Supermoon tonight

According to every other Facebook status update – and this news article – the moon is at its closest point to Earth in 18 years. The best time to see it? Probably when the sun set. But since no one has a time machine yet, the best time is right meow. Go.

Tarantula Nebula

Want Jesus out of government?

A Jewish lawmaker form Minnesota wants to take Jesus out of legislative sessions. Great, right? Not quite.

A Jewish Minnesota lawmaker is asking Senate leaders to allow only nondenominational prayers to open sessions, after feeling “highly uncomfortable” when a Baptist pastor repeatedly mentioned Jesus Christ and Christianity in one of the invocations.

Democratic Sen. Terri Bonoff says she wants Republican Senate Majority Leader Amy Koch to change the letter submitted to all visiting chaplains to say they are “required,” rather than “requested,” to make prayers nondenominational.

“I’m a very religious woman and believe deeply in God,” said Bonoff, of the Minneapolis suburb of Minnetonka. “We honor God in public and our political discourse, and that’s proper. But in doing a nondenominational prayer we are honoring him without violating the separation of church and state.”

Uh-huh. It’s not okay to prayer to Jesus because it makes people uncomfortable. But praying to God? Why, that’s just dandy. Who could that possibly offend? What part of the constitution could that possibly violate?

Bonoff is obviously a mental midget, but she still may be able to win this battle. She just needs to look at the system itself.

Koch said Wednesday she wouldn’t support such a requirement. She said the Senate invites leaders from numerous Christian and non-Christian faith traditions to pray, and notifies them that senators come from a diverse background. “I’m not going to get into the process of sort of editing prayer,” Koch said.

If senators can invite leaders from all sorts of organizations, Bonoff ought to invite an atheist leader. It’s Minnesota, get PZ Myers. Or any other atheist. It doesn’t matter. As long as the person proudly wears the label of “atheist”, all these Republican mooks will immediately start backtracking. Get the person to appear over and over; don’t let anyone think it’s just a one-time thing. Show the anti-constitutional Republicans that if they want to violate the separation of church and state by using government resources to promote religion, then they’re going to have to deal with the consequences of promoting views they don’t like. (Actually, the “consequences” would probably be very good, but I’m biased with my positive views of reason and rationality.)

Thought of the day

It amazes me how the first run of (almost) spring is both the best and worst run of my life. Every year.

How penicillin works

I’m currently in the midst of a short break I’m taking whilst studying for a massive microbio test I have in a few hours. And what better way to take a break than to post about one of the essay questions I know will be on the exam?

β-lactam antibiotics include penicillin and cephalosporins. (Everything that follows applies to both, but most people seem to be more interested if the topic is the more familiar penicillin subgroup.) The way these antibiotic works is by attacking the cell walls of bacteria. This makes gram-positive bacteria more susceptible than gram-negative bacteria; gram-positive bacteria have an outer peptidoglycan layer whereas gram-negative bacteria have their peptidoglycan layer between a plasma-membrane layer and an LPS layer. (No, I’m not going to define all these terms I’m using.)

Transpeptidase molecules are necessary for catalyzing cross-linking of glycan-linked peptide chains. Penicillin, all coy and sneaky, causes transpeptidase to link to it (penicillin) instead. (Transpeptidases are known as penicillin-binding proteins, or PBPs. I find the name misleading since it sounds like their purpose is to get all buddy-buddy with penicillin.) This prevents cross-linking. As I’m sure every nerd knows, cross-linking is what gives the peptidoglycan outer wall much of its strength. So while cell wall synthesis continues unabated, no cross-linking is happening, thus weakening structural integrity. Mike Holmes would be pissed if he was a biologist and he saw this happening. (Come on, HGTV fans, I know you’re out there.) Furthermore, autolysins are being released. What this means is the gram-positive bacteria has a weak and self-degrading outer wall. Osmotic pressure eventually causes lysis.

Now please excuse me while I enter hour 6 of studying for the (literally) 109 other things I need to know for my upcoming test.

Happy St. Patrick’s Day

The attacks on Michelle Obama

Michelle Obama has done an excellent job in her role as the First Lady. Her efforts to curb obesity deserve nothing but praise. Being fat is terrible. The only thing worse is being proud of it – I’m looking at you, America.

Unfortunately, in its faux-libertarian, blatantly dishonest attacks, the right has been going after Obama. We have morons like Michele Bachmann who whine about efforts to make poor women aware of tax deductions they can claim in caring for their infants. Then we have the other side of the moron coin, Sarah Palin, claiming that it’s okay to eat, eat, eat all sorts of shit food – despite the heavy evidence that Americans are dying because of the crap they eat. (Do dead people have liberty?) And, of course, there’s Limbaugh. He attacked Obama for eating healthy by lying and claiming she was eating shitty food.

This almost all stems from Obama’s effort to push through a bill last year that decreased the number of hungry students while at the same time funding healthier food for public schools. Conservatives, more willing than ever to lie, keep saying over and over and over “I don’t want to be told what I can and cannot eat!” (Or maybe they’re just that fucking stupid. I don’t know.) The bill changed some government standards for food in public schools. If these people weren’t against the government giving kids shit food, then they shouldn’t be against the government giving them good food. The difference is in quality, not mandates or forced diets or any other nonsense.

What brings this on is the polemics of the argument. Limbaugh showed them perfectly: Michelle Obama had shitty food? SHE HATES YOUR FREEDOM AND IS JUST AN ELITIST!!1!! It’s annoying. We can’t have an honest discussion about this stuff. People who actually give a damn about health are over here saying, hey look, nutrition starts at birth. We need to make sure every child is as healthy as can be. And we also need to make sure we continue those good habits. That doesn’t mean being perfect or not having that big meal at Thanksgiving. It means keeping the salt down, cutting out the trans-fats, boosting the minerals and vitamins; it means exercising – go for a run or a walk, lift weights, play tennis. Every day? If you can, sure. But anyone who isn’t a polemic asshole knows that one doesn’t need to train like a star athlete to be healthy.

Take a look at this typical conservative response I got (via Facebook) about Limbaugh’s failed attack on Obama:

1) You’re right. Ribs are healthy.

2) “Individual splurges”? WAIT a minute! You just said it was healthy? Let’s take a poll: Ribs for dinner – healthy or unhealthy?

It’s this sort of polarization of which I am becoming increasingly intolerant. Anyone who bothered to follow the links from the Limbaugh story knows that Obama had a small serving of lean ribs with a series of healthy sides that most Americans would never touch; she went to that restaurant specifically because it was healthy. What’s more – and I’m sure I’ve lost the polemic audience at this point, what with my use of facts and junk – she was skiing. I personally make it a point to eat some fast food before I take the mountain. I want to give myself the most energy I can for the day because I know how quickly I’m going to burn it off – just because a food is generally not healthy does not mean it is always not healthy. Not that Obama ate unhealthy or had a fatty meal because she went skiing. She actually had a healthy meal. Limbaugh and every supporting conservative either just lied or was willfully ignorant.

That brings me to my next point: fast food. Yes, once in an absolute great while, I will indulge without the reason of some major activity. As shitty as the food is, I’ve never had a problem with admitting how great it tastes. I have it maybe once or twice a month. I’m sure I’ve also gone three or four months without it. And even if I wanted it twice a week, I could get away with it because of my metabolism and healthy activity. Does that make me a hypocrite? Does it make my pro-health arguments invalid? Does it mean Obama would disapprove? Nope, nope, nope. But despite that, I hear one conservative I know give me a shit every time he sees me with a fast food burger. I hate it. Not because it exposes some double-standard – I don’t have that in regards to health. I hate it because it’s an example of the sort of polemics that are more comfortable on conservative radio than in rational discussion. I wish we could banish these arguments wherever they rear their ugly little heads.

But don’t think my motivation here is personal. I’m seeing these pro-fat arguments being made all the time, not just by friends or on Facebook. Polemics are the annoying surface of the issue, but the real problem is that all these conservatives are promoting fatness. It is wrong to not try and be healthy. That doesn’t mean it’s wrong to be fat – though fat people tend to be the chubby face of the problem. It means people ought to make an honest effort to be healthy. That will vary from person to person. (It’s especially frustrating when the lying conservatives pretend like that isn’t true.) America faces a terrible problem right now: we’re getting fat and not enough people are angry about it.

Forcing one side to argue an extreme hurts a very noble cause. And despite the lying and unwillingness to engage in an honest dialogue, I think most conservatives also recognize that obesity is a serious problem. We need to tackle it. If we can get our arms around it. We need to take the politics out of all this, get rid of the asshole-ridden polemics. Michelle Obama is making a very good effort and everyone should be thanking her. We need to follow her lead. Fill our schools with healthy foods. Discourage kids from getting fast food. Make restaurants disclose what they’re feeding us. Encourage more activity. These are good things. Let’s not fight against them because of some unrelated ideology.

Atheists: More hated than Muslims and da gays

This isn’t new research, but someone recently posted it on Facebook. As far as I remember, I don’t have a post about how hated atheists are.

The most recent study was conducted by the University of Minnesota, which found that atheists ranked lower than “Muslims, recent immigrants, gays and lesbians and other minority groups in ‘sharing their vision of American society.’ Atheists are also the minority group most Americans are least willing to allow their children to marry.” The results from two of the most important questions”

This group does not at all agree with my vision of American society…

Atheist: 39.6%

Muslims: 26.3%

Homosexuals: 22.6%

Hispanics: 20%

Conservative Christians: 13.5%

Recent Immigrants: 12.5%

Jews: 7.6%

I would disapprove if my child wanted to marry a member of this group….

Atheist: 47.6%

Muslim: 33.5%

African-American 27.2%

Asian-Americans: 18.5%

Hispanics: 18.5%

Jews: 11.8%

Conservative Christians: 6.9%

Whites: 2.3%

I thought this was funny in light of PZ’s recent post about his wedding anniversary:

Today is my wedding anniversary. I’ve been married to the same woman for 31 years, without ever straying. Newt Gingrich has been married 3 times, divorced one wife while she was recovering from surgery, and has had extra-marital affairs.

Guess who is considered the defender of traditional sexual morality?

The reason PZ gives is that Gingrich represents an asymmetric societal structure where patriarchal power is deemed moral and worthy and pesty things like fairness and equality are just hippie garbage. Religion is the cornerstone of it all. (Or, to put in PZ’s absolute favoritististist word, privilege. But religion is a better and more accurate answer.)

Beyond the funny marriage part (states, by the way, with the highest religiosity? Yep, highest divorce rates*), I have a hypothesis to explain why people blindly hate atheists so much. Well, at least why the religious hate us so much. It’s probably just because atheists do so much better on religious tests than they do. Jealousy is an ugly beast.

*That doesn’t mean religion makes people divorce. I think a better explanation is that poorly educated people tend to be more religious; poorly educated people also tend to be lower on the socioeconomic ladder. It would make sense for them to marry younger (and I’m sure religious pressure helps to hurry things up as well).

Thought of the day

I heard Sean Hannity talking about trickle-down economics today.

lol

A homeopathic solution I can support

From YH&C:

As a skeptic, I see the National Center for Complimentary and Alternative Medicine as a pure waste of about $121 million in taxes annually and would jump on any chance to eliminate the department.

Now, realistically I know this department is the baby of Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) and as a part of his reputation is tied up in it’s success he will fight for it’s survival. His interest is concentrated, while the interest of the public to save a little more money is spread out. So elimination is a tough fight that our side can’t expect to win.

But I think I have a compromise. Following the principles of homeopathy, where a substance gets more powerful if you dilute it in water and shake it up a little between steps, we should dilute the NCCAM funding down to $12.1 million. How’s that for shaking things up?

This may be the first homeopathic plan I can really support. It certainly would help decrease the number of people who are needlessly sick.