

  • Signing Up As A Spin Detector For False or Misleading Campaign Materials

    We received the following request for help from one of our favorite resources, FactCheck.org, a site we’ve used that investigated the accuracy of politicians’s statements. We thought that you might like to consider helping Spin Detectors’  monitor the candidates for Election 2012’s races and their campaigns.Spin Detector logo

    “We are a nonpartisan, nonprofit “consumer advocate” for voters that aims to reduce the level of deception and confusion in U.S. politics. We monitor the factual accuracy of what is said by major U.S. political players in the form of TV ads, debates, speeches, interviews and news releases. Our goal is to apply the best practices of both journalism and scholarship, and to increase public knowledge and understanding.”

    FactCheck.org is a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania. The APPC was established by publisher and philanthropist Walter Annenberg to create a community of scholars within the University of Pennsylvania that would address public policy issues at the local, state and federal levels. (*Note: See below for FactCheck.org‘s funding explained from their site)

    Dear FactCheck.org reader,

    The 2012 campaign season is well under way, and we could use your help monitoring the candidates and potential candidates running for president, Congress and governor.

    We are asking you to consider becoming a “Spin Detector” for FactCheck.org. We want you to send us campaign materials — videos, robocalls, campaign fliers — that you suspect may contain false or misleading information, and we’ll check it out. We may even write about it.

    For instance, we’re looking for videos of candidates making dubious claims at campaign appearances in your area. What events could you videotape? Candidate forums, stump speeches, campaign events or even casual conversations the candidates have with you and your neighbors as they walk about town shaking hands and kissing babies.

    We also want to know about questionable claims made in campaign fliers mailed to your home, fundraising solicitations emailed to you, or robocalls left on your voice mail.

    Please visit the Spin Detectors website for information on how you can upload these videos and campaign materials to allow us to review them. You can follow Spin Detectors at Twitter.com/Spin_Detectors.

    Our staff regularly monitors the major public affairs programs, nationally televised speeches, debates and interviews, as well as the TV ads run by presidential, House and Senate candidates. Where we need your help is in covering local campaign events, and gathering targeted fundraising solicitations or voter persuasion messages that go unnoticed by the national press corps.

    Spin Detectors is supported with subscriber contributions we received during our year-end donation drive to raise money for our coverage of the 2012 elections.

    If you have any questions, please send them to editor@factcheck.org and put “Spin Detectors” in the subject field.

    — Brooks Jackson
    Director, FactCheck.org

    — Ben Finley
    Staff Writer, FactCheck.org
    Project Coordinator, Spin Detectors

    *FactCheck.org’s  Funding

    Prior to fiscal 2010, we were supported entirely by three sources: funds from the APPC’s own resources (specifically an endowment created in 1993 by the Annenberg Foundation at the direction of the late Walter Annenberg, and a 1995 grant by the Annenberg Foundation to fund APPC’s Washington, D.C., base); additional funds from the Annenberg Foundation; and grants from the Flora Family Foundation. We do not seek and have never accepted, directly or indirectly, any funds from corporations, unions, partisan organizations or advocacy groups.

    In 2010, we began accepting donations from individual members of the public for the first time, responding to many unsolicited offers of support from our subscribers. We launched our first public appeal for donations in April 2010.

    At that time we also decided to disclose our finances in greater detail, so that our readers may judge for themselves whether or not any of those individual donations could influence us.

  • Occupy! At CPAC

    by Jo FreemanOccupy Logo

    Occupy! was a pervasive presence at the 39th annual Conservative Political Action Conference, held in Washington, D.C. on February 9-11.

    In his kick-off speech on Thursday, Al Cardenas, chairman of the American Conservative Union which sponsors CPAC, gave the movement five paragraphs. [see sidebar] Seven minutes into Sarah Palin’s closing speech on Saturday she was interrupted by a dozen Occupiers yelling “mic check.” They were escorted from the ballroom while the audience yelled “USA, USA, USA” — a standard response at Republican rallies to drown out verbal disruptions. Once off the hotel grounds they read the statement they had not been able to read inside.

    In between there were three demonstrations outside the conference hotel, zap actions inside, repeated referrals to Occupy by conference speakers, and a couple of panels inspired by five months of occupations all over the country.

    ACU Chairman Al Cardenas opening speech at CPAC 2012; February 9, 2012

    “The left wants to change America into something unrecognizable.

    “President Obama and former Speaker Pelosi’s support for Occupy Wall Street extremism says all we need to know about who they believe we are as a country.

    “They want an America where a degraded brigade of self-named “Occupiers” is given special recognition, above those whose taxes support most of these work-averse complainers.

    “The words on the signs of the occupiers are not of faith, family, patriotism or honor. They are about resentment and forced wealth redistribution from one “class” to … another class – themselves.

    “They seek to replace achievement, hard work and freedom with spreading the wealth, rewarding the unaccomplished and creating a dependent class. They want a world where there is no 1 percent or 2 percent or 50 percent or 99 percent. But an indistinguishable class of people who are 100 percent dependent on the federal government.

    “Is this our new social fabric? Are we witnessing the America of tomorrow under President Obama’s leadership for the next four years if we fail to unite in opposition?

    “Make no mistake. The only key to putting our nation back on a path to prosperity is making Barack Obama a one-term President.

    Thursday morning, Vinnie Vernuccio of the Competitive Enterprise Institute told a hundred people who had come to hear about “The Return of Big Labor” that “Occupy is targeting this panel because they are afraid of you.” He made a reference to what was going on outside, as he attacked unions for spending dues on politics rather than representation. That day, nothing was going on outside. The unions were marching on Friday and OccupyDC was marching on Saturday.

    Two hours later Citizens United Productions hosted a “Blogger Briefing” on its upcoming films. The only one promoted in the two-hour “briefing” was Occupy Unmasked, which is still in production.

    CUP is the documentary film production and marketing arm of Citizens United, which promotes conservative causes. CU sued the Federal Election Commission after the FEC deemed a 2007 film critical of Hillary Clinton to be an election communication which could not be publicly distributed within 30 days of the 2008 Democratic primaries.

    When CU v. FEC was decided by Supreme Court a year ago, five Justices said there could be no limits on election expenditures by corporations and unions as long as they were made independently of candidates’ campaigns. This led to the formation of “superPACs” which have poured millions of dollars into the 2012 election. A different CPAC panel celebrated this decision.

    The audience gawked as three men wearing Guy Fawkes masks and black capes marched up the aisle to the front of the room. They weren’t Occupiers but the producer, director, and one narrator of the film. The Guy Fawkes mask is worn in demonstrations by some Occupiers and has become symbolic of the movement.

    Between two showings of the movie trailer, panelists described Occupy as “dangerous” and the movie as “scary.” “This is a war movie” they said repeatedly. Occupy is portrayed as “Obama’s shock troops,” whose job is to promote the idea that “income inequality” is bad. In order to tell “the true story of the radicals behind the Occupy movement” two of the panelists went undercover to get footage and quotes. CUP is looking for more, providing an e-mail address for it on the film’s webpage.

    What they didn’t say but was obvious from the trailer, is that Occupy Unmasked is a campaign film, as was the 2007 Hillary: The Movie. The movie makers juxtapose scenes of violent property destruction next to footage of President Obama and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi seeming to make positive statements about Occupiers. The trailer also manages a dig at Michael Moore and the “liberal media.”

  • Ron Paul Retreats from CPAC

    by Jo Freeman

    Ron Paul was the only one of the four current candidates for the Republican nomination to decline an invitation to speak at the 2012 Conservative Political Action Conference. He said he preferred to spend his time campaigning in Maine, whose caucuses were held on Saturday, February 11, the last day of this year’s CPAC. His son, Sen. Rand Paul (R KY), was a last minute addition to the program as a surrogate speaker for his father.

    Paul came in second in Maine with 36 percent, his best showing so far.  Although Romney took the time to speak at CPAC on Friday, Maine was his second state win with 39 percent. His absence made it possible for Romney once again to win CPAC’s straw poll with 31 percent of 3,408 votes cast. Romney was the winner of CPAC’s straw poll in 2007, 2008 and 2009.

    In 2010 and 2011, Campaign for Liberty, a group founded by Paul and run by family members, packed CPAC with young, enthusiastic, Paul supporters in order to win CPAC’s straw poll.  He got 30 percent of the votes in 2011 and 31 percent in 2010.

    At both of those conferences, CfL paid for several exhibit booths in order to populate “Liberty Row” with CfL affiliates and qualify hundreds of Paul supporters for discounted registration fees. Anyone with a CPAC badge (even media) could vote in the straw poll.

    Without his hordes of dedicated supporters, only 12 percent of those voting in the 2012 straw poll said Ron Paul was their “first choice to be the Republican Presidential nominee.” Although this was the same proportion that favored him in 2008, when he first appeared on the list, he came in last among the current candidates. In 2008 he also came in last out of four.

    In 2009, when the field of possibles was much larger, 13 percent of those voting put Paul first, making him third out of ten.

    In addition to the straw poll, Paul supporters had an impact on the last two CPACs that was completely missing from this one. There were no panels or speakers on libertarian topics. Students for Liberty was the only libertarian group that paid for a booth in the exhibit hall. It is “friendly” to CfL, but not a part of it.

    Also among the missing was GOProud, a gay conservative group which is not libertarian. Its presence at the last two CPACs was a source of controversy, causing some traditional conservative groups to boycott the conference.

    GOProud received a letter last July specifically disinviting it from the 2012 CPAC. So did the John Birch Society, whose presence at previous CPACs was not controversial. Some of the conservative groups that did not pay for booths last year, did so this year.

    2012 CPAC straw poll results:
    Mitt Romney 38%
    Rick Santorum 31%
    Newt Gingrich 15%
    Ron Paul 12%

    ©2012 Jo Freeman for SeniorWomen.com

  • Two At An Intersection

    by Susan Samuels DrakeSchool bus stop

    I first noticed him when school started in September. He stands on the corner where my street intersects a larger thoroughfare. More man than boy, he’s probably 15, about the size of my grandson. Every weekday morning he’s there, no matter if it’s 7:30 or as late as 7:50. I’m on my way to a gym’s stretch-and-balance class, my equivalent of a cup of coffee. At the corner, I stop to wait for a break in traffic. In those seconds, waiting to gun-it onto the main street, I began waving to the boy. Why not? He’s the first human I see every day. And I felt sorry for him, all alone in our coastal early-morning chill. He never seemed to notice me.

    His blue jacket’s hood all but hid his face. Then one warm morning, the hood lay across his back and I saw his eyes, dark, maybe even a little haunted. Shoulders hunched, too. He shifted from foot to foot a lot, like a toddler desperate to find a bathroom. My curiosity and imagination, dangerous twins, ran rampant.

    Three weeks after I’d begun waving, an October morning arrived steeped in fog. The boy’s hands were in his pockets and his shoulders were rounded more than usual against the dampness. When I waved, the boy dropped his focus to the sidewalk, pulled a hand from his pocket and waved back. He didn’t shift from one foot to another, the way he used to.

    The next morning, we made eye contact and waved again. As my car swung onto the main street, I checked the rearview mirror. His arms were flinging out from his sides and he’d resumed rocking back and forth. Had I scared him? Pleased him? A couple of mornings, I saw a half-size school bus stop for him to board. Are those short buses for kids with special needs? More likely, other students in our neighborhood are driven to work by a parent.

    On the third morning,  I approached the corner and didn’t see him. Then I pulled ahead further. His head was craned, as if he were looking for me. He waved and smiled ear to ear.

    You’d think I’d won a year’s supply of homemade fudge — I was so excited.

    I wondered about his aloneness, that a momentary wave of my hand could light up his face.

    * * *

    Every morning I’m waiting for the friggin’ bus to get me. There’s this lady, old like my Grandma, that drives past the corner where I wait for the bus. She waves at me, every morning, like she knows me. But she doesn’t know me.

    Monday she saw me looking at her so I figured what the hell and waved back. You shoulda seen her face. It was like that lit-up Christmas tree downtown — me and my mother go there every year. Mom says we can’t buy our own tree ‘cuz Dad doesn’t send her money anymore. But, yeah, that old lady lit up real big.

    So yesterday and today, I smiled at her and waved, slow, casual, cool. Her face did the Christmas-tree thing again. God, she must be really lonely if waving at me makes her so happy.

    * * *

    Author’s note: Weeks later;  we still wave.

    ©Susan Samuels Drake for SeniorWomen.com

  • The Scout Report: Howard Hughes Medical Institute; Interactive Physlets; Science Oxford Live and the Eisenhower Memorial

    Research, Education and a News Feature

    In the past, we’ve mentioned that one of our favorite sources for interesting links is The Scout Report. We’ve included several of those links to introduce the report, if this is your first time. In addition, a proposed Eisenhower memorial is in the news Scout explores:

    Howard Hughes Medical Institute: 2011 Holiday Lectures [Flash Player]University of Wisconsin, Madison

    http://www.hhmi.org/biointeractive/lectures

    The Howard Hughes Medical Institute sponsors a series of holiday lectures every year, and many of the past talks are available on this site. There are over twenty holiday lectures here, and the site has a handful of informal talks as well. Perhaps what is most helpful to the casual visitor is that the talks are delivered in a non-technical, yet erudite and learned, fashion. For the individual who might be apprehensive about an overly technical approach to these subjects, there is nothing to fear. First-time visitors may wish to start with one of the most recent lectures, which cover topics like “Stone Tools and the Evolution of Human Behavior” and “Human Evolution and the Nature of Science.” Other talks of note here include “Viral Outbreak: The Science of Emerging Disease” and “The Meaning of Sex: Genes and Gender.” [KMG]

    To find more high-quality online resources in math and science, visit Scout’s sister site: AMSER, the Applied Math and Science Educational Repository at http://amser.org.

    Interactive Physlets

    http://www2.swgc.mun.ca/physics/physlets.html

    What, you may ask, is a physlet? It is a portmanteau combining the words “physics” and “applet” which can be used “to demonstrate a concept in physics through animation or interaction.” Physlets are handy tools, especially for visual learners. These physlets were created by scholars at the Grenfell Campus of Memorial University in Corner Brook, Newfoundland. Designed to be used in several different introductory physics courses, the physlets cover a range of topics, including friction, conservation of energy, projectile motion, magnetism, and simple harmonic motion. Visitors will find that they can play each physlet, pause it along the way, or skip ahead to the next one as they see fit. [KMG]

    National Science Foundation: Predicting Seasonal Weather

    http://www.nsf.gov/news/special_reports/autumnwinter

    Is it possible to predict large-scale seasonal weather patterns? This is one of the research questions that motivates scientists at the National Science Foundation (NSF). This special report from the NSF looks into how atmospheric oscillations from the El Nino-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) in the tropics to the Arctic Oscillation (AO) play a “significant part in controlling the weather on a seasonal time scale.” This report was written by Cheryl Dybas, and it contains four sections, along with an area with classroom resources. The sections cover new real-time weather forecasts (“A New and Better Way”), the creation of a more effective prediction model (“New Seasonal Forecast Model”), and a demonstration of the new model (“Model Accuracy Demonstrated”). The site is rounded out by the classroom resources which are designed to be used with the charts, maps, and interactive animations featured in the rest of the site. [KMG]

    Science Oxford Live [iTunes]

    http://www.scienceoxfordlive.com/

    The first things visitors will see when visiting the Science Oxford Live website are a few shots from the Wildlife Photographer of the Year exhibit that will soon be at the brick and mortar location of Science Oxford Live. It’s hard to decide which is cuter: the hippo, the monkey, or the giraffe’s tail. Visitors will certainly want to check out the video podcasts available through iTunes, and even may even subscribe to the podcasts to receive the latest episodes. These webcasts, found under the Watch Us tab, are recordings of live events that took place at Science Oxford Live. They cover topics such as Parkinson’s disease, the sleep versus wake balance, the science and history of chocolate, the curse of consciousness, and how “doctors and other health professionals sometimes do more harm than good to patients, despite acting with the best of intentions.” The Discovery Zone is a place for kids which is best experienced in person, but online it still has valuable lessons to teach, and it’s worth a look. [KMG]