Body-clock gene reveals sleep cycles with just a pluck, study says

When the researchers tested the genes in the subjects’ follicles, they found that body-clock gene activity peaked right after a subject had woken up, regardless of whether it was 6 a.m. or 10 a.m.

This suggests that the brain “turns on” the genes at different times of the morning in different people.

Other clock genes followed similar patterns, making it possible to predict “morning people” with just a pluck, the study said.

The Rev. Jesse Jackson came to Detroit last weekend pushing green jobs for the U.S. economy. On Monday, the Cadillac Escalade carrying him around the city was stolen and stripped.

Why Do Heavy Drinkers Outlive Nondrinkers?

A new paper in the journal Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research suggests that — for reasons that aren’t entirely clear — abstaining from alcohol does tend to increase one’s risk of dying, even when you exclude former problem drinkers. The most shocking part? Abstainers’ mortality rates are higher than those of heavy drinkers.

But why would abstaining from alcohol lead to a shorter life? It’s true that those who abstain from alcohol tend to be from lower socioeconomic classes, since drinking can be expensive. And people of lower socioeconomic status have more life stressors — job and child-care worries that might not only keep them from the bottle but also cause stress-related illnesses over long periods. (They also don’t get the stress-reducing benefits of a drink or two after work.)

But even after controlling for nearly all imaginable variables — socioeconomic status, level of physical activity, number of close friends, quality of social support and so on — the researchers (a six-member team led by psychologist Charles Holahan of the University of Texas at Austin) found that over a 20-year period, mortality rates were highest for those who were not current drinkers, regardless of whether they used to be alcoholics, second highest for heavy drinkers and lowest for moderate drinkers.

Infographic by College Scholarships.org

well, scientists have taken a look at the trajectory and come up with an equation that actually explains the physics of the trajectory of that shot:

Using tiny plastic balls and a slingshot, the researchers varied the velocity and spin of balls travelling through water to trace different trajectories.

This allowed them to study the aerodynamics of the balls without having to account for gravity and perform their experiments in a small tank instead of a large field.

While the study quickly confirmed the long-known ‘Magnus effect’, which gives a spinning ball a curved trajectory, it also revealed fresh insight for spinning balls that are shot over a distance equivalent to Carlos’ free kick.

The researchers said the friction exerted on a ball by its surrounding atmosphere slows it down enough for the spin to take on a greater role in directing the ball’s trajectory.

Prof Clanet said: ‘If he had not hit it so hard then gravity would have stopped it from taking the path it did. And he would have not have been able to curve it in such a way if he had been nearer the goal. That is why you never see penalty kicks swerve.’

It all comes down to the fact that, when a sphere spins, its trajectory is a spiral. Usually, gravity and the relatively short distance the ball travels cover up this spiral trajectory, but Carlos was a mere 115 feet away and kicked the ball hard enough to reveal its true spiral-like path. As you can see in the diagram above, the ball would have kept spiraling if gravity (and the netting) hadn’t gotten in the way.

sources: 1. Impossible soccer kick leads to new physics equation
2. Greatest free-kick was no fluke: Roberto Carlos’ 1997 ‘freak’ goal explained by scientists

Across Africa, people often lay snare traps to catch bushmeat, killing or injuring chimps and other wildlife.

But a few chimps living in the rainforests of Guinea have learnt to recognise these snare traps laid by human hunters, researchers have found.

More astonishing, the chimps actively seek out and intentionally deactivate the traps, setting them off without being harmed.

The Bat Bombers

Conservapedia: E=mc2 Is A Liberal Conspiracy

But Conservapedia founder and Eagle Forum University instructor Andy Schlafly — Phyllis Schlafly’s son — has found one more liberal plot: the theory of relativity. If you’re behind on your physics, the Theory of Relativity was Albert Einstein’s formulation in the early 20th century that gave rise to the famous theorum that E=mc2, otherwise stated as energy is equal to mass times the square of the speed of light. Why does Andy Schlafly hate the theory of relativity? We’re pretty sure it’s because he’s decided it doesn’t square with the Bible.

In the entry, “Counterexamples to Relativity,” the authors (including Schlafly) write:

“The theory of relativity is a mathematical system that allows no exceptions. It is heavily promoted by liberals who like its encouragement of relativism and its tendency to mislead people in how they view the world.[1]“

To what does that reference lead? Why, a note by Schlafly:

“See, e.g., historian Paul Johnson’s book about the 20th century, and the article written by liberal law professor Laurence Tribe as allegedly assisted by Barack Obama. Virtually no one who is taught and believes relativity continues to read the Bible, a book that outsells New York Times bestsellers by a hundred-fold”

In other words, reading a theory about physics is correlated to a decrease in people’s interest in reading the Bible, which means that it causes people to stop reading the Bible.

5 UFO Sightings That Even Non-Crazy People Find Creepy

If you want to research UFO sightings, we hope you like bullshit. Because you’re about to be drowned in sensationalist books and blogs from UFO enthusiasts who declare every blinking light in the sky to be the opening scenes of Independence Day. It’s no coincidence that so many people who encounter UFOs also really want to believe in them.

However, buried deep within the U.S. military’s own records are some very bizarre, and very well-documented sightings that have to give even a skeptic second thoughts.

Are they aliens? We’re not saying that. We’re just saying they’re really, really weird.