DDT “costly for Uganda”

July 22, 2011

To aid researchers looking for news from Africa on malaria and DDT, I’ll reproduce the entire news story from Uganda’s New Vision here.  Stories from this outlet frequently trouble me, in the unquestioning way writers take quotes from people where a more probing reporter might be more skeptical.  I am not sure of the status of New Vision among Uganda’s media, but it’s one of the few available to us here on a regular basis.

So, here’s the story, on DDT usage to fight malaria.  A couple of points we need to remember:  First, it’s clear that DDT is not banned in Uganda, and that DDT usage goes on, despite the crocodile tears of Richard Tren, Roger Bate, and the Africa Fighting Malaria, Astroturf™ group; second, this story relates difficulties in using DDT, including cost.  It’s not that the stuff itself is expensive.  DDT doesn’t work on all mosquitoes anymore, and it’s dangerous to much other wildlife.  Malaria fighters must do serious work in advance to be sure the populations of mosquitoes targeted will be reduced by DDT — that is, that the bugs are not immune to DDT — and care must be taken to control the applications, to be sure it’s applied in great enough concentrations, and only indoors, where it won’t contaminate the wild.

Here’s the story from New Visions:

DDT spraying costly for Uganda

Tuesday, 5th July, 2011

By Raymond Baguma and Gerald Kawemba

INDOOR residual spraying as a strategy to control malaria in Uganda is too costly and has affected the programme countrywide.

According to Dr. Seraphine Adibaku, the head of the Malaria Control Programme, this is why other malaria control strategies such as use of insecticide-treated nets and Artemisinin-based combination therapy are considered to be ahead of indoor residual spraying.

The Government is implementing the indoor residual spraying using pyrethrum-based and carbon-based insecticides in 10 malaria-endemic districts in the northern and eastern regions.

They include Amolatar, Apac, Kitgum, Kumi and Bukedea.

“About three million people in the 10 districts have been covered. We have reached over 90% of the population,” Adibaku said.

She added that under the Presidential Malaria Initiative, the budget for indoor residual spraying is sh4.5b per district each year.

Adibaku said it would be much cheaper if the ministry distributed insecticide-treated mosquito nets.

She, however, said indoor spraying has an advantage of delivering immediate impact compared to treated nets.

Adibaku disclosed that the health ministry is re-evaluating the effectiveness of using DDT for malaria control.

Dr. Joaquim Saweka, the World Health Organisation (WHO) resident representative in Uganda, said indoor residual spraying is highly effective and has been successful in Zanzibar and Rwanda.

He, however, added that it is capital intensive and needs a lot of money for each application done twice a year.

Saweka cited his previous posting in Ghana during which a town of 300,000 inhabitants required $3m for spraying each year.

He said with the high cost of spraying and low financial resources available, Uganda needs to prioritise usage of insecticide-treated mosquito nets.

Saweka added that Uganda is on the right path to eradicating malaria with efforts in prevention, diagnosis and treatment as well as universal coverage of insecticide-treated nets.

Health minister Dr. Richard Nduhura yesterday kicked off a nationwide programme to distribute 11,000 bicycles to health volunteers who will diagnose and treat malaria in homes. The programme is supported by the Global Fund.

It is part of the Government’s home-based management of malaria, which is part of a larger national strategy to deliver treatment to children within 24 hours after diagnosis.

 

6 Comments | Africa, DDT, Entomology, Environment, medicine, Politics | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Long time coming: Current insanity

July 22, 2011

I get e-mail from a friend on the high desert plains of the Mountain West:

On the other hand, maybe if we hadn’t been so polite for so long, they wouldn’t have had reason to think they could get away with this sort of thing: holding the country hostage to their latest demands.

Fruitcake is illogical, Robot Spock and Fruitcake holiday card

Fruitcake isn't all that's illogical, Robot Spock!

It’s been a long time coming, no doubt about it. You could say it started decades ago, with that famously loopy math: “Let’s balance the budget by cutting everyone’s taxes and spending more on the military! That’ll work!”

Was it ridiculous on its face? Of course it was ridiculous on its face. And here’s the scariest part: Things have gotten much worse since then! The fringe thinking that gave us the Age of Reagan couldn’t even get a hearing now from those who claim to worship him! Too “moderate.” Not “pure” enough.

They’ve got their own loopy math. Twenty-first-century loopy math. And their own economic theories, too — except that they’re not theories, they’re certainties. Matters of unshakeable faith. And since they’re certainties, why waste time listening to anyone else’s views on the subject? Expertise is overrated.

So they’ve got their own economics. They’ve got their own climate science, of course. They’ve got their own history. (Paul Revere, anyone? Slavery and the Civil War?) They’ve even got their own electoral history. (2008 was a glitch. Barack Obama isn’t really president.) What’s next? Their own geography? Their own gravity?

And we’ve let them get away with it.

20 Comments | Economics, Politics, Reason | Tagged: , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Still no fireworks at Texas SBOE . . . yet

July 21, 2011

July 21, Austin — The board reconvened at 5:35.  An amendment to the approval of Tech System’s chemistry supplement was quickly passed.  Without any discussion, physics and IPC (“integrated physics and chemistry” — science for kids who will not be interested in science, and for teachers who can’t make them interested — but I digress), approved on raise-of-hand, quick votes — both in under three minutes total.

Biology! Staff notes there are some noted errors contested by publishers; the board again discusses what constitutes an error.  Craig begs for delay to tomorrow, since no one on TEA staff appears to have any biology expertise to rule on whether an error is an error.

Publisher in question is Holt McDougall — the #1 biology textbook publisher, for textbooks in high schools and junior colleges.  Holt asked for a hearing on the errors.  If I understand the discussion, the board is saying they’ll stick with the panel recommendations, since they are doing that for all other publishers. In short, the process is unclear to those who invented the process and those who are ruling on the product.  This would be a good essay from Richard Feynman, wouldn’t it?

Dollars to doughnuts, those members who now claim not to be able to figure out whether errors of biology are errors of biology, will be saying soon that they are competent to rule on key theories of science (evolution).

[Remember to see the immediately previous post, for links to Texas Freedom Network and Texas Observer blogs also covering this process live.]

Oy.  Twenty minutes of discussion on whether to ask a representative from Holt to explain why Holt thinks designated errors are not errors.  Board doesn’t know their own process — are errors noted by a vote of the review panel, or by a simple designation from any panelist without discussion.

Motion to hear from the publisher.  Mavis Knight wants to know why a motion is required, if the SBOE rules say the board can call a publisher any time.  (“And, Texas doesn’t execute innocent people, either.”) Garza discusses issue before the vote.  Debatable motion?  Yes.  “I don’t think we’re going to learn anything new from the publisher.”  (Who said that?)

Knight speaks in favor of hearing, to learn how the publisher got to their conclusion that the designated error is not an error.  Soto agrees.  Ratliff favors the motion, too — “to make sure that what we’re about to approve for the next decade is the best possible material” — and because the board doesn’t know whether the question from the panel represents a consensus or a wild hare.  Clayton — “is [the publisher] also a biologist, and can he address the issue?”  “I wonder if we’re wasting our time listening to a publisher instead of a biologist.”

[Lost some text — sorry]

6:06, motion to listen to publisher fails, 7-7.

Update, after adjournment:  Board voted to approve Holt-McDougall’s supplement on the condition that the publisher change things identified as errors by the review panel.  Board, by voting not to hear the publisher, failed to note that the “errors” are contested.  View of  biologists present is that the board is ordering Holt-McDougall to introduce errors.  Before final approval, can we get the board to come down on accurate science’s side?  This is the quiet erosion of good science I feared.

Board then pulled out three products for discussion, approving the others (biology, remember) on a hand vote.  Products pulled out are Adaptive Curriculum, Learning.com’s Adaptive Curriculum on their platform, and Technical Laboratory Systems’ SciTEX Biology.

Gail Lowe says the objection is the addition of Haeckel’s embryo drawings.  This is an old issue with Texas creationists.  They jumped on the Discovery Institute’s claim that Haeckel’s drawings show evolution, but where evolution doesn’t occur.  (Haeckel fudged drawings, biologists have known for years — but his fudged drawings haven’t been used to make his erroneous point in 50 years . . .).

Publisher steps up and shows photographs that they have agreed to substitute.

Somehow, the creationists fail to notice that what has happened is they are insisting on photographs that show evolution in stead of a drawing.  (Turns out the drawings are not Haeckel’s after all — just line drawings of embryoes).  Creationist Gail Lowe excitedly makes the motion to accept the product with photos instead of line drawings.  (Somewhere a Discovery Institute wizard is having a heart attack.)

Board proceeds to make similar motion for Learning.com’s version of Adaptive Curriculum’s stuff.

6:25 p.m.

Lowe complains of spelling, punctuation and subject-verb agreement issues on the slides for SciTEX Biology.  Motion to insist they be corrected before they make it to classroom.  Discussion . . . (discussion?  discussion?)

The science is right, but the spelling is wrong.  [To this old copy editor, this strikes me as bizarre.]  “In the future we need to appoint at least one member to each panel who is an expert in the English language.”  (missed which guy said that)

Motion to approve, with errors to be fixed, passes.

Item 8, biology supplements, as amended, is approved.

No fight.

Counsel says there must be a formal motion to reject the materials from the ID/Creationist guys.  Motion passes.

I’m a fireworks fan, but missing fireworks in this room is a good deal.

Board adjourned for the evening.  Votes on other issues, and final approval, tomorrow.

4 Comments | History | Tagged: , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

No fireworks at Texas SBOE – quiet erosion of science? (Live blogging)

July 21, 2011

July 21, 2011, Austin — Far fewer people than usual signed up to testify on the electronic science book supplements the Texas State Board of Education is considering in lieu of new textbooks (no money for texts from the legislature, you recall).

So, in keeping with Chairman Barbara Cargill’s wishes, testimony concluded at 4:06 p.m. CDT, just six minutes later than scheduled.

Good deal.  The air conditioning in the first floor hearing room still doesn’t work well.

Since 2003, the most visible difference in these hearings is the back wall.  That’s where the electrical outlets are, and so those seats get taken up by publishers, lawyers, lobbyists, and a few bloggers.

These events are being live-blogged by Steven Schafersman from Texas Citizens for Science (at the Texas Observer site), and by the Texas Freedom Network’s blog, Insider.  I’ll add notes below as we progress.

When the board reconvenes at 4:30, the board will take up consideration of the supplemental materials.  If they follow the testimony, there will be a quick vote to approve all of the supplements still standing.

But this may be where the fireworks get lighted.

Most witnesses asked the board to simply approve the supplemental material favored by staff at the Texas Education Agency and by the panels of teachers and experts the board appointed earlier.  Those recommendations excluded the only pro-creationism materials by a small, first-time publishing company.

Andrew Ellington, the biology whiz from the University of Texas, gave another great presentation — limited to two minutes under the new rules.  Most pro-evolution witnesses got no questions.

Josh Rosenau, the out-of-state champion for evolution (from the National Center for Science Education – NCSE, and Sciblogs blogger at Thoughts from Kansas) made the case for hard science.  Walter Bradley, the champion for creationism, didn’t show up.  He sent a substitute to read his testimony, in which he urged rejection of all the proposed materials because they don’t savage Darwin.  He also gave thanks to God for the Texas SBOE.

Schafersman wrote, and you may wish to note:

My friends at Texas Freedom Network (TFN), Ryan Valentine and Dan Quinn, are also live blogging this meeting at TFN Insider. Josh Rosenau of the National Center for Science Education is also here live tweeting at at @JoshRosenau and @NCSE (using hashtag #txtxt). TFN informs me they are also live tweeting at #SBOE. Abby Rapoport of the Texas Observer will also be tweeting about this meeting using #SBOE.

______________

The Board reconvened promptly at 4:30.  After a typical, SBOE-style confused discussion of the process, submissions for science supplements for grades 4, 5, 6 and 7 were quickly approved on a show-of-hands vote.  The room has an electronic voting system which could offer quicker results.  A show-of-hands is folksy and friendly, but leaves a poor record for tracking.  Is this an intentional stab against transparency?

Discussion stalled at 8th grade materials.  Question raised about whether striking a publisher’s materials requires just one objection or a majority vote (should be majority vote — the chair’s description sorta said that).

One publisher disputed two of 132 found errors — staff agreed with the publisher that there was no error.  Chemistry.  Chair Cargill announces that chemistry, physics and IPC curricula for high schools will be considered first — biology last.  (Fireworks then?).

[Much of this discussion carries little significance.  Among the errors officially tallied:  “Judgment” is misspelled.  Gail Lowe makes it clear that she has what she thinks are significant errors identified for one publisher, in the biology materials- Pearson,Technical Laboratory Systems, Chemistry I think.  Fines can be levied for publishers who fail to correct errors.]

This discussion is so much inside baseball that the board takes a recess to figure it out.

It looks like — correct me if I’m wrong — the board is working to take potshots at some publisher’s biology stuff, and kill it.

Leave a Comment » | Education, Evolution, Science | Tagged: , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

War on science, war on education: Evolution under fire at Texas education board

July 21, 2011

Ryan at the Texas Freedom Network laid out the stakes:

Just a reminder about what new chairwoman Barbara Cargill — and her five “conservative Christian” allies on the State Board of Education — have in mind for the meeting this week:

I am a little bit concerned in looking at some of these science online supplementary materials. I looked at one of the links and there was a picture of a — a graphic of a human fetus next to a gorilla fetus talking about how they only differ by one amino acid. Therefore, universal common decent. So that is of some concern. And I am not quite sure if we are going to have the votes to overturn that. We will work diligently to rectify and correct some of that. But remember we lost a conservative seat, so we’re down to six.

In this unguarded moment, Cargill drops the double-speak and is honest about her plan for the first meeting over which she will preside as chair  — pressure publishers to censor scientific information from their materials and to insert bogus information questioning evolution. And she knows exactly what her task is: to get the extra votes necessary to accomplish this.

Stay tuned to TFN Insider on Thursday and Friday as we give you a front-row seat at the contentious hearing and board vote.

Live blogging the meeting starting at about 10:00 a.m today at TFN Insider at at Steve Schafersman’s blog, from the Texas Citizens for Science.

More, resources:

1 Comment | Education, Evolution, Politics, Science, Texas, Texas Citizens for Science, Texas Freedom Network, War on Education, War on Science | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Easy energy

July 21, 2011

You can’t buy the poster from Max Temkin anymore — it’s sold out — but the idea remains:

Max Temkin's poster print "Plastic Spoon" - copyright 2011 Max Temkin

Just wash your spoon, eh?

Tip of the old scrub brush to Grist. For the search engines, full text of the poster below the fold.

Read the rest of this entry »

5 Comments | Art, Conservation, Energy, Environmental protection, Life, Oil, Philosophy | Tagged: , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Debt ceiling: Pure politics?

July 20, 2011

Courtesy of some guy who goes by the handle Americus Paulytics:

Here’s the count of how many Republican U.S. Senators voted to increase the debt ceiling the last eleven times it’s been done

1997: 55
2002: 31
2003: 50
2004: 50
2006: 51
2007: 26
2008: 34
2008: 33

Then Obama was elected.

2009: 2
2009: 1
2010: 0

Bill Clinton occupied the White House in 1997; George W. Bush lived there the next seven times the Senate voted.  Is there a trend here?

Is  that account of events correct?

Tip of the old scrub brush to Marion Young.

Leave a Comment » | History, Politics | Tagged: , , | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

August 3, 2011 – potential quote of the moment, Social Security

July 20, 2011

Artificial hip, UC Berkeley

“If Social Security checks don’t go out on August 3, it’s just old people. You know how they are. They’re just gonna blow that money on medicine and hips.” – Jon Stewart

6 Comments | Humor, Politics, Social Security | Tagged: , , | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

“Eat your peas, Gregor”

July 20, 2011

Gregor Mendel was born July 20 in 1822.

Google’s doodle honors the man now generally regarded as the “father of modern genetics.”  The Washington Post blogs note, “Rare is the monk who gets to be celebrated for passing down his genes.”

Oblivious to Mendel’s work and significance, and to much else in the world of knowledge, the Texas State Board of Education debates how to frustrate the teaching of evolution with hearings in Austin tomorrow, and a vote on supplementary materials to texts in biology on Friday, July 22.

Mendel would urge, pray for Texas and the children who will be saddled with the decision of the Texas SBOE.

Look up something about Mendel.  Maybe we could all learn something from him.

Google doodle - gregormendel11-hp

Google Doodle honoring Fr. Gregor Mendel, "father of modern genetics"

6 Comments | Biology, Evolution, Genetics, History, Science | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Timelapse tour of natural wonders of the Southwest U.S. – spectacular!

July 19, 2011

Here’s a video I would like to use as a a warm-up, or prompt to a study of American geography.

Evosia Photography, the hangout of Henry Jun Wah Lee, has a short but spectacular tour of several sites in the American Southwest deserts — Arizona, California, Utah, and Navajoland — timelapse movies, usually shot at night with starry backgrounds.

He has set the photography against the music of a band named Conjure One, an edited version of their recording “Manic Star.”

Certainly there is copyright, at least a Creative Commons license — you should attribute this film to Mr. Lee and the music to Conjure One.

Can you identify these sites?  Can your students?  Can they map out a plan to visit these sites as one exercise?  Can you and your students identify any of the constellations on view? (List of sites, from Mr. Lee, below the fold.)

Have you, or your students, ever visited any of those sites, and gazed at the stars?  Why not?

2,912 looks

Read the rest of this entry »

Leave a Comment » | Geography - Physical, Geography - Political, National Parks, Native Americans, Navajo, photography | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Drive-by Christian Broadcasting Network School of Law for Government Infiltration

July 18, 2011

Do we need to add anything?

1,929 views when posted here.

Leave a Comment » | Humor, Politics, Video and film | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Bathtub reading for a broiling July

July 18, 2011

Make that a cold bath.  It hit 107° F here Friday.  15th consecutive 100°-plus day?  17th?  200th?

Birds refuse to bathe in the bird bath — they’re saving it to drink.  The sprinkler system misfired yesterday — had to kill the power to fix a kitchen light and the clock on the sprinkler got a few hours off — and we were alerted by dozens of bluejays broadcasting the news.  “Water!” they screamed.  Dallas isn’t supposed to be home to robins, but there were three of them dancing on the wet sidewalk with the jays, plus assorted other birds — house finches, mourning doves, white-winged doves, cardinals, and that little scamp, the Bewick’s wren.  The woodpeckers declined to land on the ground.  No room for grackles.

While soaking, and cooling, what do we read?  In total chaos, or at least, in no particular order:

New Year's 1909, cartoon by John T. McCutcheon of Chicago

Cartoon by Chicago cartoonist John T. McCutcheon, 1909

You can only read until your fingers get all wrinkly.  There’s still stuff on the reading stack!

Another soak, for another time.

1 Comment | Cartoons, History, Humor, Music, Political cartoons, Politics | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Hard truths about the debt ceiling and uncertainty in the Treasury market

July 16, 2011

Two organizations provide information to Congress in an unbiased manner, with great care for accuracy and completeness of information:  The Congressional Research Service (CRS), an arm of the Library of Congress, and the General Accountability Office (GAO), formerly the General Accounting Office.  Both agencies share the unique status of being organs of the Congress, and not the executive branch.

Consequently, we and Congress should give particular consideration to a report issued by GAO on February 22, 2011:

Debt Limit: Delays Create Debt Management Challenges and Increase Uncertainty in the Treasury Market

GAO-11-203 February 22, 2011
Highlights Page (PDF)   Full Report (PDF, 52 pages)   Accessible Text   Recommendations (HTML)

Summary

GAO has prepared this report to assist Congress in identifying and addressing debt management challenges. Since 1995, the statutory debt limit has been increased 12 times to its current level of $14.294 trillion. The Department of the Treasury (Treasury) recently notified Congress that the current debt limit could be reached as early as April 5, 2011, and the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that under current law debt subject to the limit will exceed $25 trillion in 2021. This report (1) describes the actions that Treasury traditionally takes to manage debt near the limit, (2) analyzes the effects that approaching the debt limit has had on the market for Treasury securities, and (3) describes alternative mechanisms that would permit consideration of the link between policy decisions and the effect on debt when or before decisions are made. GAO analyzed Treasury and market data; interviewed Treasury officials, budget and legislative experts, and market participants; and reviewed practices in selected countries.

The debt limit does not control or limit the ability of the federal government to run deficits or incur obligations. Rather, it is a limit on the ability to pay obligations already incurred. While debates surrounding the debt limit may raise awareness about the federal government’s current debt trajectory and may also provide Congress with an opportunity to debate the fiscal policy decisions driving that trajectory, the ability to have an immediate effect on debt levels is limited. This is because the debt reflects previously enacted tax and spending policies. Delays in raising the debt limit create debt and cash management challenges for the Treasury, and these challenges have been exacerbated in recent years by a large growth in debt. In the past, Treasury has often used extraordinary actions, such as suspending investments or temporarily disinvesting securities held in federal employee retirement funds, to remain under the statutory limit. However, the extraordinary actions available to the Treasury have not kept pace with the growth in borrowing needs. For example, unlike the past, the amount potentially provided by the extraordinary actions for 1 month in fiscal year 2010 was less than the monthly increase in debt subject to the limit for most months of the year. As a result, once debt reaches the limit, Congress will likely have less time than in prior years to debate raising the debt limit before there are disruptions to government programs and services. This trend is likely to continue given the long-term fiscal outlook. Failure to raise the debt limit in a timely manner could have serious negative consequences for the Treasury market and increase borrowing costs. Also, some of the actions that Treasury has taken to manage the amount of debt near the limit add uncertainty to the Treasury market. In the past, Treasury has postponed auctions and dramatically reduced the amount of bills outstanding, which compromised the regularity of auctions and the certainty of supply on which Treasury relies to achieve the lowest borrowing cost over time. GAO’s analysis suggests that borrowing costs modestly increased during debt limit debates in 2002, 2003, and most recently in 2010. In addition, managing debt near the debt limit diverts Treasury’s limited resources away from other cash and debt management issues at a time when Treasury already faces challenges in lengthening the average maturity of its debt portfolio. Observers and participants suggested improving the link between the spending and revenue decisions that drive debt and changes in the debt limit. Better alignment could be possible if decisions about the debt level occur in conjunction with spending and revenue decisions as opposed to the after-the-fact approach now used. This practice, which is similar to practices used in some other countries, might facilitate efforts to change the fiscal path by highlighting the implications of tax and spending decisions on changes in debt. To avoid potential disruptions to Treasury markets and help inform fiscal policy decisions in a timely way, Congress should consider ways to better link decisions about the debt limit with decisions about spending and revenue. Treasury provided technical comments on a draft of this report, which GAO incorporated as appropriate.

Recommendations

Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from “In process” to “Open,” “Closed – implemented,” or “Closed – not implemented” based on our follow up work.

*     *     *     *     *     *     *

Matters for Congressional Consideration

Recommendation: The projections of a growing debt burden have raised concerns both in Congress and in the public. Well-designed budget processes and metrics can help as Congress and the President seek to address the federal government’s long-term fiscal challenge. The current design of the debt limit does not engender or facilitate debate over specific tax or spending proposals and their effect on debt. In addition, the uncertainty it creates can lead to disruptions in the Treasury market and in turn to higher borrowing costs. To avoid these potential disruptions to the Treasury market and to help inform the fiscal policy debate in a timely way, Congress may wish to consider ways to better link decisions about the debt limit with decisions about spending and revenue. Such a process would build on the approach used in 2008 and 2009 when Congress passed and the President signed three laws that were expected to increase borrowing with a corresponding increase in the debt limit. This report presents a number of approaches that could serve as a basis for better linking decisions about spending and revenue with decisions about the debt limit.

Status: In process

Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.

Use the links near the top of the report to get to the full report.

Pay particular attention to this, repeated from above:

The debt limit does not control or limit the ability of the federal government to run deficits or incur obligations. Rather, it is a limit on the ability to pay obligations already incurred. While debates surrounding the debt limit may raise awareness about the federal government’s current debt trajectory and may also provide Congress with an opportunity to debate the fiscal policy decisions driving that trajectory, the ability to have an immediate effect on debt levels is limited. This is because the debt reflects previously enacted tax and spending policies. Delays in raising the debt limit create debt and cash management challenges for the Treasury, and these challenges have been exacerbated in recent years by a large growth in debt.

Tip of the old scrub brush to Michael A. Ryder.

_____________

Wall of shame:  Bloggers and others who do not have a clue

14 Comments | Economics, Government, History, Politics, President Obama, Presidents, Primary Source Documents, U.S. Congress | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Hoaxsters frustrated: Alert called off at Nebraska nuclear power plant

July 15, 2011

Sometimes time and events just catch up to the hoaxsters.

In Nebraska, on Wednesday July 14, the Cooper nuclear generating station of the Nebraska Public Power District (NPPD) ended it’s “notification of unusual event” as floodwaters of the Missouri River retreated from the site.

Walkways for flood at Fort Calhoun Nuclear Station, 2011

Publicity photo from Omaha Public Power District

According to the Associate Press report, the alert for the nuclear power plant at Fort Calhoun remains in effect.  Fort Calhoun is upriver from Cooper, and lower in elevation in relation to the Missouri River.  Fort Calhoun also was offline and in cold shutdown when the alert was posted, because it had been in a refueling operation.  Fort Calhoun is operated by Omaha Public Power district (OPPD).

NRC Chairman tours Fort Calhoun Nuclear Generating Station

Publicity photo from OPPD

No damage was done to the reactor at either site.  Operations continued at Cooper.

Rumors of a serious incident aroused conspiracy nuts when a hoax report out of Pakistan claimed the Russian nuclear agency had said the Fort Calhoun plant was in meltdown.

NRC chair tours Fort Calhoun NGS in Nebraska, 2011

No meltdown. Photo from OPPD

How with the hoaxsters spin it now?

More, resources:

Earlier at Millard Fillmore’s Bathtub:

Leave a Comment » | Energy, Hoaxes, How do we know what we know, Journalism, Nuclear power, Rivers | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Friends of science and evolution: Testify next week in the Texas textbook process?

July 14, 2011

I get important e-mail from the Texas Freedom Network; they’re asking for help next week to fight creationism and other forms of buncombe popular in Texas:

Science and the SBOE: One Week to Go

Next week, the Texas State Board of Education will take a critical vote on science in our public schools. We need people like you to make sure the vote is in favor of sound, well-established science.

Up for board consideration are science instructional materials submitted by a number of publishers and vendors who want their product used in Texas classrooms. Even before the board meets, far-right groups have been hard at work trying to ensure materials approved by the board attack and diminish evolutionary science and include the junk science of “intelligent design”/creationism.

The attacks include one from a little-know firm out of New Mexico, International Databases, which submitted instructional materials rife with creationist propaganda.

It gets worse. Far-right SBOE members last month appointed creationists with questionable scientific credentials to teams tasked with reviewing the materials and making recommendations to the board.

And new board chair Barbara Cargill upped the stakes when in a speech just last week she framed the debate over science as a “spiritual battle.”

The board will hold just ONE public hearing on the science materials. Your participation is crucial.

It is critical that you act now by clicking here to express your interest in testifying before the board on July 21.

Please note: The deadline to sign up to testify is 5 p.m. Monday.

We must insist that the SBOE keep junk science – including “intelligent design”/creationism – out of our children’s classrooms. The board must approve only instructional materials that are accurate, that are in line with sound and well-established science, and that will prepare Texas children to succeed in college and the jobs of the 21st century.

Texas Freedom Network advances a mainstream agenda of religious freedom and individual liberties to counter the radical right. www.tfn.org | www.tfninsider.org | General: tfn@tfn.org
Tell a friend to subscribe to TFN News Clips, Alerts or Rapid Response Teams. Subscribers may choose the issue areas that interest them. To change your TFN subscription preferences – or to unsubscribe – click here.
Copyright 2010, Texas Freedom Network

Trying to carve out time here.  Can you help?

Hearings will be most interesting.  Support for the Texas State Board of Education actually comes, often, from the Texas Education Agency (TEA).  TEA this week laid off just under 200 workers, to deal with the 36% budget chopping done to the agency by the Texas Lege.  Word comes this week that curriculum directors at TEA were let go, including the director of science curriculum.

It’s rather like the first 20 weeks of World War II in the Pacific, with the aggressors advancing on almost all fronts against science.  When is our Battle of Midway?

Information, resources: 

2 Comments | Education, Politics, Regulation, Religious Freedom, Science Education, Separation of church and state, Teach Them Science.org, Teaching, Texas Citizens for Science, Texas Freedom Network, Textbook Selection, Textbooks, War on Education, War on Science, War on Smart | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »