So this guy was at the marathon this morning promoting his new book Cheating Death. I of course have not read this book, but the premise as supposed by a reading of the title makes it seem like this man is setting up a straw man in matters of inevitability. I'll take a look at it the next time I'm at Border's and give a more thorough review.
In the meantime, I found this:
http://crooksandliars.com/2007/07/11/michael-moore-vs-sanja-gupta/
It seems Sanjay Gupta, Larry King, and Wolf Blitzer were all involved in a bit of a soiree after Sicko came out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JpKoN40K7mA
My gut feeling (for what that's worth) tells me that Gupta is a bit of a drone and I'm not sure how he's qualified to be a journalist (neurosurgeons aren't as smart as you think, I speak from experience, it's really more about effort and capability to deal with attrition). But let's examine this idea more closely; if I remember correctly this man was in line at one point to be our next surgeon general (a job that pays ~200k/year less than neurosurgeon and probably .5-1.0 million less than CNN analyst). He declined I believe.
Sunday, October 4, 2009
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Science Funding
Again, NPR spurring this discussion (1). We seem very well suited to have this conversation but notice that we have not yet had it on here. How is science funded and what kinds of behavior spawns from that funding? Conservative? How does a single person make an impact or is incrementalism the name of the game (caveat before joining a lab: get used to that fact)? David Montgomery (the MacArthur Genius Grant Winner 2008 for geoscience) said at one point, "my risky projects are dove-tailed to nights and weekends... not one has been funded." The other guest on the show is Kenneth Waters (who I just met last Friday), philosophy of science professor.
Noted by Waters was T H Elliot's 20-year-old undergraduate who brought in the new idea of how to map drosophila phylogenetics (does anyone know this?).
1) Audacious Science, Minnesota Public Radio Website. Accessed Sept 30, 2009.
Noted by Waters was T H Elliot's 20-year-old undergraduate who brought in the new idea of how to map drosophila phylogenetics (does anyone know this?).
1) Audacious Science, Minnesota Public Radio Website.
Core Standards Initiative
On NPR this morning a lively discussion regarding national education standards covered the feasibility and reliability of implenting new standards for public education. The difference between this and past attempts according the Hoover Instiute expert and National Governor's Association (1, 2) apparently is that this time the standards are being called for by a coalition of states (all but Texas and Alaska's governors if memory serves).
Maybe Julie knows something about this?
We're looking at questions along these lines:
Why is this set of standards better and how are they different from the MCA's?
Are the standards appropriate for college entrance (and exit), is college entrance the goal?
Are the standards high enough (or maybe they're too high)? Compared to the current standards?
Should there be national standards for teachers (as there are for accountants, doctors, etc)?
Will these standards help the US compete against other countries (we are still lagging I presume)?
Are the standards created objectively or possibly to make sure everyone passes?
1) Hoover Institution, Wikipedia. Accessed Sept 30, 2009
2) Hoover Institution Stanford University Accessed Sept 30, 2009.
http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2009/09/30/midmorning1/
http://www.corestandards.org/Standards/index.htm
Maybe Julie knows something about this?
We're looking at questions along these lines:
Why is this set of standards better and how are they different from the MCA's?
Are the standards appropriate for college entrance (and exit), is college entrance the goal?
Are the standards high enough (or maybe they're too high)? Compared to the current standards?
Should there be national standards for teachers (as there are for accountants, doctors, etc)?
Will these standards help the US compete against other countries (we are still lagging I presume)?
Are the standards created objectively or possibly to make sure everyone passes?
1) Hoover Institution, Wikipedia.
2) Hoover Institution Stanford University
http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2009/09/30/midmorning1/
http://www.corestandards.org/Standards/index.htm
Monday, September 28, 2009
Dara O'Rourke and Consumer Reporting
He seems to be the main person responsible for this: http://www.goodguide.com/
Let's study this and see if what we're buying is as nice as we think it is. Apparently Organic foods might night be as organic as we think (how many times can these companies perpetrate blatant lies to the public and get away with it?)
Let's study this and see if what we're buying is as nice as we think it is. Apparently Organic foods might night be as organic as we think (how many times can these companies perpetrate blatant lies to the public and get away with it?)
Saturday, September 26, 2009
Tipping Points
http://www1.umn.edu/news/news-releases/2009/UR_CONTENT_132007.html
I read about this in the news this week but did not realize we had some people at University of Minnesota involved. Jarrod, we should add this guy to our list of interviewees.
Are these tipping points real?
There are tipping points in the human body (I'm always forces to draw this analogy to help my understanding and realize it may be completely false). Acidification, for example. In renal and respiratory physiology, this is a big deal. But we have clear understanding in medicine for how the body regulates pH and we have a good idea of how to intervene. Now who are the doctors for the planet and how can they intervene? I think the truth would be, they can't, the science is too new and there are limited ways to gather data (medicine can watch literally millions of people die and autopsy them, earth science cannot).
I read about this in the news this week but did not realize we had some people at University of Minnesota involved. Jarrod, we should add this guy to our list of interviewees.
Are these tipping points real?
There are tipping points in the human body (I'm always forces to draw this analogy to help my understanding and realize it may be completely false). Acidification, for example. In renal and respiratory physiology, this is a big deal. But we have clear understanding in medicine for how the body regulates pH and we have a good idea of how to intervene. Now who are the doctors for the planet and how can they intervene? I think the truth would be, they can't, the science is too new and there are limited ways to gather data (medicine can watch literally millions of people die and autopsy them, earth science cannot).
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Teaching Students how to Argue
One of the sites I use to study the supreme court decisions had this article:
" For a scored discussion to work properly, students must be well prepared. This may include doing a practice discussion with students so that they understand the criteria for their grades. A practice discussion could ask students to spontaneously discuss a controversial issue within the school, such as whether the school should have a dress code. After the discussion, the teacher could tease out the positive aspects of the discussion and the negative aspects of the discussion, to come to a consensus as to what constitutes a good discussion and how the students will be marked.
For example, students might receive positive marks for demonstrating skills such as:
" For a scored discussion to work properly, students must be well prepared. This may include doing a practice discussion with students so that they understand the criteria for their grades. A practice discussion could ask students to spontaneously discuss a controversial issue within the school, such as whether the school should have a dress code. After the discussion, the teacher could tease out the positive aspects of the discussion and the negative aspects of the discussion, to come to a consensus as to what constitutes a good discussion and how the students will be marked.
For example, students might receive positive marks for demonstrating skills such as:
- stating a position
- providing evidence for a position
- challenging another student’s use of evidence
- linking the discussion to the course material
- inviting others into the discussion
- asking a question
- appearing to listen attentively
- responding to the comments of others
- building on the comments of others
- playing devil’s advocate
- disruptive interrupting
- monopolizing the discussion
- personal criticism
- irrelevant or distracting statements"
Supreme Court Case of the Week: McCulloch v Maryland
Article I, Section 8, Clause 18 of the U.S. Constitution
"[The Congress shall have Power] . . . [t]o make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof."
Case (with year)
McCulloch v Maryland, 1819
Chief Justice (just to familiarize ourselves a bit with the historical figures on the court)
John Marshall (1801-1835), nominated by John Adams
With the Federalists soundly defeated and about to lose both the executive and legislative branches to Jefferson and the Democratic-Republicans, President Adams and the lame duck Congress passed what came to be known as the Midnight Judges Act, which made sweeping changes to the federal judiciary, including a reduction in the number of Justices from six to five so as to deny Jefferson an appointment until two vacancies occurred. (1)
Soon after becoming Chief Justice, Marshall revolutionized the manner in which the Supreme Court announced its decisions. Previously, each Justice would author a separate opinion (known as a seriatim opinion), as is still done in the 20th and 21st centuries in such jurisdictions as the United Kingdom and Australia. Under Marshall, however, the Supreme Court adopted the practice of handing down a single opinion of the Court. As Marshall was almost always the author of this opinion, he essentially became the Court's sole mouthpiece in important cases. His forceful personality allowed him to dominate his fellow Justices; only once did he find himself on the losing side (1827 Ogden v Saunders case).
Background
On April 10, 1816, the Congress of the United States passed an act entitled "An Act to Incorporate the Subscribers to the Bank of the United States" which provided for the incorporation of the Second Bank of the United States. The Bank first went into full operationin Philadelhpia. In 1817 the Bank opened a branch in Baltimore, Maryland and transacted and carried on business as a branch of the Bank of the United States by issuing bank notes, discounting promissory notes and performing other operations usual and customary for banks to do and perform. Both sides of the litigation admitted that the President, directors and company of the Bank had no authority to establish the Baltimore branch, or office of discount and deposit, other than the fact that Maryland had adopted the Constitution of the United States.
On February 11, 1818, the General Assembly of Maryland passed an act entitled, "an act to impose a tax on all banks, or branches thereof, in the State of Maryland, not chartered by the legislature".
James McCulloch, head of the Baltimore Branch of the Second Bank of the United States, refused to pay the tax. The lawsuit was filed by John James, an informer who sought to collect one half of the fine as provided for by the statute. The case was appealed to the Maryland Court of Appeals where the state of Maryland argued that "the Constitution is silent on the subject of banks." It was Maryland's contention that because the Constitution did not specifically state that the Federal Government was authorized to charter a bank, the Bank of the United States was unconstitutional. The court upheld Maryland. The case was then appealed to the Supreme Court.
Synopsis
Consequences/Legacy
According to the necessary and proper clause, Congress generally may assume additional powers not specifically listed in the Constitution, sometimes called implied powers, if there is a link to a power that is listed in the Constitution. For example, Congress may allocate money to test a missile-defense system (something not specifically listed in the Constitution) because Article I, Section 8, Clause 12 gives Congress the power to "raise and support Armies".
While the above example may seem like an obvious extension of Congress's power, other powers that Congress has assumed over the years are not so obvious extensions of powers specifically listed in the Constitution.
I
Later History: McCulloch v. Maryland was cited in the first substantial constitutional case presented before the High Court of Australia in D'Emden v Pedder, which dealt with similar issues in the Australian Federation; while recognizing United States law as not binding on them, nevertheless determined that the McCulloch decision provided the best guideline for the relationship between the Commonwealth federal government and the Australian States owing to strong similarities between the American and Australian federations, and specifically cited Marshall's opinion in deciding the case.
Dissenting Opinions (what the argument against the majority opinion was)
"We are unanimously of opinion that the law passed by the Legislature of Maryland, imposing a tax on the Bank of the United States is unconstitutional and void."
Further Discussion
IMPLIED POWER: Congress gives licenses to broadcasters to play music on the radio.
ANSWER: Clause 3 may justify this activity. It gives Congress the power to regulate interstate commerce. Broadcasting is a business. Thus, it is commerce. Airwaves cross over state lines, so it involves interstate commerce.
1) Stites (1981), pp. 77-80.
2) Wikipedia: McCulloch v Maryland
3) http://www.landmarkcases.org/mcculloch/fedimpliedpowers.html
"[The Congress shall have Power] . . . [t]o make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof."
Case (with year)
McCulloch v Maryland, 1819
Chief Justice (just to familiarize ourselves a bit with the historical figures on the court)
John Marshall (1801-1835), nominated by John Adams
With the Federalists soundly defeated and about to lose both the executive and legislative branches to Jefferson and the Democratic-Republicans, President Adams and the lame duck Congress passed what came to be known as the Midnight Judges Act, which made sweeping changes to the federal judiciary, including a reduction in the number of Justices from six to five so as to deny Jefferson an appointment until two vacancies occurred. (1)
Soon after becoming Chief Justice, Marshall revolutionized the manner in which the Supreme Court announced its decisions. Previously, each Justice would author a separate opinion (known as a seriatim opinion), as is still done in the 20th and 21st centuries in such jurisdictions as the United Kingdom and Australia. Under Marshall, however, the Supreme Court adopted the practice of handing down a single opinion of the Court. As Marshall was almost always the author of this opinion, he essentially became the Court's sole mouthpiece in important cases. His forceful personality allowed him to dominate his fellow Justices; only once did he find himself on the losing side (1827 Ogden v Saunders case).
Background
On April 10, 1816, the Congress of the United States passed an act entitled "An Act to Incorporate the Subscribers to the Bank of the United States" which provided for the incorporation of the Second Bank of the United States. The Bank first went into full operationin Philadelhpia. In 1817 the Bank opened a branch in Baltimore, Maryland and transacted and carried on business as a branch of the Bank of the United States by issuing bank notes, discounting promissory notes and performing other operations usual and customary for banks to do and perform. Both sides of the litigation admitted that the President, directors and company of the Bank had no authority to establish the Baltimore branch, or office of discount and deposit, other than the fact that Maryland had adopted the Constitution of the United States.
On February 11, 1818, the General Assembly of Maryland passed an act entitled, "an act to impose a tax on all banks, or branches thereof, in the State of Maryland, not chartered by the legislature".
James McCulloch, head of the Baltimore Branch of the Second Bank of the United States, refused to pay the tax. The lawsuit was filed by John James, an informer who sought to collect one half of the fine as provided for by the statute. The case was appealed to the Maryland Court of Appeals where the state of Maryland argued that "the Constitution is silent on the subject of banks." It was Maryland's contention that because the Constitution did not specifically state that the Federal Government was authorized to charter a bank, the Bank of the United States was unconstitutional. The court upheld Maryland. The case was then appealed to the Supreme Court.
Synopsis
| ||
 | ||
| ||
| | ||
|
Consequences/Legacy
According to the necessary and proper clause, Congress generally may assume additional powers not specifically listed in the Constitution, sometimes called implied powers, if there is a link to a power that is listed in the Constitution. For example, Congress may allocate money to test a missile-defense system (something not specifically listed in the Constitution) because Article I, Section 8, Clause 12 gives Congress the power to "raise and support Armies".
While the above example may seem like an obvious extension of Congress's power, other powers that Congress has assumed over the years are not so obvious extensions of powers specifically listed in the Constitution.
I
Later History: McCulloch v. Maryland was cited in the first substantial constitutional case presented before the High Court of Australia in D'Emden v Pedder, which dealt with similar issues in the Australian Federation; while recognizing United States law as not binding on them, nevertheless determined that the McCulloch decision provided the best guideline for the relationship between the Commonwealth federal government and the Australian States owing to strong similarities between the American and Australian federations, and specifically cited Marshall's opinion in deciding the case.
Dissenting Opinions (what the argument against the majority opinion was)
"We are unanimously of opinion that the law passed by the Legislature of Maryland, imposing a tax on the Bank of the United States is unconstitutional and void."
Further Discussion
IMPLIED POWER: Congress gives licenses to broadcasters to play music on the radio.
ANSWER: Clause 3 may justify this activity. It gives Congress the power to regulate interstate commerce. Broadcasting is a business. Thus, it is commerce. Airwaves cross over state lines, so it involves interstate commerce.
- Congress sets a federal minimum wage.
- Congress establishes the United States Air Force.
- Congress establishes national parks.
- Congress creates federal laws against pollution.
- Congress makes laws regarding discrimination in employment.
- Congress decides that televisions should have V-chips that enable parents to block certain shows.
- Congress passes the Gun-Free School Zones Act prohibiting anyone from possessing a firearm in a school zone.
1) Stites (1981), pp. 77-80.
2) Wikipedia: McCulloch v Maryland
3) http://www.landmarkcases.org/mcculloch/fedimpliedpowers.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
