S/N 35709 - Afromosia fluted plinth, Valhalla supply, smoked lid, Linn mounting. Lid has a feint crack and a small dink at the front and will also need new hinges but otherwise the deck is in pretty good nick for its age and is working perfectly. It is just kicking around (not literally!) here so may as well go to a good home - a good deck to get started on, ready for lovely Linn upgrades and tinkering! Or you could probably strip it for parts and make a profit (too good for that though). Photos to come ... £370 or near enough. Would much prefer collection or delivery by myself in London or close by.

As the Queen starts making her own Windsor wine, the industry enjoys a record year

✒ It's been a tremendous year for English wine with our vineyards producing an amazing 4m bottles, a record. And it turns out that the Queen is going to start making her own wine at Windsor, though you won't be able to buy it for three years and will, of course, have to wear a ridiculous hat while drinking it.

I popped along to English wine's annual show this week and tried as many as I could without falling down. The days when a French vigneron could say to me "yurr English wine, eet tastes of rain" are long gone, and some of the sparklers are now quite exceptional – far better than champagnes selling at the same £20-24 mark. In fact, some, such as Camel Valley, Ridgeview and Nyetimber, strike me as being just as good as the premium brands from famous names being sold to footballers and rock stars for more than £100 in shops and at even sillier prices in clubs and restaurants.

It's a matter of prestige. People still feel that for really special occasions, the wine must have the word "champagne" on the label. Soon, however, I'm sure people will say: "We're laying this aside for our daughter's engagement; it's from Cornwall…"

✒ I really enjoyed the royal wedding. I know most people didn't – the viewing figures were comfortably less than half the population – but I saw no point in leaving the country as some did. You could always keep the telly switched off.

But here are the seven worst things about it, aspects of the event that were actually quite annoying:

• Tony Blair and Gordon Brown not being invited. Whether Blair "cashed in" on Princess Diana's death (he didn't), or because Cherie refused to curtsey, or because Blair's memoirs said too much about his dealings with the royals, the snub was to all of us and to democracy. And it gave what should have been a national celebration a nasty, class-bound, party political tinge.

• Beatrice's fascinator, or "repulser" as it should have been called. As if Medusa had gone to Nicky Clarke.

• The fly-past. A miserable six planes! A real, eardrum-rattling, fly-past would have looked like an RAF raid on Schwenningen.

• Prince Harry's speech. Obviously we only have press reports, but a proper, traditional best man's speech would have been packed with disgusting jokes and filthy allusions to the groom's previous girlfriends. That is Prince Harry's role in life and he let us all down.

• John Rutter's specially composed anthem. Sounded like Coldplay.

• Elton John's hissy fit when he asked to be moved to a more prominent seat. Calm down, dear, as we say these days.

• The kiss. Call that a kiss? A bit of tongue, please, Will.

✒ Why does the BBC insist on calling the soldiers and police employed by various tyrants in the Middle East and north Africa "security forces"? For example: "In Syria, security forces are said to have killed up to 60 demonstrators…" Security is the last thing these people provide. The Beeb wouldn't say: "A bomb planted by IRA freedom fighters has caused at least 10 deaths…" Just say, "government troops".

✒ I've been watching some of the host of new cop shows on TV. (The BBC says it has scrubbed Zen because it wants more women detectives. Well, many of the women I know think that Rufus Sewell is quite all right to be going to on with. You might as well say: "Men aren't interested in watching Scarlett Johansson. They want to see burly chaps pouting on TV…")

The new crop of women detectives are real people, damaged and with problems. If they get on well with their male deputies, then they have a terrible relationship with their male superiors. As my colleagues in the Guardian have pointed out, the more realistic the cops, the more fanciful and improbable the murders. And the cliches remain the same, whether in Vera, Lewis or Case Sensitive.

Here are some more recent ones I've spotted: the first murder is usually the weirdest and is unexplained at the end. Any group of children having a boisterous outing will always stumble on a body. All mobile phone calls come at the worst possible moment. When the sidekick searches for a crucial clue on the internet, he invariably finds it immediately, usually with a cry of "bingo, boss!"

✒ Labels and notices, continued: Suzan Carter bought a pack of "whole almonds" from Sainsbury's: "allergy advice – contains nuts". David Voas also went to Sainsbury's, for a steak. The label gives instructions for cooking rare: "2 ½ to 4 minutes each side… Always check that the product is cooked throughout, and no pink colour remains." Thanks, paranoid lawyers!

Les Herbert bought some fish in his local posh supermarket, the one that pushes up house prices by just existing: "plaice fillets in a bespoke Waitrose crumb". A bespoke crumb? Sounds like a very annoying tailor's assistant in Jermyn Street.

Vic McLellan photographed a sign mounted on a fence by a stream near his home: "Kew Angling Society. Strictly No Fishing."

A reader who requested anonymity to spare his wife encloses a leaflet for the Estring brand vaginal ring, used to replace oestrogen for post-menopausal women: "The Estring vaginal ring is not recommended for use in children," it says. Into what bizarre mind could that warning have wandered?

Linda Paramor bought some limnanthes seeds for her garden. "Handy tip," it says on the packet, "plant carefully as they can be evasive." I love the idea of the flowers coyly hiding when anyone tries to admire them.

I didn't love the leaflet that came with Dick Tuckey's penicillin prescription: "Unwanted side effects can include nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea, and black hairy tongue." No, please!

✒ David Scott startled me with a tale of a merciful guard on, of all services, Virgin. He was on a London to Manchester train sitting near two Norwegian tourists. One of them said he had lost his ticket and the ticket inspector let him off! "I won't tell you which train it was," David says, "because he would be sacked."

[link] [62 comments]

So, Tomorrow is Officially Birthmother's Day. You know that that they give us to keep us separated from the "real" mothers of the world. Because, as you should know, it takes more than just giving birth to make a person a real mother. And being a birthmother, all we do is make the babies and give away our motherhood to another who is more deserving of being a mother and of course, more ready. So we can't dare to count ourselves in on Mother's Day. I say screw that! Like most mothers who have...

Come on by to Musings of the Lame to read the rest of this post. Come on, you know you want to!

With the surging popularity of barefoot running, it would seem that for the triathlete, barefoot running currently ranks up there with all-you-can-eat buffet coupons, a Clydesdale triathlete cycling in front of you on a windy day, and unicorns that toot free energy bars.

But although I didn’t grow up in a small pack of wolves or come from a remote tribe of natives living at 18,000 feet of elevation, I will readily admit that I can understand and agree with the benefits of barefoot running, especially the part about making your feet strong.

After all, if you spend all day in big, padded shoes, each of your feet will be like the little fairy tale princess who is never allowed to venture outside the confines of the mighty fortress: really weak (but still pretty hot) and easily wounded, bruised or broken by the slightest of encounters with the roughness of the real world (like witches or dragons or big rocks). In other words, you need to treat your feet more like a fairy tale peasant – ready and willing to traipse naked and dirty through the forest and fields.

The problem is, even though barefoot running is really good for strengthening and stretching the muscles, tendons, ligaments and bones in your feet, it’s pretty dang inconvenient at times.

Take my house for example. Outside my front door is a world of concrete, pavement, broken glass, small stones and pine needles that turn a casual barefoot running attempt into an adventure in pain management and self-wound care.

So in order to turn my feet from a princess to a peasant, I have to tack an extra 10-15 minutes onto a barefoot run to drive, bike or run to a soft, grassy park, take off my shoes, pray there are no sprinkler heads, then run around and around and around until I’m dizzy and bored, and finally spend the time investment getting back home.

But shouldn’t it be possible to get the foot blessing benefits of barefoot running without actually barefoot running? You bet! Here’s 3 ways to do it:

1. Calf Raises and Single Leg Balancing: Both of these activities can easily be done in the comfort of your own home. Perform calf raises while in the shower (work up to 50 double leg or 25 single leg), and single leg balancing while brushing your teeth. Once single leg balancing gets easy, try to shift to your toes, and also try to do more difficult activities on one leg, such as dumbbell curls, typing on your computer, or making love. Of course, this strategy requires you to walk around your house without your shoes on, but that’s one place where your pretty princesses will hopefully be safe.

2. Bosu Ball or Balance Disc: You’ll find either of these balance devices at most gyms, and you can easily buy them at a sporting goods store. Stand on either for 3 sets of 30-60 seconds on one leg with your eyes closed. For added difficulty, add partner taps, in which a partner attempts to throw you off balance with light shoulder taps. You can also do exercise like dumbbell curls and dumbbell presses while you stand on these balance devices.

3. Jump Rope: Repetitive impact with a plyometric hopping motion like jump rope will stress and strengthen the bones and soft tissue in your feet, and teach your joints to absorb impact properly – similar to barefoot running. Practice both double and single leg hopping, and if you’d like to count like a schoolgirl, knock yourself out. If you don’t have a jumprope, try jumping jacks in your barefeet or socks. I actually do these in my office, and I haven’t been fired yet.

Today’s high-tech, ultra-supportive shoes can definitely leave your feet weak, just like that fairy tale princess. But a consistent combination of the activities outlined above can leave you with strong feet – without actually requiring you to do barefoot running. And if you are a princess reading this article, my sincere apologies. I’m sure you’re good at other stuff.

Photo by Nicholas_T

"God does not play dice with the Universe." -Einstein

"Einstein, don't tell God what to do." -Neils Bohr (disputed, but awesome)

Einstein, the brilliant mind behind general relativity and the concept of "spacetime," is making the news again this week. As you all know, gravity isn't some mysterious invisible force traveling across space, it comes about because energy itself -- most commonly in the form of mass -- distorts the very fabric of space.

(Image credit: GNU user Johnstone and NASA's Galileo spacecraft.)

Of course, wrapping your head around this can prove quite difficult. Space, as we all know, is three-dimensional; how do you expect to understand it by drawing a two-dimensional surface?

(Image credit: Today's XKCD.)

I mean, honestly, it's kind of the best we can do. It's pretty easy to imagine what completely flat three-dimensional space would look like; just take a big 3-D grid, and there you go!

But put a mass in there, and then what? Well, think of mass as a high-powered vacuum cleaner. You turn the vacuum on, and it immediately sucks the carpet (or whatever unfortunate thing the vacuum touches) into it, distorting it and causing it to "pucker".

(Or like making a fish-face, right, Kerry Katona?)

Well, mass does the same thing to space. And the greater and denser your mass, the greater the range and more severe the distortion of space!

Now a black hole is an extreme example, and we are (perhaps) fortunate to not have one nearby to study relativity with. But we do have the Earth, which does a pretty respectable job distorting space close to its surface. You feel it as the force of gravity, pulling you down towards the center of the Earth, of course. But the weird, relativistic, distorted aspect of space makes things just a little bit weird.

(Image credit: Wired.)

What do I mean, weird. It means that objects change their shape a little bit thanks to the Earth's gravity, known as the geodetic effect. If you had a gyroscope in orbit, you'd see it start to precess because of this!

But there's more; because the Earth is rotating, there's an extra effect on top of this, known as frame dragging, which means that an object moving with the Earth's rotation would go slightly faster than an object moving against it.

There was an experiment designed in the 1960s to test this.

(Image credit: Resonance Pub.)

But it's only relatively recently that the technology has advanced enough to allow us to build the necessary suspended, low-temperature, precisely smooth gyroscopes necessary to test this. And, as you may imagine, we had to do it in space. The experiment was known as Gravity Probe B.

(Image credit: Lubos.)

Unsurprisingly, the results are in perfect agreement with Einstein's prediction. In fact, the most (pleasantly) surprising thing to me, as a scientist, is that they are honest about their experimental errors; they report significant confirmation of both of these effects, but did not perform as good of a frame-dragging test as they would have liked. (The geodetic effect was measured to an extraordinary accuracy, however, <0.1%!)

So, for those of you keeping track, that's another victory for Einstein's general relativity, making the score about a bajillion to zero.

But there's a reason we keep testing it in new ways: we won't learn anything new unless we find something that general relativity is inadequate for. So we think about the most extreme situations for spacetime in the Universe, like very close to collapsed, massive object: black holes and neutron stars.

(Image credit: Infovark.)

The proverbial "vacuum cleaner" is turned up to an ultra-high setting in this instance, and space is severely distorted. What happens if you bring a second vacuum cleaner in, very close by, and have these two compact, heavy masses orbiting one another close by?

(Video credit: John Rowe animations.)

Well, according to General Relativity, two amazing things will happen:

1. These orbits will be unstable, and will decay over time. These two objects -- whether they be white dwarfs, neutron stars or black holes -- will eventually spiral in to one another. And...
2. As they do, they will emit gravitational waves!

Now, the inspiral thing is cool enough as it is. We've actually observed these orbits decaying over time, because we discovered a system of two pulsing neutron stars, and their orbits are decaying!

(Image credit: NASA/Dana Berry, Sky Works Digital.)

Yes, for those of you wondering, the discoverers of this, Russell Hulse and Joseph Taylor, did in fact win the Nobel Prize for this. But the gravitational waves coming from this? That's something we've never detected before. It would require, in fact, a huge set of antennae in space, looking for extraordinarily precise patterns that change the distance between them.

Luckily for us, we've already started building them.

(Image credit: Uri Keshet/LISA artist.)

The Laser Interferometer Space Antennae (LISA), a series of three spacecraft orbiting behind the Earth, would be sensitive to these gravitational waves. It was one of the major NASA science goals of this decade, scheduled to be launched in 2015. As a joint venture between NASA and the European Space Agency, LISA was supposed to finally find these gravitational waves, being the only detector designed to achieve the necessary sensitivity.

(Image credit: ESA.)

And then, last month, this happened:

ESA has ended the partnership with NASA because NASA is financially unable to participate when ESA's funding is available (in 2015). To preserve their program, ESA's must solicit a downscaled mission concept that does not rely on the availability of NASA funding, which they are doing.

This is according to Robin Stebbins, NASA's project scientist for LISA. Steinn has more on this, but the gist of it is that, unless something gets done about this over the next six months, the last great unmeasured prediction of general relativity -- gravitational waves -- will go undetected for decades to come. We totally expect them to be there, but there's a reason we do the experiments. If the ESA can't figure out a way to make this work, it will be tragic to see LISA go down.

This is, quite possibly, now the last mystery of classical general relativity, and we were so close to making it happen. There are lots of reasons why it's gone down this way, not the least of which is the James Webb Space Telescope going billions over budget, but I can't believe it's just going to end like this. I wrote about the importance of delivering what you promise about a year ago, and now we're facing the consequences.

Sorry, LISA. Let us know if there's anything we can do to save you!

Read the comments on this post...

Trailers are an under-appreciated art form insofar that many times they’re seen as vehicles for showing footage, explaining films away, or showing their hand about what moviegoers can expect. Foreign, domestic, independent, big budget: I celebrate all levels of trailers and hopefully this column will satisfactorily give you a baseline of what beta wave I’m operating on, because what better way to hone your skills as a thoughtful moviegoer than by deconstructing these little pieces of advertising? Some of the best authors will tell you that writing a short story is a lot harder than writing a long one, that you have to weigh every sentence. What better medium to see how this theory plays itself out beyond that than with movie trailers? The Legend Of The Mighty Soap Trailer When I was a kid I watched HBO relentlessly. Whenever there wasn't reairings of Fraggle Rock, Braingames, Heartbeeps, Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome there were lots of short films that played between movies. The actual "program" was called Short Take (anyone remember Recorded Live [1]? Still creeps me out.) and even though I only have a vague recollection of them there was one really odd film about a talking, shrunken head. It was strange even by my 10 year-old standards as the thing somehow was hanging out with a couple of kids, for whatever effed up reason, stuffed it into a soccer ball and was kicked around a field to the sounds of something equating to macabre whimpering. This trailer reminds me of that moment. To that end, there is no other, correct, response to have after watching this trailer other than realizing you need to see this film. It's probably the strangest thing you'll see today but it's worth it. While I couldn’t tell you what the hell is happening I can say with some certainty that the style is a little Tim and Eric with a dash of bizarro, netherworld action. Director Andrew Bond has made something that even those at a Freudian institute would be hard pressed to explain without breaking out into fits of frustration. There is a narrative here, though. From what I can deduce by watching,  I can't understand the vocal track because they're not speaking American, the visuals really are reminiscent of those brainiacs behind the Old Spice commercials (Again, Tim and Eric for those who didn't know) but it's a perfectly apropos comparison. Those ads worked for P&G in the number of units that were moved because of how well the public received them; they were irreverent, funny, creative, but had a purpose. This trailer has a purpose because it's not just content with being strange. It wants to express itself as a story that is pitting the unwashed masses who want to be clean against a bile shooting monster. Sometimes an explanation is too much. It's best to leave the oddness be. [Twitch [2]] The National Parks Project Trailer Moving out beyond the usual nature photographers who simply stick a camera out into a field and expect to capture nature in all its splendor, this project seems like it's something a little more unique. The opening of this trailer is representative of why it's such an evocative piece of marketing material simply because of its plain, white, snow swept mountain ranges. It's not just  a canvas that is waiting for you to give it some kind of meaning. There are no words, no guide about what we're seeing as you focus on the hills that look like ribs jutting up from the ground. This something more than what it appears to be and you can sense it. All the unwashed hippies in the audience ought to be crying at this point at the beauty of it all. Smash cut, we're now on the shore of some lush wilderness. We get close to a tree as the jangling of a guitar slips in and envelopes you in some nature photography that is certainly unlike anything I've ever seen on the Mutual of Omaha's Wild Kingdom. I can't exactly put my finger on it but this is a different kind of nature documentary. It seems hipper in a way, with a modern sensibility. And that seems to be the case when the narrator drops in. Literally, a voice of God simply lays it out simply and effectively about why we're here, what we're looking at. That's it about Canadian parks is one thing but when the information scrolls by and tells us that it and it is going to utilize 13 filmmakers and 39 musicians to essentially guide us through this walk through nature my curiosity is even more piqued. What strikes me as I watch this is that it's like something we would expect to come from authors if this was the 19th centuries; writers who looked at nature not as a utilitarian source of power but of an entity endowed with an inherent beauty, as something to be celebrated. This is the 21st answer to Henry David Thoreau or Emerson and it simply looks like it's a movie where you hunker down and let it wash over you. The Elephant In The Living Room Trailer This obviously goes beyond people who own some ferrets. Director Michael Webber has done something genuinely novel here while also creating a trailer that is both ambitious and tense. What grabs you immediately is that even before we know this is a story about people who keep really dangerous pets we get the 911 call and the police officer who fields them. We're not really sure what this is all about, it sounds a little goofy honestly and it does appear to be humorous, but that smile is turned upside down once we hear from this cop who looks deadly serious about his role in playing the part of exotic pet wrangler. He's not so much afraid as he is worried about the possibilities of what could happen. We get quotes from /Film's own David Chen and Michael Moore (always good company to be in) and it's about as an explosive, riveting opening as you're going to get for a documentary all this year. I, honestly, loved how well it pulls you in with not only the kudos, its editing, its pacing, and the ability to emotionally tug at you that all the rest is gravy. Gravy being the one thing that sustains the goodness of this thing because it is flat out enthralling. We get crazies of all kinds and that's just glorious. There's some guy who looks like the wizened, slouchy brother of Captain Lou Albano who is *really* into his lion, some dude who wants to talk about the dangers of legislating controls on the ownership of these beasts, and opinions that straddle the grey lines in-between. I love that we get a shot of some jamoke who is casually and nonchalantly hanging out with his mountain lion in his living room as the scene we get directly following this is of a police officer pumping his shotgun as he slowly walks into some tall scrub. This film shot up to the top of my most wanted list of documentaries based on the strength of the trailer as not only does it make clear what the story is about it smartly stays out of the way for the thoughts that come out of it. The people are allowed to get their opinions out without judgement and without guidance from the filmmakers about how we should think about this. It's refreshing and exciting. Tracker Trailer I honestly wish Australia could have been a good film. To that point, I would have loved to have had a compelling story to go along with the lush landscapes and places we were taken in that movie. Alas, what we got was painfully unwatchable pap that went nowhere quite fast and labored like a sick dog all the way to the end. It's interesting, then, that director Ian Sharp, who hasn't directed anything of note since 2002's blockbuster Mrs Caldicot's Cabbage War, might be able to bring some of what Australia could have been to the screen. And, yes, I realize that New Zealand is a wholly independent continent but it's a pretty close facsimile. The trailer is quite precise as it establishes what is happening in the film and that it seems to focus on the relationship between Ray Winstone and Temuera Morrison. It's that focus on the duality of these men that really appeals to me. The first half of the trailer sets up things solidly with not only establishing the persona non grata status of Winstone but explains why Morrison is on the run from Johnny Law. Instead of a good guy/bad guy demarcation there is a whole lot of gray to for both parties as the manhunt is on. As the trailer goes into its back nine, the physical landscape provides a great postcard for anyone looking to be ensconced in a world that seems to be punctuated with sound stage set-ups. The "out in the open" quality of key moments in this story are not only well presented here but have really been appealing to me as of late after seeing how the Coen's used physical landscape in True Grit. There could be some meat on this script if it can be more than just a movie about inequality and Winstone's journey to be accepted in a culture that seems to not want him around. From the looks of it there are some exciting set pieces and interesting directorial choices. It's been a while since I've caught Winstone in something reaching the epic proportions of The Departed and while I didn't get it with 44 Inch Chest there is the distinct possibility this could be something close. Bloodrape Trailer The last time I checked in [3] with this film, I was pretty much blown away by its ferocity. Well, Tucker Bennett, Taeer Maymon, and Zach Shipko are back to melt whatever was left of your face off in a trailer I simply love for reasons that I cannot justify in any coherent, factual way. By all accounts I should be annoyed by the construction of it. The sound is just pounding through the speakers, the visuals are more methed up than a junkie who just found a c-note in the street, there is no direction to it whatsoever, or any clear vision of what they're trying to "sell", but it's the rawness of it all that's so alluring. There isn't any way to talk about this trailer in a manner that breaks down the core components of what makes this a trailer worth mentioning only because you can't watch this and not feel this is either one of the most fascinating things you'll see all week (make note: I'm not saying great, I'm just stating "fascinating") or something that you are completely repulsed by. I happen to fall in the former camp as this isn't just a slapdash trailer that's put together with some snot and invisible tape, you genuinely have a focused piece of performance art that not only is giving you bits of this film's content but it's got an independent style that eschews most everything you would consider necessary to get you interested in a film you've never heard of. I have no doubt some of you will think this is the most obnoxious, attention whore-ing piece of trash you've come across but I would counter that the minds behind this have a clear voice and don't care about anyone else thinks. That indifference isn't punk so much as it is having a vision of what you want and just shoving it out there for everyone to see. From the vampire orgy, the feasting that's being done on humans with blood that seems more pink than red, the music that is damn near bleeding through your speakers, the editing that seems unable to focus on anything for more than mere milliseconds, and the last fifteen seconds that is out to melt what's left of your cerebral cortex with its distorted volume and disjointed narrative that offers no help in deciphering what in the hell is going here, it's all wonderful. I embrace the work for what it is and respect the insane vibe of it all. Elephant White Trailer Um. Ok. While everyone is in white hot anticipation for Kevin Bacon in X-Men: First Class maybe seeing Bacon plying his trade at trying out a British accent would be of interest. I'm not sure what's worse, his attempt or the premise of this film. Chocolate, Ong-bak, The Protector, all films that director Prachya Pinkaew ought to be really proud of but this is just amazing in its average-ness. It's not enough to say we've seen this before in films like Taken or Man on Fire because that would be generous to those films. This is a wholesale, played out, construction that starts off so modestly that you wonder whether this was conceived with the idea of this movie never making it to a large screen; instead, this direct-to-DVD film would probably best be deployed as freebies to those buying a Previously Viewed film at a closing Blockbuster. That, or Antonio Sabato Jr.'s latest. The trailer just doesn't inspire to be anything, really. Of course it possesses the rudimentary elements to be classified as a story, some guy is on the hunt for a girl who may have been kidnapped and is in the sex trade, but as the story is unraveled all we get is gold and red lit scenes where people are acting like this is an action blockbuster that's much too hot to be contained but it's clunkier than an AMC Pacer. There's some pretty bad choreographed fighting, uninspiring heaps of strained dialogue from both Bacon and Djimon, and pathetic running-through-crowded-streets moments that don't even manage to top the gold standard set by Bloodsport. Oh, and there's elephants. A few times. For whatever that's worth to you. For me, it just means disappointment. Operation Belvis Bash Trailer Never before has a trailer felt like having to watch Shoah without ever getting up to pee than this did. I think this will make a lot more sense if I simply let the press release I received on Monday morning set things up: George Bush’s backyard was the backdrop for what turned out to be an unexpected ending to an exciting evening for actor/singer Corey Feldman.  Feldman’s latest film, Operation Belvis Bash premiered on May 1, in Houston,TX, and is the story of a special military operation whose goal is to assassinate Osama Bin Laden.  Just a few minutes after seeing what audiences thought was a purely fictional assassination of the world’s most hated terrorist, they exited the theater to learn that it had happened in real life. “It’s absolutely unbelievable,” commented Feldman.  “I was in New York on September 11, 2001, with Michael Jackson, and then, nearly ten years later, I walk out of the premiere of my latest film, which I had postponed to be able to attend Corey Haim’s Decisions premiere and memorial, to learn that Osama Bin Laden had been killed by a special operation, just like in the film we’d just screened. The timing is simply unbelievable, and whether life imitates art, or art imitates life, now is a time for all Americans to express their gratitude to the brave men and women who serve our country and helped make this happen.” What's here, though, is awful. I watched this with the kind of fascination that a baby gives to someone speaking to them: I don't know what's going on, I don't believe what I'm seeing, and I can't understand why anyone pumped dollar one into a story that seems to be thinner than a stick of gum. Apart from the Soup Nazi, the Iron Sheik, Daniel Baldwin, that guy from the Twisted Sister video, and Corey Feldman in a role that is too bizarre for even me to describe, I am unsure of who anyone is or what it is I'm supposed to be buying into as this film's premise. It's uneven, choppy, and doesn't sell me at all on what a lot of people sunk their time and money into in order to make this. I was amazed by the press release and I'm even more amazed by this trailer. Note bene: If you have any suggestions of trailers to possibly be included in this column, even have a trailer of your own to pitch, please let me know by sending me a note at Christopher_Stipp@yahoo.com In case you missed them, here are the other trailers we covered at /Film this week: Intruders Trailer [4] - Bravo. In fifty seconds this teaser is able to actually tease a story, not give anything away, while managing to give a sense of the time and place we're in. Page One: Inside The New York Times Trailer [5] - I am such a fan of movies like this and this trailer infuses just enough drama and excitement to get any layperson charged up about wanting to see a documentary about a newspaper. The Ledge Trailer [6] - This plays a little weak. The premise isn't novel so much as it is overwhelmingly silly. I just couldn't shake the feeling this isn't a very entertaining film as it is overacted. Buck Trailer [7] - Living in the southwest I am bombarded by horses and horse related issues on a daily basis but I've never really cared about these beasts until I saw this trailer. I found myself riveted by the premise and who we'll be following on this journey. Hell On Wheels Trailer [8] - I'm unmoved one way or the other by this trailer. The show seems interesting but the attempts at giving me some money shots or reasons to tune in just aren't there. Green Lantern Trailer #2 [9] - This trailer seems to take the best parts of the teaser and the first trailer and, bravo, this actually works for me. Martha Marcy May Marlene Trailer [10] - This trailer got under my psyche and did not relent. It's such a great mix of mysteriousness and evil that I can't help but wonder how soon I can see it. Colombiana Trailer [11] - I would apologize for liking this but I'm in a sweet tooth mood right now and this looks like just what I need: by the numbers, fun, hollow, escapism. The Trip Trailer [12] - We've all heard this musical cue before but it works for me. The tempo is great and so is the trailer. I'm enthralled with the idea of seeing Coogan just be himself again. For my money, it doesn't get much better. [1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-Qeee8D2Ro [2] http://twitchfilm.com/news/2011/04/if-you-are-dirty-the-legend-of-the-mighty-soap-will-clean-you.php [3] http://www.slashfilm.com/this-week-in-trailers-trigger-night-of-the-demons-bloodrape-idiots-and-angels-picture-me/ [4] http://www.slashfilm.com/intruders-teaser-trailer-clive-owen-has-a-demon-problem/ [5] http://www.slashfilm.com/page-one-inside-the-new-york-times-trailer/ [6] http://www.slashfilm.com/ledge-trailer-charlie-hunnam-problems/ [7] http://www.slashfilm.com/buck-trailer-life-reallife-horse-human-whisperer/ [8] http://www.slashfilm.com/hell-wheels-trailer-amc-western/ [9] http://www.slashfilm.com/green-lantern-trailer-2/ [10] http://www.slashfilm.com/martha-marcy-may-marlene-trailer/ [11] http://www.slashfilm.com/columbiana-trailer/ [12] http://www.slashfilm.com/the-trip-trailer/

Hi

I have a 1999 USA C2 coupe,
How come evertime you start the car the Climate control turns is on,

kinda annoying that when you start the car EVERYTIME i have to hit the button to turn it off,

Is something wrong with it or that how it is,

Anyway of changing it to stay completely off until i want it on ,




thanks

Daniel Massey - In recent months, proponents of a bill to mandate so-called living wages at city-subsidized projects have attended rallies, delivered sermons and sent postcards to elected officials in support of the measure. Meanwhile, little has been heard from opponents of the measure. But that is about to change.

With a City Council hearing on the bill set for Thursday, and officials from the city's Economic Development Corp. preparing to brief stakeholders next week on the results of its $1 million study on the feasibility of wage mandates, opposition to the measure is mounting.

More than a dozen groups—ranging from small business owners and supermarket operators to major real estate developers and builders of affordable housing—have formed a coalition to press for the bill's defeat.

They plan to use Putting New Yorkers to Work, a nonprofit registered late last year by the Real Estate Board of New York, to educate the public about the bill's potential impact via advertisements, mailers and other methods. And they have hired the public relations firm The Marino Organization to get their message out.

Groups that have joined the coalition against the bill—which would require employers at projects that receive $100,000 or more in subsidies to pay $10 an hour plus benefits, or $11.50 without benefits—include REBNY, the International Council of Shopping Centers, the Five Boro Chamber Alliance and the Food Industry Alliance of New York State.

City Councilman Oliver Koppell, the bill's prime sponsor, said that recent amendments to the bill were designed to ensure affordable housing, nonprofits, and small businesses are not adversely affected. “These amendments are the direct result of conversations with top stakeholders who represent those interests,” he said.

Affordable housing developers are worried, despite an amendment to the bill that would exempt most projects in which 75% of the residential units are affordable for families earning less than 125% of the area median income. Coalition insiders say that the city's Department of Housing Preservation and Development will come out against the bill, but a spokesman for the agency declined to comment.

Affordable housing developers are concerned because most large affordable residential developments include ground floor retail that helps reduce the subsidy needed to finance the affordable units. Increased wage requirements would reduce the value of the retail space, which would then necessitate adding more government subsidy and/or a reduction in the number of affordable units that could be built.

“We're trying to bring retail into underserved neighborhoods like [Brooklyn's] East New York and Brownsville,” said one affordable housing developer in the city. “We have a hard enough time getting retail to locate in these areas and getting rents low enough to attract people, but with this bill any project we're working on, we'd have to get rid of non-residential space.”

Opposition also extends to officials representing other types of housing. The Council of Cooperatives and Condominiums is against the bill, according to Arthur Weinstein, a vice president and member of the board of the association. He said it would “wreak havoc” on buildings that received J-51 tax abatements to make improvements.

“It would place an unbearable burden on co-ops and condos that use a myriad of contractors to check on the wages of every worker,” he said. “To be faced with tracking down wages paid by contractors to every single employee is absolutely outrageous.”

Supermarket owners are also up in arms, said Pat Brodhagen, vice president of the Food Industry Alliance of New York State, who contends the bill would mean the end of the FRESH program, which the City Council, industry and labor designed to bring grocery stores to underserved neighborhoods. She plans to testify against the bill at the Council hearing next week.

“Supermarket careers are good careers long term, but the entry wage is not going to hit this level,” she said. “What will happen, as a store does its pro forma and looks at the numbers, it will no longer be a project they're willing to enter into. It will undo the whole purpose of the benefits under FRESH.”

Tenants at the Brooklyn Navy Yard have also joined the coalition, arguing the bill would hurt the competitiveness of their businesses. Joal Savino, executive vice president at Mercedes Distribution Center, which fulfills orders for e-commerce sites, said the bill would force him to relocate to Pennsylvania.

“It puts me out of business here,” he said. “And that's not just affecting workers making minimum wage. It's affecting everybody. I have IT guys making $120,000 a year, warehouse managers earning $65,000 with full family medical coverage.”

Small businesses, via the Five Boro Chamber Alliance, have also expressed opposition. Firms with less than $1 million in revenue are exempted, but Nancy Ploeger, president of the Manhattan Chamber of Commerce, said that doesn't go far enough. And even though nonprofits are exempted, coalition members said some of them remain opposed because the bill would impact their subcontractors or tenants.

The Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union has led the charge for the bill, which has 29 sponsors, five shy of the supermajority needed to override a likely veto from Mayor Michael Bloomberg, whose administration has consistently opposed wage mandates. Mr. Koppell said he would continue to listen to and address opponents' concerns.

“We should all be able to agree that taxpayers deserve the highest possible return on their investment in economic development and job creation,” he said. “This pragmatic bill stands up for the interests of all taxpayers and will actually help many businesses by strengthening the work force in fast-growing sectors like retail.”

'Marooned' on a desert island off the Belize coast, the castaways learn to survive using spearguns, machetes and plastic bags

The signal comes from the front. The helicopter is going down: we have to jump. I step out on to the skid, then take another step into air. Seconds later, I'm in the Caribbean sea, swimming for a small patch of sand between thick mangrove trees on a nearby island. Water fills my boots and makes my clothes heavy which, along with the current, means progress is slow. I wade on to the beach, closely followed by my fellow "survivors".

This is what we've trained for. For the past five days, we've sailed the blue waters around remote Turneffe Atoll, 40km off the coast of Belize, setting up rudimentary camps on deserted beaches to learn the essentials of island survival. The staged emergency exit from the helicopter marks the start of our Isolation Phase, in which our group will have to put what we've learned into practice, unsupervised. With air-con and cooling cocktails, these islands might be paradise. But without such comforts as beds, food, water or relief from the intense heat, these are inhospitable environments where survival depends on our ability to find or produce food, water, shelter and fire from our unpromising surroundings.

We were warned it would be tough. "The whole point is to make you psychologically uncomfortable," instructor Ian Craddock told us on day one. "This is not happy camping." He's a former SAS instructor and a mate of Bear Grylls and Bruce Parry, and the new desert island survival course he's put together is refreshingly light on health and safety hang-ups. ("Here's a speargun – point it at what you want to hit, and shoot".) It is also full of genuine hardships and tests of character. Not to be undertaken lightly.

We're in troubled waters from the start: when we set off from Caye Caulker at the beginning of our week's training phase, the sea is so rough that even hardened captain Papa Joe looks perturbed. We spend our first night on a sandy strip of shore lined with gnarly, sun-bleached tree trunks. Our team is, disappointingly, all male – I've never particularly enjoyed exclusively male company. But it's a good group, and over the course of the week, the eight of us – including an Austrian hypnotist, an American web marketer and an aeroplane engineer whose face peels, bleeds and peels again in the sun, making him look like Freddy Krueger's Welsh cousin – form a tight unit.

We spend mornings on the beach learning how to make and start a fire, how to build a shelter, how to scale, gut and cook fish. Ian demonstrates how to use a machete with a 14-inch blade: it's a vital piece of kit that can help provide food (opening coconuts, for example), water and shelter.

Real survival is a world away from TV survival, he stresses: "There are no fancy tricks, no squeezing water from cow poo. It's simple – all you need to do is stay alive."

We learn techniques that produce small but life-saving quantities of fresh water: if you wrap plastic bags around palm tree leaves, they "sweat" and the water vapour condenses and collects at the bottom of the bag. We find and hack open coconuts for the water and flesh inside.

The sun is relentless, the intense heat exhausting. Water is rationed. Food is basic and limited. But the worst thing by far, an absolute drain on spirits and morale, is the bug situation. Mosquitoes and flies pester us from the moment we landed. They make simple tasks difficult and unpleasant and they disturb our sleep (in hammocks under our makeshift shelter). (There's talk of scouting out a group of islands further south for next year's trips, to reduce the problem.) A few days in, my body is covered in itchy red bumps.

But there's great satisfaction, too, in learning skills that are mostly new to me, and in stripping life down to the essentials. The island demands assertiveness. We have to be alert and think ahead because what we do or don't do has direct consequences on, say, our food or water supplies. And in the moments when the bugs are kept at bay by campfires, I enjoy the beauty of our remoteness. There are pink sunsets that make the tropical sky glow, campfires on sandy beaches under crescent moons, mornings swimming alone in the clear sea.

The best parts of the day come when we are out on the boat and diving to catch dinner. I've never speargunned for fish before but find I have a knack for it, bringing in a good share of the group's evening meals. I engage in epic chases over coral landscapes with parrotfish and snappers.

There's a Last Supper-ish feel to the night before Isolation. Ian has deliberately withheld information so that we're unprepared but we know it will be tough. Not everyone completes these courses; some radio in for an early rescue from whatever torment breaks them.

After the helicopter has dropped us from a height of eight metres into the sea and we've swum to shore, we inspect our survival kit – a dinghy and speargun, plastic bags for collecting water, a first aid kit and two machetes – and survey our surroundings.

We are surprisingly efficient. Four of us build a wooden structure with a roof of palm tree fronds. Others collect firewood and coconuts. We set up plastic bags on green leaves and dig solar stills to start the slow process of collecting water. By early afternoon, we're sheltering from the sun in our roomy "hut".

The speargun turns out not to be much use. We go out on the dinghy but there's no reef close to the island on which to fish. (The fish hide in the mangroves close to the island, Ian later tells us.) We manage to keep fires burning through the night, but the insects are still a major annoyance, and with no beds or hammocks, no one gets much sleep. I spend most of the night by the campfire trying to stay warm, feeding the flames with coconut husks and tree branches.

The following day, the group is sapped of energy. Tony (ex-British army) manages to catch a few small crabs and cooks them on the fire. We eat the minuscule amounts of white flesh, but mostly live, Papillon-style, on coconut. Ian checked in briefly the night before, dropping off a few small fish and a bottle of water as rewards for our good work (a cheat, but a welcome one). But we are all hungry, thirsty, tired, itchy from our bites and drained by the heat. We collect wood to keep the fire burning, but otherwise spend lethargic hours in our shelter.

Time slows, which is both a blessing and a curse. There's time here to think and also to talk. We have long philosophical discussions about memory, sexuality, sport, the history of mankind. The group's camaraderie maintains our vital PMA (Positive Mental Attitude, the top tier in the army's triangle of survival needs). There are filthy jokes, games of hangman and I-spy. Inevitably, conversations find their way back to the cold beers and junk food that await us back on Caye Caulker after rescue. This thought sustains us.

But mostly, Isolation is a test of mental fortitude and the capacity to endure discomfort. Rescue can't come quickly enough.

We keep the fires burning through another difficult night, and early in the morning sit together, chewing on small chunks of coconut, watching through a gap in the mangroves for the small yellow boat that will carry us away from the island. When it comes, we board quickly. Relief passes through our bodies, each one of us bearded, dirty, exhausted, but alive.

• Bushmasters desert island survival courses (bushmasters.co.uk) in Belize cost £1,300pp. The next courses are in 2012 and include 2-11 February, 16-26 February, 1-10 March. It also runs jungle survival courses in the Amazon in Guyana. British Airways (0844 493 0787, ba.com) has daily flights to Belize with connections via Miami, starting from £889 return. For more information, see travelbelize.org

Judd Trump caused a sensation this week when, aged just 21, he rocketed into snooker's World Championship final. So who is this new boy wonder?

Judd Trump can measure, precisely, when and how fast he got properly famous. Just over three weeks ago, on 14 April, he opened a Twitter account with the cheery "Hello twitter!!", swiftly followed by "In nandos tucking into half a chicken!!" (he is fond of exclamation marks. And food.) Initially @judd147t, "part time snooker player, full time international playboi!!" [sic] had some 200 followers – respectable, for a normal citizen. Then he went to Sheffield and played his first game in his second World Championship, which, after a wobbly – and duly tweeted – beginning ("Nervy start but gotta take 5-4 powwow!!"), he won, dispatching the title holder, Neil Robertson. The follower count jumped to 3,000. "I was shocked. And then I started publicising it a little bit, and said I'd love to get up to 10,000, or 20,000, and then one day, after, I think, my semi-final" – a game which, by fearlessly going for shots others might avoid ("If in doubt hit it as hard as you can?!!"), he both thrilled his audience and won – "it jumped from like 10,000 to 25,000, and I was really shocked. I overtook all of the rest of the snooker players." By the end of last week, over 51,000 followers were being informed that it was "time to put a dent in the bank balance in london today!!"

For said bank balance has swelled a lot in that time, too. On 3 April, the 21-year-old won the China Open, pocketing £60,000 and gaining his first ranking title; he didn't win the World Championships, but came a close second to three-time world champion John Higgins, pocketing £125,000. In some ways more important than the money, however, was the sense of a blistering new arrival in snooker, warmly welcomed. "Judd's greatest asset is his game terrifies people. Never seen anyone pot so well. Scary," tweeted Ronnie O'Sullivan, the game's last such arrival (who, incidentally, joined the Twitter-sphere on the same day as Trump). "Judd was by far the better player," said Higgins after the game. "He was playing a brand of snooker I've never seen in my life. We've got a new sensation, which is great for the game. It's just a fantastic feeling." Viewing figures peaked in the UK at 6.6 million, the best for the last five years, in no small part due to Trump's bravura showmanship (and boyband haircut); a total of 27.1 million watched the tournament overall. In China, 30 million people watched the semi-final, in which Trump beat Chinese star Ding Junhui. "The Juddernaut is the future," hyperventilated the Daily Mail, "and that future is now."

Although, right now, the future is late. When it finally pulls into the business centre car park on the edges of Romford, Essex, in a white BMW with a flamboyant spoiler, Trump, his childhood friend Ryan, and his manager Django Fung, a Hong Kong-born businessman in natty narrow trousers and velvet-lapelled jacket, are discussing the afternoon's prospective shopping trip. Fung suggests he might not come along; Trump's face falls. "Come with us?" The openness of his face, looking at his manager, the obvious, implicit trust in an elder, make him look very young. All ignore the journalist in the room.

So what was he up to this morning? He is watchful now, the vulnerabilty contained. "Sleepin'." Absently, he strokes the large, fake diamond-studded watch on his wrist. His tight white Gucci T-shirt is pristine, his belt and the obligatory band of striped underwear just so. He is fit, but incredibly skinny, a broomstick topped by an elaborately teased mop of hair. It's all very self-aware; when I mention that the swell in viewing figures seems largely to have been because of him, he says, "Yeah – I had a lot of people tell me that. A lot of younger kids and that – obviously because I'm more at their age and a little bit different to the rest of the snooker players, with my image and stuff." Image? "My whole hairstyle, the way I dress. Older people like to dress older. I dress in more flamboyant, stylish … " Has he always made this degree of effort? "More so now. I used to be quite laid back and that. But obviously the more you're in the public eye, the more you've got to … dress to impress." (There is also the fact that he simply loves to shop. "Love it. Absolutely love it." He can't wait, when the interview is over, to hit Gucci first, then Harrods.)

It's of a piece with the deliberate showmanship of his play – the supposedly impossible shots, the calculated recklessness of his pocketing, which, as he tells it, are a kind of evangelism. "I think I wanted – not to show off, but try and make [snooker] more popular, whereas other players maybe just want to play the game and don't really care about the fans as much. But I always want to go for certain shots that please the crowd, and stuff like that." Partly this is because it's just "a lot easier with them supporting you than with them against you. You enjoy it more." But also "I've just got the mindset of really wanting to open the game up to new people. I kind of want to create a massive attention around snooker."

He doesn't seem particularly arrogant, nor is there any false modesty. Snooker is almost a lone sport, played in many ways against yourself and in your head; an internal negotiation of skill and confidence practised, for hours, largely alone. Trump is obviously gregarious, as up for a laugh and night out with friends as any 21-year-old, but a lifetime of self-reliance and discipline (in the sport, at least) definitely shows. He hasn't ever had a coach, apart from the worried attentions of his father when he was much younger, and simply doesn't see the need for one. "I've just kind of learnt on my own. I literally know just by playing a shot, by the feel of it – I can tell, straight away. I don't really need anyone to tell me. Other people try and tweak their techniques and that, but I've just been exactly the same all my life, and I'd never change anything."

Trump was born in Bristol; his parents and most of his family come from either Bristol or Cornwall. His father is a lorry driver, and his mother a cook. It was all very "normal, really. Both doing quite normal jobs, nothing extravagant – just do their work, come home, eat, go to bed." He inherited his mother Georgina's shyness. "I've always been pretty shy. Unless I know someone really well" – or increasingly, if he is being interviewed – "I can't keep a conversation going more than 10 seconds, really."

He doesn't remember this himself, but his father has said that he bought him a mini snooker table when he was three, and could instantly tell that his toddler had talent and application; he played his first competitive game at six, standing on a cardboard box, and had his first sponsorship deal at eight. By nine he had been sufficiently noticed for World Snooker to arrange for him to meet his hero, Ronnie O'Sullivan, at the Welsh Open. "It was a bit weird, meeting your hero for the first time." (They have since become quite friendly, and share a manager in Fung). Trump won the national under-15s when he was 10 – "That was when I thought that I might have a future in the game" – and at 13 he beat Mike Hallett, a former world No 6, who, minutes later, saw the boy playing on some swings. "That made me feel a lot better," Hallett has said, wryly. Later in his teens Trump was playing, and winning, 40-50 tournaments a year.

He isn't oblivious to what this has cost his parents. "It was hard work for them. Obviously my dad never really had time out to go and do normal things. He was working all week, and then driving me on weekends. They've never really been on holiday. They spent all their money on me, growing up. So it would obviously be nice to repay that. I don't want to just throw money at them, I want it to be thoughtful. I'll have a think, and ask them, and see what we come up with."

It was a shock, when he turned pro, and moved to Romford (a hotbed of world-class snooker players, it turns out), to start losing games. There were far fewer tournaments at first, six or seven a year, so lots of time to brood on what went wrong. The sports press began to notch him up as a disappointment, an underachiever. Alone, and fending for himself for the first time – "I can just about use the oven. And it is hard, learning to use a washing machine and stuff" – he was, also for the first time, properly lonely. "I would come here" – to Grove Academy, where he practises; in competition season he is here for about five hours a day – "then go home, and just sit at home until the next day." Travelling, especially abroad, he sometimes now pays for a friend to come along, otherwise it is as it was in China last month: "Getting up, getting ready, playing my game, and just going back to my hotel, eating on my own, going to sleep, and that's it."

In China – where snooker is huge, even among the quite young, and he has been a pin-up, frequently mobbed by female autograph-seekers, since he was 17 – he broke up with his girlfriend of a year, a drama student. The way he describes it is somehow simultaneously honestly insightful and oblivious, both to the hurt he might cause, and to the fact that he's effectively diagnosing something fame might do to him if he's not careful. "We were never really seeing each other, because this is her last year at uni and obviously I've been travelling, nearly every two or three weeks, and so it just got to the point where it was like, 'There really is no point.'" It hasn't been too hard, though. "I won China straight away, and then I had the World Championships to concentrate on, and there's been so much attention from other people and that, it was kind of easy to put it to the back of my mind, and that was it, really. It was like a year of being with her was just gone. It was quite strange, because when I split up with my previous girlfriend [whom he had been with for a year and half] it was really hard to get over, for like, a month, but this time there was no emotion, nothing. I just kind of shut it off. I don't know – I could wake up one day and it might sink in, but obviously a year's a lot of time to just shut off, like that." In the meantime, he announced to a newspaper, with little hint of tongue-in-cheek, that "if there are groupies, bring 'em on, the more the merrier. I'm young, free and single."

And for the moment he's enjoying it. He gets recognised nearly everywhere he goes, asked for autographs and pictures; he basks in the attention. Is that what he really wants? He laughs. "Only from girls. No – obviously – when you're growing up, you kind of dream about being famous and that – but when you … I think … I won't mind it for maybe a couple of weeks, but I dunno how I'll take it after that. I think it could get quite annoying, But I'm enjoying it for the time being."

A couple of the elder statesmen of the sport have warned that he has a choice – dedication, sacrifice and world domination – or fun and fame and the occasional good tournament. What does he want? "Both. I think I dedicate myself to snooker – while I'm in season, it's just snooker, snooker, snooker – but when I'm away from it I'm completely the opposite – just go out and have fun." And what's your idea of fun? The answer is immediate. "Driving around in a supercar making as much noise as possible – getting as much attention and as much people looking at me as possible." He's definitely on his way to that particular goal.

No, this isn’t about Neil Shubin’s wonderful book about fossils, fishes, and evolutionary remnants, but a an article by Dr. Michael Mosley on, oddly, the BBC News “health” page.  You must see it, if only to watch the 30-second time-lapse video (made from high-quality scans) of the development of the embryonic human face up to ten weeks.  As Mosley explains (and the video shows), our fishy ancestry explains that curious groove between our nose and upper lip, the philtrum.  Have you ever wondered why it’s there? It doesn’t have any obvious adaptive function.  It’s an evolutionary remnant.

The video (which I’m unable to embed) shows this clearly, but Mosley explains:

The early human embryo looks very similar to the embryo of any other mammal, bird or amphibian – all of which have evolved from fish. Your eyes start out on the sides of your head, but then move to the middle. The top lip along with the jaw and palate started life as gill-like structures on your neck. Your nostrils and the middle part of your lip come down from the top of your head. There is no trace of a scar; the plates of tissue and muscle fuse seamlessly. But there is, however, a little remnant of all this activity in the middle of your top lip – your philtrum.
...

Read more

Leigh Centurions 16-22 Catalan Dragons

Leigh fell just short of dumping the 2007 Challenge Cup finalists out of the competition at their first hurdle but they gave Super League's form team a real fright in a rousing tie that provided a heap of reassuring evidence that there is plenty of life yet in the game's grand old knockout.

The Catalans showed sufficient respect for the competition, and for Ian Millward's Championship underdogs, to field their strongest available team, and it was a good job they did as they had to come from 10-0 behind and then withstand a ferocious Leigh onslaught in the last few minutes.

"It was a very even game and it would have been fitting if it had gone to golden point extra-time," said Millward, who was twice a cup-winning coach with St Helens and whose chances of filling the vacancy that recently arose at nearby Salford cannot have been harmed by this performance.

"They're a good side and they probably deserved a bit more out of that than they got," the Catalans' coach Trent Robinson said. His team had overcome Wigan, Warrington and Huddersfield in a six-match unbeaten run through April and he argued that "Leigh are the first team to have outtmuscled us for a while".

Cup upsets have been rare since the Super League revolution of 1996 opened a gulf between the full-time elite and the rest. But Leigh's part-timers gave the Catalans an early shock with two well-worked tries from Adam Higson and Tommy Goulden in the first 13 minutes to take a 10-0 lead.

The French club settled as the first half wore on, with Damien Blanch crossing in the right corner for their first try before they received an unexpected bonus from the referee James Child. Scott Dureau was unable to convert Jean-Philippe Baile's try from wide out, but Child gave him a second chance from in front of the posts, ruling that Baile had been fouled in the act of scoring – a law that is employed only slightly more frequently these days than lower division victories in the Challenge Cup. Dureau therefore reduced the Catalans' half-time deficit to 12-10, Martyn Ridyard having added a penalty to his conversion of Goulden's try.

They took the lead for the first time four minutes into the second half when the full-back Cyril Stacul caught Leigh napping from acting half on the sixth tackle. That prompted a sustained spell of Leigh pressure, with the Dragons needing all their Super League quality to stop Stuart Littler in the corner.

They appeared to have secured their place in the last 16 when the influential substitute Ian Henderson scored with 10 minutes remaining. But still Leigh refused to concede defeat and set up a breathless climax when their captain Stuart Donlan slid in.

The Dragons held on, leaving Leigh with the considerable consolation of having run them much closer than Wigan managed when the French club launched their unbeaten Super League run at the start of April. They may be out of the cup, but this was a memorable night.

Leigh Centurions Donlan (capt); Maden, Littler, Higson, McGilvray; Ridyard, Ellis; Hill, Duffy, Mills, Thornley, Goulden, Taylor. Interchange Nash, Pownall, Hopkins, Govin.

Catalan Dragons Stacul; Blanch, Farrar, Baile, Vaccari; Bosc, Dureau; Ferriol, Pelissier, Simon, Casty, Raguin, Mounis (capt). Interchange Henderson, Fakir, Baitieri, Touxagas.

Referee J Child (Dewsbury).

Here’s a tidbit from Jon Heyman’s latest column at SI.com:   It’s early in Ryan Howard‘s $125 million contract. But Howard, who has a league-leading 29 RBIs, is worth every penny so far. Couple things. One, it’s so “early in Ryan Howard’s $125 million contract” that the contact hasn’t even started yet. He signed a five-year, $125 million extension that starts in 2012. Kind of hard to be “worth every penny so far” when he hasn’t even been paid any of those pennies yet. Beyond that, Howard “has a league-leading 29 RBIs” largely because he’s come to the plate with significantly more runners on base than anyone else in the league. Howard has had 111 runners on base for his 125 plate appearances. No other NL hitter has had more than 96. Howard is hitting .266 with an .851 OPS with runners on, which is hardly anything special. Thanks to Redro Pamos.

I took a few photos of the HYA tri-blend last week and I realsied that I totally forgot to share them with you guys, which must explain why there are still some left to be bought, because there’s literally no other reason why you wouldn’t want one of these… oh come on, just buy one, [...]

Advertise here with BSA

And that's not even mentioning the deaths we're inflicting on the civilian population:

WASHINGTON -- White House Press Secretary Jay Carney reiterated on Thursday that the killing of Osama bin Laden would not alter the president’s policy with respect to the war in Afghanistan.

Speaking to reporters en route to the president’s Ground Zero visit, Carney said that strategy regarding the Afghan war “remains unchanged.”

“In many ways,” he elaborated, “while the mission against bin Laden was a singular event, it was part of a general intensification of our focus on the AfPak region, on the need to disrupt, dismantle and defeat al Qaeda, which was the primary goal of the president’s policy in the AfPak region, and it was reflective of a general success that we've been having in taking out al Qaeda members and terrorists in the region.”

"Success"? An economic black hole that's crippling our economy in a country called "the graveyard of empires" is a success? "Taking out" al Qaeda members and terrorists? Come on, Mr. President, it's time to get the hell out of there. Stop channeling Richard Nixon.

The public line is at odds with several reports that have surfaced in the immediate aftermath of bin Laden’s death in Pakistan. The Washington Post’s Rajiv Chandrasekaran, one of the most respected reporters on the beat, wrote on Tuesday evening that the Obama administration was “seeking to use the killing of Osama bin Laden to accelerate a negotiated settlement with the Taliban and hasten the end of the Afghanistan war.”

Several anti-war lawmakers, meanwhile, have heightened their calls for a more precipitous withdrawal of troops -- the process of which is set to begin in July 2011. At least one aide to an on-the-fence congressmember said that bin Laden’s death would encourage his boss to at least re-think his position. Another, Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.), has acknowledged that he is readjusting his position.

The death of bin Laden would, indeed, seem like an opportune break point at which the Obama administration could make major readjustments in its AfPak strategy without eliciting domestic criticism. A drawdown of forces would be a logical option. So too would be readjusting budget priorities to reflect the growth of al Qaeda’s presence in Pakistan.

The defunct file-sharing service Limewire is facing off with the record labels this week in front of a New York jury, and reports from the courtroom are relaying passionate arguments on both sides. The record label want to get a damage verdict greater than $1 billion, and Limewire will be hard-pressed to limit the damage to something that isn’t financially devastating to its founder, Mark Gorton.

The record industry wants to make a powerful example out of Gorton, and is demanding the maximum damages from the company and its founder—which would be $1.4 billion, according to CNET’s reporting from the courtroom. That’s far more than Gorton has, although he is wealthy—the RIAA’s lawyer made sure to mention to the jury that Gorton has a $100 million retirement fund and a fancy Upper West Side home.

Limewire lawyers said the service was being treated like a “scapegoat.” Record sales were dropping before Limewire took off, and in any case, file-sharers have been able to switch easily from one service to another since the dawn of the Internet. Gorton shouldn’t have to pay anywhere near the maximum damages, argues his lawyer, Joseph Baio. “Music that is free is here to stay,” he told the nine-person jury. “The consumer has won.”

The lawyer representing the record labels, Glenn Pomerantz, told the jury that what Gorton did was tantamount to stealing—and Gorton knew it. He designed Limewire so that he could pretend like he didn’t know illegal file-sharing was going on, working hard to establish “plausible deniability.” Pomerantz told the jury that Limewire had kicked off “the biggest theft of music in the history of the world,” according to a report in Courthouse News Service.

How will these competing narratives go over with the jury? It’s always hard to say, but I wouldn’t bet on Limewire in this situation. This is only a trial focused solely on damages—Limewire has already been found to be guilty of copyright infringement, and the jury has been told that. Juries in such a situation, knowing that a judge has already evaluated the case and favored one side, can sometimes be prone to judge somewhat harshly—consider the multiple tough judgments against the two individual file-sharers that have gone in front of juries, Joel Tenenbaum and Jammie Thomas. In addition, the RIAA is making emotional and moral arguments about right and wrong, which are easier to grasp than the economic arguments that Limewire is making.

In a sense, Limewire’s argument to jurors has to be “We know we’re bad, but come on, we’re not that bad.” It’s tough to make that argument in a compelling way. If Baio manages to limit the damage here, it will be impressive.

The jury, composed of eight women and one man, appears to be mostly middle-aged, according to CNET’s Greg Sandoval. That doesn’t favor Limewire either, since those more familiar with file-sharing—and perhaps sympathetic to it—tend to be younger and male.

The judge notified lawyers on Wednesday that the trial could last four weeks, which seems to me like a long time. I’ve seen complex patent cases argued to juries within six or seven days, so holding a four-week trial for a case that isn’t that complicated seems like it could be overkill. But judges do have great discretion in scheduling matters.

Related

• As Trial Begins, Early Results Don't Look Good For Limewire
• RIAA v. Limewire: Record Labels Will Get Paid Twice For Some Downloads
• Limewire Settles With Music Publishers But Keeps Fighting Record Labels
• Battle Over Limewire Damages Drags Google And MySpace Into The Fray
• Get Ready For The Legal Skirmishes Over LimeWire Damages

Gulf Businesses to Vacationers: Come on Down, the Water's Fine Fox Business “I am happy to say that since the spill there was been a massive water sampling program going on, and there are no reports of anything toxic in the water.” Currently, the Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric ... and more »

'They might've come to see Dirty Money but you're going to leave thinking about me,' singer says.
By Vaughn Schoonmaker

Lloyd
Photo: MTV News

Lloyd was in New York recently as the opening act for Diddy-Dirty Money's Coming Home Tour. He sat down with MTV News to discuss his upcoming album, his first concert and what it's like to open for one of hip-hop's biggest and baddest names.

Atlanta-based R&B; singer Lloyd recalled how he became Diddy's opening act after encountering Diddy on a trip to Los Angeles. "Me, Polow Da Don and the whole Zone 4 crew went to UCLA for our daily routine working out, and one day Diddy came to work out with us. I remember Diddy actually talking to me while I was in the middle of some exercises and I wouldn't look at him. He would just say, 'Come on, man! Smile, man! Be happy!' And I was just like, 'I don't want to smile. I just want to focus.' "

While many would have basked in the opportunity to converse with one of hip-hop's greatest living legends, Lloyd simply wanted to finish his grueling workout. Diddy seemed to take something from that conversation.

"I think that he just admired something about seeing how driven I was at the time," Lloyd recounted. "I think he could relate to and respect that."

The 25-year-old singer entered the mainstream music scene when he signed to the Inc. Records back in 2004, in the days when he was closely associated with co-founder Ja Rule and labelmate Ashanti. He parted ways with the Inc. in 2009 and has since landed himself a new deal with Interscope. He recalls that his path to success came with a lot of hard work and sacrifice.

"I sacrificed a lot of my childhood for music," he said, showing no signs of regret, only pride. "I signed my first record deal when I was 10."

Lloyd excitedly shared a coincidental fact about an inspiring moment. "My very first concert was a Diddy show in Atlanta," he said, smiling. "Puff came out and he just rocked it, man. I had never experienced anything like that."

Now Lloyd performs on the same stage as the star he admired so much as a kid. "Diddy's one of the first people to take hip-hop to a popular music standpoint," Lloyd noted. "He's the godfather of hip-hop!"

Lloyd is humbled by his current circumstances. "I really enjoy being an opening act because I look at it as an opportunity to earn new fans," he said.

Old fans and new fans alike can look forward to his upcoming fourth album, King of Hearts, hitting stores in June. "It's going to be my best work to date," he promised, hinting about some "real cool surprise collaborations."

"I heard a rumor that I was doing a song with Andre 3000 and Lil Wayne," Lloyd teased.

Lloyd expressed some high hopes for this tour when it comes to acquiring Diddy fans. "They might've come to see Dirty Money but you're going to leave thinking about me," he promised.

Related Videos

• Opening Act: Artists To Look Out For

Related Artists

• Lloyd
• Diddy-Dirty Money

• Only seven areas out of 379 back electoral reform
• Turnout highest in Scotland
• Mandelson says poll centred on Clegg
• AV results map

The Liberal Democrats faced a further blow tonight as polling results showed that the UK is on course to emphatically reject AV as a system to elect MPs.

On a day in which hundreds of Lib Dems lost their seats in the local and devolved elections, the party had its hopes of changing the electoral system dashed. Early results showed the no camp had won in all but seven of the 379 areas to have declared so far. The overall majority so far was put at 68.3% to the yes camp's 31.7%.

Danny Alexander, a Liberal Democrat cabinet minister, conceded that the party's attempt to replace the first-past-the-post system with the alternative vote had failed, with the no camp outperforming the opinion polls by some distance in the UK's first national referendum since 1975.

Alexander, who was involved in drafting the coalition deal in which the Lib Dems stipulated the referendum as part of their deal with the Conservatives, said: "It looks like we are going to lose quite handsomely. It will be a victory for the no campaign. We wanted to have a referendum. We wanted to give the people the chance to vote on transforming our voting system, helping to put more power in people's hands.

"It is disappointing that people have chosen to vote the way they have. I think there is a whole number of reasons for that, but I think the most important thing is to accept with good grace the verdict of the people and say, 'That's that'."

The Electoral Commission said 18.6 million votes had been cast across the UK, a provisional turnout of 41.8%, although this figure does not include Northern Ireland.

With such a strong showing for the no campaign, the postmortem has started, with some campaigners saying the vote has put back electoral reform for a generation.

Lord Mandelson, a former Labour minister and a keen proponent of electoral reform, said AV supporters had paid a "big price" for staging the national poll on the same day as the first elections since the general election. He also criticised the yes campaign for failing to do the "groundwork" and paid tribute to David Cameron for some "very bold leadership".

The prime minister had "mobilised" his support effectively, even at the expense of coalition unity, said Mandelson.

Describing himself as disappointed but "entirely unsurprised" by results coming in, Mandelson said: "Nobody could have foreseen the extent to which the whole vote over the last 24 hours has become a referendum on the Liberal Democrats in general, and Nick Clegg in particular."

He added: "I think that the public felt the thing had come out of the blue as the result of some arrangement between the coalition partners and they didn't see why AV was such a big deal. I don't think they felt AV was the solution to many of the problems they feel are in our political system."

The highest turnout (50.7%) was in Scotland, which held the devolved Scottish elections on the same day. The lowest turnout was in London (35%).

Predictions that the capital would produce a turnout as low as 15% – being the only region without other elections taking place – proved wide of the mark, with more than twice that number casting their vote.

Some of the first results in the AV referendum came from areas held by Lib Dems at Westminster – all of them delivering an emphatic rejection of the constitutional change that the party has championed. The Isles of Scilly was first to declare, with 65.3% support voting no, followed by the Lib Dem-held Orkney Islands, with 60.2% for no. The no campaign won all of the first nine areas to declare, with a thumping 70.27% to the yes campaign's 29.73%.

Jeremy Browne, a Lib Dem minister, acknowledged the yes campaign had failed to make "a sufficiently compelling case".

Browne told the BBC: "It already looks like there is a pattern in place. I do think there is an onus on the people who want to make a change to make the case for the change, and the yes campaign ultimately didn't make a sufficiently compelling case."

The turnout figures were published amid bitter recriminations within the Lib Dem camp over the tactics of their Tory coalition partners leading the no campaign.

Lord Ashdown, a former Lib Dem leader, who appeared effectively to concede defeat in the AV battle, said the Tories were also guilty of "bloody stupidity" for failing to prevent the no campaign – mostly funded by its supporters – targeting Nick Clegg personally.

"I don't put that in the box marked betrayal but I put it in the box marked bloody stupidity. And the truth is there are consequences for that," he said.

Moving his sights toward Cameron, Ashdown said any other prime minister would have dissociated himself from the "lies" produced by the no campaign.

"This is a triumph for the regiment of lies. We live with pretty strenuous political campaigns in Britain, but these were downright lies," he told the Guardian.

"David Cameron is the prime minister. He sets the tone of politics in this country. It is an unhappy fact that when he was asked to dissociate himself from a campaign that was run on the basis of personalisation and personal attacks, and messages that were far more than some subtle bending of the truth, he refused to do that."

Cameron sought to build bridges by insisting earlier that there would be "no celebrating, no congratulations" if the British public rejects AV.

He said he wanted a "clear result" but tried to play down the implications for the coalition, saying: "Whether [the result] is a 'Yes' or a 'No' there will be no celebrating, there will be no congratulations, the issue will be settled and we can get on with the vital work we're doing as a coalition, governing in the national interest."

But the Lib Dems signalled that tensions were far from resolved. Chris Huhne, the energy secretary, said there was "extraordinary anger" about the Tory behaviour in the no campaign "from top to bottom of the Liberal Democrats".

The crushing no vote follows large-scale Lib Dem losses in local and devolved elections, which Clegg branded "a real knock".

The Lib Dem deputy leader, Simon Hughes, told the BBC that the no camp had conducted a "fundamentally fallacious campaign" which would affect the coalition.

Hughes said that the five-year coalition deal would not change, but he added: "It will mean, from now on, we are very clear that we will keep to what the coalition has agreed in the coalition agreement – that other stuff will not be allowed in as policy unless our party has agreed to it, and I guess that the same will apply for the Tory party."

He said the party would now assert its independence in Westminster by extracting concessions on issues such as House of Lords reform and the expansion of private healthcare provision in the NHS. Hughes told BBC Radio 4's PM programme: "Lords reform is a done deal – that was part of the coalition agreement.

"NHS reform is absolutely the area that is now in the frontline. It is absolutely clear that what has been proposed in [Health Secretary] Andrew Lansley's Bill is not what was agreed in the coalition agreement and is not what our party members and supporters have agreed to.

"That will be changed and if it is not sufficiently changed it will not happen."

He dismissed suggestions that Clegg's position might be challenged, insisting the Lib Dem leader was "personally and politically as strong as when he joined the government".

But Tory backbencher Mark Field said Cameron's position had been "very much strengthened" by the results and the prime minister would not be in a mood to make "undue concessions" to Liberal Democrats following their "catastrophic" showing.

Field told the PM show: "Clearly there will be an effort to try and shore up Nick Clegg's position, but the idea that there will be a whole lot of policy concessions allowing the liberals to look good in the months to come is way, way short of the mark."

The final AV result will be formally announced by the Electoral Commission later tonight.

Osama bin Laden's death prompted celebrations in the US but elsewhere the response has been more sceptical

Expert commentators Colonel Tim Collins, former Royal Irish Regiment commander and counterinsurgency expert, AC Grayling, professor of philosophy at Birkbeck College, University of London, Mona Siddiqui, professor of Islamic Studies at the University of Glasgow, and Giles Fraser, Canon Chancellor of St Paul's Cathedral give their views on the killing of Osama bin Laden.

1 Do you have any concerns over how the operation was handled?

AG I have concerns over the fact that it seems Osama bin Laden was shot out of hand rather than arrested and put on trial. The US and its Nato allies are meant to stand for due process in law and proper legal procedures. For no doubt very justifiable, pragmatic reasons, it was just an assassination.

TC No. It's achieved its aims so it was a successful mission.

MS Difficult to know because the story keeps changing.

GF It looks more and more like an assassination. So yes, it concerns me. They didn't want to see the rule of law being followed and Bin Laden put on trial.

2 Was Bin Laden a legitimate target for execution?

AG He was certainly a legitimate target for arrest and trial and I have no doubt that the pragmatists everywhere will say that if he had been put on trial it would have been a focus for terrorism and martyrdom and arrests. From the practical point of view you can understand the motivation but it's very hard to excuse it.

TC You have the most dangerous man in the world and the expectation that he is unlikely to want to be taken alive. You've a duty of care towards the people you send. They should be in no doubt — and if in doubt — they should take him on, so I think they did the right thing.

MS He was definitely a legitimate target for capture.

GF I don't support the death penalty. I'm against it.

3 Was it legitimate to send US forces into Pakistan without telling its government?

AG Given the fact that the Pakistani authorities have been very ambiguous in the war against terror, it's pretty obvious that part of their army and certainly part of their intelligence services have been supporting the Taliban and al-Qaida. It makes it very difficult and if the Americans had told the Pakistanis that they were going to go in, they probably would have alerted Bin Laden and he might have got away. From a practical point of view you can understand what happened, but from the international law point of view, of course they should have consulted the Pakistani authorities.

TC I'm not sure that [no consultation] happened, despite what the Pakistani and US governments say.

MS I'm sure the US have carried out other operations in Pakistan before without telling the government and the Pakistan government will allow them because they receive such large US funding.

GF Let's put that under the umbrella of realpolitik.

4 If he was unarmed, as has been reported, was it wrong for him to have been killed?

AG Yes, absolutely. In the idea, if we are going to live by our principles, we should do the tough thing — the harder thing — which is to arrest and put on trial. You don't just shoot down an unarmed person — that's what terrorists do and you don't want to emulate them.

TC I don't think he was killed for the sake of killing, in the same way that [the IRA's] Danny McCann in Gibraltar was shot. With someone who has taken as many innocent lives as Bin Laden and McCann, why wouldn't they take your life when confronted? Caution must be the watchword and unless he had made absolutely clear he was unarmed and did not wish to resist, then the safe thing to do would be to neutralise a target like that and kill him.

MS For a lot of people revenge would mean death, no matter how. Bin Laden had become de-humanised; yet he had also become more than human – and the US wanted to get rid of that symbol.

GF If he posed some threat to the people who were trying to arrest him, then I could understand that. If he did not, then it was wrong to shoot him.

5 Is it acceptable that other people were killed and wounded in the operation?

AG Only if they were putting up armed resistance and it was a case of self-defence. But it looks like there were women and children involved as well. This is the use of force in response to completely unbridled atrocities by al-Qaida. It just shows you Thucydides's point, which he made over 2,000 years ago, about how our whole moral outlook and behaviour is corrupted if we fight fire with fire and respond in the way that they respond.

TC There was a 40-minute gunfight with somebody. I think they'll find they can never win. On one hand, they're coming forward with the facts as they find them out and there's criticism that they keep changing the story: well that's what happens in life. On the other hand, if they were to rock back and refuse to discuss anything whilst they fully investigate everything and then come along six months later and say, "Here's what happened", with a definite debrief from everyone, then people will say there's a cover-up, so they can't win.

MS It's not legitimate that the deaths of innocents should have been caused.

GF I don't know the full circumstances. [Maybe] if you are going to arrest someone and people fire back and you are in the middle of a war…

6 Should greater efforts have been made to take him alive?

AC Efforts should have been made to take him alive in order for a due process of law to be engaged in.

TC If the world's been looking for the geezer for nine years and 265 days and they find him, parting his hair to the left isn't an option. What you've got to be able to do is hope that you actually encounter him and be prepared when you encounter him — him being the most dangerous man in the world — to protect yourself. And I think that's the best you can hope for. Why didn't they wing him like they do in the Hollywood movies? Because that's fantasy.

MS We should have taken him alive and put him on trial. The desire to kill him is being seen as synonymous with the end of a problem. It's not; it's just another death.

GF It doesn't look like they made any effort to take him alive. They should have.

7 Would it have been preferable to capture him and put him on trial?

AG It would have been preferable to do that — not because it would have been easier and not because it would have saved other lives in future — but because in the ideal, if we were to live up to the principles of our civilisation (or the ones we claim, anyway) it would have been the right thing to do. But practicality makes very, very different demands.

TC I don't think that was a consideration. Had he been captured, I think we would have had a whole series of issues about jurisdiction and where he would have been tried and by whom. It would have been very complicated. Now that he's dead, it's much less complicated. But ultimately, there was intelligence which could have been gleaned from that. The fact of the matter is it's probably neater that he wasn't captured but the right thing probably would have been to capture him.

MS It would have been difficult to give him a fair trial. I'm not saying he wouldn't have been guilty. But two of the pillars on which the west stands are freedom and justice – this action diminishes that status.

GF He was a war criminal and should have been put on trial. People are dying in that part of the world to establish the rule of law and human rights. Going in and shooting him undermines the whole of that purpose. A lot of people are using 'justice' as a euphemism for 'revenge'. It's absolutely wrong.

by Makenna Goodman.

Climate change is the issue of our time. Its ill effects will fall heaviest on the people who have least contributed to it: billions in the global south. But no one will escape the impact of the warming climate, and one place it will manifest most obviously is on our plates. If we look at chile peppers, for example, it’s easy to see how the negative effects of climate change have affected the food on our plates and the farmers behind that food. In their new book, Chasing Chiles: Hot Spots Along the Pepper Trail, authors (and self-titled “gastronauts”) Gary Nabhan, Kurt Michael Friese, and Kraig Kraft clear a path in the rubble on their beloved “spice ship,” with the chile pepper as their guide. You’ll never see hot sauce in the same way again. In this interview, the three spoke as a team, so I’ve conglomerated their answers to reflect their pepper-infused mind-meld.

Q. Your new book, Chasing Chiles: Hot Spots Along the Pepper Trail looks at both the future of place-based foods and the effects of climate change on agriculture through the lens of the chile pepper. Why the chile pepper, as opposed to, say, corn?

A. There is an easy enough metaphor behind the heat of chiles and the heat of global warming, but really it’s much more than that. Chiles are grown all over the world and have become the hallmarks of certain cuisines. There exists a tremendous amount of diversity in the shapes, tastes, and ecological adaptations of the chiles that reveal much to us about how climate change is affecting place-based foods. But there is also great diversity in how people process and consume chile peppers. They fire up people’s imaginations (and taste buds) in ways that corn, wheat, or soy can’t do. Plus we happen to love the hot little suckers.

Q. Over a year-long journey traveling in the U.S. and Mexico, the three of you—an agroecologist, a chef, and an ethnobotanist—came face to face with the realities of once thriving farms and producers now in danger of losing chiles integral to their local cultural identity. What chiles did you focus on, and why?

A. Of course there are many more heirloom chiles than the handful we focused on in the book. We happened to choose these because they are integral parts to the places we visited. Chimayos in New Mexico, Chiltepines in Sonora, Habaneros in the Yucatan, Tabascos in Louisiana, Datils in St. Augustine, Fish Peppers near Chesapeake Bay, even Beaver Dam peppers in Wisconsin and Jimmy Nardellos in Connecticut—each chile pepper has its own poignant (and pungent!) story and a role in local culture and cuisines.  

Q. How did the three of you come together to work on this project?

A. It started with a conversation between Gary and Kurt, about following the pepper trail—tracing how this simple nightshade made its way from Central America all the way to Southeast Asia. Gary admired the vitality of Kraig’s field work and enthusiasm for chile cultures, so we invited him on board the “spice ship.” For our first orbit, we decided to focus on plant hunting for peppers in North America. But we hope to take the spice ship around the world someday.

Q. I didn’t realize Tabasco™ sauce was once created solely from Tabasco™ peppers grown at the McIllhenny company production site in Avery Island, Louisiana. And while the company still produces all of their seed peppers in the original location, currently their peppers are farmed in over 165 countries worldwide. In your book, you talk about how this could be seen as a model for achieving resilience in the face of climate change. Can you speak more to this issue?

A. The key idea here is indeed resilience, the capacity to survive change. How do we adapt our culinary traditions and our cultures to deal with the changes that come with global warming without compromising identity and authenticity? 

For those who saw the vulnerability at Avery Island of having all their chiles in one basket, it was a very easy decision. Diversify where Tabasco would be grown, or risk losing everything. Yet in implementing some viable bet-hedging strategies, the McIllhennys admirably maintained links to tradition. All their peppers—wherever they are grown—are mashed with salt mined from Avery Island and all the seed for all the Tabasco grown elsewhere is maintained and propagated at Avery Island. Forced to make a change, this community figured out a way to adapt which maintained some sense of place and tradition.  

Q. How has the sustainable food movement and increased interest in terroir affected small-scale chile growers in the U.S.?

A. Because of the resurgence of direct marketing by small-scale growers, there is more vegetable diversity offered today at farmers markets, through CSAs and in grocery stores than a dozen years ago. Terroir—the taste of place—is still better known in wines, tequilas, maple syrup, and coffees than in vegetables and fruits, but growers and connoisseurs know it has been there all along. This, however, is the first book of many recent ones discussing the taste of place which recognizes that terroirs as we know them are being dramatically scrambled by climate change. [See Gary Nabhan’s Grist post on “global weirding and the scrambling of terroir.”]

Q. What is the most delicious chile dish each of you have ever had, and where did you eat it?

A. Kurt: Of course I can’t pick just one, but for me the most delightful recent discovery was learning about Xnipec in the Yucatan. It’s a kind of pico de gallo with habanero chiles and sour orange juice, sometimes they add cabbage. The name comes from the Mayan for “dog’s nose,” because when you eat it, it may make your nose run from the heat.

Kraig: Only one? A green chile cheeseburger —either in my parent’s backyard, or at the Owl Bar and Cafe in San Antonio, New Mexico.

Gary: So many chiles, so little time ... My two favorite traditional chile products are the Halaby pepper from Aleppo, Syria and chile Coban from Guatemala, but my favorite dishes is Ysleta green chile stews served near El Paso and my own chiltepin-vanilla bean ice cream, which is so hot you have to eat more of it to cool yourself down ...

Q. How can other chile lovers join the movement to protect and support heirloom chiles and their farmers?

A. A mutual friend of ours, Poppy Tooker, has coined the phrase “You’ve got to eat it to save it!” which is so true. The more of a market that exists for heirloom and local foods—not just chiles—the better their chance for survival.

For those who are gardeners, the best thing they can do is to grow and save and share heirloom seeds at home. In addition, there are some great organizations doing important work to protect biodiversity in our food system, including chiles. Native Seeds/SEARCH, Seed Savers Exchange, and Southern Exposure Seed Exchange are among the many nonprofits that work to conserve chile seed stocks and their related cultural legacies. And of course, support the chile farmers themselves and the many nonprofits working to save food biodiversity, such as Slow Food and its Ark of Taste.

Related Links:

Nisbet is wrong: the forces of climate progress are not as strong as their foes

How to profit from the coming ecopocalypse

New York Times blows the Dust Bowl story

By Drew ~

Most people say that in times of greatest trial is when God strengthens faith the most. While that might be generally true, in my case it isn't.

I was raised Lutheran. I used to attend church regularly. I was fervent during our Confirmation classes. I studied my Bible, I took notes during the pastor's sermon, and I attended youth rallies and conventions with our youth group. I accepted all of the Bible's teachings without question. Moreover, I was encouraged to NOT question, because Jesus said that it is best to have a "child-like faith." And children don't question, they accept what the adults tell them.

Once I turned 18, I stopped going to church. There wasn't any real reason for it, other than I was going out every Saturday night and getting up at 7 to make it to church by 8 was a drag.

At about this time my parents were having problems. My father drank constantly. He wasn't a belligerent drunk, nor was he abusive. He was just negligent. To everything that mattered, to his family and business. My mother turned to her pastor. He, doing his job, told her that God didn't condone divorce, and that she should try and "work it out" with her husband. I told her that if she was unhappy being married to a man that loved the can/bottle more than her and her children(my brother and myself), then she needed to get out. I told her that I only cared about her happiness.

At age 19 she divorced my dad. He was a piteous thing. Crying and calling at all hours, begging for forgiveness while, at the same time, indulging in the thing that drove my mother from him. It was absurd and sad. He even became violent with me one night when I tried to escort him from her apartment. That didn't end well for him.

We fast forward about 7 years or so. At 25 I was living on my own for 7 years or so, living with some friends. I'd been through a lot of stuff, being cheated on, dumped, failed experiments in love. The usual for a mid-20's guy. My mother got remarried to a wonderful man that treats her well.

At nearly 27 I was diagnosed with kidney failure. The totality of that was catastrophic. I was admitted that evening with 5% kidney function. The doctors were amazed that I was still alive and functioning. I should have been dead. Six months after my diagnoses I had a transplant. My mother donated to me.

"If God is so powerful, then why did it take a PERSON to save my life?" When no answers came to me, that's when I officially lost my faith. I was an atheist. It was during this time that I officially lost my faith. I couldn't tell you what it was, exactly. Perhaps it was that everyone told me that "God still loves you, and he has a plan for you." That one idea, that despite almost being dead, coming hours(quite literally) away from being dead, he still loved me.

I started to think about what my mother did to save me and thought, "If God is so powerful, then why did it take a PERSON to save my life?" When no answers came to me, that's when I officially lost my faith. I was an atheist.

Looking back, my faith was failing long before. I'd been unhappy in my spiritual path, and had been unsure how to improve the spiritual scenery. I was already losing my grasp on why I believed. I began to question everything. No answers came, no matter who I asked or where I inquired.

I was terrified of telling my mother and step-father. They are both devout Christians, and tend to think in only those terms. They informed me that "people at our church are praying for you," when I was in the hospital. I kept thinking, "Wow. So they're taking a few moments to think nice thoughts about me? Big deal. That doesn't help ME at all."

About a year after the transplant, I'd begun looking into other spiritual paths. Paganism didn't appeal to me, as it centered on more deification of the natural world. Islam and Judaism were more of the Abrahamic tradition and wouldn't help me anymore than Christianity did. Then I was turned on to a book. "Siddhartha" by Herman Meyer(I think that's how his name is spelled). My mind devoured it. I bought books by the Dalai Lama and other Buddhist monks.

At this time my FaceBook page said I was "agnostic." I wasn't quite ready to face my mother's disbelief and guilt over her professed "failure" with me. But, just that one thing, the labeling of my doubt, was enough to engender a speech about her failings as a parent.

When I tried to explain my feelings, my doubts, my questions, I was dismissed as being argumentative. She held onto the idea that MY life was a result of hers. She took my being "agnostic" as a personal failure on her part. So, after a few months I had to change it again. Atheist/Buddhist.

Now, everything I post that even suggests I have a question and a lack of understanding about things in the Bible she labels as combative and defamatory. I love my mother. She gave me life. Twice. She's a strong example of what women should be, and I'd do well to find a woman similar to her to spend the rest of my life with.

Yet, I know I cannot date a Christian woman. Whenever it comes up, she looks like she's going to cry. My step-father and I have a more intellectual look at things. He's a great man, and I think understands my "crisis of faith," as they call it. I know it isn't a "crisis," but a "death" of faith. I do not believe, and I feel I haven't for almost ten years.

So, where most people's tragedy with organ failure, and a brush with death, might make them MORE apt to believe, in miracles, God, and fate, my experience proved to me the LACK of those things. The idea that "It rains on saints and sinners both" is only proof to me that there isn't any divine justice in this world. Instead, it proves to me what the Buddha said, "Life is suffering."

This is where my story ends. As of now I've been a "practicing Buddhist" for nearly a year now. I've been a "practicing Atheist" for almost four. I've come to accept that when people ask me "What do you believe in?" in wonder, all I can answer is, "I believe in myself."

Warning: what's below is cheeky and irreverent. Because that's the kind of person Serie A editor Kirsten Schlewitz is.

Week 36 in Serie A is about one thing and one thing only. Forget the relegation struggles, forget the battle for fourth place -- all eyes are watching AC Milan on Saturday, waiting for them to clinch the title. Whooohooo bring out the booze.

Saturday

18:00 CET, 12:00 PM ET

Palermo v Bari

Bari might be relegated, but they certainly gave it the old college try last week, very nearly beating Roma before Aleandro Rosi stole the show and all three points. Palermo lost 3-1 to Parma last weekend and have no chance of finishing anywhere but midtable. This match starts off the week because if it had any competition, no one would have a reason to watch.

20:45 CET, 2:45 PM ET

AS Roma v AC Milan

And this is the match everyone is waiting for -- by the end of Saturday, Milan could be holding the scudetto. Roma are without Daniele De Rossi and Simone Perrotta due to their, shall we say, utter stupidity in picking up straight reds last weekend at Bari. Milan, meanwhile, welcome back Zlatan Ibrahimović, at least until he mouths off again and gets sent off in the 53rd minute. Fortunately they've got Alexandre Pato back, too, which is a relief as it's been about two weeks since anyone's made a duck joke. Chill the champagne, everyone.

Sunday

18:00 CET, 12:00 PM ET

Bologna v Parma

When I wasn't looking, Parma vaulted themselves into safety, their three straight wins coming mostly through January loan signing Amauri. Not sure what's weirder: Parma being above Bologna in the standings or Amauri looking like a footballer rather than a useless lump. Anyway, safety to both, moving along.

Brescia v Catania

Brescia aren't quite relegated yet, but need at least seven points from their last three matches to save themselves. While Catania might be an annoying thorn in many teams' sides, at least they're slightly more interesting to watch than boring, boring Brescia, so let's just put that nail in the coffin this weekend.

Cagliari v Cesena

Come on, Seahorses! No reason other than that is needed.

Inter Milan v Fiorentina

Out of seemingly nowhere, Fiorentina pulled a fast one on Udinese last week, scoring five goals against the suddenly struggling side. Can the Viola repeat that feat against Inter? Probably not -- remember, Leonardo has a plan. And that plan involves forcing Giampaolo Pazzini to lull the opposition into a false sense of security, heading wide multiple times before stoppage time kicks in and he's allowed to put the ball into the net. Keep an eye on that master tactician, Fiorentina.

Lecce v Napoli

Lecce are third from bottom. Napoli should be able to easily pull off a win and maintain third place. In other words, Napoli will freak out, forget how to pass, lose the ball in midfield, and help Lecce stay out of Serie B.

Udinese v Lazio

Is there a such thing as a Champions League six-pointer? Lazio and Udinese are separated by just a point, but with the way things are going for both sides, it may be Roma that slips in to take the fourth spot. If Lazio hadn't seen Cristian Ledesma sent off against Juventus, they likely would have found at least a point last week. Trouble is, Lazio have seen a man sent off in nearly every match in 2011, it seems. Fortunately for the Roman side, they won't have to deal with Alexis Sanchez, who seemingly invites teams to earn red cards as he dances around defenders. Still, this one will likely end as a draw.

20:45 CET, 2:45 PM ET

Genoa v Sampdoria

Hey, a derby! Let's show this last on Sunday because it's a derby and those are always thrilling! Mocking aside, Sampdoria have found a run of decent form in their last two matches...against Bari and Brescia. Ok, mock away. Genoa have nothing to play for except the thrill of beating their local rivals. Could Samp really be heading down?

Monday

18:00 CET, 12:00 PM ET

Juventus v Chievo Verona

I'm sure there's some sort of reason behind Juventus playing on Monday two weeks in a row. But I don't know what that reason is, and I refuse to do research into it. Watch this match because there's nothing else on, but set your expectations low, because Gigi Delneri certainly has.

Aboard Air Force One
En Route Indianapolis, Indiana

10:36 A.M. EDT

MR. CARNEY:  I just want to mention a couple of things before I get started here.  First, as you all know, we had an employment report today that showed private sector payrolls increasing by 268,000 in April, which makes 14 consecutive months of private sector employment growth.  During that period, the economy added 2.1 million private sector jobs, including more than 800,000 jobs since the beginning of the year.

This is obviously good news.  The February number was revised upwards to 261,000 private sector jobs created, and the March number was estimated upward to 231,000 -- very, very solid; an average of approximately a quarter of a million private sector jobs created each month for three straight months. 

We're pleased about that.  We obviously have a lot more work to do.  The recession cost the American labor force 8 million jobs and we're still digging ourselves out of that hole. 

Next I'd like to just remind you about where we're going today.  The President will first visit Allison Transmission, which is a leader in hybrid technology and the world’s largest manufacturer of fully automatic transmissions for medium and heavy-duty commercial vehicles, tactical military vehicles, and hybrid compulsion systems.  This visit is meant to highlight the President’s commitment to diversifying our energy requirements, to reduce our dependence on imported oil, and to ensure that we are leaders in clean energy technology in the 21st century.

Finally, I just wanted to note that when we go to Fort Campbell today, the President and Vice President will be visiting with members of the 101st Airborne Division, which, if you don't know, has such a remarkable history, beginning in World War II, where they were the first allied forces to set foot on occupied France territory; fought valiantly through World War II; were a vital division during the Cold War, Vietnam, Operation Desert Storm and then obviously in the Iraq war, and most recently in Afghanistan.  Extraordinary service, extraordinary sacrifice.

What is less known is that it was elements of the 101st Airborne Division who were sent by President Eisenhower to Little Rock to ensure that the “Little Rock Nine” attended Little Rock Central High School.  It was also elements of the 101st that were sent to help make sure that James Meredith was able to attend as the first African American at the University of Mississippi.  So it is a noble, noble history.  And both the President and Vice President look forward to that visit.

With that I will take your questions.

Q    Jay, the President has said he doesn't want to spike the ball.  But he’s speaking to troops.  Doesn't he expect a celebratory mood there in the wake of bin Laden’s death?  And does that kind of go against that mood that he’s trying to -- a non-gloating mood?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, I don't expect you’ll hear the President spiking the ball or gloating when he speaks to troops returning from Afghanistan today.  The point he will make is that while the successful mission against Osama bin Laden was an historic and singular event, it does not by any means mean that we are finished with the war against al Qaeda.  The fight goes on.

And one of the reasons why the President refocused our resources and attention on the Afghanistan-Pakistan region, increased our commitment there in terms of troops -- which these troops represent -- is because he believed very strongly that al Qaeda central was the number one target -- should be the number one target of that effort.

He’s going to speak to these troops to thank them for their service.  They have fought valiantly and incurred significant casualties in that effort.  So there’s nothing -- there’s no intent to gloat at all in that regard.

Q    Is he meeting with members of the teams that carried out the operation to get Osama bin Laden?

MR. CARNEY:  What I can say is that he is meeting with special operators -- some special operators who were involved in that, but that is all I can say.

Q    On the bin Laden operation, Al Arabia is reporting that al Qaeda is now -- may not come as a shock -- threatening to attack the U.S. in retaliation for killing bin Laden.  Is the President aware of that?  And what’s his thinking on that?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, we are aware of it, seen the reports.  What it does do, obviously, is acknowledge the obvious, which is that Osama bin Laden was killed on Sunday night by U.S. forces.

Q    Is there any more concern now that there’s been --

MR. CARNEY:  We're being extremely vigilant.  You can ask questions of the Department of Homeland Security as well, but the -- we’re quite aware of the potential for activity and are highly vigilant on that matter for that reason. 

One of the things we saw I think last night was the notice that DHS put out with regard to the information collected about the consideration at least of a terrorist plot against American railways back in February of 2010.  The fact that the world’s most wanted terrorist might have been considering further terror plots against the United States is not a surprise, but it reminds us, of course, that we need to remain ever vigilant.    

Q    Jay, can you at least tell us whether this group of special operators that you referred to will include Navy SEALs or helicopter pilots --

MR. CARNEY:  I’m not going to say anything more about that.  It is extremely important that I say nothing more.

Q    If we’re done with the bin Laden questions, or are you not?  On another matter, the Republican congressional leaders appear to be backing away from attempting to pass their Medicare plan prior to the 2012 election it’s widely reported today.  What does the President think about that?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, I would say simply that the talks that the Vice President led yesterday, the initial meeting of the members of Congress and team from the administration, was productive.  And we certainly think that it’s a good thing if those who are participating in those negotiations understand that in order to achieve compromise, we need to find common ground. 

We obviously have -- the President has laid out his plan, and there are elements of stark contrast with the House Republican’s budget that passed.  What we’re looking for now is where we can find some common ground to achieve a goal that Republicans and Democrats share, which is reducing the debt significantly, getting our fiscal house in order and, as the President sees it, while making sure that we protect the investments we need to protect in order to continue to grow the economy, continue to create jobs and educate our children.

Q    Does the President have any reaction to the report today that CEO pay is up 25 percent over last year  --

MR. CARNEY:  I haven’t heard him react to that, no.

Q    Jay, can you tell us anything about the President’s immigration speech next week and any other events from the week ahead?

MR. CARNEY:  What I can say is that the speech will reflect the President’s continued commitment to find a bipartisan way to create a bipartisan -- rather comprehensive immigration reform.  As I think I said earlier this week, the fact that we were not able to achieve that in the first two years only means that we need to refocus our efforts and try to find that compromise.  In the past, obviously there has been Republican support for the kind of comprehensive immigration reform that is necessary and we hope that there will be again in the future.  

Q    -- rest of the week ahead?

MR. CARNEY:  I do have that, if you’re ready for it.

Q    Can you field more questions after?

MR. CARNEY:  Do you want to ask those questions first, and then I’ll do --

Q    In April of 2008, President Obama -- or then candidate Obama appeared at a gas station in Indiana -- gas was at $3.60 a gallon -- said we need to vote for change, a new set of policies. He’s returning to Indiana now with gas well over $4.00 a gallon. What does it say about the success he has had over the last three years in dealing with the fuel issue, the gas issue?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, I think you’ve heard the President speak quite a lot lately about the impact of high gas prices on Americans’ pocketbooks and wallets.  We’re very concerned about it.  We do note the steep drop in oil prices in the last couple of days.  And I would also note that one of the things the Attorney General task force will be looking at is coordinating with state attorneys general to make sure that we don’t have a what I’ve heard described as a “rockets-and-parachutes phenomenon,” where prices at the pump rocket up when oil prices rocket up, and yet they come down in a parachute fashion when oil prices go down.  So we want to make sure that a drop in oil prices is appropriately reflected in a drop in gas prices at the pump.

Q    Does the President believe gas prices will drop in the coming months?  The futures market seem to be indicating they will.

MR. CARNEY:  We don’t predict markets here, obviously.  And we have seen a drop.  We have -- but they go up and down.  The President, as you know, has said many times that there are no silver bullet solutions here, no short-term solutions, and that’s why he is committed to -- while we are doing the things in the short term that we hope can provide some relief, the big challenge is the long-term solution that weans us off our dependence on foreign oil, that diversifies our energy supply, that allows us to build clean energy industries in the United States that both enhance our national security and provide quality jobs in this country. 

So that’s been his commitment; you’ve heard him speak about that many times.  You’ll hear him speak about it again today in Indiana.

Q    What does the President think about all the Monday morning quarterbacking on the Osama bin Laden operation?  Does he think it’s helpful -- all the criticism and the questioning about how it went down?  Does it --

MR. CARNEY:  I haven’t heard much criticism about how it went down.  What I’ve heard is a pretty universal acclamation of the fact that a remarkable team of U.S. personnel conducted one of the most -- one of the riskiest operations imaginable flawlessly, and limited collateral damage and civilian casualties, achieved their goal of bringing Osama bin Laden to justice, and returned safely every single American.

So I think that is what most people have focused on, appropriately, because it was a remarkable achievement that was the product of years of intelligence work, years of training in the case of the personnel involved in the actual mission, and some very bold decision-making by the President and others to bring this about.

Q    Jay, how did he feel about yesterday’s events in New York?

MR. CARNEY:  He felt very good about it.  I think he -- the meetings with firefighters, with the police, with families and loved ones of victims were powerful events.  And I think he understands that this is a bittersweet moment, especially for those who lost loved ones in 9/11, both in New York, in Pennsylvania and at the Pentagon.  And he was very glad he made the trip.

Q    Jay, the President won Indiana by less than 30,000 votes in ’08.  Does he think that it’s as tough or even tougher political environment right now for him to get support for his agenda or even win reelection?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, I think that it’s a long time before next year’s election, and he’s focused on the things that a President needs to be focused on -- our national security -- his focus on that I think has been quite evident in the last several days; and the economy, which is what he’ll be focusing on today in Indiana.

I think that the President firmly believes that making the right policy decisions tends to be beneficial come political season, but for him, at least, political season is a long way off.

Q    -- we’re flying into another swing state.

MR. CARNEY:  The fact is that this -- Allison Transmission is, as I just read to you, a major manufacturer of the kind of the technology that the President believes is going to help us win the future in the 21st century.  So I think we go where the action is, and in this case, this company is where the action is.

Q    Did the President watch the Fox News Republican debate last night?

MR. CARNEY:  I haven’t asked him.  I don't know.  I think there was some basketball on last night -- maybe there wasn’t, maybe that's tonight -- so I don't know.  I think the Bulls are playing tonight, is that right?  Well, come on, guys. 

Yes.  Okay, I can do the week ahead if you don't have any more questions.

On Monday, the President will meet with heads of the Chinese Strategic Economic Dialogue delegation at the White House. 

On Tuesday, the President will travel, as you know, to the El Paso, Texas area to deliver a speech on comprehensive immigration reform.  He will then travel to Austin, Texas, before returning to Washington, D.C.

On Wednesday, the President will participate in a CBS Town Hall at the Newseum.  In the evening, the President and the First Lady will host a celebration of American poetry and prose by welcoming accomplished poets, musicians and artists, as well as students, from across the country to the White House.

On Thursday, the President will deliver remarks at the National Hispanic Prayer Breakfast. 

And on Friday, the President will attend meetings at the White House.

Q    The town hall is Wednesday, not Thursday?  Initially it was --

MR. CARNEY:  That’s correct, it’s Wednesday. 

All right, thanks, guys.

END
10:52 A.M. EDT

Over in comments they are discussing how to translate the ablative absolutes of Tacitus... ---- 20110506 Romanes Eunt Domus: [Brian is writing graffiti on the palace wall. The Centurion catches him in the act] Centurion: What's this, then? "Romanes eunt domus"? People called Romanes, they go, the house? Brian: It says, "Romans go home. " Centurion: No it doesn't ! What's the latin for "Roman"? Come on, come on ! Brian: Er, "Romanus" ! Centurion: Vocative plural of "Romanus" is? Brian: Er, er, "Romani" ! Centurion: [Writes "Romani" over Brian's graffiti] "Eunt"? What is "eunt"? Conjugate the verb, "to go" ! Brian: Er, "Ire". Er, "eo", "is", "it", "imus", "itis", "eunt". Centurion: So, "eunt" is...? Brian: Third person plural present indicative, "they go". Centurion: But, "Romans, go home" is an order. So you must use...? [He twists Brian's ear] Brian: Aaagh ! The imperative ! Centurion: Which is...? Brian: Aaaagh ! Er, er, "i" ! Centurion: How many Romans? Brian: Aaaaagh ! Plural, plural, er, "ite" ! Centurion: [Writes "ite"] "Domus"? Nominative? "Go home" is motion towards, isn't it? Brian: Dative ! [the Centurion holds a sword to his throat] Brian: Aaagh ! Not the dative, not the dative ! Er, er, accusative, "Domum" ! Centurion: But "Domus" takes the locative, which is...? Brian: Er, "Domum" ! Centurion: [Writes "Domum"] Understand? Now, write it out a hundred times. Brian: Yes sir. Thank you, sir. Hail Caesar, sir. Centurion: Hail Caesar ! And if it's not done by sunrise, I'll cut your balls off.

Ew. Come on, you can’t tell me this weird-ass shout-out Chris Smith makes to the Susan B. Anthony List after H.R. 3 passed the House doesn’t sound a wee enamored. Too bad their love affair over “re-enfranchised” fetuses is bound to get a little rocky once the Senate takes the bill down. (Make sure they [...]

Candidates Matches-2011. Day 1: Four draws in a row
Friday, 06 May 2011

The Candidates Matches has taken their start. High officials have made their first moves to officially open the Event. And remarkable to state, that all the four games of the day 1ended in a draw, with just one to be characterized as peaceful.

Prestigious Korston Hotel of Kazan, Russia. We are in the competition hall before the start. There are still no participants. And only photographers are looking for the best positions to take pictures. Behind their backs, there is a non-transparent screen to exclude the contact of players with spectators. The least can watch the main characters play, while vice versa that’s hardly impossible. There are two large demonstration screens in both sides from of stage. They are to broadcast games and display pictures from the two cameras in the playing zone. Doctors are entering the spectators hall. Don’t be surprised. That’s a sport competition after all, and there will is be doping control as well. Chess, no doubt, have got something to do with football.

On the way to the playing hall Alexander Grischuk is greeting local grandmasters Andrey Kharlov and Sergey Rublevsky, both Kazan born. Rublevsky together with the «64» editor in chief Mark Glukhovsky are getting ready to comment on the coming games. One can join their commentaries taking a set of headphones at the entrance.

Radjabov and Kramnik are at the table now. They seem puzzled by the noise, coming from the spectators’ hall. It turns out, that officials have already come to make the Event officially open. Kirsan Ilyumzhinov is asking spectators about the best possible move for Kramnik. “Nf3” – they answer in chorus. And…Kramnik will play Black… Officials are coming up to the players.

Mintimer Shaimiev is making the opening move on that chessboard: е2-е4! A bit later Timur will return the pawn back and make the one more typical for him “1.d4”. Shaimiev is spending most of his time near Kamsky, Tatarstan born. He even shows him a physical exercise to keep him fit to amaze the perfectly calm Topalov.

Officials are conducting the press-conference. The First President of the Republic of Tatarstan confesses, that he has got a favorite of his own at the Candidates Matches. However, he will not disclose his name until the end. «I confess, I support Alisa Gallyamova, - escapes Mintimer Shaimiev diplomatically, – We have from the same Motherland-village”. Kirsan Ilyumzhinov announces, that Gallyamova will enter the next FIDE Women Grand Prix to be staged within 1-15 June, 2012 in Kazan.

Ilya Levitov, Russian Chess Federation Board Chairman speaks on the measures taken to tackle cheating. “To begin with, there is a screen to part spectators from players. Then, all participants are to undergo thorough control to enter the competition hall; in case the leave it deliberately they automatically have a technical defeat. And more than that, - he promises, - all the radio waves are blocked”.

And now let’s come to the competitions, which took their start at 3 p.m. local time. The first game finished at 05.03 p.m. Radjabov and Kramnik concluded a draw. Vladimir in his inimitable manner explained, that that had very much to do with the warming up to feel the game.

- I chose a strong opening, Timur answered with 10.Be2, a very rare following, but there was something in it. I took some time to analyze the situation and came up to 17…Be6! Psychologically the move is uneasy to take, since bishop is normally stronger than the knight, but here there was no use to beat it. The Black wanted to place the bishop on d5, to have no problems. The final position is clear, no sense to proceed playing.

Radjabov confessed, that after 17…Be6 he had been very distressed, realizing, that the White had no advantage at all. He started to consider the opportunity to play 18.Kh1 and after 18…Bd5 let exchange for f3 with doubled pawns, but opted not to take such a risk. In case the Blacks had the plan to transfer the knight through d7 to е5 and attack the broken White king’s wing.

Comments by Sergey Rublevsky:

– Radjabov and Kramnik didn’t manage to have a fight. Radjabov set no challenges at all. At the end, the Black had a more agreeable situation, though one could hardly squeeze something out of that.

Post-game press-conference started in an unexpected manner. Journalists wondered, why the Azeri chess player came to Kazan without a coach (to say, he is the only player without a coach at the Cadidates Matches-2011 in Kazan).

– I just don’t want to get disturbed, - he answered, - In long games, it’s quite OK to lock the coach in the room so that he could develop an opening for the next game, and it’s not of that importance to have him doing that in short games.

Timur added, that he had assistants, but he decided not to bring them to Kazan, and they help him off-line.

Boris Gelfand and Shakhriyar Mamedyarov went to see journalists soon after the first drawers. The Azeri grandmaster could hardly hide his disappointment:

– I think, I had a good margin in the opening, I won a pawn, and was supposed to play securely afterwards to preserve the advantage. I don’t know how I should have played, and where exactly I have made my mistake, but I am sure, that I have had a good advantage.

- Well, after the opening I had a weaker position, - confessed Boris Gelfand, - I had to play defensively all the game long. It seems to me, that I did that not that bad, and I didn’t see where I was loosing exactly. However, all the game long I was forced to make strong defensive moves.

Comments by Sergey Rublevsky:

-It seems to me, that Gelfand had a principal answer for 17.Nc3 - 17…Bg4, and that’s difficult to characterize what result they have come in the end. I didn’t like the move 22.а4, it was too concrete. I think, one should better have either 22.Ne2 or 22.Rd3, and something like that in the game, but there were pawns «а» left, and the White would have better chances. To go on, I consider strange the following 30.Kf1, when Mamedyarov was forced to go with Rb1, and it was quite unclear how to make the denouement in this case with the view not to miss the pawn f2. He seemed likely to overestimate this endgame. There could have been a beautiful position with the knight on с5, with the pawn «b» standing still. Shakhriyar lost his chances; he was a pawn up after all, and he didn’t attack the Black practically, rushed somewhere and exchanged everything. That’s all.

– I very much liked the way Kamsky played in some moments, - commented Sergey Rublevsky on Kamsky vs Topalov, - He was almost brilliant! It would have been interesting if Topalov answered the novelty of 7.а5 by 7…Nxа5 to be followed by 7…е6 8.Nхс6, the pawn а5 is of some importance there. It seems to me, that the principal objection to the is 7…g6 and Bg7, and the position is totally unclear. However, tastes differ. It’s possible, that Topalov doesn’t like Sicilian with the bishop on g7, that’s why he preferred to play what he likes better. There started a tactical clash. It seemed to me, that Topalov didn’t see 20.Nа4 from afar, and then just couldn’t change anything, since he had been forced to make the endgame, a bit heavy somewhat. The sacrifice exchange performed by force, though too bad if otherwise. In that moment within the 4 moves Kamsky could have played much stronger, though he seemed not to be winning. It was clear, that Gata doesn’t know, what to do with the rook against bishop; as a result, the Black had the full compensation. It’s possible, that the White should better not play 23.b4. And at the end just Topalov could have played to win, but there was no ground for that. Kamsky consolidated his grip after 33.h4, and the Black had no way to advance.

Aronjan vs Grischuk finished to play after almost 7 hours.

Comments by Sergey Rublevsky:

– Judging upon the opening, it seemed that the Black should level more concretely, the position should have been drawn. However, there was not a clear way to reach that, and after the 4 moves I started to dislike Grischuk’s position. Levon stabilized, and it was 50/50 won or lost. Initialy, it seemed, that the Black should change the bishops as soon as possible. I don’t know how, but this position should not be lost, anyway. The Black had had heavier position, but the fight had been on.
In spite of the late hour, both grandmasters went to the press-conference to speak to the journalists.

– It seemed, that there was an interesting theoretical duel, - Aronjan told reporters ironically, - I didn’t consider 20…Bg4 as the major one. The plot was interesting: the Black had the hope to conclude a draw at the expense of their activity. It seems to me, that I have spoiled the position, and it was closer to the draw. Then the Black made a mistake 28…Rc8 to provide me with the absolute winning position, which I managed to end in a draw.

– 28…Rc8 – it was a yawn indeed, - Alexander Grischuk noted, - After 29.Ne3 I was going to move to 29…Ne6 and didn’t notice, that after 30.Nd5 I didn’t manage to beat the bishop with the knight because of the 31.Nb6, and I lost exchange. It was a key moment, after which the game went downhill. The White had been a pawn up, which was out of the opening, but all the compensation started to disappear gradually, providing the White with the better position, besides the pawn up. The luck started to follow me on and on. Knight ending is of some etude character. I believe, that 67…h4 – brings the better chances since the White wants to move Nc5, and I need the f4, to make up a fork with с d5. After that we ended with a draw.

Vladimir Barsky for the Press-center of the Candidates Matches-2011

At a lunch in Chicago last week, Senator Dick Durbin (D-Illinois) said he was “blown away” during a recent trip to China by how competitive their renewables industries had become, according to wind developer Michael Polsky, President and CEO of Invenergy. When Polsky asked the senator what he was going to do about it, Durbin shrugged helplessly.

“He didn’t know what to do about it,” Polsky said, because Congress cannot agree on stable, long-term incentives for U.S. renewables. “We’re debating something that should not be debated. It’s obvious. For the Chinese, it’s obvious. For the rest of the world, it’s obvious.” But, Polsky said, “We’re still debating.”

“I was listening to another panel,” Polsky went on, referring to a Milken Institute Global Conference panel like the one at which he was speaking. “They criticized the renewable subsidies all over the world. Like they are three people on the panel who are right and the whole world is wrong. It was just laughable.”

Venture capitalist Peter Labbat, a partner at Energy Capital Partners, remembered the 2007-2008 period when his firm made its big renewables commitments as a metaphorically “sunny day.” Demand was strong, and substantial support, including long-term tax credits, a federal Renewable Energy Standard (RES) and a price on emissions, appeared imminent.

With the changes that followed the Great Recession and the political swing back to the right, the day has turned “cloudy,” Labbat said. Incentives were lost to partisan bickering. Now, “there is a lot of supply chasing fewer and fewer opportunities to build projects, fewer and fewer PPAs, [and] fewer contracts on offer from utilities demanding renewables.”

Falling solar panel prices, low returns on PPAs for wind, competition from cheap natural gas and other factors, Labbat said, have drastically cut into the payoff an investor in renewables can expect. “Whereas you could get double-digit returns building a wind farm a couple of years ago, now you’re stuggling to get 8 percent or 9 percent. That makes it tough for private capital to take the risk.”

With the new spending austerity in the House of Representatives, even long-protected incentives like wind’s production tax credit (PTC) are, Labbat said, in jeopardy. “With the wind PTC expiring at the end of 2012,” he said, “if you’re building a wind farm today, you better be sure it’s going to get done by December 31, 2012, because you need those tax credits -- [and] if it’s going to miss that deadline, you probably aren’t going to take that risk.”

To avoid such loathed uncertainties, Labbat said, “We’re looking for projects with PPAs, we’re looking for projects where developers have capital, [... and] we’re looking for projects that can definitely get done on time.”

“China did make a decision back in July 2010,” said venture capitalist Patrick Eilers, Managing Director of Madison Dearborn Partners, “to spend $800 billion over the next decade to capture the entire manufacturing renewable chain,” while U.S. renewables investors continue to struggle for meager, fluctuating short-term tax credits worth perhaps $2 billion.

Adding insult to injury, Eilers said, the strongest competitors are “manufacturers from overseas [whose products are] delivered domestically, who have set up headquarters in Chicago, L.A. and New York.” The impotent congressional response, he said, might be domestic content rules that, if they even win passage, Eilers suggested, will not stop foreign manufacturers.

“Fifteen people in China’s ministry looked at the United States,” Eilers said, and realized it was a democracy and so “could not come to a decision to do anything for ten years” and so their $800 billion dollar investment was secure.

“What China does is not an accident,” Polsky agreed. “They’re gearing up for something really big.” Their plan, he said, is to “create their own markets -- to generate, to build plants, to really learn, to attain economies of scale. And then they will come to the world, while we are debating whether $2 billion is a good investment. And then we’re going to be blaming China for bad trade practices.”

But that is just the beginning, Polsky warned. “What I think Chinese manufacturers will do, they will bring not just technology but also money.” This, he said, “will dramatically change the landscape.”

A wind farm builder-owner-operator needs money to buy equipment, but, in this current climate of compromised incentives and disappearing venture investment, the builder needs project financing as well. With the cash the Chinese government has made available to its turbine manufacturers, they can entice purchases of their technology with promises of financing. “The rest of the manufacturers will not be able to compete,” Polsky said. “On the solar side, it’s the same,” he added.

“This is our problem,” Polsky said of U.S. policy. “If it’s not convenient, we pay no attention to the long term. For nuclear, we looked long-term. When it comes to renewables, we have to justify the investment today or it’s no good. If we start talking about the price of gas today, we have already lost the battle. If it is natural gas or oil, it doesn’t matter. It’s a finite commodity."

“It just makes sense that this country should have a policy to obtain a specific percentage of its energy from renewables,” Polsky finished. “A third, twenty percent, whatever. It just makes sense from any standpoint: economic, national security, diversity, the environment, jobs -- whatever reason you bring, it just makes sense.”

DS; £24.99; cert 12+; PopCap

Like a shuffling horde of walking dead, the march of Plants vs Zombies continues unabated.

Originally landing on the PC in 2009, PopCap's superb tower defence game was released in 2010 on iTunes for the iPhone where it broke sales records, raking in $1m in revenue in just nine days. Since then, it has spread to the iPad, Xbox Live and PSN platforms. Now it's making a bid to conquer the DS.

As with all of PopCap's titles, Plants vs Zombies straddles the core and casual gaming demographic with an enviable ease. This is a charming, easy-to-play game wrapped in cute, cartoonish visuals and eerily sweet music, yet it boasts hidden depths both in terms of its content and its tactically minded gameplay.

The game's basic premise is simple; the player is trapped in a house and has to fight off wave after wave of approaching zombies. The zombies come in a variety of forms; some wear buckets and traffic cones to ward off damage, some sprint across the lawn in American football gear, while some float above the lawn using balloons. If the zombies manage to cross the lawn and enter the house, the player loses. To prevent this, players are given an array flora and fungi offering them both offensive and defensive options – ranging from pea-shooting plants, to immovable rocks to spikes which attack the zombies' feet. At the end of every level, they unlock a new plant and their arsenal of foliage steadily grows. They can also pick up coins from fallen zombies to buy new plants from the in-game shop, which is run by their eccentric neighbour, Crazy Dave.

The game's main campaign is a lengthy affair, featuring 50 levels split across five environments which are broken up by imaginative mini-games. Once they've conquered that, players can turn to several other modes offering up new challenges – as well as the opportunity to revisit old ones. The DS port doesn't skimp on content; all the previous features from other PvZ titles are present and correct here, including Survival modes, the multiplayer which first appeared on Xbox Live, the Zen Garden (available as an unlockable) and the mini-games mode which houses some nice twists on the main campaign and include the mini-games that have already been unlocked.

There are also a couple of new and exclusive features for the DS version of Plants vs Zombies, including a mini-game in which the player uses the microphone to spur their plants on, a boss battle involving an airplane and a zombie creator utility. Finally, as with all the other versions, Plants vs Zombies for the DS also boasts the best end credits of any game outside the Portal franchise.

However, the DS title isn't flawless. While the stylus and touchscreen make for a decent control system – albeit a drag-and-drop one, rather than a select and click – it should be pointed out that this is the least attractive of all of the Plants vs Zombies versions currently available. The animation is far less smooth and when the screen fills up with the undead, the frame-rate can slow down quite considerably. The top screen of the DS also feels underused; all the action in the game takes place in the second screen and the only use the top screen has is to measure the distance between each wave of zombies. It's also worth noting that at £24.99, this is also the most expensive version of the game on the market.

These slight considerations aside, Plants vs Zombies is an incredibly strong title for the DS. Mind you, this is probably because is it was an incredibly strong title when it was first released. Given the popularity of the game, it's hard to build a mental picture of the sort of gamer who has heard of Plants vs Zombies and has yet to play it.

If, however, you are one of those unfortunate folk and you own a DS – and you don't own any of the platforms it's already been released on – I urge you to pick up a copy immediately. Plants vs Zombies is brilliant; cute as a button, ingenious in its design and as addictive as any core title you could mention, this is one of the best investments you will make all year.

• Game reviewed on DS

Rating: 4/5

Listen to an audio version of this interview.

Musician Adam Chester, like many of us, has received thousands of letters from his mother since he left home. The letters are funny, affectionate, embarrassing, inappropriate. Sometimes all at once. For years, Chester kept the letters in a box, some of them unopened. One day he started publishing them as a blog called "Please Don't Eat Sushi! Love, Mom!" The blog, now called "S'Motherboard," led to this month's publication of "S'Mother: The Story of a Man, His Mom, and the Thousands of Altogether Insane Letters She's Mailed Him." Mother Jones spoke recently with Adam and his mother, Joan, about maternal advice, their relationship, and Adam's side job as 'the surrogate Elton John.'

Joan Chester: Hello?

Mother Jones: Joan, hi; can Adam come to the phone?

JC: Hold on, I'll get him. Adam! It's some guy on the phone for you.

Adam Chester: This is Adam.

MJ: Adam, hi, this is Tim.

Continue Reading »

The great John Lennon once said, “It’s a fear of the unknown. The unknown is what is.”

May 28th, 2011. The UEFA Champions League final. The unknown demon of FC Barcelona’s fears will manifest itself into human form, codename Little Pea.

As a United fan myself, I am not deluded, Barcelona go to the match as favourites. The best midfield in the world, probably the best strike force in the world, the best player in the world, the second best defence in the world (after United); it makes for harrowing reading.

Yet what really irks me is the wild assertions from fans of teams that are, surprise suprise, not actually in the final, of how United will get “hammered.”

“There’s not even any point turning up,” a particularly bitter Chelsea fan claimed.

I can see their logic. A demolition of the great Real Madrid, of Jose Mourinho, the demi-god and heir apparent for a place at the summit of mount Olympus. Yet if you think about it, the second leg was the fifth El Clasico of the season, such is the totalitarian dominance these two sides exhibit over the rest of their La Liga minions.

Five matches to weigh up the opposition, in a ground you are by now familiar with, against players whose game you have ample opportunity to analyse at close quarters. As opposed to one match in a foreign country, against players who you may play once in a while.

Manchester United vs. Barcelona is a whole different ball game.

Of all the players at United’s disposal, I think it is Javier Hernandez that Barcelona will be most worried about. The man that came out of nowhere to become a revelation. I will make the claim that 90 percent of Barcelona’s players will never have faced Hernandez as a cautious estimate as a few might well have faced him on international duty.

Yet even this was a year ago. Since he arrived at OT and was schooled into the United psyche, Hernandez’s game has blossomed, and he is a different prospect now than he was nine months ago. Video tapes can only teach you so much, especially with a player as unpredictable as Chicharito.

He is the archetypal goal poacher, kicking balls off his own face, heading it in with intentional back-headers. It is basic instinct at it’s most refined level. Hernandez possesses pace in abundance too, with stats at the World Cup citing him as its fastest player.

With the exception of Gerard Pique, who still isn’t as fast as Hernandez, Barcelona’s defence contains a 33-year-old Carles Puyol, who despite still being one of the world’s best defenders with his back to goal. When turned, he no longer has the legs for a footrace with Hernandez.

At right back Barcelona have Dani Alves, a precocious talent, but one inclined to make long forays up the pitch, leaving gaps behind that United’s patented counter-attacking play can exploit.

Finally, in the absence of the brilliant Eric Abidal, after his inspirational victory over the cancer that looked to curtail him (article to come), the defence will quite possibly be completed by Javier Mascherano, a small, slow, defensive midfielder. A player, who despite portraying a great defensive instinct and holding prowess, has an inclination to allow his fiery temperament to influence his play, and as a central defender the stakes are all the higher.

Then there is Hernandez’s movement. In my recollection, I have never seen a player so adept at finding himself in the right place at the right time.

It shows resonance to the play of a young Michael Owen, but in my opinion he was more technical and had worse movement than Hernandez. Chicarito finds space where their shouldn’t be any. His lighting pace, pulls the defenders this way and that, exploiting gaps where he finds them or drawing defenders away, to allow Wayne Rooney or one of the midfielders to fill the void.

Puyol et al will have never faced a player like Hernandez, watched him maybe, but when the whistle sounds, he will become a different proposition. The Rooney, Hernandez double-act, when working effectively, like they were against an admittedly abysmal Schalke in the first leg, are almost unplayable.

Such is the manner in which they complement each other's play. Hernandez pushes and finds the gap, leaving Rooney space to bring out his repertoire and play in a winger or a midfielder or go on himself, where any defensive errors are inevitable punished by the pea green reaper.

Barcelona’s defenders while have to adjust to the unconventional style of Hernandez’s play as the game is going on, but will 90 minutes really be enough?

In my opinion, where the game will be won and lost is in the midfield. Barcelona will inevitably set the tempo, but it is what Manchester United do with the ball when they have it that will be the defining factor in the game.

Sir Alex will, in all likelihood, adopt a defensive formation, at least to start. For this reason, with the premium placed on tracking back to defend, I can see Nani being dropped, with Valencia and Giggs preferred. Park Ji Sung also is a shoe-in to start, such is his stoic stipulation to his defensive duties when the need is at its greatest, probably as a partner to Michael Carrick.

Where, therefore, does this leave Chicharito?

Rooney’s inclusion is inevitable, so, depending on how cautious Sir Alex is, there will, in all likelihood, be another striking birth. Berbatov, a player low on form and panache, for whom his goals earlier in the season seem like a distant memory, or Hernandez, unleashed from the start to tear the weakest part of this impregnable Barcelona unit asunder?

I know who I would choose. Whatever strategy Fergie cooks up though, the brilliant thing about Hernandez, as opposed to, to give an example Berbatov, is that his impact is not diluted by starting from the bench.

In his short time at the Theatre of Dreams, Chicharito has conjured up fond memory’s of another slightly built forward who was plucked from obscurity to weave his mark on super-sub folklore. And we all know how the Champions League final of '99 ended for Ole Gunnar Solskjaer.

With three weeks to go until the showpiece event, the tension is palpable. Barcelona will enter the match as favourites, justifiable trumpeted as the "best club side in history," yet football has an uncanny knack of delivering a surprise or two.

In my humble opinion, the way that Sir Alex chooses to utilise Javier Hernandez could be key to the destination of the trophy at ninety minutes end.

Barcelona may well win, that I am not arguing with. Just don’t claim that the result is a foregone conclusion.

“It will be as easy as shelling peas for Barcelona,” another friend said. He, like Barcelona, clearly didn’t know too much about the littlest pea of them all.

 

Update: Uncle Mo has been scratched. 

With the 2011 Kentucky Derby just one day away, we know which horse will be the morning favorite and where the odds stand heading into Saturday at Churchill Downs. While the odds are stable for now, they are subject to change on Saturday based on the amount of action. So while Dialed In is a slightly favored over Uncle Mo, the odds can all change in an instant on Saturday.

According to And Down The Stretch They Come’s Matt Gardner, Kentucky Derby odds can be a fascinating element to watch on Saturday. The betting lines will move throughout the morning due to the sheer volume of wagers for horse racing’s biggest event. But with about an hour to go, the odds should be stable, finally giving us a good idea of which horse will go off as the favorite at Churchill Downs.

Consider the morning line odds the starting point, or guideline, for derby betting. As the windows open, these will be the odds bettors are placing wagers on, but the lines will be fluid throughout the day. While it’s quite unlikely a horse goes from long-shot to favorite, many of the horses near the top of the morning line can move up, down or shuffle around on derby morning.

Here are the latest odds for the 2011 Kentucky Derby. The morning line odds were set shortly after the post position draw on Wednesday afternoon.

Dialed In: 4/1
Uncle Mo: 9/2
Nehro 6/1
Midnight Interlude: 10/1
Archarcharch: 10/1
Soldat: 12/1
Mucho Macho Man: 12/1
Shackleford: 12/1
Pants On Fire: 20/1
Stay Thirsty: 20/1
Twice the Appeal: 20/1
Master of Hounds: 30/1
Animal Kingdom: 30/1
Comma to the Top: 30/1
Derby Kitten: 30/1
Twinspired: 30/1
Brilliant Speed: 30/1
Santiva: 30/1
Decisive Moment: 30/1
Watch Me Go: 50/1

Mike Rowe – creator, executive producer and host of Discovery Channel’s Emmy-nominated show, “Dirty Jobs with Mike Rowe” – has been named the 2011 ambassador for Lee National Denim Day, one of the country’s largest single-day fundraisers for breast cancer, benefiting the Women’s Cancer Programs of the Entertainment Industry Foundation (EIF).

By ditching his jeans and donating the cost of a pair, Rowe wasted no time making his mark on his newest job.

Rowe has a strong personal connection to the cause as his mother, Peggy Rowe, was diagnosed with breast cancer 14 years ago. During her battle with the disease, Peggy received emotional and social support, like that provided by The Cancer Support Community, a key beneficiary of Lee National Denim Day, through EIF. Rowe’s mother is one of 2.5 million breast cancer survivors living in the United States.

“My mom is a huge inspiration to me and even though she doesn’t think I have enough celebrity status to be the Denim Day ambassador, I’m glad I can be a part of such a great cause to show my support for her, as well as all breast cancer patients and survivors,” said Rowe. “I’ll do just about anything it takes to increase donations—I mean come on, I’ve already stripped down to my shorts. If people want to donate money for me to put my jeans back on, that’s fine too.”

Rowe bares his boxer briefs in a new public service campaign encouraging people to donate the cost of a pair of jeans to support crucial breast cancer research and support services.

Peggy Rowe appears with her son in the PSA, which asks people to wear their jeans on Friday, October 7. The mother-son duo will participate in Denim Day publicity efforts, appear on Denimday.com and encourage participation through social media.

Starting today, groups and individuals can donate and sign up as a team by visiting denimday.com or by calling 1.800.521.5533. The program provides a free participation kit to those who request it. Kits include educational material about breast cancer and supplies to coordinate a Denim Day event among a group of friends, family, or co-workers.

Breast cancer is the most frequently diagnosed cancer among women worldwide. Money raised through Lee National Denim Day will help the Women’s Cancer Programs of EIF to fund:

• Lee Translational Laboratories, a collaboration of six of the nation’s leading research institutions to find less toxic, more effective treatments
• The EIF Breast Biomarker Discovery Project, a multi-year effort led by world-class scientists to develop a blood test for early detection of breast cancer when survival rates are the highest
• The Cancer Support Community, an international non-profit uniting The Wellness Community and Gilda’s Club Worldwide that provides emotional and social support to all people affected by cancer

“The Entertainment Industry Foundation is honored to have Mike Rowe as the Lee National Denim Day ambassador to help raise awareness and funds for critical cancer research,” said Lisa Paulsen, President and CEO of EIF.

Members of EIF’s partner, the Cancer Support Community, are also excited about and thankful for the leadership of their newest ambassador. The organization believes Rowe’s connection to their cause makes him a perfect fit as the Denim Day ambassador.

“Having Mike Rowe as this year’s ambassador is such an honor,” said Kim Thiboldeaux, President and CEO of CSC. Thanks to his involvement, CSC can further support the emotional and social needs of people affected by cancer — people like Mike’s mom who received support from a local affiliate 14 years ago."

Rowe’s connection to several key elements of Denim Day proved to be an influential determinant for the leaders of Lee Jeans as they narrowed the ambassador search. Even more influential, however, was the uniqueness Rowe brought to the campaign.

“We’re thrilled to have Mike on board this year,” said Liz Cahill, VP of Marketing and Communications for Lee Jeans. “He brings such a unique presence and powerful drive to the campaign. Mike’s not afraid to make a point by taking off his jeans and increasing our donation goal. He understands our battle cry that more participation in Denim Day will generate more research opportunities, which will ultimately lead to more survivors.”

Since its inception in 1996, the program has raised more than $83 million to fight breast cancer. To learn more and hear a personal message from Mike, visit Denimday.com.

Related past articles

• Conan O'Brien To Host Unforgettable Evening For Charity
• Celebrity Charity Party Follows Screen Actors Guild Awards
• Donnie Wahlberg: Do Good, Live Well For Charity
• Stars Join Club Charity
• Jake Gyllenhaal Stands Up To Cancer

---

Want to write for us, or help with our research? Find out more about contributing.

Copyright © 2011 Look To The Stars. This article may not be reproduced without explicit written permission; if you are not reading this in your news reader, the site you are viewing is illegally infringing our copyright, and we would be grateful if you would contact us.

In 2003, when the British government first decided it wanted to teach emotional well-being to the nation’s youth, it decided that each British school had a statutory responsibility to turn children into SHEEP. The acronym stood for ‘Safe, Healthy, Enjoying life, Economic well-being and Positive contribution’ - well-intentioned stuff, but the acronym unfortunately suggested that the Department for Education wanted to raise a nation of docile conformists. 

And, in fact, one of the principal dangers of the entire ‘well-being movement’ or ‘happiness agenda’ is this: it could lead to adults and children being spoon-fed advice on how to live, without being given the means to challenge that advice, and hold it to account. When managed this way, then the ‘happiness agenda’ really is creating sheep, rather than rational, autonomous and empowered citizens.

The main problem is that the ‘happiness agenda’ is being presented as an objective science, rather than a moral philosophy. This is particularly the case with Martin Seligman’s Positive Psychology, which informs Richard Layard’s Action for Happiness, and which is now being taught to every soldier in the US Army. It’s also being piloted in 60 British schools, and may eventually be introduced it into the British national curriculum, to replace the increasingly discredited Social and Emotional Aspects of Learning (SEAL).

Positive Psychology purports to teach people how to ‘flourish’. It teaches a model of the Good Life, and uses government policy to disseminate this model. Now, until recently, it was assumed that the role of liberal governments is to secure our negative freedom from war, crime, disease, want and so on, while leaving people free to pursue their own good in their own way. Governments should protect our inalienable right to pursue happiness, but how we pursue it is up to us. It was previously seen as dangerous, or even illegal, for governments to go any further and promote a particular model of the Good Life, because that would overstep our religious freedom, our freedom to decide what we and our children believe about life, the universe and everything.

This has changed in the last decade, thanks to the growth of ‘happiness science’, which claims to have experimentally discovered what ways of living really lead to well-being and happiness. Scientists like Martin Seligman insist that what they are producing is not moral philosophy. It is science - descriptive, not prescriptive. Therefore, if governments promote it in schools, or armies, or prisons, or anywhere else, they are not really telling their citizens how to think, how to live, or what to believe. They are merely passing on the evidence-based skills and techniques needed to thrive. The language is one of skills, means and technologies, rather than moral values.

It is hoped that, through this neat manoeuvre, the state can finally go beyond a limited nightwatchman function, and provide the people with some form of moral guidance, to help them learn how to control their minds and bodies, to overcome all the problems of western society - depression, anxiety, drug abuse, food disorders, smoking, stress, insomnia, obesity, underage sex and drinking, bullying, loneliness - all those emotional and behavioural problems that emerge from our apparent ignorance of how to live, and how to govern ourselves.

Now there is a lot to welcome in this initiative. I happen to believe there are certain ‘techniques’ which one can use to learn how to govern yourself and live a happier life. Many of them come from ancient philosophies - from Stoicism, or Buddhism, or Yoga - but you can test them out, and build up an evidence base to show they work. So a lot of the new happiness science actually draws on ancient wisdom, and re-connects us to it. 

However, there’s a limit to the extent to which one can ‘prove’ what is the right way to live, and what the Good Life consist of. There is also a limit to what government technocrats, civil servants and teachers can roll out to the people as ‘objective science’. Most of the evidence for the science of happiness comes from happiness questionnaires, which ask you simply to rate how you are feeling, on a scale of one to seven. So, in order to test a happiness intervention, researchers will simply ask you how you feel before doing an intervention, and how you feel after doing it. If you feel better after doing it, presto, another happiness technique has been discovered, and we’re one step further towards a perfect model of the Good Life.

The problem is, there is a moral assumption behind the objective science. It is a Utilitarian or Epicurean assumption: that the aim of life is simply feeling good, and that the test of the worth of an action is simply how many good feelings it creates. That’s what Epicurus believed, it’s what Jeremy Bentham believed, it’s what Lord Richard Layard believes, but it’s certainly not what everyone believes. In fact, I’d say a majority of people believe there’s more to life than simply good feelings. Many might agree with Aristotle that some things, like virtue, achievement, knowledge or civic duty, are good in themselves. They might make you feel good too, but the good feelings are a bonus, rather than an end in themselves. Others might agree with the Stoics that the Good Life doesn’t just mean focusing on the positive. It also means being able to face the worst that life can throw at you, and still carry on.

Within the well-being movement, in fact, there is a high level debate between two broad camps - the Aristotelians and the Utilitarians - over the definition of well-being. The Aristotelians, who include some government ministers, define well-being as eudaimonia, which means not simply feeling good, but living a life of optimal human functioning, meaning and virtue. Martin Seligman also considers himself more an Aristotelian, as opposed to a hedonist or Utilitarian.

An Aristotelian approach to life sounds great - but it’s quite hard to turn into an objective science. Can you measure the extent to which a person’s life is eudaimonic? Can you scientifically measure how meaningful a person’s life is, how full of spiritual significance? It sounds ridiculous, but in fact, Martin Seligman’s resilience training course for the US Army claims to be able to measure soldiers’ ‘spiritual fitness’ using a simple questionnaire. It asks them a handful of questions such as ‘to what extent do you think your life is connected to a higher meaning’, and if they score too low, it recommends they read the ‘appropriate self-development modules’. Unsurprisingly, soldiers have been offended by this automatic spiritual counseling, and some have even threatened to sue the Army. It offers a simplistic technocratic solution to a deeply personal spiritual question.

At the moment, I worry that there is a pyramid-like structure in the well-being movement. At the top of the pyramid, experts debate the philosophical ideas of well-being: how can one define it, can one measure it objectively, what moral assumptions are we making, what philosophers have come up with the best answers in the past? At the bottom of the pyramid, however, all this debate is covered up, and the masses are simply presented the evidence as ‘facts’.

This is especially true in well-being classes in schools - all the debate and contention is left out, and one is left with Wellington College’s ’10 steps for a happy life’, which is “what every child and adult needs to follow in order to live a happy life”, as headmaster Anthony Seldon puts it. Personally, I don’t want my children to be taught how to be Utilitarians. That was tried in the 19th century, and the unfortunate pupil who received this Utilitarian education, John Stuart Mill, ended up having a nervous breakdown at the end of it.

It seems to me that, if the well-being movement is not to become another ossified and hierarchical church, then ordinary people need to be included in the debates going on at the top of policy circles over what exactly well-being is. They need to be educated and empowered to consider the different philosophical approaches to the Good Life. They also need to learn about the history of these different approaches, and the areas of disagreement and debate. Otherwise, they are not being treated as equals, but as sheep. 

So what would a more democratic approach to teaching well-being mean, practically? 

1)  You need to be open about your moral assumptions, and the fact that those assumptions are debatable. If you’re teaching a Utilitarian approach to well-being, you need to be up front about that. Let people know that alternate views are possible, that not everyone thinks the meaning of life is to feel as much happiness as possible.

2)  Encourage debate, and train people how to debate. You don’t want well-being teachers who get terrified every time a child (or adult) challenges their philosophical principles. On the contrary, you need a teacher who is comfortable with debate, and who can show their students how to debate, in an open-ended and open-minded way.

3)  Be open about where your ideas and techniques come from, and their history. Some CBT therapists and Positive Psychologists are frighteningly unaware that their theory’s roots are in ancient philosophy. Give people at least some awareness of the original contexts and source material, and make these sources as available as possible to people. In adult well-being classes, the original material should be taught and discussed more directly.

4)  Well-being classes shouldn’t just be for schools and universities. People should have access to them all through life. The government should help set up a network of philosophy clubs, which allow people to come together and debate the Good Life. There should also be a website which gives people the classics of philosophy and spirituality free to download, which provides the latest information, news and essays on well-being, while also allowing people to upload their own stories, videos and findings from their own experiments.

5)  Academia also has an important role to play. In particular, the government should encourage the development of well-being institutes, which bring together leaders in neuroscience, psychology, philosophy and theology, and encourage cross-disciplinary conferences and debates, the proceedings of which should be publicly accessible via YouTube. At the moment, these disciplines aren’t really talking to each other, which is to the detriment of the well-being movement - they have much to learn from each other. 

6)  Finally, you need to teach a plural approach to teaching well-being. You can’t take a one-size-fits-all approach, as Action for Happiness does. I would suggest teaching adults about the Epicurean, Stoic-Aristotelian, Taoist, Buddhist, Marxist and Monotheistic approaches to the Good Life.  What do these traditions say about the question of how to live well? Where do they agree, and where do they differ?

The art of living and governing yourself is not easy to teach well. I think it might actually be the hardest subject to teach, in that it requires real intelligence, humour, flexibility and compassion. But it could also be the most rewarding subject to teach and to learn. The goal, it seems to me, is not to train young people to unquestioningly accept the principles of Utilitarianism, or Aristotelianism, or Marxism, or any other ism, but instead to prepare them to be autonomous and resilient citizens who can think for themselves. You can’t do that via automated questionnaires with a limited set of responses, because their responses might be something very intelligent that we haven’t thought of yet.   

Every year, millions of homes lose power for hours – even days – at a time. Being prepared is the best defense for such energy emergencies. And for many homeowners, that means investing in a standby generator – one that is fully automatic and permanently installed outside the home. While virtually all home owners can benefit from having a standby unit, reliable power is especially important in homes with elderly residents or young children who are more dependent upon heating, air conditioning and other of life’s necessities. It’s also important for home businesses and for travelers who are not home to deal with the damaging consequences of a power outage. If you’ve made the decision to purchase a standby generator for your home, it’s helpful to be familiar with what is involved in regards to the installation process. This article IS NOT intended to serve as a step-by-step guide. It is highly recommended that all standby generators be installed by a licensed contractor – not the homeowner. Improper installation can cause damage to the unit and could potentially void the warranty. However, knowledge is power and understanding the installation process will help you properly screen and oversee a contractor during the installation process. In this article, we’ll go through the key steps involved in installing an air-cooled home generator, which operates on the same fuel source that currently runs the appliances in your home (LP or natural gas). We’ll discuss the key components of the system, including: Selecting a generator Where to place a generator Making power connections Connecting to fuel sources Pre-start checks Remote monitoring Basic maintenance Selecting a Generator Permanent standby generators are different from portable generators, which are designed to power worksites. With a standby generator – which is specifically designed for the home – there’s no need to fill the gas tank every few hours or change the oil. In addition, portable generators can only back up appliances that can be plugged in via an extension cord run outside to the generator. Standby generators are hard-wired into your home and can back up the circuits you choose without running extension cords. Furthermore, standby generators don’t have exposed engine parts that could lead to burns or hazardous conditions such refilling/spilling gasoline onto hot engines. Permanent standby generators are also better suited for delicate electronics like big-screen TVs or computers due to better voltage and frequency regulation and lower total harmonic distortion. Standby generators range from 8 to 125 kilowatts. It’s important to choose a standby generator that meets your lifestyle and needs. If you simply want to power a few key appliances in a large home, or everything in a smaller home, an 8- to 20-kilowatt generator may serve you well. If you have a large home and want to keep everything powered up, a larger generator will be required. To determine what size generator you need, contact a local power professional (dealer) or licensed electrical contractor familiar with standby generators. Before you meet with a contractor, you may want to get some estimates from an online sizing tool such as the calculator found here . However, enlisting a licensed power professional is essential to determine the right size for your needs. They will also help you comply with any municipal codes governing proper installation, including: Noise ordinances (typically under 70 dBA) Positioning of the generator (flood risks) Electrical codes In addition to selecting the size of the generator, don’t forget about its appearance. A generator sits outside your home – permanently, so look for a unit with a bold, clean look and one that is corrosion resistant, particularly in salty air or moist environments. Where to Position a Generator Once you’ve purchased a standby generator, the next step is to find an ideal location for installation. Similar to where your central air conditioning unit is placed, select an area where hot exhaust gases don’t blow on plants or other combustible materials. Also, be sure your contractor allows the minimum clearance provided in the installation manual. Clearance refers to the minimum distance from the home and/or any other structures that may affect airflow. Some generators, like Kohler’s air-cooled models, come with a built-in composite mounting pad. This eliminates the need for pouring a concrete pad in most locations. Just place it on a level area covered with pea gravel. In some coastal areas with high-wind conditions, it may be desirable to place it on a concrete pad and bolt it down. To move the generator, your contractor will want to insert two metal bars in the lifting holes found in the base of the product and use them to lift the unit into place. The lifting holes allow four strong people to lift a 20-kilowatt generator (approximately 500 pounds). Straps or a lift can also be used if available. Making Power Connections For purposes of this article, we will assume the unit is being placed on a concrete slab with electrical stub feeding wires through the bottom of the unit. In most installations, which don’t include the concrete slab, your contractor will need to drill a hole in the access panel located in the lower part of the cabinet for electrical leads. Be sure to drill the hole in this area, and not through the upper part of the cabinet. Kohler generators come with a field-connection terminal block, streamlining the wiring process. Route the AC leads through flexible conduit. Then feed the wires through the opening drilled in the cabinet. If installing a model RDT automatic transfer switch, connect the emergency source to the terminal block labeled “load leads.” Also, connect the automatic transfer switch (ATS) or remote start/stop leads. If connecting a model RRT transfer switch, be sure to route low-voltage communication leads through a separate conduit. Connect the leads from the utility power for accessories. Then connect the neutral and ground leads from the ATS and the main panel. Ground the generator according to methods that comply with NEC and local codes. All Kohler generators come with a factory-installed battery charger that’s designed to keep the starting battery fully charged. Plug the battery charger’s power cord into the AC receptacle on the bottom of the controller junction box. Utility leads brought to the customer connection terminal block that supply this receptacle should be on a circuit that is backed-up by the generator. You will need to place a 12-volt battery in the controller. Once these steps have been completed, verify that the generator is off. Make sure the “OFF” LED on the controller is flashing. Also, verify that the battery is fully charged before placing it in the unit. Kohler typically recommends an optional carburetor heater for improved starting in locations where the temperature drops below freezing. The heater requires a continuous source of power. Plug the carburetor heater into the other AC receptacle. Some generators may also recommend battery warmers, or other cold weather aids.  Check the manufacturer’s guidelines for your particular climate. Connecting to Fuel Sources Your generator operates on either natural gas or liquid propane (LP) vapor fuel. It is EPA-certified for both types of fuel. When shipped, the unit is typically set for natural gas, with the loose LP orifice tied near the fuel solenoid valve. To convert to LP vapor, install the orifice and disconnect the spark advance leads as described in the installation manual. Then verify that the output pressure from the primary gas utility – or LP tank pressure regulator – is adequate. Also, check that the utility gas meter flow rate is sufficient. Have your contractor refer to the manual for guidelines. Once all the pipe connections are made, check for fuel leaks. Pre-Start Checks Before starting up the generator, go through the items in the pre-start checklist. Inspect the air cleaner, air inlets and make sure there are tight connections on the battery. Also inspect the exhaust system for leaks and blockages. Be sure to check oil levels on a regular basis. Oil should be at or near the “Full” mark on the dipstick – not over. Once you’ve completed the pre-start checks, start the generator by pressing the “Run” button on the control panel. Then turn the system off. Press the “Auto” button on the control panel. At this point, the unit is in “Auto,” and is monitoring the utility – ready to react in the event of a power outage. Kohler Generators are faster than most brands and can restore power to the home within 10 seconds of an outage.  Most other brands will restore power in 20-30 seconds. The automatic transfer switch (ATS) transfers electrical load from a normal source of electrical power (utility) to  an emergency source (generator). Refer to the manual for compatibility between ATS modes and Kohler generator sets. The ATS can be wired to supply all of your home’s electrical load, or just essential systems, such as the furnace, refrigerator and sump pump. If the generator powers the whole house, you will want an ATS without a load center. If you’re planning to power only the essential systems in your home, choose an ATS with a built-in load center. A load center allows you wire just the circuits from your main distribution panel that you want to power during an outage. The 100 amp Model RRT transfer switch shown in this picture includes a built-in load center with room for up to 16 single-pole circuit breakers. Verify that the total rating for all breakers in the load center does not exceed the rating of the transfer switch. Connect the “Normal Source,” which is typically the utility power, to the lugs labeled NA and NB. Connect the “Emergency Source,” which is typically the generator, to the lugs labeled EA and EB. Then connect the neutral from the main panel to the neutral in the ATS enclosure.  Ground the system according to NEC and local codes and connect the start wires from the generator set. To test the system, simulate a disruption of power from the utility by turning off the breaker that feeds the normal side of the ATS. The ATS will send a signal to start the generator. When the generator reaches its rated voltage and frequency, the ATS will transfer generator power to the emergency load. At this point, the generator will power all loads in the essential loads sub-panel. To simulate utility power coming back on, close the breaker in the main panel. There will be a short delay as the unit verifies that utility power is back on and flowing strong. When this is verified, the ATS will transfer back to the main source of power. The generator will continue running for a cool down period. This should take no longer than five minutes based on engine oil temperatures. Basic Maintenance Refer to your installation and operation manuals for recommended maintenance and service intervals. In general, if your generator is running for extended periods of time, you should check your oil regularly and add oil as needed.  The service schedule will address how often oil, oil filters, spark plugs and air cleaners should be changed as well as other cleaning, inspection and service suggestions. Some home owners may be comfortable with the basic maintenance, while others will prefer to set up a service contract with a professional to take care of it all for them. Remote Monitoring Now that your generator has been properly installed and tested, it’s important to monitor its functionality. This is particularly important for those who are routinely away from home and want to make sure a generator is working properly. A couple of generator manufacturers like Kohler now offer remote monitoring capabilities. Kohler’s OnCue™ Home Generator Management System software loads directly onto a PC, laptop or smart phone. Once installed, you can check the status and test your system from anywhere in the world. You can even set up text message or email alerts to keep you informed while on the move. The OnCue Home Generator Management System also makes it easy to implement service contracts. The service provider can monitor and test the generator from their business and see any fault codes and history prior to going out for a service call. This gives you a higher level of attention and service while creating efficiencies that ultimately cut costs. For more information on how to install a residential generator, consult the installation manual that came with your system, or call your nearest distributor. You can also learn more about residential generators and the installation process at KohlerSmartPower.com . Source: Kohler Generators If you have specific questions and would like to contact a residential generator expert, click this link to find a Kohler power professional in your area.

From an 11-goal thriller in 1954 to the Peacock triptych of 1994, here are a few iconic memories from United v Chelsea games

1) Chelsea 5-6 Manchester United (October 1954)

Since taking over as Chelsea manager in 1952, Ted Drake had desperately tried to instill a winning mentality into a club yet to bother the engravers. The small things first. With the club a hardy perennial of the music-hall comics, the nickname the Pensioners had to go. In its stead came the monicker the Blues. And out went the club crest, a cartoon of a grinning septuagenarian, to be replaced first by a Rangers-style CFC logo, then the rampant lion still in use today.

Drake then turned his attention to the relegation-haunted team, which he soon turned into a hard-battling mid-table side, built around defenders Peter Sillett (brother of Coventry's FA Cup winning boss John) and future England

manager Ron Greenwood, and the striker Roy Bentley. By the time the 1954-55 season came round, fans hoped for another comfortable finish, after a few hairy seasons in the early 50s, but nothing more.

The favourites for the title were reigning champions Wolverhampton Wanderers and Matt Busby's upcoming Manchester United side. Few would have guessed Chelsea would eventually prevail when the latter visited Stamford Bridge in October. United handed Chelsea an awful thrashing, goals from Dennis Viollet (three), Tommy Taylor (two) and Jackie Blanchflower putting the away side 6-3 up, before Seamus O'Connell scored twice late on to complete his hat-trick and put an unjustified gloss on the scoreline for Chelsea. "With a roar of Hampden proportions urging them on, Chelsea strained every nerve to share the points," reported the Guardian, "but somehow a rather shaky United defence held out to give their brilliant attack the reward they had so thoroughly earned". United went top of the table as a result.

It was one of the first displays of the Busby Babes' budding excellence, yet their emergence wasn't the story that day. Chelsea's hat-trick hero O'Connell, making his debut, was one of two amateurs on the home side's team. By trade, he was a cattle farmer. One of Chelsea's other goals was scored by Jim Lewis, another debutant, who in his day job travelled the country hawking Thermos flasks.

Chelsea lost their next two games – completing a run of four defeats on the spin – to end October in 12th place, Wolves having taken over from United at the top. But then form flew out of the window. Chelsea only lost four more games all season as they stormed up the table and, beating Wolves twice en route, shocked the nation to win the title. Their last defeat of the season was at Old Trafford – but by then, the title had been won.

The Busby Babes would have to wait to make their mark on English football's roll of honour. Chelsea, meanwhile, could finally tell the engraver to get his burin out.

2) Manchester United 4-0 Chelsea (March 1965)

Tommy Docherty's side had gone the first 10 games of the season unbeaten, and topped the table amid much talk of Chelsea landing their second league title. But it was not to be. United had youthful talent of their own – specifically an 18-year-old George Best – and on his team's visit to Stamford Bridge, he would make the first telling impact of his career, scoring one and making one for Denis Law as, in the words of our very own Albert Barham, the Doc's "ebullient young team were toppled gracefully by the sophisticated maturity of Manchester United".

Chelsea – and Eddie McCreadie – hadn't learned their lesson come March. They were still league leaders, but Best served notice that the title was United's. After three minutes, he "induced an attack of vertigo on McCreadie and drove the ball over Peter Bonetti's head from a narrow angle 20 yards out, a brilliant effort". Best went on to set up two more. "Roget's Thesaurus itself stands in danger of being denuded of adequate adjectives with which to describe this United side," wrote Eric Todd in the Guardian. "United can make fools of everyone, except themselves."

United went on to take the title on goal average from Leeds United. Chelsea ended up in third, five points back, wondering what could have been were it not for Best taking a wrecking ball to their momentum not once, but twice.

3) Manchester United 0-4 Chelsea (August 1968)

United were newly crowned champions of Europe – finally – and the world appeared to be their oyster. But of course they wouldn't pick up another trophy until winning the Second Division championship in 1975. This was the first sign that a mild complacency had set in at Old Trafford. "Chelsea surely will never gain two points so easily again," reported the Guardian, "and at the same time it is difficult to visualise United being so abysmally poor."

The visitors employed a power game – Ron Harris, Eddie McCreadie and David Webb crunching in with hard tackles, winning almost every ball, and shipping it forward quickly. Tommy Baldwin put Chelsea in front within 40 seconds. Bobby Tambling snaffled a ridiculous clearance by Tony Dunne to make it 2-0 on 13 minutes. Baldwin made it three seven minutes before half time. United made a few "desultory raids" which were easily mopped up, before Alan Birchenall made it four.

The man from the Guardian bemoaned United's "fragile" defending, but stopped short of offering a solution. "For people to tell Sir Matt Busby what he should do in United's hour of extremity is, to put it in somewhat plebian language, tantamount to telling your grandmother how to suck eggs." Perhaps someone should have had a word, though. They had already been beaten at West Bromwich Albion. A week later United lost 5-4 at Sheffield Wednesday. By the middle of October, they had been beaten at Burnley and Liverpool, and lost at home to Southampton. They were four points off the bottom in 16th place.

United would recover. They ended the season in ninth place – they lost the return fixture against Chelsea at Stamford Bridge 3-2, in a match described by John Arlott as "of splendid flair by the standards of any age or area" – and were unlucky not to make their second European Cup final. But Busby had announced his retirement in January 1969, and the downward trend had been set.

4) Manchester United 2-1 Chelsea (January 1971)

A League Cup meeting on New Year's Day, instantly forgettable were it not for one of football's greatest-ever juxtapositions of beauty and the beast. Ron Harris had many qualities, but subtlety was not one of them.

Here he is hoving into view from way out, belabouring George Best's ankles with a proper old-school reducer. It's a textbook piece of uberviolence – a vicious sliding tackle perfectly timed and executed, as graceful as brutality can ever get – but it was all for naught. Best ignored Chopper's galoot-isms, somehow retained his balance – despite being kicked almost horizontal in mid air – and continued his run.

Beauty and the beast. As the willowy long-haired Best sashays round the keeper and calmly slots home, as androgynous as you like, Harris, bloated with testosterone, picks himself heavily off the turf.

5) Manchester United 1-2 Chelsea (April 1986)

For such a domineering football club, United's home league record against Chelsea is nothing short of appalling. In the modern Premier League era, United have won six, drawn seven and lost five against the Blues. Now your super soaraway Joy of Six doesn't usually make the distinction between the top division pre and post 1992, but this time we make an exception because Chelsea's good record at Old Trafford is seen as something of a modern phenomenon. But look at what happened between the two clubs there before the Premier League, all the way back a quarter of a century to the 1966-67 season: United wins: one. Draws: eight. Chelsea wins: eight.

Fans of both clubs are disqualified, but hats off to any neutral who'd have called that. Perhaps the most painful for United of those eight defeats – and remember we've already mentioned the 4-0 in 1968 – was Chelsea's 2-1 win in April 1986. Both clubs were in the title race, though they were struggling to keep hold of Everton and Liverpool's coat tails. Neither team were in good nick. Depression was setting in with United, who had let their early-season lead slip and their form totally dissolve, while Chelsea were frittering away the games they had in hand on the leaders, having just been skittled 4-0 at home by West Ham, and 6-0 at QPR.

This was make or break for both clubs. With the early emphasis on break. In the opening exchanges, Mike Duxbury nearly broke Colin Pates' leg, then Doug Rougvie dispatched Mark Hughes into the stands, before flattening his old Aberdeen colleague Gordon Strachan. After a goalless first half, Kerry Dixon beat a high offside trap to score his first goal for four months. United equalized through a Jesper Olsen penalty, Rougvie this time sending Hughes crashing to the floor in the area, but Dixon had the last laugh in the dying moments to knock United out of the title race. Chelsea would subsequently win only one of their last seven games, but for a moment the future looked bright.

6. Chelsea 1-0 Manchester United (September 1993); Manchester United 0-1 Chelsea (March 1994); Manchester United 4-0 Chelsea (May 1994)

The Peacock triptych. In the first league fixture between the teams in the 1993-94 season, Chelsea became the first team to beat Manchester United since they had become champions, Gavin Peacock's goal consigning them to their first defeat since early March, a 17-game stretch. In the return fixture, Peacock would scupper an even longer unbeaten record of United's, 34 games this time, Glenn Hoddle having infused his side with positivity. "We have this strong feeling we can win the FA Cup," said Peacock after the win at Old Trafford as Chelsea looked to land their first meaningful trophy since the 1971 Cup Winners' Cup.

But Chelsea would have to wait another three seasons, as United won their first double. In the final, Peacock produced, according to David Lacey in the Guardian, "the best piece of individual skill in the game". He chested down a dreadful Gary Pallister clearance, and sent a lob whipping over a stranded Peter Schmeichel. Unfortunately for the striker, and for Chelsea, the ball twanged off the crossbar. In the second half, two penalties awarded by David Elleray – one a no-brainer after Eddie Newton's idiotic lunge on Denis Irwin, the other a no-brainer of a different sort, the referee punishing Frank Sinclair for coming together with Andrei Kanchelskis outside the area – did for Chelsea, who ended up on the wrong side of an undeserved 4-0 thrashing.

Thanks to Rob Smyth

The first week in May marked a momentous announcement from "the president of the free world": their number-one nemesis had been killed.

Perhaps the spontaneity of some of the celebrations in Washington and other US cities took the administration by surprise. There is only one death that is so widely celebrated in the West. For the United States of America, this mission is most momentous.

A reveller dressed as "Captain America" celebrates the killing of bin Laden (courtesy of Der Spiegel)


The first announcement by president Obama seemed sombre and reflective, projecting an impression of closure and an opportunity for conciliation, "we will never be at war with Islam" he said. Osama Bin Laden was "not an Islamic leader".

Picking on the hints of conciliation, Muslim leaders all over the world put the issue of the world's most-wanted man aside and opted to welcome the opportunity for conciliation. There was not one word of praise for bin Laden or grief over his death from any credible Muslim leader anywhere. We thought that this would mean the end of US occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq, that Obama's next announcement would be "mission accomplished" and it is time to resume our friendship.

However, the first deflating comment I noted from our Prime Minister right here in Australia, gave the impression that she missed the conciliatory tone of president Obama, opting rather to maintain the fear-alert by her promise to stay the course in Afghanistan and alarming the population about increased risk of a terror attack.

Then the confused conflicting messages started to emerge, the Pakistani government was quick to deny any involvement or knowledge in the operation that led to the killing. They even denied any knowledge that bin Laden might have been living in Pakistan. The US did not take long to corroborate the denial with an allegation that Pakistan is untrustworthy and if they had told them they might have jeopardised the operation. Not to be outdone, India also ignored the potential for conciliation, perhaps in pursuit of some US brownie points, India's home minister immediately charged Pakistan with being a haven for terrorists. In a coincidence mired in irony, the day that the German Der Spiegel questioned the legality of the operation we received the announcement that the US was suing the Deutsche Bank over mortgage fraud.

Nothing in our world happens in a vacuum!

The comedy of errors continued with president Obama's chief counterterrorism advisor at first charging "bin Laden" with trying to use his wife as a human shield only to be contradicted later by the statement that "bin Laden" was unarmed but tried to resist and she was not his wife, but his aide's wife caught in the crossfire even though only the Navy Seals were firing and "bin Laden" had no weapons! The latest revision of the story says that the room had several weapons and they shot at him as he tried to reach for one, or seemed to be reaching for one! It goes on, the son who was killed was not Hamza as first thought but Khaled! Hang on, let us make sure we get it right, it was Khalid not Hamza. Make sure that you get those details, they must add up to something?

Then that telling short video from the White House observation room, the president of the free world looks like he is biting his nails, Hilary Clinton holding a weight of worries on her brows and the rest of the talent in the room, visions that could provide the posters for the inevitable Hollywood production of these nail gripping events described by the president’s chief counter terrorism advisor John Brennan as "probably the most anxiety-filled periods of times".

They say that they respected Muslim tradition by washing the body and seeking to bury it quickly only to then dump it into the sea. Oh what secrets lie beneath thine waves!

To try to make a little more sense of what is happening, one needs to go back in time a few weeks, in March of this year, Reuters reported US Attorney General Eric Holder telling a house panel that "Osama bin laden would never appear in a US court room". This led to speculation that either bin Laden is already dead or would soon be. Various writers have speculated that bin Laden has been dead for some time, for example, in his book Messages to the World: the Statements of Osama bin Laden, Bruce Lawrence presented a compelling argument that bin Laden had been dead since 2004. Others have suspected that he had been dead or killed earlier, possibly in the 2001attacks on Tora Bora. David Ray Griffin in his book Osama bin Laden: Dead or Alive provides other compelling arguments that bin Laden died of kidney failure in December ‘01, just a few months after the September 11 attacks. If he was not already dead, Holder's statement meant they had discovered his whereabouts and made a decision to kill him and that they soon would. Though such certainty raises more questions.

For an empire that has suffered great moral and financial losses in Iraq and Afghanistan, the "death" of bin Laden provided that pivotal point from which they can announce a face-saving withdrawal of troops and divert the resources to much-needed facilities and services at home.

For Muslims, torn between the conflicting stories about bin Laden, all we wanted was for the enigma to be put to rest. To us, all the stories about bin Laden painted a picture of our faith that was alien to anything that we knew and cherished. He has been presented as a leader who would stop at nothing to achieve his plans of domination. The enigma drew some to his cause. However, the trickle of individuals who heeded his call were being arrested and he was left with a very small following, perhaps tens of people, perhaps less. They were the remnants of those idealists who came to Afghanistan to help save its people from Soviet occupation, they were trained and equipped by the United States in its hope to tear down Soviet power and limit its influence.

That plan worked too well. The resulting the hubris may have been a key factor in developing the false perception that it can invade, occupy and dominate the resources of countries such as Afghanistan and Iraq. They forgot one important element, the Afghan Mujahideen and their foreign friends were fighting a war of liberation whereas the US campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan were campaigns of occupation. They forgot the lessons from history that no people, no society would ever acquiesce to foreign occupation. As the great Pakistani cricketer-turned-politician Imran Khan, said: "now that they have achieved their goal, they should pack up and leave".

Muslims are relieved that the West no longer has to beat the drums of war after a "Muslim" bogeyman. We have four views with respect to bin Laden, all these views pour into the same end result.

1) He was a crusader for his own worldview and died with the Arab spring revolution, long before the Navy Seals killed the actual person. Those who sympathised with him would view him as a martyr dying at the hands of his enemies and those who didn't would be rather indifferent. For those who view him as a martyr, from the Islamic perspective, they view martyrdom for a cause as a noble aspiration which had been achieved by its seeker, they would not begrudge him that fate, rather, they would celebrate it and draw comfort from the verse that says: Nay, they are alive, with their Lord, well provided for.

2) He never stopped working for the CIA who trained and equipped him to help defeat the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan and that the US wanted to put an end to the enigma and they have given him a new identity and killed off his character, like producers do for a television series. In which case, we are all being manipulated as is the strategy of governments.

3) He died a while ago and the US only saw fit to make a "convincing" announcement this week because there are no longer any strategic gains from keeping his myth alive.

4) He is still in hiding, the US didn't kill him, we will hear of bin Laden "sightings" in the future. However, as the publicity around his death has been so profuse, no-one is going to believe that he lives, he will not want to come out because he knows that they will go after him so his character is killed off just like in point 2.

Under all four scenarios, we need to all view this very difficult period in our lives as over. For those brothers and sisters who were antagonistic or indifferent to Osama bin Laden or those who believed that he was genuine, maybe we can put our different opinions aside and see if we can bring some semblance of unity into our community. Our mission as peacemakers, do-gooders and disseminators of goodwill compels us to look for opportunities and signals to do just that.

The baggage that had been associated with the bin Laden persona which we have been forced to carry has been delivered; let us move on, our work is just beginning.

There is a golden opportunity for the US and the Western world. Seeing the conciliatory reaction from the Muslim world to their operation against bin Laden, the US must receive those Muslims’ hands that have been stretched in the spirit of conciliation and seek a future of cooperation and collaboration on the premise of mutual respect. The estimated 1.6 to 2 billion Muslims around the world are showing signs of goodwill, will the Western world reciprocate?

On another note: A number of countries in the Muslim world have witnessed peaceful and not-so-peaceful revolutions. Whilst these revolutions were taking place, supporters rallied the world over to give them moral support and lobby on their behalf. I thank all those who have supported the oppressed in their march towards freedom. At the same time, I appeal to them to research their audience and select slogans that make sense, slogans that get the message across to the people who witness their demonstrations. In a secular society, chanting that a certain despot should be ousted because he is an enemy of God or religion is really counter-productive and neither conveys the intended message nor wins people over. This is especially so when the chant is in a foreign language. What does it mean when an Australian says: we will give our blood and soul for a foreign country (even if it is the country of his parents)? These become meaningless or negative slogans chanted because we have not applied our minds to develop the message that we need to develop for our audiences. Such chants give the impression that we were not thinking, that we focused on the activity but not on the message, that we started on a journey but lost ourselves on the way choosing a detour that would not deliver us to our destination. Please my dear brothers and sisters, instead of shouting ‘Down down’ whatever, or so-and-so is an ‘enemy of God’, or ‘our blood and soul’ for such-and-such a country or some other counterproductive slogans that were only selected for rhyme rather than reason, we should put a little more effort and select slogans that convey to those who hear them exactly what we want to convey in a manner that they will understand.

Finally, as we hear that the International Criminal Court is about to issue warrants for senior leaders in Libya, very disturbing news is coming out of Egypt that possibly as many as 50,000 individuals have faced military trials without due process. This is a terrible outcome when the Egyptian people showed so much confidence in and gave so much praise for their military. Whatever counter revolutionary forces are influencing these show trials (and the alleged associated tortures), the Egyptian military must as a matter of absolute urgency hand over these cases to the civilian judiciary and the people be assumed innocent until proven otherwise.

Keysar Trad is founder of the Islamic Friendship Association of Australia.

• Read all responses to this article

Listen to an audio version of this interview.

Musician Adam Chester, like many of us, has received thousands of letters from his mother since he left home. The letters are funny, affectionate, embarrassing, inappropriate. Sometimes all at once. For years, Chester kept the letters in a box, some of them unopened. One day he started publishing them as a blog called "Please Don't Eat Sushi! Love, Mom!" The blog, now called "S'Motherboard," led to this month's publication of "S'Mother: The Story of a Man, His Mom, and the Thousands of Altogether Insane Letters She's Mailed Him." Mother Jones spoke recently with Adam and his mother, Joan, about maternal advice, their relationship, and Adam's side job as 'the surrogate Elton John.'

Joan Chester: Hello?

Mother Jones: Joan, hi; can Adam come to the phone?

JC: Hold on, I'll get him. Adam! It's some guy on the phone for you.

Adam Chester: This is Adam.

MJ: Adam, hi, this is Tim.

Continue Reading »

Steven Spielberg is looking to recruit an impressive raft of big name stars for his soon-to-shoot Abraham Lincoln biopic.

While Daniel Day-Lewis is already attached to star as the 16th US President, a mammoth list of other actors currently in negotiations for the film has been released.

Among them are Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Tommy Lee Jones, James Spader, Tim Blake Nelson, Bruce McGill, Joseph Cross, John Hawkes, David Costabile and Jeremy Strong.

If their deals become official, Jones will play Pennsylvanian Republican congressman Thaddeus Stevens, a supporter of abolishing slavery, while Gordon-Levitt would play Lincoln’s son Robert Todd.

The only other actor currently confirmed for the film is Sally Field, who’ll play Lincoln’s wife Mary Todd.

If Spielberg manages to bag even half the people he wants (and, come on, he’s Spielberg, so we’re betting he will), he’ll have quite a cast list on his hands.

Lincoln will begin shooting this autumn, and opens late 2012.

A lot of what is being said about the neuroscience of conflict resolution is cringe-worthy. Not only is research often done on college students, in the artificial setting of a lab, being presented as if it applies to real-life conflicts, but also as if we know how people act outside the lab.

Don't forget to come back on Wednesday to add your link when The Gallery post goes up. Then visit as many of the other entries as you can to see what they've come up with.

Free in-store fittings are now a standard service, yet a new survey has shown that most women are still getting their bra size wrong

I was 15 years old when I bought my first bra in 1997. It was a non-wired 28B, white with a yellow trim, found in the Oxford Street branch of Marks & Spencer, and sized and selected by eye by my mother. I don't recall seeing a specialist bra-fitter lurking around the dressing room that day. Nor do I remember thinking I needed any help (beyond my mother's) in selecting my own underwear.

That world is long gone. Now we have specialists wielding tape measures, happy and eager to help you with your brassiere needs. Almost every department store has a team of women who will size you up (for free) for specially engineered lingerie. But do we really need people to tell us what size bra to wear? Moreover, in light of this now ubiquitous service, are there really still women who do not know what size they are? A survey says British women own, on average, 16 bras at any one time. Are they all the wrong size? Can't women be trusted to choose their own undergarments correctly?

Bizarrely, the answer seems to be no. Last year, the University of Portsmouth's breast biomechanic research unit found that women tend to wear the wrong bra size, with the most common problem being a too-small cup. My call for bra-fitting stories via Twitter and Facebook resulted in an overwhelming number of responses. More than one person came up with the cliched "It changed my life!" reply. In my – entirely unscientific survey – almost everyone who responded said they had been wearing bras that were too small before they went for a fitting, and every last woman reported new realms of comfort and pleasure. Following my initial bra-buying trip as a teenager, I did not seek professional help fitting a bra until 2009, when I was 27. That day, I walked into M&S; in a 34C (which I had been wearing for years) and emerged 20 minutes later with a straight back and a 32E bra.

Although shops must see resizing as a way of boosting sales, Debenhams surveyed 1,000 women across the UK and found the biggest reason for not going to get professionally measured was embarrassment. This, alongside a lack of knowledge about what a bra fitting actually entails, was the reason why 85% of women were wearing the wrong bra size. It's part of the reason why the store did a series of live bra fittings in the shop window of its flagship London branch yesterday. Although the store used models and provided modesty curtains for potential customers, it is difficult to see how this could help with the embarrassment.

Despite these findings, I'd argue that for most people, it's more force of habit. Michelle Dowdall Debenhams' lingerie PR manager, agrees. "You get a size that you start to wear in your late teens, then you stick with that until you're told otherwise, usually during pregnancy and nursing," she says. "After that, people just don't spend the time."

Amie, who has been working as a bra-fitter with Debenhams for 10 months, fits a minimum of five women every day, but this has been known to go up to 50 during busy sale periods. "I get people who are so off the mark, it's unbelievable," she says. "I've had someone come in wearing a 36A when they were actually a 32E." Amie reckons lots of women get it so wrong because they simply don't know what they're doing. "We're just not taught what to look for when we go bra shopping."

So, what are the basics? "Simple things: if the bra is underwired, make sure the centre panel lies flat against your chest," she says. "Make sure it's not too tight across the back – you should be able to get two fingers between the bra and your skin. The straps mustn't slide off. When trying it on, always start on the loosest clasp. Most of all, make sure it's comfortable."

Of course, some people just don't see the need. One friend says: "I still stubbornly believe that I can try on my own clothing. There are only so many sizes out there and I've done the trial-and-error thing." She accepts that her smaller bust may be a factor. "I don't have much going on in that arena, so maybe that makes it easier." Others have eschewed bras altogether: "Uniqlo's one-size-fits-all supported vests have changed my life," says one. "I'm never wearing an underwired bra again."

What are you going to do?
Will you show me your Gush Garara
What are you going to do?
Will you show me your Gush Garara

When I do it for you
What are you going to do?
Will you show me your Gush Garara?

Lemme hear you say Gush Garara
Come on, come on Gush Garara.

We live in a gladiator society and majority of NHL fans love watching a fight between two willing combatants; fighting in hockey is also an aspect of the NHL that I like. Two people square off and fight it "usually" solves the problem and it "usually" ends right there.

As far as an out right ban on fighting in the NHL, I also don’t think the NHL GM’s, coaches and players would probably ever go for it. Here is the way I see it, it you take fighting out of hockey, how in the heck are you going to police the game? You can’t count on the Colin Campbells of the NHL to protect the players on the ice, nor can the referees do so as well. Also, if there is no threat of player ever having to fight on the ice in the NHL you will see more acts of violence from the Matt Cooke type players around the NHL…

TORONTO — If it was Chicago, it might be two bottles of wine. They always seemed to have tough guys in Chicago, scary guys who would keep Jim Thomson awake the night before a game, and the extra wine at dinner helped to fortify him for what lay ahead.

Sometimes the anxiety led to more self-medication, pills that helped him get over the fear of being knocked unconscious in front of 20,000 fans. He was a fighter.

“As a fighter in hockey, you live in fear,” Thomson said.

He lived on the margins of the roster, protecting Wayne Gretzky one year, playing for the Phoenix Roadrunners the next. Thomson logged dozens of fights over a 115-game career, and when it ended, he suffered.

“I went through periods of depression,” he said. “I’m a recovering alcoholic. I believe a lot of my demons, if you will, came from hockey ending and the head blows and certain things that I wasn’t aware of.”

Now 45, Thomson said he “easily” suffered five or six concussions. During one stretch in the American Hockey League, he was punched so hard in a fight on Friday that he cannot remember what he did on the ice during Saturday or Sunday’s games.

On Wednesday, Thomson was among a collection of current and former athletes gathered at the Hockey Hall of Fame to promote a website (stopconcussions.com) designed to help educate athletes on the cause, effects and consequences of concussion. Retired NHL star Keith Primeau was the keynote speaker, but Thomson delivered perhaps the most radical solution to reducing the risk on the ice.

The former fighter would like a blanket ban on fighting in hockey.

“Get it out,” he said. “I mean, come on, why do we need it?”

He referred to it, more than once, as “bare-knuckle fighting.”

Read the full original article...

Peggy Guggenheim: art collector, poor little rich girl and whisky faker

For nearly a year, Nonjatta has been taking part in the "Whisky Round Table," a discussion forum that is hosted every month at one of 12 participating blogs on a topic chosen by that month's host or hostess. There have been some fascinating questions and really stimulating discussions (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10).

Now, the time has come for Nonjatta to act as host. This is the question I hurled at my fellow bloggers:

The socialite and art collector Peggy Guggenheim used to pour bottles of cheap blended whisky into premium bottles and, presumably, laugh down her sleeve at those sniffing and simpering over her drams.

How confident are you of your whisky tasting skills?

Is there any purpose to the pursuit of objectivity in whisky tasting (unless you work in the industry) or does it suck the joy out of a essentially subjective experience.

Is it possible to categorise a sip in words and is something lost or gained in that process?

The answers from my fellow whisky "knights" took the issue way beyond my cheeky scepticism: 

Keith Wood (The Whisky Emporium)

Just fancy that; being invited round to Peggy's place and being offered something along the lines of a Dalmore Trinitus bottle, only to find that it contains Dalmore 13y, or even JW Black. Or perhaps not so extreme an example would be a Macallan 25y containing 12y. The possibilities are endless and I'm sure she had a little private giggle or two over this.

But could I tell the difference? Now, there's a good question and one which would depend upon the bottle and whisky being offered. Yes, I am very confident in my tasting skills, or at least my ability to assess a whisky rather than immediately identify it. This was not always the case. My personal whisky adventure started just over 30 years ago when I learned to appreciate the main two offerings at that time: Glenfiddich and Glenmorangie. In those days I tended to prefer the smoothness of Glenmorangie to the fire of Glenfiddich.

Obviously, over the last 30 years my palate has become far more experienced, perhaps mostly so in the last 4-5 years as I started to not only enjoy my drams, but also to study and evaluate what I was drinking.

So, do I see any purpose in my pursuit of objectivity? Well, I guess we are all quite vain and would like to think so, but I believe that if one is going to dedicate a significant portion of one's life to a hobby, then it really should be on the basis of knowing what one is talking about!

For me, evaluation of a whisky does not detract from any enjoyment of it. In fact, I find it increases my enjoyment as I search for hidden or less-pronounced flavours and nuances, only to be delighted when I find them, perhaps after allowing a whisky to breathe in the glass for what can be anything up to 30-45 minutes.

You ask if it's possible to categorise a sip in mere words? Is anything lost in doing so?

Well, having experienced many instances where long-lost memories of specific times and places are suddenly thrown into recollection just by nosing a certain whisky, I feel that in putting these recollections and experiences to paper, or website in my case, actively enhances the process and at the same time, hopefully gives my readers more insight into the dram(s) and a more interesting read too.

In fact I recently addressed this subject with another whisky blogger as we looked specifically at how closely connected the olfactory sense is with memory. This alone is a subject on which I could endlessly pontificate and elaborate to the complete boredom of all, but worry not as I will refrain from doing so here, other than to say don't be surprised the next time you see me compare something like a magnificent Port Ellen to a childhood day out in Scarborough some 40+ years ago.

Peter Lemon (The Casks)

"Is there any purpose to the pursuit of objectivity in whisky tasting (unless you work in the industry) or does it suck the joy out of a essentially subjective experience." Uh...what about people who actually find joy in the pursuit of objectivity? Not being in the industry, I'd think it would be the opposite, that is, having to be objective for your job is more likely to suck the joy out of "subjective" tasting than tasting for what's basically a hobby.

I enjoy tasting (or at least trying to taste) objectively and find that what I've learned from doing so makes those times when I'm just sipping a whisky for no reason other than to enjoy it even better. As for my tasting skills, am I confident that I can sit down with a glass and pick out the flavors and nuances that reflect the process and make it enjoyable or not? Yes. For me, that's part of what makes the experience, subjective or objective, enjoyable.

Am I confident that I can take a blind sip and know exactly when, where, and how a whisky was made and whether or not a rivet was loose in the still that fateful Thursday, making the feints taste smartly of heirloom cantaloupes rotting in the Chilean sun? No, and that doesn't bother me one bit. If after years and years, I drink enough whisky to be able to conjure that knowledge out of thin air, then I'll know for damn sure I've wasted too much time drinking and learning about whisky.

I think it is possible to categorize and describe a sip of whisky, we do it whether we want to or not. Our brains subconsciously want to break down and compartmentalize experiences and sensations so we can understand them better. That some of us take this categorizing and describing one step further with whisky and do so in tasting notebooks and on free blogging platforms perhaps makes us better appreciators of the stuff. On some level, though, I do think a little something is lost when whisky is dissected in this way because that pure, initial experience can get lost. The first time I tried Laphroaig 10, I really had no information on the stuff other than it came from an island called "Iss-lay".

That first glass was a revelation, but it was also the last time that I had that raw reaction, that I experienced it that way. From that point on, I'd categorized it as challenging, pungent, smokey, etc., and thought about it that way every time after. In the end, though, the positives outweigh the negatives in terms of categorizing and describing each sip, doing so helps create a common language about this stuff we love which in turn helps share it with others.

Chris Hoban (The Edinburgh whisky blog)

I think perhaps this question needs to be split into its component questions.

1. How confident are you of your whisky tasting skills?

In the last 4 years I have tried pretty much every brand of single malt Scotch, as well as many blends, single cask editions, grain whiskies, square barreled whiskies, 50 year old whiskies, 70 year old whiskies and 90 percent abv new spirit (plus many more crazy things I can't remember). Whisky from Japan, New Zealand, Wales, USA, Ireland, Sweden, India, Czech Republic, England. I have been very lucky!

Does that make me think I am confident in tasting whisky? In some ways, yes. I can recognise area styles (Islay or Kentucky for instance). I can normally make quite educated guesses in blind tastings and I know what I like, so I can recognise what for me is a good whisky and what for me is a bad whisky. I understand some of the science behind why certain flavours appear. Whether it is the type of oak, length of distillation, shape of still, consistency of wash, type of yeast, type of barley or the many other variables which contribute to this fantastic spirit.

But then I think about the blind tastings. I make educated guesses, but I consistently get it wrong. I may get the region right, or I may be able to justify why I made the guess that I did, but I cannot state that I have a world class, Usain Bolt/Messi/Muhammed Ali level palate (these guys being world class in their sport, rather than having amazing palates. Although I wouldn't put it past Messi!) I think because I enjoy fine wine, whisky, beef and the many other pleasures of life (a spicy curry and a beer for instance) that I am slowly eroding my palate. Because I taste so much, I am constantly training my palate, but to truly develop the palate and maintain a sensitive palate, you have to water down the whisky and spit out. These are two things I rarely do.

Also Women naturally have a better palate, so if there was a palate Olympics, their natural advantage would shine through.

2. Objectivity and subjectivity in our business

I think this is where it gets complicated and it depends on the purpose of the whisky tasting. If the tastings purpose is to judge the liquid for a competition, then the aim is to make the tasting as objective as possible. I am always more of a fan of the idea that the judges would be told a region, since this gives them some sort of yardstick to judge the whisky against. Why taste a Glenfarlclas alongside Islays? They are almost completely different drinks. Competition tastings should be blind, with minimal information (e.g region) and the judges should be as neutral as possible.

As competitions should be fair, objectivity is key. When it comes to blogs, I think it becomes a little more complicated. We are in an opinion business. We get wrapped up the history of the distillery. We tell a story of our day and at the end of it, there are some tasting notes. We have a philosophical outlook, so objectivity can become slightly skewed. The key for Lucas and I, is that we try and remain as objective as possible. We try to separate our emotions and feelings towards a distillery, its history, philosophy and people from the liquid itself. It is hard to do.

The questions I ask myself as I write tasting notes on a dram: Is it any good? Would I buy it in a bar? Would I buy a bottle? Is it the best thing I have tasted from this distillery and does it represent their house style well? How does it sit with other whisky's from that region?

To get to the crux of the matter, I think constant blind tastings, with scores out of 100 would drain the pleasure out of blogging for me and make my blog dreadfully boring. I enjoy learning about the history of a distillery and meeting the people who run it. I enjoy hearing about the philosophy of a distillery. The tasting notes are, for me, just a handy way of keeping notes of the whisky's I have tasted along the way. I think that since I try so many, it is important for me to write down tasting notes and opinion, otherwise I would never remember! I hope anyone that reads them is encouraged to try the whisky and make their own minds up, even if I have said that the whisky is not to my taste. If they read the tasting notes and like the sound of it, they should try it regardless of whether I liked it or not. I read other peoples tasting notes to get an indication of things to try, but I always try to make my own mind up over whether I like the whisky or not.

Joshua Hatton (The Jewish Single Malt Whisky Society)

How confident am I in my whisky tasting skills? An interesting question. I know that I can blindly taste a whisky, tell you what I'm smelling and tasting as well as how I feel about mouthfeel, balance--basically the whole experience. This is quite possibly the most objective way of whisky tasting.

Take the blindfold off and things can and do change.

Preconceived notions with regards to brand, color, age, cask, ABV, chill and non-chill filtration, caramel coloring are all formidable opponents when it comes to a completely objective, unbiased review. These are tough to get past and to help do so, I've actually started tasting a minimum of two whiskies at time and I review them blindly to help in being as objective as possible.

There's another element here as well, especially when it comes to whisky reviewers like ourselves. And that is how the sample given can affect the opinion... Or to put it another way: some people who give samples and some people who read reviews of whiskies that were written up from a sample (a sample given to a reviewer by the distillery or brand representative) might expect the overall review to be tainted or have a more positive spin on it than the whisky should actually have. I wrote a piece on this particular concern a while back (it can be read here). My simple answer to this concern -- I've done a good job pissing some people off by not giving the shining review they were expecting. Oh well...

When it comes to the delivery of my review I feel my personality needs to shine through here so I'll take all of the information I've gathered in the reviewing process and deliver it with my patented "JSMWS feel".

I particularly like the following definition of 'subjective'.... the wording of it: "Subjective is a statement that has been colored by the character of the speaker or writer. It often has a basis in reality, but reflects the perspective through with the speaker views reality. It cannot be verified using concrete facts and figures." (Here's a link to the quote's source.)

My approach is to base my reviews on the facts, being as objective as humanly possible: first a blind review, then a gathering of all the information on the whisky, then delivery of the information to the readers of my blog through my view of reality; my writing style.

Lastly, you asked, "Is it possible to categorize a sip in words and is something lost or gained in that process?" One can never taste or experience whisky vicariously through another person's review. I hope that my reviews do help people not only choose a whisky because of the flavors and experience I describe but also the suggestions I give as where, when and how to enjoy said whisky. The 'loss' for people is in not going out to try new things. The 'gain' is to know, or at least pay heed the suggestion, when and how to enjoy new things (whisky).

Mark Connelly (Glasgow's Whisky and Ale)

Yes, a reminder that sometimes life (and all things in it) can be taken too seriously. Since this post is on a Japanese blog, I guess this is a good time to take a step back and look at the bigger picture given the events there and how even basic things like a roof over your head can’t be taken for granted.

I recently had a discussion at a tasting regarding tasting notes. Someone started off by asking what they are and why people write them. I then veered off into various recollections of some people who can’t try a whisky without writing a note about them. I suppose it’s a form of collecting (or OCD, perhaps) whereby not writing a note would be detrimental to the growth of that collection but also the knowledge. And a note can be a valuable memory tool at a later date.

I tend to only write notes when I’m at a tasting, writing a review or in the mood to. Fairly often I don’t bother as I simply want to enjoy the drink in front of me. I still find myself nosing it out of habit (and have caught myself nosing tea and even a glass of water) but I don’t have that urge that some do to record every detail of everything drunk.

I think that tasting notes are a great way to express what you thought of a particular drink but as has been discussed elsewhere at length this is one person’s opinion and naunces and shouldn’t be taken as a definitive guide. We all need to try for ourselves and make our own minds up. It is certainly better than a mark out of 100, which to me is meaningless.

This all leads me to conclude that indeed we can lose sight of the fact that this is only an alcoholic drink to be consumed for pleasure.

Again, let’s try to remember that there are more important things in life and my thoughts are with Japan and its people at this time.

Gal Granov (Whisky Israel)

I am quite humble when it comes to my whisky tasting skills, I tend to remind myself of that when participating in "blind" tastings, or "blind " whisky swaps. Will I be able to pinpoint all of my favourite drams when they are given to me blind folded? Probably some, but I would not claim to be able to guess all of them. It would be very embarrassing to mistake an Ardbeg 10 for a Laphroaoig 10 (though I am quite sure that would not happen).

I am fairly "new" to the whisky tasting business, but not a newbie. I've been sampling malts for the past few years, as opposed to the decades some have spent. Researchers have shown that the amount of pleasure you get from sipping an expensive and highly respected malt or wine (say a Port Ellen), is greater than the same amount had you been told it was "only" a young Islay 'mystery dram'. So, I say that what makes us happier and makes us enjoy our dramming sessions more is what's good for us.

There is no such thing as a completely "objective" experience, since we are always affected by the past, our conceptions (or misconceptions), and a bias towards some drams. But this just goes without saying and is a fact of life.

I do hope when I am tasting a new dram, knowing what it is, I allow myself only to be only a wee bit affected by my past experiences/things I've heard about it/how other bloggers or whisky industry 'experts' rated it and what they thought of it. Am I completely innocent? Probably not, but my blog is not a scientific endeavour to rate whisky. It is a means to document my journey through this wonderful world of Whisky.

I am having a ball, and I hope my readers are enjoying the ride, and then experiencing the whiskies for themselves.

Matt and Karen (Whisky for Everyone)

An interesting question – let’s deal with the tasting skills first. If you can’t trust your own whisky tasting skills then who will? More importantly, if you don’t trust your ‘skills’ (sorry, having a Napoleon Dynamite moment now …), then who is going to take any serious note of what you tell them face-to-face or write in your blog? The aroma and flavour notes that each of us will find in a certain whisky will vary according to our individual tastes, although the basic characteristics will/should come through. This can be seen by selecting a whisky and then reading all of the reviews that you can find online of that whisky, not just on the blogs of the Whisky Round Table members but on the multitude of other whisky or spirit-related blogs that exist.

The beauty of tasting a whisky (or a wine or any other spirit for that matter …) is that there are no right or wrong answers. This is something that we try and encourage, especially with our ‘beginner’ readership and it helps to break down some of the perceived (and real) snobbery and intimidation that surround the subject. The reality is that once you get to a certain knowledge level about whisky, then it becomes second nature to analyse (and over-analyse!) whatever you may be drinking, be it in a day-to-day drinking scenario or a formal tasting scenario. You cannot help it and it is the same if you get to a certain level of expertise in any subject, be it within your job or a hobby – eg. can a film or restaurant critic ever just watch a movie or eat a meal without analysing what they are doing? Do they ever just enjoy a film or meal or the experience for what it is?

Is it possible to categorise a sip of whisky in words? Maybe … but the key is the objectivity of the description. People want to listen and read our opinions and hundreds do everyday from all over the world. This is one of the primary reasons why they read all of our whisky blogs – readers want to find information and get reassurance about something that they are planning to buy or try. Equally, we get comments from readers who use tasting notes on blogs as a tool to try and build up their own tastes, words and experiences of drinking whisky so as to educate themselves and gain confidence.

Ultimately, if you strip away elements such as writing style and a blogger’s personal tastes, most readers want a sip of whisky characterised into words and to know what characteristics to look out for or what style of whisky to expect. This is the same as us reading movie or restaurant reviews to find out what the storyline is or what the quality of the food is like.

And my take on this?

Chris Bunting (Nonjatta)

First, I suppose I should apologize for asking such a cheeky question.

The issues surrounding tasting and tasting notes are something I have been mulling over for some time. On my own blog, among notes from a number of outside contributors, I publish the tasting notes of a whisky expert in Australia who writes really interesting reviews. I really look forward to them. My own notes are published much less regularly. I have also refused all invitations to judge whiskies in competition settings.

There are a number of reasons for this diffidence but the easiest to explain is that I am intensely sceptical of my own tasting skills. I am not sceptical of other people's abilities to discern and describe whiskies, but I am acutely conscious that I am a rank amateur (judging the products of professionals who devote their lives to their drinks) and that I have only been seriously sipping whiskies for a few years. Perhaps, with time, I will grow more relaxed, but I don't want to be the egit who goes trampling all over a bed of exquisite snowdrops looking for a daffodil.

This is why I have completely rejected any attempt at objectivity in the notes I do publish. My rating system is a very simple 5-star system, which only attempts to describe my subjective assessment. I think it is quite possible that by not trying to be objective I may be stunting my own whisky development, but that is what I am comfortable with.

I would make one plea to other whisky drinkers on this topic, however: embracing subjectivity does not necessarily have to devalue whisky tasting. For a whisky drinker like myself, who is determinedly wallowing in subjectivity, mulling over the rootless, shifting nature of our impressions can actually be a point of departure rather than a troubling challenge. I feltt Keith's mention of memory in his response to this question was really interesting, for instance. It is a really fertile area for thought.

 I am not so much in the business of problematising the pursuit of objectivity. (If I were, the cheap shot here would have been: "What if Proust had set himself the challenge of numerically ranking the taste of cakes according to a strict 100 point rating system, designed to standardize his preferences and impressions over his whole life?" That is a facile point). But I am in the business of espousing the interest of a parallel pursuit and exploration of subjectivity. For me, with my very limited tasting experience, getting away from a stolid obsession with categorizing sense impressions seems to open up the possibility of playing more freely with the relationships between words, environment, memory etc. in creative and rich ways, and thinking in different ways about what publishing about whisky is about. There are endless lines of thought and practice arising from the dropping of objectivity. But a basic, practical one would be descritions of a single bottle over its whole life, embracing varying impressions. Or reviews that described in great detail the circumstances of tasting: the leather chair next to the fire, the conversation with a friend, or the sterile competition room....

Today's News: Our Take:Fringe Finale Scoop: Producers Tackle Burning Questions (Including "Who's Going to Die?")
May 5, 2011 09:18 PM ET
by Natalie Abrams

The penultimate episode of Fringe saw Peter (Joshua Jackson) enter the machine, which transported him 15 years into a decimated future. As the very fabric of our universe is being ripped apart, Peter will attempt to prevent this grim future from happening. And along the way, lives will be lost (yes, that was plural!) Executive producers Jeff Pinkner and J.H. Wyman answer burning questions about the finale:

How is this flash-forward different from others we've seen on TV before?
J.H. Wyman: The very nature of Fringe is that it's all about choices that we make, so we get to celebrate that authentically. Whatever we see in the future can be adjusted and might be adjusted. We feel like we've actually earned the ability to go backwards and forwards to eliminate and re-contextualize the show for the viewer. There's so much story to tell in the future, in the past, and the present with Fringe. It's kind of like a wheelhouse that we feel comfortable playing in.

Is this a permanent jump or will you decide to jump backwards and forwards next season?
Jeff Pinkner: The ending of the finale sort of answers your question. As the Observers once told us, there are many futures happening simultaneously. Which one will come true is based on, as Joel just said, the choices that we all collectively make. The finale is the future in 2026 that our characters are on a path towards if nothing were to change. By the end of the episode, that change has occurred. So we may continue to tell storytelling that's both in the past, like we've done a couple of times to see Walter's story with Peter, and we may jump to the future again. But it won't be necessarily the same one that we're in in this episode.

The whole season has been building towards the destruction of one universe or the other, but in jumping ahead 15 years, you skipped over that. Will we see what happens or will that be mirrored in the deterioration of our universe in the future?
Wyman: We love to answer questions. There's some great shows that love to ask them and maybe not answer them so quickly. We've always tried to sort of fill in the blanks and get the viewer to feel satisfied that they're watching a story for a reason. We both feel that you'll be satisfied, that you will understand what the future held for each universe and their collective and individual fates.

How have the characters' relationships changed 15 years in the future?
Wyman: Some of them are what you would expect, but some of them are not. We tried to make sure that each one was at least logical, of course, and colorful in its own way; how they grew and what happens to them. But we looked at this as a huge possibility to paint a canvas in the future to allow the viewer to fill in some blanks and take that away with them and go, "Wow, that's really interesting. How did this transpire?"

Thanks to the promos, we've seen glimpses of how bad the future is. Will Peter be able to prevent this future from happening?
Pinkner: It's bad! I think that the question of the episode is: What's to come? And for Peter, Olivia (Anna Torv), Walter (John Noble) and, obviously, the rest of the team — what is their role in trying to prevent what seems to be a pretty awful fate?

What can you tell us about the End-of-Dayers and Walternate's plan to destroy our universe?
Wyman: The concept of End-of-Dayers is an interesting one because it deals with faith and loss of faith. That's kind of a big theme for us; that people are constantly looking for things to believe in. Right now, in society, we feel that there's a breakdown in a lot of different areas in life that people once had great faith in, like politics or religion or whatever. People are looking for something to believe in. So the End-of-Dayers are basically people that have faith, but faith in the end of everything. That it is the end of days that would deliver them into some sort of salvation. It's tough to have faith when the environment is what it is and you're living in conditions that these people are living in. It's pretty dire.

Are the future citizens of the world aware of the cross-universe war?
Pinkner: Yeah. Fifteen years in the future, when the story takes place, everything has become much more public and necessary.
Wyman: Eventually you can't hide it any longer.

We're going to be losing a main character in the finale. What can you tell us about that? Is it permanent?
Wyman: Is this death permanent? You'll see it's not exactly what happens. Maybe the best hint is that there's actually more than one.

Is this a mass casualty situation?
Pinkner: The deaths are actually both in entirely different contexts.

The Fringe finale airs Friday at 9/8c on Fox.
Source:tvguide.com

The pace continues at a nice clip with our pick at No. 20. A job well done by Bringin' the Wood(ley). Many thanks! Next up: the Kansas City Chiefs, represented by Wichita Sun Steeler. - Michael B. -

**************

Since 2008, the Bucs have had 22 draft picks. 10 of those 22 were starters in 2010, most notably led by Josh Freeman, Mike Williams, and Gerald McCoy. In the 2010 draft, Tampa bay drafted Gerald McCoy (DT, Oklahoma) and Brian Price (DT, UCLA) in the first two rounds, in an attempt to shore up a defense that had become a sieve in recent years. Their draft was rather heavy defensively, but they also had a chance to get two targets for budding QB Josh Freeman, with Arrelious Benn in the 2nd and Mike Williams in the 4th round, who finished the season with 65 rec, 963 yds, and 11TDs.

The Buccaneer's biggest needs for the 2011 season come down to DE, OL, and LB, in no particular order. They invested heavily at the DT position last year, but after Brian Price was put on the IR for a hip fracture early on, their defense only managed to tie for 30th in the league with 26 sacks, led by Stylez G. White. I think that says enough to go ahead and draft a DE right now. But wait- Barrett Ruud, team leader in tackles for 4 straight seasons, is set to be a Free Agent, and if he isn't retained, a LB would be a top priority, particularly one with some pass-rushing ability also. And lastly, the OL- had I not looked up a roster or some news about the team, I don't think I could've named one of their O-linemen. Not even Pro Bowl Guard Davin Joseph. Unfortunately, he is a FA along with Jeremy Trueblood, and I would have to imagine that protecting their young star QB and opening some lanes for the freight train known as LeGarrette "I'm a sock you in the mouth" Blount would seem logical at worst, necessary at best.

I really wanted to take a DE here, most likely Adrian Clayborn, but this draft is incredibly deep at the position, and I think with their second round the Bucs will be able to nab a guy like Jabaal Sheard or Clayborn's teammate Chris Ballard. I also think that 20th overall is a little high for a guy like Martez Wilson at LB, who missed his entire junior year at Illinois because of a herniated disk in his neck. However, he has shown great maturity since the injury by become a better disciple of the game, and he could be the missing link to this team ever since Derrick Brooks left. And lastly, I was very tempted to pick Brandon Harris here, as he could be more of a hometown name in Tampa, potentially playing opposite Ronde for a year while he learned the ropes.

However, After days and days of waiting for the 20th pick to roll around in the BTSC draft, The Tampa Bay Buccaneers would formally like to give the call to Anthony Castonzo, OT, Boston College. Castonzo has great size (6'7", 311 lbs.), quick feet, and a high football I.Q., some of the most important attributes for offensive linemen to possess when entering the NFL. He set a school record for the most starts at Boston College with 54 and was named a third-team AP All-American for the 2010 season. He started all 13 games for the Eagles as a team captain during his senior season in 2010. This guy has the makings to step in day one and excel for one of the youngest teams in the league, anchoring the left side of the line, protecting Freeman's blind side and clearing a path for Blount.

 

Here's an interview with Castonzo from the Senior Bowl.

BTSC 2011 Community Mock Draft Selections

1. Carolina Panthers -- Cam Newton, QB, Auburn
2. Denver Broncos -- Marcell Dareus, DT, Alabama
3. Buffalo Bills -- Von Miller, LB, Texas A&M
4. Cincinnati Bengals -- Da'Quan Bowers, DE, Clemson
5. Arizona Cardinals -- Patrick Peterson, CB, LSU
6. Cleveland Browns -- 'The Snow Cone Machine' A.J. Green, WR, Georgia
7. San Francisco 49ers -- Blaine Gabbert, QB, Missouri
8. Tennessee Titans -- Nick Fairley, DT, Auburn
9. Dallas Cowboys -- Prince Amukamara, CB, Nebraska
10. Washington Redskins -- Robert Quinn, DE/OLB, North Carolina
11. Houston Texans -- Aldon Smith, DE/OLB, Missouri
12. Minnesota Vikings -- Tyron Smith, OT, USC
13. Detroit Lions -- JJ Watt, DE, Wisconsin
14. St. Louis Rams -- Julio Jones, WR, Alabama
15. Miami Dolphons -- Mark Ingram, RB, Alabama
16. Jacksonville Jaguars -- Brooks Reed , DE, Arizona
17. New England Patriots -- Gabe Carimi, OT, Wisconsin
18. San Diego Chargers -- Ryan Kerrigan, DE/OLB, Purdue
19. New York Giants -- Akeem Ayers, LB, UCLA

As part of my path to enlightenment, and to attain my goal of becoming a true renaissance man, I learned to cook (Also, I've never been married, so it was essential). Cooking can be many things to many people. Some do it for the artistry, some do it for the creativity, some for their health and some for the love of a good dish well prepared. I'm not talking about them.

 

I'm talking about a specific dish. Pay attention, because I'm going to give you a recipe for disaster.

Disaster comes in many forms. It can be small like your sisters wedding or quite large like the Pacific Ocean taking a quick trot across Indonesia and India. It can be simple, with only a couple ingredients like water and tectonic plates, or it can be complicated like rednecks, money, miniature horses, guns, alcohol, free time, the movie "Jackass", Girls in Daisy Dukes and country music (Don't try this at home).

The recipe I'm going to give you is quite complicated.

For a good disaster you will need a solid base. Again, this can be almost anything, from the Yellowstone National Park to a family reunion. Today, I will be using the NFL as my base. The NFL is a sports league base. There are many leagues you could use, but this one is by far the most prevalent and popular. It's expensive, but well worth it - most of the time.

Now that we have a rich and fertile base to build on, we need some key ingredients:

Money: This ingredient in the hands of the trained and untrained alike is wonderful for promoting a disaster all by itself, but add it to other potent ingredients, and your disaster can be truly epic.

Owners: One owner by himself does not a disaster make, necessarily (See: the Bengals). But a group of owners with a healthy sprinkling of egos, greed, stupidity, and plastic surgeons can be a most powerful ingredient. Don't skimp on this ingredient, you want to get a batch with very strong overtones of Brown, Jones, Richardson and Kraft, if you want to produce an historical disaster.

Players: This is truly one of the great ingredients in any recipe for disaster. As a group, players can be as consequential to your recipe as owners, but separately, you usually need many players to be able to contribute to a disaster as fully as one owner, usually (See: Vick, Michael: dog fighting: lying). Really, the beauty of this ingredient is its diversity. Your local grocer will usually have several varieties of domestic and wild, it is really up to you and how big you want your disaster.

NFL employees: You have to do your homework on this ingredient otherwise you could just end up with an incident, as apposed to a disaster your guests and family will remember for years to come. For example, everyone knows the GPARD, Roger Goodell has disaster written all over him, but with a little research, you can uncover a truly devastating ingredient like Jeff Pash, a major ingredient in the NHL disaster. Do your homework.

The NFLPA: This is not actually a single ingredient, but a blend of ingredients that includes, De-Morris Smith (Yes, I do that on purpose, and, I find, I don't much care how it's spelled), players, lawyers, and a bunch of retired old guys with nothing better to do than contribute to a disaster. This is a funny ingredient, as many will try to tell you it is not available anymore, stay with it, keep looking and you can have the NFLPA help you to achieve a full bodied disaster.

Once you have collected the key ingredients, it is time to start thinking about what spices your are going to add to your brew. These spices are catalists, if you will, that help drive the recipe to new flavor and add nuance to your disaster.

Congress: This is a hit and miss spice. Usually very affective at fostering large magnitude disasters, it is usually ineffective when it comes to driving a sports disaster. But, you never know, congress can surprise you and quickly help push a disaster over the edge, so throw some in just in case you happened to get a potent batch at the farmers market.

Adam "Packman" Jones: Sometimes adding a small disaster to a larger one in the making, will help it ferment faster. Make sure you get the Packman variety, as Adam Jones will sometimes just produce a bad situation, and you don't want to dissapoint your guests with one of those. Note: Sometimes you can substitute Matt Jones for this ingredient if you can still find it. If you are desperate, ask your friends who are Jaguar fans, they might still have a stock in the back of their cupboard.

Alcohol: This is a no-brainer when it comes to disaster. This one spice, all by itself, has kept many disasters from fizzling and always adds volume to a flat disaster. Don't bother using this ingredient in moderation, go wild. You can even partake of some as you do the cooking, what the hell.

The Media: The Media is more of an accent. While it doesn't actually contribute to making a disaster, it can intensify certain disasters, making them seem worse than they really are. So, be genreous with this spice if you want to really enhance the disaster experience for your guests. Note: If you can't find this ingrediant, throw in a couple of talking parrots.

Strip Clubs and/or the Sex Trade Industry: This spice is heavily used and a definate staple for NFL disasters, both big and small. Additionally, it's just fun to have around the house. Be sure to store it in a warm, dry place and properly secure it. You don't want your kids getting into this. Now that would be a disaster, just ask your wife. She will be keeping tabs on what you use it for and how much. For God's sake, don't use this spice on your own life. The disaster that would follow would make the NFLs pale in compairison.

Greed: This is a classic. Researchers have found this ingredient in ancient recipes for disaster as far back as time itself. Greed comes in many forms and colors. Try to find the monitary-green. Green doesn't just work for envy, it is very potent in greed, as is monetary. Fortunately, this ingredient is not hard to find and is very easy to cultivate if you want to grow it in your back yard. Very little is needed to start, as it quickly multiplies under the right circumstances, which it will with all the other ingredients I have listed so far.

Idle Hands: Idle hands are good for the concept of the disaster. This spice will help give the disaster structure. It helps drive the disaster by adding elements of stupidy and paranoia which are developed when certain ingredients have too much free time on their hands.

Ego: The nice thing about this ingredient, is that if you already have owners, players, NFL employees, and the NFLPA, you will have plenty of ego. All you have to do is seperate some out to add back in at just the right time. Usually, you will add this spice back in when your disaster is fizzling, so keep it handy at all times.

Note: You want to be sure your ingredients are pure. A wild card ingredient could hamper your recipe quit a bit. For example, if some Tomlin got in by mistake, he could possibly neutralize another ingredient, like Ryan Clark, by talking some sense into him and getting him to shut-the-f**k-up. You don't want that. As a matter of fact, stay away from all clear-headed, rational ingredients, you don't want them hampering your recipe for disaster.

So, now that you have all your ingredients, lets get started cooking up a disaster.

The first thing you want to do is seperate out your GPARD, Roger Goodell and De-Morris Smith from the NFL employees and the NFLPA, respectively. For this, you will need two bowls of water. Add the NFL employees to one and the NFLPA to the other. Sit back and wait a couple of minutes. Using the "S**t floats" principal, both the GPARD, Roger Goodell and De-Morris Smith should quickly float to the top. Scoop them out with a slotted spoon. Additionally, Jeff Pash will float to the top as well, you can go ahead and seperate him out too, putting him in a seperate bowl.

You will be left with a bowl of water with the NFLPA and one with NFL employees. Add owners to the NFL employees bowl and and players to the NFLPA bowl. The process you are going to do now is very similar to panning. You want to do it over a collander in the sink. Swirl the contents of the bowl as you let small amounts escape over the edge to be strained of all liquid in the collander. At the end of this process you will be left with a sandy black substance at the bottom of the bowl, this is Ego. Repeat the process with the other bowl. Fold the ego from both bowls gently together in a yet another bowl, cover with Saran wrap and keep it handy for later.

Now, you want to fill a stock pot two-thirds full with two parts water and one part vinigar. To that, add the Money, owners, players, NFL employees, and NFLPA. Place on a burner and heat on medium. This is success. It will be the foundation for a wild and thorough disaster. The only spices you want to add at this point are The Media and Congress (Chances are, Congress wont do anything, but you never know, they could magnify this disaster beyond your wildest dreams). It is important you have The Media from the start. The vinigar begins the process of turning sucess to disaster, but it will need a lot of help to turn that kind of success around.

Heat a saute pan to medium high and throw in the GPARD, Roger Goodell and De-Morris Smith. Using a whisk, combine the ingredients and bring them to a strong boil. By combining the GPARD, Roger Goodell and De-Morris Smith over heat, you will start to produce methane gas, a great contribution to your disaster as well as the chief aroma. You will know you have done this step right if someone stepping in your front door exclaims, "Holy-s**t! what is that stench?" The more the two combine, or "Negotiate" if you will, the higher the content of methane, and thusly, the stronger the fecal smell.

Once sufficiantly heated and combined, remove the combination of the GPARD, Roger Goodell and De-Morris Smith from the heat. This is called "Futility" (Some chefs call this "The Lie"), a smelly and essential part of our recipe for disaster.

Add the futility to your stock pot and just a pinch of ego, this will start to accelerate the disaster that was started by the vinegar. Keep a close eye at this point, you don't want The Media to fool you into thinking your disaster is further along than it really is. If Peter King floats to the top, ignore him and stir him back in.

When this concoction comes to a slow boil, the money you put in earlier will be multiplying and will start to cause your future disaster to foam up. Quick, throw in the greed before your pot boils over. Stir vigorously for five to seven minutes, reduce heat, throw in Jeff Pash and an additional tablespoon of Ego.

Your concoction will appear to thicken and coagulate. This is called the "Lockout", and it means you are really heading for disaster, the kind your friends and guests will rave about. Literally, rave.

Turn the whole thing down to low heat. You don't so much want it to cook as ferment. Once the lower temperature stabilizes, add in the Idle Hands, Strip Clubs/Sex Trade Industry, Adam "Packman" Jones and copious amounts of Alcohol.

Now your disaster will be headed in the right direction and almost inevitable. Keep it cooking/fermenting for about six months or so. Some chefs only add Ego as needed, when the disaster takes a step back or seems about to be headed off by an ingredient like, say, a Rooney (That's why you need good Brown, Jones, Richardson, and Kraft). Other chefs like to just continually add Ego to keep the process moving in the right direction. It's really up to you.

And there you have a recipe for disaster. Enjoy.