http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/03/us/03nuke.html?hp

This article is about how a new idea for sealing the leaking oil pipe would be to use a nuclear explosion to seal the hole. The intense heat would, in theory, would melt the hole shut creating a cap like plug. The idea is gaining a lot of support, but the federal government is totally against it. not only would it go against obama's ideas of reducing nuclear armaments, but it would also ruin the pacts made between the US and Russia to try to stop using nuclear weapons even in peaceful ways. I think the government is right. I think the only reason that the idea is gaining support is because people are becoming really impatient with so many failed attempts by BP. People aren't thinking about the consequences that could come with detonating a nuclear weapon. For one it might not even work because it hasn't really been tested underwater or on an oil leak, and also who knows what the radiation could do. It just seems way too dangerous, irrational, and desperate to use such a method.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/22/business/energy-environment/22rare.html?hp

This article is about our reliance on China's low priced rare-earth minerals. Most of American mines for the rare minerals have been run out of business because of Chinese low wages and total ignoring any environmental factor the mining may have on the environment (the landscape around their mines look like moonscapes). Some big mining companies in the US want to open up older mines and make new ones; they are looking for possible help from the government on possible regulation of the Chinese mineral market. The problem with this is that the Army relies on the Chinese low prices, which totally out compete any American prices. I think this is ridiculous because we should be focusing on our own economy. The only reason the prices are low is because Chinese workers are being exploited and on top of that their homes are being destroyed by the dust from the mines. It seems like such a horrible thing to be buying from the Chinese when they are using their workers so unfairly and basically infecting the surrounding environment with the waste produced. This is just another example of how money is the only thing that matters to big agencies, like the Army.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/13/science/13adhesive.html?src=un&feedurl=http%3A%2F%2Fjson8.nytimes.com%2Fpages%2Fscience%2Findex.jsonp

This article is about how scientists are trying to imitate a natural adhesive made by the caddisfly. This is no ordinary adhesive, however, because it can cure underwater. This has not been able to be done by scientists so far because the problem is that when trying to cure an adhesive underwater it starts to adhere to a water layer in between the actual object. This makes it very hard to make an adhesive that will actually work. This is why scientists are studying these caddisfly, they have the ability to make a natural glue to build their homes. This glue could be extremely useful because it could be used for the Navy and also for possibly glueing bones, tissue, and muscle back together on people. This would make it much easier to fix problems like broken bones or large cuts. I think this is very intriguing and a really good area of research. If this underwater adhesive could be made it would make a large impact on medical and Navy uses.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/13/science/earth/13trash.html?ref=science

This article is about how Denmark has created a super-clean waste to electricity plant. For years incinerators have been terrible polluters and hated by many people, especially those who live close to one. Now, however, this new plant has many filters to filter out anything from mercury to dioxins. It converts waste to electricity with less harmful emissions than a fire place and barbecues have. This is a huge advancement and many more of these plants are being set up in the country. The idea has been brought to America, but not in a very positive light. Scientists are split, on the one hand these are extremely green plants, but on the other hand its just encouraging people to produce more waste and use more plastics. This has the opposite effect of what people want because people would be more loose with what they buy and throw out. I think this is a really great idea, even though it could encourage bad behaviors. I think it could be the transition to perfectly green energy and would solve the problem of what to do with waste.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/08/world/asia/08reef.html?src=un&feedurl=http%3A%2F%2Fjson8.nytimes.com%2Fpages%2Fscience%2Findex.jsonp

This article is about another large oil spill off the coast of Australia in the very delicate ecosystem of the Great Barrier Reef. Apparently a Chinese oil tanker with 1075 tons of oil on it was basically speared by the reef and so is now stuck there until something is done to stop any further leaking. There hasn't been any major leaking because sea water rushed into the tank rather than the oil rushing out into the ocean, although this won't last for long. The Australians are saying that the Chinese crew tried to take a short cut through reefs, but got stuck. This conclusion was made because the vessel had just left a port in Australia, picking up coal and steel, and got stuck 12 kilometers off the shipping lanes. The Australians are extremely upset, calling it the equivalent to a terrorist attack because it could be so harmful. I think this is just yet another example of the stupid things people do. You would think the captain of a fuel tanker would be a lot more cautious with 1075 tons of oil and 72000 tons of coal on board. I think it is an outrage and the Australians should do as much as they can to punish the chinese vessel, releasing oil into the Great Barrier Reef, the biggest and most extraordinary reef in the world, is like pouring some paint on the Mona Lisa. It is such a delicate ecosystem and holds such beauty, tarnishing something like that is just plain stupid.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/23/science/23aquarium.html?ref=science

This article is about the aquarium fishing industry and how there may be a possibility of over harvesting in the Florida Keys. There is a debate going on among scientists as to whether aquariums may be asking too much from the environment. Most of their attractions come from the Keys and, although the fishing is highly regulated, there may be a chance of over fishing. One side of the argument is that the fishing is so regulated that nothing could possibly go wrong. This I think is naive, most of the animals harvested there have very little information known about them, including their reproductive cycles. Even if they are highly regulated if, hypothetically, one species every female reproduces every 3-5 years that would take a lot of time for the species to recover from harvesting. This could very well be the case and no one would know. I think there just needs to be more research on the actual animals being harvested so we know for sure we aren't hurting the environment.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/16/health/16essa.html?ref=science
This article is about how fat people are being judged harshly by doctors and employers. Many doctors are very frank saying that they would treat fat people a lot different than average sized people, as they don't trust them to do what they need to do. They cause a lot of stress towards fat people, according to the article, causing diabetes and other stress related diseases. Employers are very biased, in that they will not even consider hiring a larger person for a job. One woman described how she had a really good phone conversation with an employer, but when they met in person she was totally turned down. The employer didn't look at her and made a big deal about whether or not to go up the stairs or take the elevator. She didn't even recieve a "not thank you" letter. I think this is a very biased article. The person who wrote it was obese herself, saying that in the first paragraph. She probably made it sound worse than it actually is and is making excuses for herself. Honestly, yes there are people who just don't have the ability to take off weight, but that must be a fairly small percentage. I think most obese people have the choice to work hard, eat right, and stay healthy or continue what they normally do. Employers probably stereo-type many obese people because they think they are too lazy to do anything about their weight. If you have ever seen the Biggest Loser, it proves that even the largest people can get thin, its just a matter of working for it. I think this article is just making excuses for obese people not to do anything about their weight and make them feel better about themselves.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/05/science/05sfsealion.html

This article is about how California sea lions are having a large increase of deaths from cancer, specifically metastatic cancer. It's been found that 18% of all sea lion rescues are caused by cancer, and most die from it. This is really sad because it is most likely due to either prior use of pesticides, such as DDT, that were used 20-30 years ago, or from the mass amount of pollution coming from California cities. It could also be that it is a combination of a lot of different things; researchers can't really find the real reason because it is a non-point source of pollution. This is not only happening to sea lions though. Beluga whales have the same problem with roughly the same amount of cancer killed whales washing up on shore. I think this is a major environmental problem, but one that is extremely hard to fix because it comes from mass amounts of pollution.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/02/science/02evo.html?ref=science

This article is about how scientists are finding that culture has been influencing human evolution over the past thousands of years. One example was that a lot of northern Europeans had developed a gene that keeps the lactose digesting gene working. Generally the lactose digesting gene is shut down after weaning, but in these cattle based societies more offspring survived if they were able to digest lactose so the gene prevailed. It shows evolution in a very quick manner. This same thing has been found in African pastoral societies, however the mutation is different, but still with the same effect. It also has been found that Asians and Europeans generally have lighter skin color because of the climate they live in. Also scientists have found that the human skeleton has gotten lighter over the past thousands of years, this is probably due to the fairly recent invention of settled society. I think this is really cool because it basically proves evolution. It is also very cool how we have evolved so fast, usually this takes a lot more time, but in a matter of a couple thousand years we have changed. I think this is due to our sedimentary society and constantly changing society.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/23/health/23liver.html?ref=science

This article is about the ability of the liver to regenerate and how doctors have been using this to their advantage. There is now a very successful new way for a "temporary" transplant for livers. For very young children who need a liver transplant there is now a temporary transplant that can allow for the child to grow out of the transplant and become a perfectly normal and healthy person. The idea is that a liver is transplanted into the child, over a few years the patient's own liver regenerates, while they are taking antirejection drugs for the transplant, then when their own liver is large and strong enough to function on its own the doctors cut out the antirejection medicine and the transplant is then destroyed by the body's immune system. This then allows the child to live a perfectly healthy life, without the medication, which lowers the immune system's ability to fight off disease. I think this is such a great idea and can make a child's life that much better and healthier. It also makes it easier on the parents who then don't have to pay for the medications and won't have to worry about their kid getting sick as much.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/23/business/energy-environment/23recycle.html?ref=science

This article is about how airlines produce an enormous amount of waste; not only from the exhaust from the planes, but from all the trash collected before the flight. Airports force you to throw out any liquid that you have when going through security, generally there are mostly plastic bottles that are disposed of. There is so much trash and possible recyclable items and airports don't do a good job at all of recycling the waste. Allen Hershkowitz made a great point in saying “It does not make sense to acquire oil from the Middle East or the north slope of Alaska and turn it into a plastic bottle, use it once and throw it away,” 75% of trash generated in airports is recyclable and only about 20% is recycled. This can so easily be fixed and would help the environment greatly by stopping the buildup of landfills, but airports still don't have a good recycling program. I think this is just ridiculous, airports probably have a lot of money because of the high demand for flights so they should be able create a respectable recycling program.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/09/science/space/09shuttle.html?ref=science
This article is about future plans for our space program and the recent launching of the Endeavour. The flight

was originally cancelled Sunday because of bad weather conditions. This morning was not perfect, but still good enough for a launch. The space shuttle had one problem, some of the foam insulation was peeling off into the first two minutes of flight. This, however, was not seen as a major problem, but was still going to get checked out. The article also mentioned how president Obama cancelled our next project to go to the moon, which was planned for 2020. It wasn't totally thrown out, but the plan will be delayed some years. Instead, we will focus on our orbiting space station. I think the Endeavour should be inspected immediately because that could be a serious problem. Obama's plan I think is better because I think it's more important to invest in something that is going on now and to help make our current astronauts more safe and comfortable.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/02/business/02oil.html?scp=2&sq=oil&st=cse

This article is about how the oil company Exxon has been not downsizing or being conservative during the recession, but rather expanding and contracting smaller gas companies. It very recently acquired a natural gas company worth 31 billion dollars. They are also looking for more gas in brazil and Iraq. Although their profit has went down, they are still making billions a year, showing how powerful they are. I find it scary that an oil company can still be doing so well in this economy. If the oil companies have this much money and power then how is a renewable resource or more efficient method of energy use to become popular? This just shows what a predicament our world is in if we are basically ruled by the oil companies, there can be almost no way for a different method for energy to come along if the oil companies are so powerful.

Carp Invasion

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/20/science/20carp.html?ref=science

This article is about the very possible and likely invasion of the asian carp into the great lakes. These fish have been feared for years because they would have no natural predators in the lakes and would destroy the ecosystem. Millions of dollars were spent on a very elaborate blockade to stop the fish from getting in. Unfortunately just recently DNA evidence of the carp was found in one of the lakes. No live or dead fish were found, but it is very likely there is a live specimen in the lake. So far no action has been taken, as a conference held by some officials overruled any emergency action. Now the senators are looking to the Obama administration to save their 7 billion dollar fishing industry from total destruction. I think this was bound to happen eventually, no matter how horrible it sounds. Even with the blockade system, whether it be some idiot throwing away a live fish or one of the fish getting past the barrier, it was bound to happen. It will take a lot of work to get rid of the asian carp, if it is even possible.

Virus in the Genome

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/12/science/12paleo.html?pagewanted=1&ref=science

This article is about how scientists have been discovering retroviruses in the human genome. These viruses are no longer active obviously but some of them do play important roles in the human genome. This is really quite interesting because this is described as "fossil hunting" in the genome. It shows a history of how our genome developed through evolution. This happens not because the virus inserts itself into the genome, but rather the genome absorbs it. Scientists are not exactly sure why this happens, but it has helped the human body defend against some other viruses. A major way this helped is when earlier in history when one virus was absorbed it was used to make placentas. In a test scientists pulled this virus out from the genome from mice and found that the placenta ended up deformed and unable to do its job. I found this really interesting and I think they could use this for another type of vaccination possibly. If scientists could find a way to insert certain viruses, unharmfully, into the genome to prevent diseases like HIV that would be a huge scientific breakthrough.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/06/dining/06frozen.html?ref=science

This article is about a company that freezes developed embryos, semen and eggs from rare goats, cattle, and sheep. They are doing this for multiple reasons. One is to have all these reproductive tools just in case the animal happens to become extinct or on the verge of extinction. Another is in case these animals become needed for food purposes, for example the goat has become extremely popular. I think this is really interesting and a really good idea because in todays world animals can quickly and easily become extinct or endangered.