Sunday, July 21, 2013

Presidential Memorandum -- Federal Employee Pay Schedules and Rates that are set by Administrative Discretion

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

MEMORANDUM FOR THE HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES

SUBJECT: Federal Employee Pay Schedules and Rates That Are Set by Administrative Discretion

Section 1112 of the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013 (Public Law 113-6), reflects the Congress's decision to continue to deny statutory adjustments to any pay systems or pay schedules covering executive branch employees. In light of the Congress's action, I am instructing heads of executive departments and agencies to continue through December 31, 2013, to adhere to the policy set forth in my memoranda of December 22, 2010, and December 21, 2012, regarding general increases in pay schedules and employees' rates of pay that might otherwise take effect as a result of the exercise of administrative discretion.

This memorandum shall be carried out to the extent permitted by law and consistent with executive departments' and agencies' legal authorities. This memorandum is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

The Director of the Office of Personnel Management shall issue any necessary guidance on implementing this memorandum, and is also hereby authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the Federal Register.

BARACK OBAMA

Extending Middle Class Tax Cuts

President Obama tell the American people about the budget he is sending to Congress, which makes the tough choices required to grow our economy and shrink our deficits

Here’s a quick glimpse at what happened this week on WhiteHouse.gov.

President Obama marks the end of the Easter season with a prayer breakfast at the White House.

view all related blog posts

View the original article here

Statement by the Press Secretary on the Visit of the Amir of Qatar

Statement by the Press Secretary on the Visit of the Amir of Qatar | The White House Skip to main content | Skip to footer site map The White House. President Barack Obama The White House Emblem Get Email UpdatesContact Us Go to homepage. The White House Blog Photos & Videos Photo Galleries Video Performances Live Streams Podcasts 2012: A Year in Photos

A unique view of 2012

2012: A Year in Photos

Briefing Room Your Weekly Address Speeches & Remarks Press Briefings Statements & Releases White House Schedule Presidential Actions Executive Orders Presidential Memoranda Proclamations Legislation Pending Legislation Signed Legislation Vetoed Legislation Nominations & Appointments Disclosures Visitor Access Records Financial Disclosures 2012 Annual Report to Congress 2011 Annual Report to Congress 2010 Annual Report to Congress on White House Staff A Commitment to Transparency

Browse White House visitor logs

President Obama greets White House visitors

Issues Civil Rights It Gets Better Defense End of Iraq War Disabilities Economy Jobs Reform and Fiscal Responsibility Strengthening the Middle Class Support for Business Education Energy & Environment Ethics Foreign Policy Health Care Homeland Security Immigration Refinancing Rural Service Seniors & Social Security Snapshots Creating Jobs Health Care Small Business PreK-12 Education Rural Taxes Tax Receipt The Buffett Rule Technology Urban Policy Veterans Joining Forces Violence Prevention Women Now Is The Time

To do something about gun violence

Now Is The Time

Immigration Reform

Creating an Immigration System for the 21st Century

Immigration Reform

The Administration We the People

Create and Sign Petitions Now

We the People

President Barack Obama Vice President Joe Biden Being Biden Audio Series First Lady Michelle Obama Dr. Jill Biden The Cabinet White House Staff Chief of Staff Denis McDonough Deputy Chief of Staff Rob Nabors Deputy Chief of Staff Alyssa Mastromonaco Counselor to the President Peter Rouse Senior Advisor Valerie Jarrett Executive Office of the President Other Advisory Boards About the White House White House On the Go

Download our mobile apps

Download our mobile appsTake A Virtual Tour

View the Residence, East Wing and West Wing

Interactive Tour Inside the White House Interactive Tour West Wing Tour Video Series Décor and Art Holidays Presidents First Ladies The Oval Office The Vice President's Residence & Office Eisenhower Executive Office Building Camp David Air Force One White House Fellows President’s Commission About the Fellowship Current Class Staff Bios News and Newsletters White House Internships About Program Presidential Department Descriptions Selection Process Internship Timeline & FAQs Tours & Events 2013 Easter Egg Roll Kitchen Garden Tours Take a Virtual Tour of the White House Mobile Apps Our Government The Executive Branch The Legislative Branch The Judicial Branch The Constitution Federal Agencies & Commissions Elections & Voting State & Local Government Resources /* Maximize height of menu features. */if(typeof(jQuery)!='undefined')jQuery.each($('#topnav'),function(i,v){var o=$(v),oh=o.height(),sh=o.siblings().height();if(oh HomeBriefing Room • Statements & Releases   The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release April 05, 2013 Statement by the Press Secretary on the Visit of the Amir of Qatar

President Obama will welcome to the White House the Amir of Qatar, His Highness Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani, on Tuesday, April 23rd.  The United States and Qatar have a strong bilateral relationship, reflecting our close defense partnership, expanding commercial ties, and many other areas of cooperation. 

The United States is firmly committed to continuing to deepen our consultations with Qatar on the many important developments in the region.  The President looks forward to a broad discussion with the Amir on a range of mutual interests and regional issues to further strengthen our bilateral partnership. 

Extending Middle Class Tax Cuts

Blog posts on this issue April 06, 2013 5:30 AM EDTWeekly Address: The President’s Plan to Create Jobs and Cut the Deficit

President Obama tell the American people about the budget he is sending to Congress, which makes the tough choices required to grow our economy and shrink our deficits

April 05, 2013 4:42 PM EDTWeekly Wrap Up: “We Have Not Forgotten”

Here’s a quick glimpse at what happened this week on WhiteHouse.gov.

April 05, 2013 4:00 PM EDTPresident Obama Marks the End of Easter Season at Prayer Breakfast

President Obama marks the end of the Easter season with a prayer breakfast at the White House.

view all related blog posts ul.related-content li.views-row img {float: left; padding: 5px 10px 0 0;}ul.related-content li.view-all {padding-bottom: 3em;} Stay ConnectedFacebookTwitterFlickrGoogle+YouTubeVimeoiTunesLinkedIn   Home The White House Blog Photos & Videos Photo Galleries Video Performances Live Streams Podcasts Briefing Room Your Weekly Address Speeches & Remarks Press Briefings Statements & Releases White House Schedule Presidential Actions Legislation Nominations & Appointments Disclosures Issues Civil Rights Defense Disabilities Economy Education Energy & Environment Ethics Foreign Policy Health Care Homeland Security Immigration Refinancing Rural Service Seniors & Social Security Snapshots Rural Taxes Technology Urban Policy Veterans Violence Prevention Women The Administration President Barack Obama Vice President Joe Biden First Lady Michelle Obama Dr. Jill Biden The Cabinet White House Staff Executive Office of the President Other Advisory Boards About the White House Inside the White House Presidents First Ladies The Oval Office The Vice President's Residence & Office Eisenhower Executive Office Building Camp David Air Force One White House Fellows White House Internships Tours & Events Mobile Apps Our Government The Executive Branch The Legislative Branch The Judicial Branch The Constitution Federal Agencies & Commissions Elections & Voting State & Local Government Resources The White House Emblem En español Accessibility Copyright Information Privacy Policy Contact USA.gov Developers Apply for a Job

View the original article here

Marijuana

(Difference between revisions)[[Image:Marijuana.jpg|thumb|250px|right|Indoor Marijuana Grow (DEA photo)]][[Image:Marijuana.jpg|thumb|250px|right|Indoor Marijuana Grow (DEA photo)]]'''Marijuana''' (colloquially known as '''"weed"''' or '''"pot"''') is the name given to the flowering buds of the cannabis sativa plant prepared for human consumption. The main active ingredient in marijuana is [[Tetrahydrocannabinol|THC]], or delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, an [[organic chemistry|organic chemical]] compound. Marijuana is harmful and generally illegal to possess, cultivate and sell in most countries, although it is legal in a few liberal jurisdictions as a medical treatment.The sale of marijuana is illegal virtually everywhere in the world, and results in long prison sentences in many places.  In Portugal, Argentina, California and South Australia, the use (rather than the sale) of small quantities of marijuana is allowed. In only one country in the world, the Netherlands, the sale of marijuana in small quantities is reportedly allowed by law enforcement.'''Marijuana''' (colloquially known as '''"weed"''' or '''"pot"''') is the name given to the flowering buds of the cannabis sativa plant prepared for human consumption. The main active ingredient in marijuana is [[Tetrahydrocannabinol|THC]], or delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, an [[organic chemistry|organic chemical]] compound. Marijuana is harmful and generally illegal to possess, cultivate and sell in most countries, although it is legal in a few liberal jurisdictions if prescribed as medication by a physician.The sale of marijuana is illegal virtually everywhere in the world, and results in long prison sentences in many places.  In Portugal, Argentina, California and South Australia, the use (rather than the sale) of small quantities of marijuana is allowed. In only one country in the world, the Netherlands, the sale of marijuana in small quantities is reportedly allowed by law enforcement.The effects of marijuana can include short-term memory loss, malaise, psychosis in predisposed individuals as well as impairment of physical and mental functioning. Some research has found that cannabis has medicinal benefits (see [[Medical marijuana]]); however many contest this, and state that there are numerous federally approved medicines for the diseases that medicinal marijuana can be used to treat.The effects of marijuana can include short-term memory loss, malaise, psychosis in predisposed individuals as well as impairment of physical and mental functioning. Some research has found that cannabis has medicinal benefits (see [[Medical marijuana]]); however many contest this, and state that there are numerous federally approved medicines for the diseases that medicinal marijuana can be used to treat.

Marijuana (colloquially known as "weed" or "pot") is the name given to the flowering buds of the cannabis sativa plant prepared for human consumption. The main active ingredient in marijuana is THC, or delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, an organic chemical compound. Marijuana is harmful and generally illegal to possess, cultivate and sell in most countries, although it is legal in a few liberal jurisdictions if prescribed as medication by a physician.[1]

The effects of marijuana can include short-term memory loss, malaise, psychosis in predisposed individuals as well as impairment of physical and mental functioning. Some research has found that cannabis has medicinal benefits (see Medical marijuana); however many contest this, and state that there are numerous federally approved medicines for the diseases that medicinal marijuana can be used to treat.

if (window.showTocToggle) { var tocShowText = "show"; var tocHideText = "hide"; showTocToggle(); }

Marijuana contains many of the same carcinogens as tobacco, thus when smoked it has the same harmful effects including: potential damage to DNA, cancer, respiratory diseases associated with smoke inhilation, and impaired immune system.[2]. However, these effects have not been linked directly to alternate methods of marijuana use. Marijuana use can impair short term memory while intoxicated. THC has slight negative affects on long term memory and thus, in chronic users (approximately 1g/24Hrs)[3], complications with long term memory are a risk. If smoked, marijuana leads to a temporary increase in heart rate and blood pressure while intoxicated. For this reason, there is a slight increase in the risk for heart related problems including heart attack during the time of intoxication[4]. Chronic smokers often suffer from mild withdrawal symptoms, however marijuana is not physically addictive.[5]. Marijuana can impair judgment, motor skills, and balance [6]. Marijuana has also been linked to impaired learning and developmental diability in unborn children [7]

The active ingredient in marijuana, THC, has been shown (in studies) to produce certain psychological and medicinal benefits. Marijuana has been used to treat anorexia and has been used as an antiemetic.[8] Harvard University conducted a study on the effect of ?-9-Tetrahydrocannabinol on certain lung cancers. The result of the test was that THC can reduce tumor size by as much as half.[9] In addition to a significant reduction in tumor size, there was a reduction in lesions on the lungs by 60%, and a reduction in protein markers associated with the progression of cancer.[10] This study shows that not only can THC treat the side effects of cancer treatment, but can stop the spread of cancer, repair damage caused by tumors, and even reduce the size of tumors.

In addition to the positive effect on cancer treatment symptoms and cancer itself, marijuana is used to help patients afflicted with ALS[11].

Marijuana is an antispasmodic and is used in the treatment of seizures [12]. Marijuana is also used in the treatment of migraines, arthritis[13], depression[14], and glaucoma. However the effect of marijuana on intraocular pressure (IOC) is not as effective as those offered by other drugs on the market [15].

There have not been many in-depth and widely distributed studies into the possible medicinal effects of marijuana. However, with pressure from liberal advocates of marijuana, more otherwise accredited institutions are conducting research on the drug.

Carl Sagan used recreational marijuana to help "open his mind".[16] Cannabis was first cultivated in China around 4000 B.C.[17] U.S. Declaration of Independence was not written on hemp paper, despite popular belief.[18] George Washington grew marijuana. [19] Alcohol is over 100 times more lethal than marijuana (ratio of lethal dose to effective dose)[20]. President Obama has admitted to use of marijuana. Former President Clinton has also admitted to smoking marijuana, but claims that he 'did not inhale'.

Marijuana is a Schedule I Controlled Substance in the United States of America, meaning that it is illegal under federal law of the United States, and considered to have no redeemable medical value. In several countries, particularly in Western Europe, it is has been decriminalised. However, in many other countries, particularly those in the Middle East and Asia, possession of even small amounts of cannabis can be punishable by death. In 2012, the states of Washington and Colorado adopted voter referenda to legalize the recreational use of marijuana. At the same time, Oregon voters rejected a similar proposition. Federal officials said that they would contest state laws that would legalize marijuana.[21]

The Netherlands decriminalized the use of marijuana in 1976. As a result, marijuana use among the 18-25 age group doubled, however, despite its availability, marijuana use in the Netherlands is lower than the European average. The Netherlands also saw an influx of "drug tourists" and other undesirables, as well as an increase in crime. This has since levelled out, leaving the Netherlands with one of the lowest crime rates in Europe.

Many liberals have advocated for decriminalization.[22][23]

Many American conservatives, especially social conservatives, oppose legalization of marijuana in any form due to its perceived harmful medical and psychological effects and its likelihood of harm to third parties due to drug-related crime and reckless driving. A few libertarian-leaning conservatives, most notably Ron Paul, William F. Buckley, and Larry Elder, have advocated the decriminalization of this drug. Some liberals support legalization, but most instead advocate for drug treatment and rehabilitation. Libertarians are usually the biggest supporters of marijuana legalization. Gary Johnson, a former Republican and 2012 Libertarian Party Presidential candidate for President, is the highest ranking US politician to advocate for marijuana legalization. He was a two-term Governor of New Mexico.

? The sale of marijuana is illegal virtually everywhere in the world, and results in long prison sentences in many places. In Portugal, Argentina, California and South Australia, the use (rather than the sale) of small quantities of marijuana is allowed. In only one country in the world, the Netherlands, the sale of marijuana in small quantities is reportedly allowed by law enforcement.? Science Daily 6/9/2009? AskMen: Benefits of Marijuana? AskMen: Benefits of Marijuana? Psychology Today: Is Marijuana Addictive?? [1]? Neuropsycopharmacology: High-Potency Marijuana Impairs Executive Function and Inhibitory Motor Control? National Cancer Institute? Science Daily 4/7/2007? Science Daily 4/17/2007? American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine? National Academies Press: Marijuana and muscle spasticity? Online Library: Treatment of adjuvant arthritis in rats with anti-inflammatory drugs? Interesting Facts: Facts about marijuana? National Eye Institue: Glaucoma and Marijuana use? Boing Boing: Carl Sagan Spaced Out? Interesting Facts: Facts about marijuana? Constitutional FAQ Answer #145 - U.S. Constitution Online? The President and the Cabinet: George Washington the Man? Wikipedia: Tetrahydrocannabinol? Dobuzinskis, Alex. "Marijuana legalization victories could be short-lived", Nov 7, 2012. Retrieved on November 8, 2012. ? Law Enforcement Against Prohibition? http://www.lp.org/issues/lp-oss.shtml

View the original article here

Ben Carson Finally Apologizes For Comparing Same-Sex Marriage To Pedophilia

A week and a half after Dr. Ben Carson outraged the LGBT community by linking same-sex marriage to pedophilia and bestiality in a nationally televised interview on Fox News, the Johns Hopkins brain surgeon is finally apologizing for his hateful remarks.

Carson had already tried to walk back his comments and extinguish a few fires late last week during an appearance on MSNBC, but he didn’t issue much in the way of an apology. This time though, in an email sent to the Johns Hopkins community, he sounded sincere:

In a Friday email to the Hopkins community – which a source shared with POLITICO – Carson apologized for having caused “any embarrassment” to the institutions he has been affiliated with.

“As you know, I have been in the national news quite a bit recently and my 36 year association with Johns Hopkins has unfortunately dragged our institution into the spotlight as well. I am sorry for any embarrassment this has caused,” wrote Carson, who is the director of pediatric neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins Hospital. “But what really saddens me is that my poorly chosen words caused pain for some members of our community and for that I offer a most sincere and heartfelt apology. Hurting others is diametrically opposed to who I am and what I believe.”

A majority of students in the 2013 graduating class at Johns Hopkins’ School of Medicine signed a petition calling on the administration to replace Carson as this year’s commencement speaker, but a report yesterday suggested that university officials were still planning invite him. Faculty and staff at JHU also condemned Carson’s remarks in the days following his appearance on Sean Hannity’s Fox News program.


View the original article here

Socratic principle

- The late world famous philosopher [[Antony Flew]] proclaimed that his departure from [[atheism]] was caused by consequent adherence to this principle.{{Cite book|title=There is a God, How the world's most notorious atheist changed his mind|author=Antony Flew|publisher=HarperOne|year=2008|isbn=978-0-06-133530-3|pages=22, 42, 75, 89|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=zbL66ePcjpQC&dq=Antony+Flew+There+is+a+God&source=bl&ots=o0jEX-bGMl&sig=Rrf5Tv5MynLGVHFOhZy95LFfLGw&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Zfx_UI7sNLDY4QSLi4HAAQ&redir_esc=y|quote=he was obeying the the command that the Plato in the Republic attributes to Socrates: "We must follow the argument wherever it leads." ...This Socratic principle also formed the inspiration of Socratic Club, a group that was really at the center of what intellectual life there was in wartime Oxford. ...C.S. Lewis's Socratic Club was open for business during the heyday of the new philosophy, and the Socratic principle I saw exemplified there...This statement represents a major change of course for me, but it was nevertheless consistent with principle I have embraced since the beginning of my philosophical life - of following the argument no matter where it leads...When I finally came to recognize the existence of a God, it was not a paradigm shift, because my paradigm remains, as Plato in his Republic scripted his Socrates to insist: "We must follow the argument wherever it leads."}}  +   + *The late world famous philosopher [[Antony Flew]] claimed that his departure from [[atheism]] was caused by consequent adherence to this principle.{{Cite book|title=There is a God, How the world's most notorious atheist changed his mind|author=Antony Flew|publisher=HarperOne|year=2008|isbn=978-0-06-133530-3|pages=22, 42, 75, 89|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=zbL66ePcjpQC&dq=Antony+Flew+There+is+a+God&source=bl&ots=o0jEX-bGMl&sig=Rrf5Tv5MynLGVHFOhZy95LFfLGw&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Zfx_UI7sNLDY4QSLi4HAAQ&redir_esc=y|quote=he was obeying the the command that the Plato in the Republic attributes to Socrates: "We must follow the argument wherever it leads." ...This Socratic principle also formed the inspiration of Socratic Club, a group that was really at the center of what intellectual life there was in wartime Oxford. ...C.S. Lewis's Socratic Club was open for business during the heyday of the new philosophy, and the Socratic principle I saw exemplified there...This statement represents a major change of course for me, but it was nevertheless consistent with principle I have embraced since the beginning of my philosophical life - of following the argument no matter where it leads...When I finally came to recognize the existence of a God, it was not a paradigm shift, because my paradigm remains, as Plato in his Republic scripted his Socrates to insist: "We must follow the argument wherever it leads."}}   + **''...Thus the density of the nebular distribution increases outwards, symmetrically in all directions, leaving the observer in a unique position. '''Such a favoured position, of course, is intolerable'''; moreover, it represents '''a discrepancy with the theory''', because the theory postulates homogeneity. Therefore, in order to restore homogeneity, and to escape '''the horror of a unique position'''{{#tag:ref|Similar embarrassment known from history of science, or philosophy, respectively and related to [[vacuum]] was expressed by famous sentence ''"[[horror vacui]]."''|group=note}}, the departures from uniformity, which are introduced by the recession factors, must be compensated by the second term representing effects of spatial curvature.''  + Although not explicitly mentioning the Socratic principle, [[Richard Feynman]] effectually comments that the reluctance to adopt it and an effort to replace it with [[prejudice]] in case of a so called unique position of [[Earth]] in the [[universe]] stems barely from [[embarrassment]] and not [[exact sciences|scientific rigor]]: ''"I suspect that '''the assumption of uniformity''' of the universe reflects a [[prejudice]] born of a sequence of overthrows of [[geocentric]] ideas...It would be embarrassing to find, after stating that we live in an ordinary [[planet]] about an ordinary [[star]] in an ordinary [[galaxy]], that our place in the universe is extraordinary...to avoid embarrassment we cling to the hypothesis of uniformity"''{{cite book |title=Feynman Lectures on Gravitation |author=Richard Phillips Feynman et al. |publisher=Westview Press |year=2002 |page=166 |isbn=978-0813-340388 |url=http://books.google.com/books?id=jL9reHGIcMgC&dq=Feynman+lectures+on+gravitation&source=bl&ots=_nuGcNOn2_&sig=VyTgUmNcfeCOiwisdwoTEgKK9og&hl=en&sa=X&ei=gaYyUMHwIcfP4QTm5YD4Ag&redir_esc=y}}. Slovak mathematician Adam Roman maintains that scientists should base their research on starting point where except verifiable [[fact]]s no biased ''[[a priori]]'' assumptions are made. Furthermore, scientists should bear the [[burden of proof]] in any case of [[reductionism|reducing]] the set of [[explanation in science|explanatory]] possibilities. Narrowing down options requires [[Scientific evidence|proof]] from one who argues that this narrowing (such as ''"the theory postulates homogeneity"''; ''a favoured position...is intolerable''; ''"we cling to the hypothesis of uniformity"'') should take place.{{cite web |title=Kto má pravdu dokazovat? (Who should bear the burden of proof)|author=Adam Roman|date=November 1, 2001|accessdate=June 7, 2013|url=http://adam.humanisti.sk/?p=31|language=Slovak|quote=Ludia pravdu iba zistujú a dokazujú (ak sa im to darí). Isteže, pri objavení neocakávanej pravdy je bremeno dôkazu na nich: ked donedávna ani len nevedeli, co je pravda, a teraz to zistili, s radostou to oznámia celému svetu. Vedci k objavenej pravde radi pripoja aj dôkaz, aby im druhí rozumeli (a uverili, lenže to je už druhoradé: ak rozumieme, môžeme verit). Ten, kto novú, doteraz nepoznanú pravdu objavil, ju rád a bez mucenia aj dokáže. ...Z toho všetkého už zacína citatel tušit, kto je povinný pravdu dokazovat: každý, kto ju odhalil, vychádzajúc z predpokladov, ktoré okrem každým overitelných faktov nic a priori nepredpokladali.  ...A máme tu druhé kritérium pre to, kto má znášat bremeno dôkazu: ten, kto tvrdí, že sa deje jedna z mnohých (apriórne rovnako pravdepodobných!) možností. Ak by niekto tvrdil, že mu pri hode kockou vypadne stále císlo šest, tvrdil by, že sa uskutocní iba jedna zo šiestich možností a mal by preto dokázat, preco akurát vypadne jedno císlo a nikdy nie ostatných pät. Pochopili ste? Zúženie možností si vyžaduje dôkaz od toho, kto tvrdí, že k tomu zúženiu dôjde. Ten, kto tvrdí, že môže vypadnút hocaké císlo, nic dokazovat nemusí, lebo jeho tvrdenie nezavrhuje žiadne možnosti. Napríklad Pytagorova veta sa dokazuje preto, lebo tvrdí, že súcet plôch štvorcov nad odvesnami nie je hocaká plocha, ale akurát plocha štvorca nad preponou. Pytagorova veta, ako každé slušné matematické tvrdenie, zužuje apriórne možnosti, a preto sa musí dokázat. Každé pravdivé tvrdenie je zaujímavé práve preto, že zužuje možnosti. Poznávanie sveta stojí na tom, že vieme co nie je možné. Pre malé dieta je možné všetko, svet (rozumného) dospelého je už chudobnejší na možnosti.}} An [[argument]] where ''a priori'' assumptions (cf. "a... must be avoided at all costs... Therefore, we accept ..., and assume that ...") are masquerading as [[proof|evidence]] for [[conclusion]]s (''"the universe must be pretty much alike everywhere and in all directions"'') is in effect a form of [[circular reasoning]].{{cite book

View the original article here

Texas Lawmaker Withdraws Amendment To Punish Universities For Offering LGBT Support

University LGBT resource centers in Texas may be safe for now. Thursday night, state Rep. Bill Zedler (R) withdrew his amendment to the appropriations bill that would have cut funding for any public universities that provided support service for LGBT students. Zedler did not explain his decision to withdraw, but his actions mirror those of Rep. Wayne Christian (R) who proposed then withdrew a similar measure in 2011.

Zedler’s bill not-so-subtly suggested that homosexuality directly causes disease:

An institution of higher education may not use money appropriated to the institution under this Act, or any property or facility of the institution funded by appropriations under this Act, to support, promote, or encourage any behavior that would lead to high risk behavior for AIDS, HIV, Hepatitis B, or any sexually transmitted disease.

Though Zedler’s amendment is not advancing, efforts are still underway to undermine the support for LGBT students, particularly at Texas A&M University, where students are attempting to opt-out of funding the campus’s center on religious grounds.


View the original article here

Logic of possibility

- |url=http://books.google.com/books?id=gvyHquVubDoC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Hedtke+The+secrets+of+the+sixth+edition&source=bl&ots=VQBk7unu95&sig=3-pYZsIj2vzBHgcIbYEpexlVc9s&hl=en&sa=X&ei=FsOGUO2kCIKJ4gS-tYCoBg&redir_esc=y}}{{#tag:ref|cf.''"But were I to make such a claim I would observe, as Richard Dawkins does, that to the extent that simultaneous and parallel changes are required to form a complex organ, to that extent does the hypothesis of random variation and natural selection become implausible. It is one thing to find a single needle in a haystack, quite another to find a dozen needles in a dozen haystacks at precisely the same time. Surely the [[burden of proof]] in such matters is not mine. I am not obliged to defend such mathematical trivialities as the proposition that as independent events are multiplied in number, their joint probability of occurrence plummets."'' (David Berlinski){{cite web|title=A Scientific Scandal? David Berlinski & Critics|author=David Berlinski|publisher=Center for Science and Culture(originally: Commentary)|date=July 8, 2003|accessdate=May 15,2013|url=http://www.discovery.org/a/1509}}|group=note}} Effectively, the logic of possibility replaces one unknown mystery with another.{{#tag:ref|For example, the assumably unknown causes of homosexual behaviour are replaced by insisting that such behaviour is result of operation of so called '' 'evolutionary enigma' ''.{{cite web|title=Homosexuality as a Consequence of Epigenetically Canalized Sexual Development|author=William R. Rice, Urban Friberg and Sergey Gavrilets |publisher=The Quarterly Review of Biology|date=(December 2012|page=343-368|acessdate=03.03.2013|url=http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/10.1086/668167.pdf?acceptTC=true|quote=This paper argues that sexually antagonistic selection can also be involved in epigenetic effects and explain the enigmatic high prevalence of several ?tness-reducing human characters. ... Homosexuality is frequently considered to be an unusual phenotype because it represents an evolutionary enigma —a trait that is expected to reduce Darwinian ?tness, yet it persists at substantial frequency across many different (possibly all) human populations.}}|group=note}} [[Darwin]] was criticised for using this method in [[The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection|The Origin of Species]] for there in it is assumed that ''the mere possibility of imagining'' a series of steps of transition from one condition of organs to another is to be accepted as a reason for believing that such transition has taken place.{{cite book|title=Darwin and the Darwinian revolution|author=Gertrude Himmelfarb|publisher=Peter Smith|year=1967|page=273,274,334|url=http://books.google.no/books?ei=StgxUcXSEMSK4AS9qoBg&id=C0OTeANFU88C&dq=himmelfarb+Darwin+and+the+darwinian+revolution&q=transitions#search_anchor}}{{#tag:ref|cf.''"Today it is simply unscientific to claim that the fantastically reduced entropy of the human brain, of the dolphin's sound lens, and of the eye of a fossilised trilobite simply "happened", for experimental experience has shown that such miracles just do not "happen"."''{{cite book |title=The natural sciences know nothing of evolution|author=Wilder Smith|publisher=Word for Today|year=2003|page=146|isbn=978-1931713504|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=Qbr7AQAACAAJ&dq=The+natural+sciences+know+nothing+of+evolution&hl=en&sa=X&ei=bJozUcalHemL4ATj-4CoAQ&redir_esc=y}}|group=note}} Adopting the logic of possibility is an unscientific way of avoiding criticism of a [[hypothesis]] and attempt to free it from the [[burden of proof]] because a critic could reply to conjecture and imagination only with conjecture of his or her own, what would pointlessly lead nowhere.{{#tag:ref|cf.''"As my colleague, the physical chemist Peter Atkins, puts it, we must be equally agnostic about the theory that there is a teapot in orbit around the planet Pluto. We can’t disprove it. But that doesn’t mean the theory that there is a teapot is on level terms with the theory that there isn’t"'' Bertrand Russell (1958), quoted in Ars Disputandi{{cite web |title=Absence of Evidence, Evidence of Absence, and the Atheist’s Teapot|author=Brian Garvey|publisher=Ars Disputandi|year=2010|volume=10|issn=1566–5399|acessdate=03.03.2013|url=http://www.arsdisputandi.org/publish/articles/000339/article.pdf}}|group=note}} The logic of possibility is native to [[postmodern science]] and [[scientism]], respectively; and it violates the borderline, until recently respected with dignity by great scientists, between what is known and what is not. The counterfactual reasoning inherent to logic of possibility should not be confused with [[Gedanken experiment|Gedanken (thought) experiment]], an legitimate device of the imagination used, inter alia by brilliant practitioners like, for example, [[Galileo]], [[Descartes]], [[Newton]], [[Leibniz]], and [[James Maxwell|Maxwell]]{{#tag:ref|For example, [[Maxwell’s intelligent agent]], referred to by secular scientists as '[[Maxwell's demon]]', was a [[Gedankenexperiment]] to help us to understand the dissipation of energy in [[nature]].{{cite book|title=Information and Information Flow: An Introduction|author=Manuel Eugen Bremer, Daniel Cohnitz|publisher=Ontos Verlag|year=2004|page=17|isbn=978-3937202471|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=NSsUhHlysrcC&pg=PA17&dq=Maxwell's+thought+experiment+dramatized+the+fact&hl=en&sa=X&ei=7G4zUe3JMOmk4ATJsIHQDw&ved=0CCwQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Maxwell's%20thought%20experiment%20dramatized%20the%20fact&f=false|quote= This thought experiment was intended by Maxwell to dramatize the fact that the second law is a statistical principle and that it is not certain that the entropy in any case increases.}}|group=note}}, to investigate the nature of things without making factual claims about what had allegedly happened in their unobservable history.     + |url=http://books.google.com/books?id=gvyHquVubDoC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Hedtke+The+secrets+of+the+sixth+edition&source=bl&ots=VQBk7unu95&sig=3-pYZsIj2vzBHgcIbYEpexlVc9s&hl=en&sa=X&ei=FsOGUO2kCIKJ4gS-tYCoBg&redir_esc=y}}{{#tag:ref|cf.''"But were I to make such a claim I would observe, as Richard Dawkins does, that to the extent that simultaneous and parallel changes are required to form a complex organ, to that extent does the hypothesis of random variation and natural selection become implausible. It is one thing to find a single needle in a haystack, quite another to find a dozen needles in a dozen haystacks at precisely the same time. Surely the [[burden of proof]] in such matters is not mine. I am not obliged to defend such mathematical trivialities as the proposition that as independent events are multiplied in number, their joint probability of occurrence plummets."'' (David Berlinski){{cite web|title=A Scientific Scandal? David Berlinski & Critics|author=David Berlinski|publisher=Center for Science and Culture(originally: Commentary)|date=July 8, 2003|accessdate=May 15,2013|url=http://www.discovery.org/a/1509}}|group=note}} Effectively, the logic of possibility replaces one unknown mystery with another.{{#tag:ref|For example, the assumably unknown causes of homosexual behaviour are replaced by insisting that such behaviour is result of operation of so called '' 'evolutionary enigma' ''.{{cite web|title=Homosexuality as a Consequence of Epigenetically Canalized Sexual Development|author=William R. Rice, Urban Friberg and Sergey Gavrilets |publisher=The Quarterly Review of Biology|date=(December 2012|page=343-368|acessdate=03.03.2013|url=http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/10.1086/668167.pdf?acceptTC=true|quote=This paper argues that sexually antagonistic selection can also be involved in epigenetic effects and explain the enigmatic high prevalence of several ?tness-reducing human characters. ... Homosexuality is frequently considered to be an unusual phenotype because it represents an evolutionary enigma —a trait that is expected to reduce Darwinian ?tness, yet it persists at substantial frequency across many different (possibly all) human populations.}} Cf. [[explanation in science]].|group=note}} [[Darwin]] was criticised for using this method in [[The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection|The Origin of Species]] for there in it is assumed that ''the mere possibility of imagining'' a series of steps of transition from one condition of organs to another is to be accepted as a reason for believing that such transition has taken place.{{cite book|title=Darwin and the Darwinian revolution|author=Gertrude Himmelfarb|publisher=Peter Smith|year=1967|page=273,274,334|url=http://books.google.no/books?ei=StgxUcXSEMSK4AS9qoBg&id=C0OTeANFU88C&dq=himmelfarb+Darwin+and+the+darwinian+revolution&q=transitions#search_anchor}}{{#tag:ref|cf.''"Today it is simply unscientific to claim that the fantastically reduced entropy of the human brain, of the dolphin's sound lens, and of the eye of a fossilised trilobite simply "happened", for experimental experience has shown that such miracles just do not "happen"."''{{cite book |title=The natural sciences know nothing of evolution|author=Wilder Smith|publisher=Word for Today|year=2003|page=146|isbn=978-1931713504|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=Qbr7AQAACAAJ&dq=The+natural+sciences+know+nothing+of+evolution&hl=en&sa=X&ei=bJozUcalHemL4ATj-4CoAQ&redir_esc=y}}|group=note}} Adopting the logic of possibility is an unscientific way of avoiding criticism of a [[hypothesis]] and attempt to free it from the [[burden of proof]] because a critic could reply to conjecture and imagination only with conjecture of his or her own, what would pointlessly lead nowhere.{{#tag:ref|cf.''"As my colleague, the physical chemist Peter Atkins, puts it, we must be equally agnostic about the theory that there is a teapot in orbit around the planet Pluto. We can’t disprove it. But that doesn’t mean the theory that there is a teapot is on level terms with the theory that there isn’t"'' Bertrand Russell (1958), quoted in Ars Disputandi{{cite web |title=Absence of Evidence, Evidence of Absence, and the Atheist’s Teapot|author=Brian Garvey|publisher=Ars Disputandi|year=2010|volume=10|issn=1566–5399|acessdate=03.03.2013|url=http://www.arsdisputandi.org/publish/articles/000339/article.pdf}}|group=note}} The logic of possibility is native to [[postmodern science]] and [[scientism]], respectively; and it violates the borderline, until recently respected with dignity by great scientists, between what is known and what is not. The counterfactual reasoning inherent to logic of possibility should not be confused with [[Gedanken experiment|Gedanken (thought) experiment]], an legitimate device of the imagination used, inter alia by brilliant practitioners like, for example, [[Galileo]], [[Descartes]], [[Newton]], [[Leibniz]], and [[James Maxwell|Maxwell]]{{#tag:ref|For example, [[Maxwell’s intelligent agent]], referred to by secular scientists as '[[Maxwell's demon]]', was a [[Gedankenexperiment]] to help us to understand the dissipation of energy in [[nature]].{{cite book|title=Information and Information Flow: An Introduction|author=Manuel Eugen Bremer, Daniel Cohnitz|publisher=Ontos Verlag|year=2004|page=17|isbn=978-3937202471|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=NSsUhHlysrcC&pg=PA17&dq=Maxwell's+thought+experiment+dramatized+the+fact&hl=en&sa=X&ei=7G4zUe3JMOmk4ATJsIHQDw&ved=0CCwQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Maxwell's%20thought%20experiment%20dramatized%20the%20fact&f=false|quote= This thought experiment was intended by Maxwell to dramatize the fact that the second law is a statistical principle and that it is not certain that the entropy in any case increases.}}|group=note}}, to investigate the nature of things without making factual claims about what had allegedly happened in their unobservable history.     

View the original article here

UPDATE 1-Optimer shares rise after report names Glaxo, Cubist as potential buyers

buyers@

* Co aims to get as much as $1 bln - report

* Optimer could get $15-$16/shr - analyst

* Shares up 18 pct

(Adds comments from an analyst, details)

April 2 (Reuters) - Shares of Optimer Pharmaceuticals Inc rose as much as 24 percent after a Bloomberg report said GlaxoSmithKline Plc and Cubist Pharmaceuticals Inc were among those interested in buying the antibiotic maker.

Optimer, the maker of diarrhea drug Dificid, aims to get as much as $1 billion in a possible auction, the report said, quoting two unnamed sources. (http://link.reuters.com/cys96t)

The report also named AstraZeneca PLC and Japan's Astellas Pharma Inc as potential buyers.

Robert W. Baird & Co analyst Brian Skorney said the $1 billion target implied a price of about $18 per share, which, he felt, would be difficult to achieve.

"I think we can see a $15 to $16 (per share) deal get done," Slorney said, calling the jump in Optimer's stock price a probable overreaction.

Tuesday's gains in the stock price eclipsed the 13 percent jump it had seen on Feb. 27, when the company first said it would explore a sale after replacing its CEO.

The shares were up 18 percent at $13.84 in afternoon trade on the Nasdaq, well above their closing price of $12.13 on Feb. 27.

"I think bankers are probably leaking some information to try drum up some more enthusiasm to get a higher deal value than what is already on the table," Skorney said.

Analysts have previously identified Pfizer Inc, Viropharma Inc and Cubist as potential suitors for Optimer.

"Anyone who has commercial infrastructure selling hospital-based antibiotics could be a bidder here," Skorney said.

"Astellas is already partnered with Optimer and since they already own most of the worldwide rights, it makes sense to consolidate everything."

Similarly, he said, Pfizer Inc had a number of antibiotics that would go generic over the next couple of years, so bidding for Optimer would make sense for it too.

Skorney said the cost, and the benefit, of the acquisition would be trivial for companies like Glaxo and Johnson & Johnson , but Forest Laboratories and Cubist would have to pay over 10 percent of their current valuation for Optimer.

Optimer spokesman David Walsey was unavailable for comment.

Cubist spokeswoman Julie DiCarlo said the company did not comment on speculation or rumors related to mergers and acquisitions. GSK declined to comment.

Dificid, which treats adult patients who contract infectious diarrhea in hospitals, accounted for $62.4 million in sales in 2012. The company is expected to generate sales of $310 million from the drug by 2017, according Thomson Reuters data.

Optimer is also testing to see if the drug can prevent diarrhea in patients under 18 years and whether it can treat it in patients undergoing bone marrow transplants.

(Editing by Sreejiraj Eluvangal)


View the original article here

User:Patmac


View the original article here

Kan. abortion clinic opens in slain doc's building

WICHITA, Kan. -- A new clinic offering abortions and other women's medical services saw its first patient Thursday in the Wichita building where a slain Kansas abortion provider had practiced.

The South Wind Women's Clinic opened nearly four years after Dr. George Tiller, one of the nation's few doctors performing late-term abortions, was gunned down in his church by an abortion opponent in May 2009.

The shuttered facility was bought by an abortion-rights group, Trust Women Foundation, which reopened it as a family and women's health center offering abortions and other health care services.

"We have been working a long time, really hard to get this open to provide services to women in Wichita," said Kerry Townsend Jacob, the group's spokeswoman.

Townsend Jacob cited privacy rights in declining to say whether the first patient, a Wichita woman, had an abortion or some other medical service. She also refused to say how many appointments have been scheduled so far.

Tiller was one of the few remaining physicians in the nation who did late-term abortions, but South Wind Women's Clinic does not plan to do abortions beyond the 14th week of pregnancy.

The Trust Women Foundation is a nonprofit organization founded in 2010 by Julie Burkhart, who worked with Tiller for seven years. The foundation bought the property from Tiller's wife in August.

Troy Newman, president of the anti-abortion group Operation Rescue, called the Wichita clinic's opening "symbolic" for abortion rights advocates.

"For me, we are winning across the board," Newman said, a reference to scores of laws seeking to restrict access to abortion passed by Republican-controlled legislatures during the last few years.

In Kansas, legislators on Thursday were preparing for final votes on a sweeping anti-abortion measure that would block tax breaks for abortion providers and outlaw abortions performed solely because of the baby's gender.


View the original article here

Rubio to brief GOP on immigration talks

By Daniel Strauss and Molly K. Hooper - 04/05/13 03:15 PM ET

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) plans on briefing Republicans on progress in crafting an immigration reform bill during the next Republican policy luncheon.

Rubio, who has been involved in bipartisan negotiations on crafting an immigration reform bill, said he had been given the green light to update his Republican colleagues next week.

"Earlier this week, I requested and received permission to brief the entire Republican conference during our policy lunch next week. I look forward to briefing you at that meeting," Rubio wrote in a letter to four Senate Republicans on Friday.

Rubio's letter was in response to the four GOP senators, Mike Lee (Utah), Jeff Sessions (Ala.), Chuck Grassley (Iowa), and Ted Cruz (Texas), who urged Rubio and other senators involved in the immigration negotiations to offer more transparency on the bill's progress.

The four senators sent a letter to the Republican senators in the so-called bipartisan Gang of Eight, urging them to release more details on their negotiations in crafting the immigration proposal. Members of the bipartisan group have recently said they plan to unveil their immigration reform bill soon.

"It is time for you to discuss the status of your negotiations, disclose what concessions have been made, and provide details to members of the Judiciary Committee as well as the entire Republican Caucus," the senators wrote in the letter, released Friday. "As members of the Judiciary Committee, we believe it is critical that the public and the entire Senate body be given adequate time to read and analyze the contents of any immigration bill put forth by the Majority. Our Committee has had only three hearings in recent months, barely touching on issues involving enforcement, border security or the creation of a temporary worker program."

They said that they were "deeply concerned" with recent statements made by Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) that a basic agreement has been reached by the group on legalizing undocumented workers in the U.S. Schumer is one of eight senators involved in the talks.

"We should not further test the faith of the American people by implementing a major overhaul of the immigration system that prioritizes legalizing law breakers over the long-term needs of the country," their letter stated. 

"In that regard, we are deeply concerned by Senator Schumer’s recent statement that your group has “come to a basic agreement, which is that first, people will be legalized. In other words, not citizens, but they'll be allowed to work, come out of the shadows, travel. Then, we will make sure the border is secure," the GOP senators wrote.

  The senators wanted staffers to brief members of the Republican Committee staff by the end of Monday on the specifics of the immigration reform negotiations.

"Therefore, we ask that your staff be made available to brief Republican Committee staff no later than close of business on Monday, April 8," the senators wrote. "We also request that you personally discuss your group’s proposal with the entire caucus early next week so that all members can raise concerns and questions before the deal is finalized."

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) recently told Rubio that he wanted to move quickly on moving the immigration bill to through his committee once it was unveiled.

"Because the President has failed to lead on this matter, your group has secretly met for months and not consulted with members of the Committee about major changes to our nation’s immigration laws," the senators wrote in the letter. "The time for transparency has come. Given the majority’s rushed timetable, we believe it is time for you to discuss the status of your negotiations, disclose what concessions have been made, and provide details to members of the Judiciary Committee as well as the entire Republican Caucus."  

--This report was updated at 5:10 p.m.

View Comments

View the original article here

Conservapedia:Community Portal

The database did not find the text of a page that it should have found, named "Conservapedia:Community Portal" (Diff: 0, 1055201).

This is usually caused by following an outdated diff or history link to a page that has been deleted.

If this is not the case, you may have found a bug in the software. Please report this to an administrator, making note of the URL.


View the original article here

New Hampshire Rejects All Private Prison Bids

New Hampshire officials rejected all four bids to privatize its prisons, citing prison operators’ insufficient understanding of court-mandated standards of inmate care, and proposed wages that are half what prison security staff now earn. The decision comes following a recent vote by the state House of Representatives to prohibit private prisons in the state. For-profit prison operators’ interest in profiting off inmates leads to perverse incentives, and many private facilities have been cited for human rights abuses and violations of state law. The Concord Monitor reports:

“The proposals exhibited a lack of understanding of the overarching legal requirements placed upon the (corrections department) relating to the court orders, consent decrees and settlements which, in large part, dictate the administration and operation of their correctional facilities and attendant services to the inmate populations,” read the report. It concluded that meeting those requirements for inmates’ medical and mental health care “appeared to be too great a burden for the vendors.”

The state’s decision to cancel the bid puts prison privatization off the table for now unless Gov. Maggie Hassan or the Legislature directs the state to reissue the bid, said Michael Connor of the state Department of Administrative Services. That seems unlikely. […]

State corrections and administrative service officials began investigating prison privatization in 2011 at the direction of former governor John Lynch and the last Legislature. Four companies submitted 17 proposals that were so voluminous and complex that state officials hired a private consultant, at a cost of $171,000, to help them evaluate the bids.

New Hampshire’s now-governor has been vocal in opposition to private prisons, and her spokesman said this week that “the track record of such arrangements in other states has not demonstrated success in terms of protecting taxpayer dollars while maintaining the highest level of public safety.” The state could, however, solicit new proposals in future years if the House bill to prohibit the facilities is not also approved by the Senate.

Earlier coverage of the bids reports that the three national private prison companies each have at least two lobbyists in the state, reflecting the nationwide efforts of prison firms to lobby for privatization of prison facilities, prison health care, and laws that incarcerate more people in a country that already has the world’s highest incarceration rate. Legislators who support private prisons, many enriched by campaign contributions from these very companies, have claimed that they are a way to save money. But New Hampshire’s report confirms the experiences of other states – that these prisons cost more. New Hampshire spent $171,000 for a consultant to pore through proposals that, in spite of being too unwieldy to be reviewed in-house, failed to address basic state criteria. What’s more, New Hampshire’s report is the latest evidence that private firms’ attempts to cut costs come at the expense of adequate inmate treatment and good wages.


View the original article here

Vanguard Health rebounds on Medicaid contract

NASHVILLE, Tenn. -- Shares of hospital operator Vanguard Health Systems took back some ground Wednesday after the company said it had secured a three-year contract to manage Medicaid patients in Arizona. It had said last month that Arizona wasn't renewing a bigger Medicaid contract.

THE SPARK: Vanguard, which owns hospitals and also manages health care benefits through subsidies including Phoenix Health Plan, announced late Tuesday that the contract covers patients in Maricopa county, which includes Phoenix. Medicaid is the state-run health plan for low-income Americans.

THE BIG PICTURE: The company had said late last month that its Phoenix Health Plan had lost its contract with the Arizona Medicaid system. Tuesday's announcement will help the company retain approximately 98,300 members, or about half of the 186,000 Medicaid beneficiaries covered under its previous contract.

In announcing the new agreement, Vanguard said it would not file a protest with Arizona over losing the previous Medicaid contract.

THE ANALYSIS: Susquehanna Financial Group analyst Chris Rigg said in a note the company is "making the best out of a bad situation." He still lowered his fiscal year 2014 earnings estimate to $1.12 from $1.25.

Analysts polled by FactSet expect profit of 90 cents per share for the year ending in June 2014.

Cantor Fitzgerald analyst Joseph France noted that Vanguard's hospital business accounts for about 90 percent of its earnings, and that managed care has not been a strong growth area for the company.

"Vanguard's Arizona HMO has actually been a disappointing performer over the past year as the state reduced benefits and raised eligibility requirements," France said in a note to investors.

SHARE ACTION: Shares of Vanguard Health Systems Inc. rose $1.25, or 8.6 percent, to $15.81 in afternoon trading Tuesday. The Nashville, Tenn.-based company's stock had fallen 12 percent after announcing the loss of the previous contract and before Tuesday's announcement. The stock reached a 52-week high of $17.74 the week before the March announcement of the lost contract.


View the original article here

Postmodern science

(Difference between revisions)'''Postmodern science''' is the one governed by the principle: "''anything goes''" {{#tag:ref|cf.''"When an [[explanation in science|explanation]] is so supple that it can explain any behavior, it is difficult to test it experimentally, much less use it as a catalyst for scientific discovery."''{{cite web |title=Why Do We Invoke Darwin? Evolutionary theory contributes little to experimental biology|author=Philip Skell|publisher=The Scientist (quoted by the Center for Science and Culture)|volume=19(16):10|date=29 August 2005|accessdate=03.03.2013|url=http://www.discovery.org/a/2816}}|group=note}} (native also to [[moral relativism]]) as aftereffect of the [[Postmodernism|postmodern]] concept that it is not possible to learn the objective true [[knowledge]] about reality and world. In consequence of landing at conclusion that science is not really knowledge at all, postmodern scientists speak in terms of [[chaos theory]], the unpredictability of science, indeterminacy, or uncertainty.  '''Postmodern science''' is the one governed by the principle: "''anything goes''" {{#tag:ref|cf.''"When an [[explanation in science|explanation]] is so supple that it can explain any behavior, it is difficult to test it [[experimental science|experimentally]], much less use it as a catalyst for [[scientific discovery]]."''{{cite web |title=Why Do We Invoke Darwin? Evolutionary theory contributes little to experimental biology|author=Philip Skell|publisher=The Scientist (quoted by the Center for Science and Culture)|volume=19(16):10|date=29 August 2005|accessdate=03.03.2013|url=http://www.discovery.org/a/2816}}|group=note}} (native also to [[moral relativism]]) as aftereffect of the [[Postmodernism|postmodern]] concept that it is not possible to learn the objective true [[knowledge]] about reality and world. In consequence of landing at conclusion that science is not really knowledge at all, postmodern scientists speak in terms of [[chaos theory]], the unpredictability of science, indeterminacy, or uncertainty.  Paul Feyerabend, former philosophy professor at the University of California (Berkeley) explains how in the history of science many theories have arisen, been accepted as established, promoted as the truth, and then eventually discarded. Feyerabend further maintains that scientific data promoted by scientist in support of a theory are anything but neutral because every scientist has an agenda. In all fields of science questions remain open as scientific theories are regularly tweaked. Moreover, the scientific establishment is regarded as very much [[Politically correct|politicized]]. Thus, scientists regularly work with unproven assumptions and filter data through their preconceived ideas.Paul Feyerabend, former philosophy professor at the University of California (Berkeley) explains how in the history of science many theories have arisen, been accepted as established, promoted as the truth, and then eventually discarded. Feyerabend further maintains that scientific data promoted by scientist in support of a theory are anything but neutral because every scientist has an agenda. In all fields of science questions remain open as scientific theories are regularly tweaked. Moreover, the scientific establishment is regarded as very much [[Politically correct|politicized]]. Thus, scientists regularly work with unproven assumptions and filter data through their preconceived ideas.In Humanist Manifesto 2000, secular Humanist [[Paul Kurtz]] insists that rejecting [[objectivity]] is a mistake and that [[Postmodernism]] is counterproductive, even [[nihilism|nihilistic]].{{cite web |title=Postmodern Science|author=|publisher=AllAboutWorldview.org#sthash.XYgaloi0.dpuf|access date=03.03.2013|url=http://www.allaboutworldview.org/postmodern-science.htm|quote=For that reason, science cannot tell us what is real, only what scientists believe to be the case at that particular time in history. This falls in line with the Postmodern concept that everyone, including the scientist, is locked into his or her particular culture and language, and thus cannot claim to have an objective picture of the world.}}  In Humanist Manifesto 2000, secular Humanist [[Paul Kurtz]] insists that rejecting [[objectivity]] is a mistake and that [[Postmodernism]] is counterproductive, even [[nihilism|nihilistic]].{{cite web |title=Postmodern Science|author=|publisher=AllAboutWorldview.org#sthash.XYgaloi0.dpuf|access date=03.03.2013|url=http://www.allaboutworldview.org/postmodern-science.htm|quote=For that reason, science cannot tell us what is real, only what scientists believe to be the case at that particular time in history. This falls in line with the Postmodern concept that everyone, including the scientist, is locked into his or her particular culture and language, and thus cannot claim to have an objective picture of the world.}}  

Postmodern science is the one governed by the principle: "anything goes" [note 1] (native also to moral relativism) as aftereffect of the postmodern concept that it is not possible to learn the objective true knowledge about reality and world. In consequence of landing at conclusion that science is not really knowledge at all, postmodern scientists speak in terms of chaos theory, the unpredictability of science, indeterminacy, or uncertainty. Paul Feyerabend, former philosophy professor at the University of California (Berkeley) explains how in the history of science many theories have arisen, been accepted as established, promoted as the truth, and then eventually discarded. Feyerabend further maintains that scientific data promoted by scientist in support of a theory are anything but neutral because every scientist has an agenda. In all fields of science questions remain open as scientific theories are regularly tweaked. Moreover, the scientific establishment is regarded as very much politicized. Thus, scientists regularly work with unproven assumptions and filter data through their preconceived ideas. In Humanist Manifesto 2000, secular Humanist Paul Kurtz insists that rejecting objectivity is a mistake and that Postmodernism is counterproductive, even nihilistic.[2]

if (window.showTocToggle) { var tocShowText = "show"; var tocHideText = "hide"; showTocToggle(); }

Postmodern doubts about the objectivity and neutrality of science arose in the mid-1900s from Michael Polanyi’s Personal Knowledge and Thomas Kuhn’s The Structure of Scientific Revolution. Kuhn points out that science is not merely a progressive and incremental discipline that studies and records facts. So-called facts can be understood and interpreted in a variety of ways depending on the worldview assumptions of the scientist. Kuhn further asserts that scientific theories are often not discarded due to being proven wrong, but rather older theories tend to die out along with their proponents.[note 2] Then the new and creative theories attract the attention of younger scientists who, in turn, promote their theories over the older ones. From this perspective, a current scientific theory is just a momentary current theory that will be replaced by another current theory in the future. For that reason, postmodernists held that science cannot tell us what is real, only what scientists believe to be the case at that particular period in history of humankind.[2] In 1996 the physicist Alan Sokal published a paper entitled "Transgressing the Boundaries: Toward a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity" in the journal Social Text. This essay was a hoax designed to ridicule post-modern thought and consequently a call was made to make a radical change in what scientific community accepts as a legitimate foundation for a physical theory. The department of physics at Hardvard is now often referred to as the department of post-modern physics by its critics.[5]

In the postmodern science, the traditional scientific method demanding from scientists to provide the scientific evidence for their hypothesis and conduct experiments was replaced by logic of possibility. This paradigm shift in science can be demonstrated at a representative example, the description of research by Alan Guth, where a claim is made about tests being performed in a 'hypothetical laboratory' [6]:
"Working with Prof. Edward Farhi and others, Guth has explored the question of whether it is in principle possible to ignite inflation in a hypothetical laboratory, thereby creating a new universe. The answer is a definite maybe. They showed that it cannot be done classically, but with quantum tunneling it might be theoretically possible.[note 3] The new universe, if it can be created, would not endanger our own universe. Instead it would slip through a wormhole and rapidly disconnect completely."
Postmodern science does not lead to resolution of scientific questions but leaves them undecided by applying terms like 'a definite maybe' [note 4]. Consequently, the scientific discoveries are being replaced by the beliefs affected by worldview of scientist which are then effectively promulgated as statements of faith or scientific myth calling for public acceptance. The journal Science published in 2002 an article in which Charles Darwin is criticised for gamely nailing together a just-so story of how creation of complex organs might have happened.[9] Another example demonstrating the traits of Postmodern science can be given from interview with Joseph Silk, Savilian Professor of Astronomy at University of Oxford[10]:
ESA: We seem to agree that the Big Bang started with an 'inflation', a short period of high-speed expansion. But what happened before that? Joseph Silk: Maybe long before inflation there was a Universe that was collapsing near a singularity, which then inflated again, so there was already a history before the Big Bang. Some people think there was a 'pre-Big Bang'. One possibility is that this pre-Big Bang, if there was such a place, would have made lots of entropy (the amount of disorder in the Universe). And the Universe we live in does have huge amounts of entropy. That's one theory. But we have no understanding of how to change from collapsing to expanding. There's no physical way to explain that transition. Some people believe that they have explanations the pre-Big Bang, so it's a respectable theory.
In Postmodern science theories are considered 'respectable' not due to their merits in terms of observational discoveries or scientific evidence but merely because 'Some people believe [them]'. ? cf."When an explanation is so supple that it can explain any behavior, it is difficult to test it experimentally, much less use it as a catalyst for scientific discovery."[1]? cf. "An important scientific innovation rarely makes its way by gradually winning over and converting its opponents: it rarely happens that Saul becomes Paul. What does happen is that its opponents gradually die out and that the growing generation is familiarized with the idea from the beginning." Max Planck, The Philosophy of Physics[3] "Academic appointments were also manipulated to favor younger scientists with Darwinian sympathies who would ensure that the next generation was educated to take the theory for granted."[4]? cf."Physical scientists like Newton are not content to say that it may be so, and then build up theories based on bare possibilites."[7]? cf."If one wishes to obtain a definite answer from Nature one must attack the question from a more general and less selfish point of view." Max Planck[8]? Philip Skell (29 August 2005). Why Do We Invoke Darwin? Evolutionary theory contributes little to experimental biology. The Scientist (quoted by the Center for Science and Culture). Retrieved on 03.03.2013.? 2.0 2.1 Postmodern Science. AllAboutWorldview.org#sthash.XYgaloi0.dpuf. “For that reason, science cannot tell us what is real, only what scientists believe to be the case at that particular time in history. This falls in line with the Postmodern concept that everyone, including the scientist, is locked into his or her particular culture and language, and thus cannot claim to have an objective picture of the world.”? Max Planck (1936). The philosophy of physics. W.W. Norton & Company, inc., 97. ? Janet Browne (Feb 23, 2010). Charles Darwin Volume 2: The Power at Place. Random House, 608. ISBN 9781407053233. ? David Berlinski (2009). "The State of the Matter", The Deniable Darwin. Seattle, USA: Discovery Institute Press (reprinted from Commentary February 1998 by permission), 511. ISBN 978-0-9790141-2-3. ? Faculty Directory: Alan Guth, Victor F. Weisskopf Professor of Physics. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Physics. Retrieved on 03.03.2013.? David L. Hull (1973). Darwin and his critics: the reception of Darwin's theory of evolution by the scientific community. Harvard University Press, 275. ? Alfred Korzybski (1995). Science and Sanity: An Introduction to Non-Aristotelian Systems and General Semantics. Institute of General Semantics, 415. ISBN 978-0937298015. ? Virginia Morell (01-Nov-2002). Placentas May Nourish Complexity Studies. Science Magazine. Retrieved on 17-Mar-2013. “It's one of the oldest riddles in evolutionary biology: How does natural selection gradually create an eye, or any complex organ for that matter? The puzzle troubled Charles Darwin, who nevertheless gamely nailed together just-so story of how it might have happened...”? Is the Universe finite or infinite? An interview with Joseph Silk. ESA, European Space Agency (02-May-2001).

View the original article here

InVivo Therapeutics gets approval for human trials

CAMBRIDGE, Mass. -- InVivo Therapeutics Holdings Corp. said Friday that the Food and Drug Administration will allow it to start human trials of an experimental product that is intended to treat spinal cord injuries.

InVivo said it plans to start a trial of the device, called a biopolymer scaffold product, in the next few months. The company wants to study the device in five patients and said the initial study will last about 15 months.

The Cambridge, Mass., company said there are no FDA-approved treatments that intervene directly in the spinal cord following an injury.

On Thursday the FDA awarded the scaffolding a humanitarian use device exemption. Given to products intended to treat conditions that affect fewer than 4,000 people a year, the exemption could speed up approval of a product and reduce the amount of testing a company has to do. InVivo is trying to get a second exemption, a humanitarian device exemption, which would allow it to get marketing clearance if the FDA agrees the product's probable benefits outweigh its risks and that it doesn't pose a significant risk of illness or injury. InVivo would not have to prove the scaffolding is effective, although it would still have to run clinical tests.


View the original article here