data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/14925/1492565a0483b94bb1036dce558cbdeb48e5ef5b" alt="Not reassuring. Are asteroids dangerous? Some are, but the likelihood of a dangerous asteroid striking the Earth during any given year is low. Because some past mass extinction events have been linked to asteroid impacts, however, humanity has made it a priority to find and catalog those asteroids that may one day affect life on Earth. Pictured above are the orbits of the over 1,000 known Potentially Hazardous Asteroids (PHAs). These documented tumbling boulders of rock and ice are over 140 meters across and will pass within 7.5 million kilometers of Earth -- about 20 times the distance to the Moon. Although none of them will strike the Earth in the next 100 years -- not all PHAs have been discovered, and past 100 years, many orbits become hard to predict. Were an asteroid of this size to impact the Earth, it could raise dangerous tsunamis, for example. Of course rocks and ice bits of much smaller size strike the Earth every day, usually pose no danger, and sometimes creating memorable fireball and meteor displays. Click on the image for larger view. (NASA and JPL-Caltech)"
Today’s Live Wire: Quick Links
- Stop and Frisk Unconstitutional
- Florida Children on Steroids, With Parents’ Approval
- Jeb Bush’s School Reform Agenda Goes Splat
- The Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill of the Prairie
- To Lose Weight, Cook More
- A Tennessee Judge’s Messiah Complex
- Texting and Death: Werner Herzog’s “From One Second to Next”
- Larry David Stands Up
Stop and Frisk Ruled Unconstitutional
Judge Shira A. Scheindlin’s Ruling on Stop and Frisk
How Does It Feel to Be Stopped and Frisked?
See Also:
- Stop and Frisk Follies
- Black Man 101: Déjà Jim Crow All Over Again For African-American Parents and Their Sons
- Stop-and-Frisk in Bunnell Turns Into Brawl With Officers, and Threats of a “Hit”
- In Florida Case, U.S. Supremes Strike Down Drug-Sniffing Cop Dogs Outside of Home
Florida Children on Steroids, With Parents’ Approval
See Also:
Jeb Bush’s School Reform Agenda Goes Splat
See Also:
- Florida Education Commissioner Bennett Changed School Grading System in Indiana to Benefit a Donor
- Florida Education Commissioner Tony Bennett Is Resigning Over Favoritism Scandal
- Common Core Here to Stay Despite Heckles by Conservatives, But Testing Questions Remain
The Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill of the Prairie
Watch:
See Also:
- Cold Lake Oilsands Spill: Canadian Natural Resources Says Leak At Primrose Operation Contained
- Greenpeace Canad’s Oil Sands Portal
- Alberta’s Oil Sands Portal
It’s not nearly as counter-intuitive as you might think. From the UK Telegraph: “Jean-Michel Cohen believes he has the cure for obesity. As I chatted to the French diet doctor recently in his large, modernist apartment on the outskirts of Paris, Cohen told me the answer was far simpler than anyone seemed to think. If we want to lose weight, Cohen said, we should cook more meals. Cook more meals? And lose weight? Absolutely, said Cohen, whose book, The Parisian Diet, has sold more than two million copies. Societies that cook more meals are slimmer and healthier. Like the French, for instance. Only 16.9 per cent of the French population is obese, compared to 22.7 per cent of people in the UK, who cook far less than the French, and 33.9 per cent of Americans, who cook even less than us.
Of course, as Cohen points out, it helps if what you cook is healthy, with lots of fresh vegetables and high-quality protein. But what if cooking, in and of itself, promotes healthy eating? What if cooking, like a good recipe, adds up to more than the sum of its parts? When you cook, you have to think about ingredients, buy them, chop them up, heat them, watch as they transform into a meal, and clean up afterwards. All the time, you are in control. Psychologically speaking, cooking from raw ingredients is nothing like eating fast food, or processed food; it’s the opposite of eating sandwiches at your desk, or bagels on the train. […] And yet, we’re doing less and less of it. According to Pollan, “the amount of time spent preparing meals in American households has fallen by half since the mid-Sixties” when it was just under an hour a day. Now it’s 27 minutes. […] the French snack less – only 10 per cent of their calories come from snacks, as opposed to 20 per cent of the calories consumed in the US. […] On the other hand, curiously, we’re spending more time watching television programmes about cooking. […] In essence, cooking made us human. And for thousands of years, every advance in cooking made us healthier. But there was a point, says Pollan, when “cooking took its fatefully wrong turn: when civilisation began processing food in such a way as to make it less nutritious rather than more”. So what, exactly, went wrong? […] Michael Pollan […] believes the rot set in a century ago, when bread-making became industrialised. Steel mills found a way of removing the outer layer of bran and the endosperm – the bits that contain “the dietary fibre, the vitamin E, the folic acid, phytic acid, iron, zinc, manganese and magnesium”. That was good for the food processors – the inert starch they were left with had many qualities they liked. It was stable, consistent, and it didn’t go off. And people wanted more of it, because, when you ate it, this refined starch was swiftly turned into glucose in your blood – what we now call a blood-sugar spike. When the spike is followed by the inevitable crash, you want more white bread. […] But there are other more profound reasons to reclaim the act of cooking. As Jean-Michel Cohen told me, cooking is directly linked to the pleasure we take in eating. This is the happiness that comes from creating something delicious from scratch and more often than not, sharing it. “There’s a tradition in France to enjoy food,” Cohen added. “In many other countries, people just eat to fill themselves up.”” The full story.
See Also:
A Tennessee Judge’s Messiah Complex
Watch two different perspectives:
Better yet:
See Also:
Texting and Death: Werner Herzog’s “From One Second to Next”
From Slate: “”From One Second to the Next,” the rather unlikely film below, came together when AT&T approached the legendary German filmmaker Werner Herzog and asked if he would direct a series of short films warning people about the dangers of texting while driving. “What AT&T proposed immediately clicked and connected inside of me,” Herzog told the AP. “There’s a completely new culture out there. I’m not a participant of texting and driving—or texting at all—but I see there’s something going on in civilization which is coming with great vehemence at us.” The result is haunting. It focuses on four accidents, some of them fatal, and Herzog aims his camera squarely at the faces of both victims and perpetrators, asking them to describe in detail what happened and the aftermath. Herzog emphasizes the change in civilization he perceives in part by examining an accident in which an Amish family was killed and another in which a horse-shoer’s truck was involved.”
Watch the full film:
See Also:
- Texting While Driving Ban Passes Florida Legislature
- Road Rage Genesis: Law Banning Texting a Long-Overdue Correction
After Herzog, we need a little David:
See Also:
Nancy N. says
My 10 year old daughter has to take steroids for her juvenile arthritis and the side effects and the way it alters her personality are scary. Anyone who would do that on purpose to their child for potential financial gain, to turn them into a pro athlete, doesn’t deserve to be a parent.
A.S.F. says
@Nancy N–I am so sorry about your daughter. You, and she, obviously have no choice because your daughter is forced to take Steroids as medicine, in order to function. I can only imagine how horrified you are to read about what other parents may be doing to their children by giving them these drugs. What kind of lowlife Dr./clinic would be willing to supply them? Are some of these parents getting these drugs as prescriptions for themselves and THEN giving them to their kids? Are they getting them off the street? And, for what? To win games? Maybe because these parents have some fantasy that it will move their kids into position to get some kind of scholarship to college or entry into the “big-time?” Because they have frustrated ambtions themselves and are trying to live vicariously through their children? Talk about fantasy and magical-thinking! Kids absorb what their parents and the society around them teaches them. If we are teaching them that ego, glory-seeking, surface appearance and ambition are worth more than something as basic and life-sustaining as their health, do we really have to wonder what those childrens’ values will turn out to be as they grow into adulthood? This really is a shame!