Father Kish noticed that Canada is able to produce one useful thing besides Lucy Maud Montgomery: teeth!
Snaggle-toothed hockey players and sugar lovers may soon rejoice as Canadian scientists said they have created the first device able to re-grow teeth and bones . . .
[Engineering Professor and Nano-Circuit Design Expert Jie] Chen helped create the tiny ultrasound machine that gently massages gums and stimulates tooth growth from the root once inserted into a person's mouth, mounted on braces or a removable plastic crown.
I know I was devastated at the age of 16 when a dentist told me I had my very first cavity. I have still not recovered from the trauma. Perhaps now I can be restored to my formerly perfect state.
Morgellons disease (?) is getting more attention:
[O]ne medical school is taking Morgellons very seriously. Most of the research on Morgellons is being done at Oklahoma State University in Tulsa. Doctors and scientists at OSU said this disease is real, and it's frightening . . .
The CDC has formed a task force to investigate Morgellons, and they are launching a study to find out where this condition is most common and who it affects.
I watch with interest . . .
The UK is considering a ban of topless men.
Now, I assumed that this law was - at its root - a gender equality issue. But that is not the case:
The proposal has been inspired by the least attractive side effect of the heatwave - the tendency of a number of often middle-aged men to go about in nothing more than shorts and trainers.
Proponents claim that these top-doffing males are causing the local economy to sag, because shoppers are discouraged by the "eyesore" of the untoned male form.
As pleased as I am that standards of decorum are being promoted, I would prefer they be spurred by social taboos, rather than legislative sanctions.
Perhaps the UK will next propose standards for "ugliness" and try to remove unattractive people from the streets.
There was a young lady who swallowed a phone.
A doctor at a Kansas City hospital's emergency room used a tool called a "pincher" to remove the phone from Abell's throat.
She testified yesterday that she couldn't remember how the phone got in her throat, saying she drank too much that night.
Perhaps she mistook the phone for a drink. With cell phones getting smaller and smaller, soon we shall need childproof warnings on them!
This is almost embarrassing to admit, but when I was little, I used to play Monopoly with myself for hours. I had a very elaborate set of personal rules to emulate the randomness of the real-life decision-making process, i.e., whether or not a person would buy a property.
I learned a lot about money from Monopoly. Today's Monopoly loners will learn even more:
Monopoly money will be phased out in a new version of the game in a bid to keep up with the times.
Instead players will use mock Visa debit cards to keep track of how much money they are winning or losing . . .
The revamped model will also include several changes, such as an increase in property prices and new fines like paying the congestion charge, to bring it upto date.
(Hat tip to Tony Meizelis.)
Every lawyer should have a coloring book.
(Hat tip to Kevin Miller.)
The Zidane thing is so old that I should probably just let it die, but the video analysis was brilliant.
(Hat tip to Rushabh Doshi.)
Check out Jen Caputo's sketch collections. I anticipate the day that she will no longer have to earn a living as a lowly software engineer.
Peter Cullen will be the voice of Optimus Prime.
When [producer Lorenzo] Di Bonaventura was asked what made them decide to go with Cullen as the voice, someone jokingly muttered, "Death threats," referring to Transformers' rabid fanbase and their demand to have the film remain true to the original animated series. The producer laughed and said, "That’s not a bad motivator, if you think about it,"
"But no, if you really think about it, forget about how good [Cullen] is. I think a lot of people grew up with that voice as sort of the diviner of what is right and what is wrong, so it’s so deeply ingrained in people, it would have been crazy not to think about [casting Cullen]."
There is always a risk when you undertake a classic, is there not? It would be so easy to get it wrong. In this case, they made a wise choice, I think.
(Hat tip to Tim Skirvin.)
Misha Voloshin has an interesting discussion about atheism.
Soon, we should be able to receive text alerts from the government.
The new digital system will update the emergency alerts planned -- but never used -- during the Cold War in the event of a nuclear strike. More likely, these 21st-century technologies will carry warnings of natural disasters and terrorist attacks.
The Homeland Security Department, through the Federal Emergency Management Agency, expects to have the system working by the end of next year . . .
Only the president can order a national emergency alert. The system was initially designed to warn Americans of a nuclear attack. But President Bush last month ordered Homeland Security to extend the alert "for situations of war, terrorist attack, natural disaster or other hazards to public safety and well-being."
Apparently, you can choose to live in ignorance and opt out of the alerts.
(Another hat tip to Kevin Miller, who apparently spent a very productive day in his otherwise-empty office.)
Happy Birthday to You!!
Happy Birthday to You!!
Happy Birthday, dear Kevin!!
Happy Birthday to You!!
. . . to the most endearing radical left-winger I know. Thanks for being brave enough to post on this forum.
Happy Birthday to You!!
Happy Birthday to You!!
Happy Birthday, dear Genna!!
Happy Birthday to You!!
. . . from Chi-cago, IL-L-L-L-L-L!!
Happy Birth day to You!!
Happy Birth day to You!!
Happy Birth day, dear Val-e-rie!!
Happy Birth day to You!!
. . . and many mo-o-o-o-o-ore!!
Happy Birth day to You!!
Happy Birth day to You!!
Happy Birth day, dear Bar-bar-a!!
Happy Birth day to You!!
. . . you're getting o-o-o-o-o-o-old!!
The more I read the whining defense of Materazzi, the more I sympathize with Zidane.
I'm almost sorry that the French didn't win.
Is the Grillz fashion statement a tribute to Johnny Depp or something?
I just don't get it.
Mexico considers it highly unreasonable to be expected to pay for the medical care of their own people:
Parkland Memorial Hospital plans to bill Mexico and other countries to help cover the costs of health care for indigents . . .
Last year, hospital officials said, Dallas County spent $76.5 million to treat people from outside Dallas. Of that, almost $27 million was not reimbursed . . .
Hugo Juarez, a consul official at the Mexican Consulate in Dallas, was visibly perturbed.
He called the statements made by the judge "a strange posture, a strange reasoning." He said there had been no agreement or contract between his nation and Dallas County that would make such action legal . . .
"What's wrong with sending them a bill?" commission member Maurine Dickey said. She said officials "hoped" the counties that sent their citizens to Parkland would pay something. "We owe it to taxpayers to at least try."
The notion that one pays for services rendered to one does not seem outlandish to me. (For the record, Mexico is not the only entity being targeted. Surrounding Dallas counties that send their citizenry to the Dallas hospital are also being billed.)
I understand that Mexico has no control over Mexican citizens using the hospital (and, as such, can not be expected to foot the bill,) but I think the political ramifications could be beneficial. Why should the people of Dallas be plunged into debt to pay for the health care of their neighbors? It's an altruistic thing, to be sure, but given the structure of our current health care system, it's impractical. Let's make it fair.
When a self-proclaimed very rabid left-wing blogger threatens another's child, the media downplays it.
Apart from Frisch's own idiocy, the article almost seems to be excusing her conduct by noting that the conservative blog is known for its "considerable mocking of liberal academics and ideas" and that Frisch herself is merely a bit "outspoken." It then spends seven of the article's eleven paragraphs discussing the personal turmoil that the mean old conservative bloggers are causing her to feel for her "joke in bad taste." It's almost incredible.
[Deborah] Frisch, [adjunct lecturer at the University of Arizona] posted a comment last week on Protein Wisdom, a Web site known for its no holding back conservative commentary, frequently with considerable mocking of liberal academics and ideas. Frisch, an adjunct lecturer at the University of Arizona until this weekend, said in the posting that she would not be sad if the 2-year old child of the site’s founder, Jeff Goldstein, was "Jon Benet Ramseyed" . . .
Although Frisch apologized for the remark, which she called “nasty,” numerous conservative Web sites over the weekend traded stories about Frisch, saying that she had physically threatened Goldstein and his child (she denies this and says that however inappropriate her comments were, they weren’t threatening)
Personally, I think discussions of fathers, mothers, sisters, brothers and especially children should be left well away from the realm of political debate, a courtesy consistently ignored by both Democrats and the press. But Frisch, oddly enough, feels justified in responding to what she considers to be "personal attacks" with attacks on family members.
Frisch said she continues to receive harassing and threatening e-mail messages, and the conservative blogosphere continues to denounce her . . .
"I made extremely distasteful comments about his child, to whom he referred in the original post, in order to make Jeff feel the way I felt when his cronies made sexual references to me. My goal was to hurt Jeff’s feelings, to make him feel disgusted and verbally assaulted"
As a blogger herself, Frisch should understand that blog admins who hope for interesting discussion keep post censorship to a minimum - as evidenced by the publication of her own mindless comments. Why she considers the blog admin personally responsible for the intimidating comments of others displays both a paltry understanding of the blog-o-sphere and an astonishing lack of reason. Not everyone who comments on a blog post is the "crony" of the blog admin. Heck, even on a personal blog like mine, I don't know all the people who post and I think it's safe to say that - apart from the extended family who formed a lot of my reasoning patterns - very few agree with everything I have to say (and even among my family members it gets a little sketchy.) On a public blog, I presume that far fewer than half of the people are friends of the blog admin, much less his "cronies." But I suppose the "us vs. them" mentality is necessary for the liberal academics to survive in such a large scary world where not everyone is in lockstep.
In any case, "debating" with personal attack is lousy enough, but "debating" with personal attack on someone's child is beyond pathetic. And for a cognitive psychologist too. A pity she didn't apply some of that book-learning to herself.
Douglasdale has giant ice balls falling from the sky:
Research conducted by a Nasa- affiliated scientist suggests that the frozen object that plummeted from the clear sky last Friday morning was one of the first "megacryometeors" to be recorded in Africa . . .
"Megacryometeors are not the classical big hailstones, ice from aircraft (waste water or tank leakage), nor the simple result of icing processes at high altitudes," Frias said.
"The term 'megacryometeor' was recently coined to name large atmospheric ice conglomerations, which, despite sharing many textural, hydrochemical and isotopic features detected in large hailstones, are formed under clear-sky conditions," he said.
I am posting this for no other reason than I find it interesting. Can you imagine being killed by a random megacryometeor? What a way to go!

You scored as Elliot.
Be warned that you could fall prey to an Elliot! While he may appear to be extremely agreeable, you will find he is political in order to achieve a position. If you do not help him in his ambition, he will find someone else to use. Question his motives!
Elliot | 80% | ||
Wickham | 70% | ||
Churchill | 60% | ||
Crawford | 60% | ||
Thorpe | 45% | ||
Willoughby | 25% |
(Hat tip to Janice Walker.)