You
may think you’re better at reading than you are at math (or vice
versa), but new research suggests you’re probably equally good (or bad)
at both. The reason: The genes that determine a person’s ability to
tackle one subject influence their aptitude at the other, accounting for
about half of a person’s overall ability.
The study,
published Tuesday in the journal Nature Communications, used nearly
1,500 pairs of 12-year-old twins to tease apart the effects of genetic
inheritance and environmental variables on math and reading ability.
Twin studies provide a clever way of assessing the balance of nature
versus nurture.
Collective member Davide Carpano is surprised the university doesn’t
want to support the alcohol free zone at the CHE, given what he calls
“rampant alcohol abuse on campuses nationwide.”
The CHE Café, a UCSD underground music venue as well as a
hotbed for progressive politics for over three decades, may have to
close because university officials say it's unsafe. The student
volunteers who run the CHE are putting up a fight.
The battle to save the CHE Café,
an all-ages, underground music venue and vegetarian restaurant on the
edge of the UC San Diego campus, has been underway for months. Some
might say for years.
“This is something the university has done before,” explained Davide
Carpano, one of the student volunteers who helps run the CHE through a
collective. He’s referring to the university’s latest effort to close
the CHE (which stands for Cheap Healthy Eats). Administration officials
say the building is in need of a fire sprinkler system — to the tune of
$700,000 — and is unsafe. They've sent the collective an eviction
notice.
“We actually have an article from the 1980s, where the university
used the exact same pretexts and the exact same inflated numbers,” said
Carpano.
On a campus known for cutting edge research and modern architecture,
the CHE Café feels like something out of the 1960s, though the venue
dates to 1980. Its small wooden building is covered in murals, some of
them by well-known muralists, featuring activists like Che Guevara and
Angela Davis.
Music fans, especially of punk and hardcore, have flocked to the CHE
over the years to see bands they couldn’t see elsewhere. Green Day
played there before they became famous. So did Billy Corgan of the
Smashing Pumpkins.
By Angela Carone
Davide Carpano and Rene Vera are volunteers who help run the CHE Cafe, which may close later this year.
“It’s been a place where students who don’t really fit in with the
dominant culture on campus can come and create their own community
around types of music that aren’t listened to on campus, and types of
activism that aren’t appreciated on campus,” said Carpano.
He said university officials have never liked what the CHE stands for, so there’s always some renewed effort to shut it down.
The CHE collective insists the fire sprinkler system was only
recommended, not mandatory. The UCSD Fire Marshall would not comment for
this story.
The collective has been fighting back, most notably by filing a
lawsuit on Monday against the university, their landlord, for breach of
contract. They also filed and won a restraining order against the
university so they can stay in the building until the lawsuit is
resolved. They plan to continue booking shows until September.
Money to pay for the fire sprinkler system would normally come from
student fees. Sammy Chang chaired the student board that decides how
student fees should be spent. He says only a small portion of UCSD
students go to the CHE Café, so even though it has this unique history
on campus, it’s not a priority. “We’re still obligated to the students
who pay the fee who don’t really fully understand all of the CHE’s
traditions and what the CHE Café is,” explained Chang. “Only 2 percent
of the students even use the CHE Café,” he added. That's based on a
survey conducted by the university.
Chang said most students use the spacious Price Center, where there
are restaurants and lounges. In the face of budget deficits, he said
they have to put the money where the most students are.
Andrea Carter, the lawyer representing the CHE’s fight to stay open,
said this is about the university opting to make a profit. The CHE’s
rent is low ($80 a month) and Carter said the university could make more
money by renting the land to a private vendor.
“The social spaces that the university now seems to prefer are ones
that are privately operated, profit-driven and not dedicated to
providing practical education opportunities,” said Carter.
She sees the recent decision to allow a Starbucks on campus as emblematic of the trend.
The CHE Café, however, has not been a model tenant. They are close to
$4,000 behind in rent and utilities. In years past, they’ve let their
insurance payments lapse and lost their non-profit status for not filing
tax forms.
Representatives for the collective admit keeping up with the rent was
tough because they focused on paying a hefty insurance bill. They say
they’ve never been a priority at the university, despite operating a
historic building that was once the student center and the heart of
campus.
“Overall this space has not been given the maintenance it deserves
over the last 34 years,” said Rene Vera, another CHE cooperative member.
“If they would just put $10,000 into it every couple of years, or maybe
a $50,000 renovation, this would all be fixed right now and it wouldn’t
be this big lump sum come due.”
Those fighting to save the CHE Café have nostalgia on their side.
Music lovers, like Charles Henry Peckham, insist the music scene at the
CHE is rare. “There’s not anything like the CHE that I have ever seen
and I’ve been going to shows for a long time,” said the Cal State East
Bay grad. Collective member Davide Carpano is surprised the university doesn’t
want to support the alcohol free zone at the CHE, given what he calls
“rampant alcohol abuse on campuses nationwide.”
If repeating a statement over and over again were a guarantee that the statement is true, then I would have to believe that Jim Garlow does not fear gays and liberals. He certainly goes on at length insisting that he has no such fear. But I suspect that the reason Garlow invited liberals to speak at his church was to exploit them for his own purposes. I doubt that he wants his flock to seriously entertain the notion that God might be okay with homosexuality.
Skyline Church, the Rancho San
Diego megachurch known for hosting conservative speakers such as Glenn
Beck and Texas Gov. Rick Perry, was harshly judged this week by a former
Episcopal bishop famed for defending gay marriage, including his own.
The Right Rev. Gene Robinson. Image via Wikimedia CommonsIn a column for The Daily Beast, the Right. Rev. Gene Robinson wrote about attending a Sunday service at Skyline and finding a mood that turned dark.
“In between the uplifting songs, the message is: They’re coming to
get us. One by one, the speakers lay out the parameters of the siege
under which Christians live, attacked by liberal and godless forces on
every side.”
In a piece headlined “Even After Hobby Lobby, the Religious Right is Still Terrified,” Robinson wrote:
Every message, action and gesture seems calculated to
ratchet up the anxiety of those who are listening. And then it’s over.
Just like that.
I honestly don’t know how typical such a service is among
evangelicals, bent on making people fearful, but if you left that
service feeling hopeful, at peace with God, and eager to help the poor
and needy, then you weren’t paying attention.
Now a senior fellow at the liberal Center for American Progress, Robinson concluded his 1,100-word column posted Sunday with this:
“Anti-gay sentiment is waning in American society, and with that
forward progress, conservative churches will see a loss of credibility
and a diminished effectiveness of their fear-mongering. That is as it
should be. Neither the church nor the state is served by it.”
On Tuesday, Skyline senior pastor Jim Garlow responded.
Answering a Times of San Diego request for comment, Garlow said: “We
did not know the writer was in the audience on that Sunday morning
service. We did invite him to a Sunday night service.” Here is Garlow’s full response to Robinson, which he termed “my thoughts.”...
Conservative
evangelicals have internalized a besiegement narrative that doesn’t
change even when they win political victories. But fear has no place in a
properly Christian worldview.
There
is nothing intimidating about the building, other than its sheer size
and the many millions of dollars it took to build it. In fact, it is one
of the most welcoming places I’ve ever been. This conservative,
evangelical megachurch, just outside San Diego, is a hive of activity on
a Sunday morning. Upon entering, I’m drawn into the sophisticated café
that makes Starbucks look like a 10-year-old’s sidewalk lemonade stand. I
get my latte and am assured that I am welcome to take it with me to my
seat in the church. I find a seat, which is plush and comfortable, and
sure enough, there’s a cup holder for my coffee.
I am struck by
the starkness of the worship space: no windows, all black, no cross or
stained glass, and not a single sign that this is a place of worship. A
drum trap set is the only thing on the massive stage. It’s hard to tell,
really, when the service starts; it just seems to grow organically,
with additional people coming onto the stage over the course of 15
minutes, everyone dressed in jeans and comfortable clothing. The sense
of expectation grows minute by minute.
The crowd gathering in the
congregation is old and young. Some members are alone, some coupled, and
lots of families, with kids in tow. And virtually all white. Everyone
seems excited to be here. When things actually begin, it is as
professional as any Broadway show, with fantastic music by a small band,
and everyone is singing. Although there is a brief prayer early on, the
service seems oddly devoid of any mention of God, much less Jesus. And
within the first 10 minutes, the head minister announces that the time
has come for what we’ve all been waiting for: the collection, the chance
to give for the work and ministry of this place. And everyone cheers.
That’s right, cheers! Wild applause, enthusiastic delight at the chance
to contribute to the ministry.
If
you left that service feeling hopeful, at peace with God, and eager to
help the poor and needy, then you weren’t paying attention.
But
soon, the mood turns dark. In between the uplifting songs, the message
is: they’re coming to get us. One by one, the speakers lay out the
parameters of the siege under which Christians live, attacked by liberal
and godless forces on every side. An African-American minister from New
York describes a change in policy in New York City to disallow churches
to hold services in public schools, and his message is, “Beware. What’s
happening in New York is headed your way! Get ready!”
The sermon
is delivered by a guest preacher, whose main point seems to be the evils
of feminism and sexual immorality. In the 40-minute “sermon,” there is
hardly a mention of the Divine. “God” shows up about 30 minutes in, and
Jesus is mentioned only once, at the last minute. The senior pastor
delivers an additional message, imploring those present to return that
evening for a debate about homosexuality (the reason I’m there—and to
their credit, both sides are being represented). His explicit message
is, “Come tonight! I cannot prepare you for the onslaught of immorality
and anti-Christian fervor if you don’t come! There is a battle underway
for your souls, and I intend to outfit you for a holy war!” Every
message, action and gesture seems calculated to ratchet up the anxiety
of those who are listening. And then it’s over. Just like that.
I
honestly don’t know how typical such a service is among evangelicals,
bent on making people fearful, but if you left that service feeling
hopeful, at peace with God, and eager to help the poor and needy, then
you weren’t paying attention. It is no wonder to me that many
conservative, Christian people are fearful, and believe that there is a
war on religion (especially Christians) in this country. After all, it
is drummed into them every week...
The Rev. Frank Schaefer, a United Methodist minister, was defrocked after officiating at the wedding of his son Tim.Credit
Gabriella Demczuk/The New York Times
Father
and son had always been close, from the moment Tim Schaefer was born,
six weeks premature, with blood poisoning, a weak heart and lungs, and a
doctor who thought he would not make it through the night.
His
father, the Rev. Frank Schaefer, a United Methodist minister, thought
of his eldest son as a miracle child, saved by some combination of
medicine and prayer, saved for something special.
“We
couldn’t even touch him; he was in an incubator, and we had to reach in
with latex gloves through those holes in the sides,” Mr. Schaefer said.
“I begged God to please save his life.”
Their
bond was such that, years later, facing a choice between upholding his
church’s teaching and affirming his son’s sexual orientation, Frank
chose to endanger his own career by officiating at his son’s same-sex
wedding. The actions that followed — a rebellion in his congregation, a
church trial, a defrocking and then, last month, a reinstatement —
have made the Schaefers symbols of the conundrum facing much of
American Christianity: How does religious doctrine on homosexuality
respond to the longings for spirituality and community from congregants
and family members who are gay?...
Jon Stewart, Sarah Silverman, Stephen Colbert (Credit: AP/Brad Barket/Jack Plunkett/Dave Allocca)
In
the latest version of America’s long-running culture wars, conservatives
(and even some liberals) have zeroed in what once might have seemed
like an unlikely target. While all the usual suspects still find
themselves in reactionary cross hairs — Hollywood, “lamestream”-media
elites and the LGBT community to name a few — another group, the
scientific establishment, has emerged as one of the most polarizing
institutions in American political culture.
Climate change,
vaccination and evolution — each of these are things that the scientific
establishment overwhelmingly agrees on. But the anti-intellectual fury
of climate deniers, anti-vaxxers and creationists is such that any
empirical consensus gets overshadowed.
For better or worse, comedy
has emerged as one of the most visible platforms for laying bare the
insanity of anti-science reactionaries. Jon Stewart and his “Daily Show”
correspondents, for example, have been scrutinizing such people for
years, while John Oliver has emerged in recent months as a veritable
pro-science powerhouse. Stephen Colbert has interviewed Neil deGrasse
Tyson at least 10 times!
There’s never been a shortage of
qualified experts to debunk anti-science, but few have generated the
kind of heat that comedians have of late. Perhaps is the viral-friendly
nature of social media, or the intrinsic advantage that satire enjoys
over the cut-and-dried recitation of facts. Whatever the case, let’s
take a lesson from these witty minds. Below are 10 sterling examples of
comedy as an antidote to science-denialism.
1) John Oliver takes on climate skeptics
Many
comedians have done a bang-up job showing that climate deniers are
ridiculous, but nobody has done it better than John Oliver. On his HBO
show, “Last Week Tonight,” Oliver hosts a statistically accurate mock
debate between Bill Nye and climate skeptics.
2) Samantha Bee destroys anti-vaxx nuts
When celebrities give anti-vaccination hysteria a platform — and, as a result, we get outbreaks of measles and whooping cough — it feels like the nation is crawling backward. Despite the fact that research has conclusively shown that vaccinations are not linked to autism, many still refuse to vaccinate their kids. In this clip, Samantha Bee takes anti-vaxxers to task for their dangerous campaign.
Creationists
believe that the Earth is only 6,000 years old, and that humans roamed
the world with dinosaurs. (Spoiler: Scientist Clair Patterson
found that the Earth is actually 4.5 billion years old, and humans
evolved long after dinosaurs became extinct.) Though it sounds
ridiculous, a recent Gallup Poll found that 42 percent of Americans
believe in a creationist human origin. The most problematic issue is
when their views infiltrate the education of children. Stephen Colbert
proves this point in the great interview below:
In June of 2014, TV personality and physician Dr. Oz testified at a congressional hearing that
his “miracle” cure-alls “don’t have the scientific muster to present as
fact.” Following this admission, John Oliver took him to task over his
false science, and taking advantage of doctor-patient trust.
5) Lewis Black throws fossils at creationists
“I
would love to have the faith to believe that [creation] took place in
seven days,” Lewis Black says in the hilarious clip below. “But I have
thoughts. And that can really fuck up the faith thing.”...
Sadly, I fear that Joan Rivers might be right when she says, "I'm sure I say the same things your viewers say to their friends sitting next to them on the couch." But that just proves how idiotic people can be.
When I was a child I loved Joan Rivers. I thought she was so pretty and funny. But she's been making me cry, not laugh, for a few years now.
Leather shoes? Seriously? The cows are already butchered, so why not use their skin for shoes? That's a bit different from killing wild animals ONLY for their pelts.
The comedian was promoting her new book, Diary of a Mad Diva, when she took offense at Whitfield's statement that her Fashion Police show was "mean."
"It's not mean," Rivers, 81, insisted. "I tell the truth. I'm
sure I say the same things your viewers say to their friends sitting
next to them on the couch."
She seemed to get more unsettled as Whitfield asked her about the jokes she makes about topics that might seem "off-limits" – Casey Anthony and Princess Diana – in her book. "Life is very tough, and if you can make a joke to make something easier, and funny, do it," Rivers responded.
When Whitfield mentioned the fact that Rivers is wearing a fur coat on the cover of her book, Rivers got even angrier.
"This whole interview is becoming a defensive interview," Rivers fumed. "Are you wearing leather shoes? Then shut up."
"I'm going," Rivers declared, pulling out her earpiece. "All
you've done is negative … I've made people laugh for 50 years. I am put
on earth to make people laugh."
Standing up to leave, she told Whitfield, "You are not the one to interview a person who does humor. Sorry."
Whitfield explained after the interview that she thought Rivers
was joking the whole time and wondered if it was a stunt, but told
viewers that off-camera Rivers was still wearing her microphone and
"dropped some rather unflattering four-letter words. So, yeah, she was
serious."
UK kids' TV star Rolf Harris jailed for child abuse
By Costas Pitas
Jul 4, 2014
(Reuters) - Veteran entertainer Rolf Harris, a household name in his native Australia
and adopted home Britain, was jailed for almost six years on Friday for
repeatedly abusing young girls during decades as a beloved host of
children's television.
Handing down the sentence,
Judge Nigel Sweeney said the 84-year-old host of shows like "Rolf Harris
Cartoon Time" had shown no remorse for the harm he had done to his
victims.
Harris was found guilty
earlier this week of 12 counts of assaulting four girls, some as young
as seven or eight, between 1968 and 1986.
It
was the second conviction in a long-running investigation into sex
abuse by British celebrities that has led to soul searching in the
country, revealing that some of its most prominent stars of the 1970s
and 1980s were serial pedophiles who evaded detection for decades.
"It
is clear from the evidence that what you did has had a significant
adverse effect on each victim," the judge told Harris, detailing how one
woman had battled with alcoholism as a direct result of his abuse.
"You have shown no remorse for your crimes at all."
An
artist and musician who first earned fame in the 1950s with the top 10
hit novelty song "Tie Me Kangaroo Down, Sport", Harris went on to
present prime-time TV shows mostly aimed at children during five decades
at the pinnacle of show business. In 2005 he painted Queen Elizabeth's
portrait.
Harris was the biggest
name to go on trial since British police launched "Operation Yewtree" to
investigate celebrity child abuse, following revelations that late BBC
TV host Jimmy Savile had been a prolific child abuser.
Harris
sat motionless as the judge read out the sentence at a packed courtroom
at London's Southwark Crown Court. He was later led from the dock,
wearing a grey suit, white shirt and multi-colored tie.
During
the trial, the prosecution had portrayed the bearded, bespectacled
entertainer as a predator who groomed and abused one woman for her
entire teenage and young-adult life.
The
London court was told he first assaulted the woman when she got out of
the shower aged 13, and then repeatedly abused her until she was 28
years old.
Police launched
Operation Yewtree in the wake of the disclosures that Savile, who died
in 2011 at 84, had managed to escape detection while abusing hundreds of
children over the course of decades as one of Britain's best known
celebrities, using his fame to gain access to victims and deflect
suspicion.
Since then, a dozen
ageing British media luminaries have been the target of investigations
over decades-old child abuse allegations.
The
country's most well known publicist, Max Clifford, was found guilty in
May of indecently assaulting teenage girls some 30 years ago as part of
the investigation.
(Writing by Kate Holton; Editing by Peter Graff)
“If
fascism comes to America, it will not be identified with any “shirt”
movement, nor with an “insignia,” but it will probably be “wrapped up in
the flag and heralded as a plea for liberty and preservation of the
constitution,” [claimed] a 1936 issue of The Christian Century. Nobel
Laureate recipient Sinclair Lewis put it even more succinctly when he
warned, “It [fascism] would come wrapped in the flag and whistling the
Star Spangled Banner.”
No one who has followed the rise of the
Christian Right in national politics over the course of the past three
decades should be surprised by Monday’s Supreme Court decision to grant
corporations religious personhood. It was as predictable as Pat
Robertson saying something stupid about gay sex. The hyper religious
conservatives on the bench of the nation’s high court, all of whom were
appointed by Republican presidents, see the federal government as being
controlled by ‘secular humanists’ who wish to make war against the
purity of the Christian belief system. Like the 89 million Americans who
count themselves as evangelicals, they seek total cultural and
political domination.
Not only is the Christian Right the most
politically agitated and reliable voting bloc of the Republican Party,
but it is also emboldened like no other time in their warped history.
With recent efforts to legalize discrimination against gay Americans
defeated, the Hobby Lobby case against the Affordable Care Act has
reenergized the theocratic wing of the GOP base — the wing that is now
the party’s fuselage. Throw red meat to their holier than thou
rationalizations and they won’t care what big business does to this
great nation. They care for one thing – turning America into a
theocratic regime. Don’t be fooled by the flag-waving and the obnoxious
hyper-masculine jingoistic platitudes; the Christian Right does not love
America unconditionally. They love America on the condition that
representatives they help get elected are carrying out their political
agenda.
There is no conspiracy theory here. Their strategy is
evidently clear and unashamedly boasted. Their strategy is to control
state and federal legislatures, and the courts – in a way that says,
“We don’t care what the American people want. We write the laws, and
those laws will not reflect the wishes of the center majority, but
instead will cater only for the theological cranks within our ranks.”...
The slide towards American theocracy was nudged one more step forward
by today's Supreme Court decision in support of the "freedom" of
corporations with "religious" beliefs to restrict the rights of their
employees. In essence, religious "beliefs" trump the obligations,
rights, and responsibilities that come with being members of the polity
and a broader political community. The NY Times details the logic of the theocrats as:
The 5-to-4 decision, which applied to two companies owned by
Christian families, opened the door to challenges from other
corporations to many laws that may be said to violate their religious
liberty.
Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., writing for the court’s five more
conservative justices, said a federal religious-freedom law applied to
for-profit corporations controlled by religious families. He added that
the requirement that the companies provide contraception coverage
imposed a substantial burden on the companies’ religious liberty. He
said the government could provide the coverage in other ways.
The dissent offers up this chilling observation:
On that point, Justice Ginsburg, joined by Justice Sonia
Sotomayor, said the court’s decision “is bound to have untoward effects”
in other settings.
“The court’s expansive notion of corporate personhood,” Justice
Ginsburg wrote, “invites for-profit entities to seek religion-based
exemptions from regulations they deem offensive to their faiths.”
The corporateocracy and the 1 percent are using the tricks, smoke, and
mirrors of "religious faith" to expand their power and protections from
civil authority and the social compact.
The tactic is Orwellian and dystopian.
Alas, if corporations are indeed "people"--an insult to the Equal
Protection clause of the Constitution which was put in place to protect
the rights of newly freed black slaves--then their behavior is sociopathic. The sociopath will lie, dissemble, and exploit others for his or her own gain because that is their essential nature...
Jon Stewart, Sarah Silverman, Stephen Colbert (Credit: AP/Brad Barket/Jack Plunkett/Dave Allocca)
Clarence Thomas, Antonin Scalia (Credit: AP/Randy Snyder/Reuters/Brendan McDermid)
Clarence Thomas, Antonin Scalia (Credit: AP/Randy Snyder/Reuters/Brendan McDermid)