Varan means "lizard" or something

I just discovered by accident today that varan is actually a word in some foreign languages, and means various things, but is especially associated with monitor lizards. Also, in science-speak, monitor lizards are sometimes known as varanoid lizards. That's pretty cool, considering the source of my interest. http://worddomination.com/varan.html#

It's also apparently a boy's name used in Asia:
https://www.facebook.com/suresh.varan.5

NPR: Free MIT Biology Course Online

Here and Now is exactly appropriate for this topic. It addresses the most up-to-date state of biology and genetics, although from one man's perspective. This stuff gets me excited. If you do a bit of searching, I'm sure there is a way to listen to the interview given today (2/20/2013) with guest Eric Lander, professor of biology at MIT and science advisor to the president. http://hereandnow.wbur.org/2013/02/20/eric-lander-biology

The FREE course, presented by EdX.org, is March 5th, 2013. Following the link may not work unless you search the main website)

I have never yet used edX, but this looks exciting. 6 to 8 hours a week isn't too hard to committ to, and I am releived, because I was imaging a "live" streaming lecture that I would have to be available for. Also, I worried I might have to buy an expensive textbook.

The materials for study, along with the class, seem to be all freely online, including the main "supplemental" textbook, Molecular Biology of the Cell, 4th edition.

EdX.org also seems to have courses available in quantum mechanics, greek history, justice, and environmental science. I can't find information on how many "students" can take the class. It appears I might receive a "Certificate of Completion" if I pass the class, but I can't find information whether the certificate is free or not.

sci-fi backstage

RedLetterMedia has made some EXCELLENT reviews of Star Trek movies (and Star Wars, and Avatar, and many others). These have been uploaded onto YouTube fairly recently (2012) Star Trek Generations Star Trek: First Contact As much as I liked First Contact generally, I found his wit and critism to be severe but fair. And sometimes painfully spot-on. Star Trek: Insurrection I was impressed by factors I had not considered before, especially the comparison with the DMZ native Americans. Star Trek: Nemesis I liked the Nemeis review best, perhaps because I respected Nemesis the least of all the films. Yes, worse than I and V. His criticisms were spot-on. I was impressed.

I have been reading a bit about the history of the sci-fi genre and it's corresponding media ghetto.
I suggest some (in)famous essays: http://www.verysilly.org/lethem/lethems_vision.html (the link seems to have wandered around) The Squandered Promise of Science Fiction (Why Can't We All Just Live TOgether?), by Jonathan Lethem Things Are Tough All Over, by Ray Davis.
A concurrent e-mail exchange between Davis and Lethem is also a worthwhile read.

goodies from your friendly neighborhood uber-goober

I had not heard of 'Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal' comics until today. This one is about the revolution debate. http://www.smbc-comics.com/?id=2703 If you watch the Star Trek movies, the series by this author are really good. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CoWfTq8dYos&noredirect=1 Again, if you watch Star Trek. It seems I was wrong. http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=35860 Commercials sometimes are really catchy. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmWWJ3OPCtI Who knew taxes could be such fun? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmynbxyfFjM

TV series Heroes

I said I was going to post more on natural history and ecology, and I had entirely intended to, but life intervenes. (Although on an ecology note, I heard on NPR this morning that the guest was estimating a 80%-90% chance Obama will succumb to the Keystone pipeline bill during his second term, despite his political base. Say it isn't so!) Well, my pre-wife bought me the box-set DVD collection of Heroes Season One. I finished it last night, and it was quite the thrill ride, but I am glad it is over. It was fun, but I am glad. Why? It was not a series that was convenient. It was not kind to it's audience (or at least the part represented by me). Here's why: there were very few story frameworks. It was not appropriately episodic. There were very few reliable endings. Now, cliffhangers during a two-parter are acceptable. Unresolved endings are acceptable. Hints that "the villian lived and will come back for revenge later" or somesuch are acceptable. Heroes was a continuous flow of story lines that felt like a 26-parter (I forget how many episodes the season had.) It was not until the season ended that I felt a little relief in the form of something resembling an ending. A TV series needs to be episodic, I think. It felt more like a made-for-tv movie. I guess that is a matter of taste, but I think I have precedent on my side. A talented creative team can form a wonderfully rich story taken as a whole, but with each installment being readable or watchable in and of itself. This may be been a matter of taste, and certainly makes good business sense for the TV series, but I wa unhappy with it. Storywise, I was especially disappointed that the whole series did not diverge much from the X-Men archetype. Wrapped up with that, I was also disappointed the eclipse (despite the series logo and pilot) wasn't much of a factor in the plot. Perpahs the solar eclipse was explained and incorporated later, but it was such promise as an alternative to the tired old mutation concept. Like the X-Men movies, heroes even featured a mutant conspiracy and government-sponsered genocide. And the concept of a villian-stealing-super-powers was one of their biggest innovations, but even that was taken from LXG (League of Extraordinary Gentlemen). Can you please point me to any example of innovation? I generally applaud the series, but I am very glad I caught it on DVD rather than immersed in the broadcast episodes. One of my largest applauds most go to the casting of Malcolm McDowell as a great, multi-faceted villian. I have caught his performances on other occasions, and this was one of the best roles. A role befitting him. I am still annoyed that Star Trek Generations so wasted his potential. Although the same happened with F. Murray Abraham in Star Trek: Insurrection, so I guess it's a sad habit of the franchise. Speaking of Trek, seeing the reboot Spock (Quinto) as Sylar was interesting, and very good casting also. George Takei had a good "peice of the action." Oh, and do you recognize this guy? I knew he looked familiar! Erick Avari was Daniel's Abados father-in-law on Stargate, plus a million other things, including bit roles in Star Trek: Enterprise, Babylon 5, Independace Day, and Lois and Clark, among others. And he was in The 13th Warrior, too! Speaking on Insurrection earlier, I did a quick search on YouTube, and although it says little to nothing about Abraham, it's well done: http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=qlV3bsafkq0&feature=endscreen

NPR Broadcast: "Hidden Life of Wolves"

I am going to try to make more posts about natural history and ecology. I have been very, very remiss, and the last post I recall that was truly natural history may have been another NPR radio broadcast about Pre-Columbian ecology. Anyway, I heard this this morning on the Diane Rehm Show http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2013-02-07/jim-and-jamie-dutcher-hidden-life-wolves It wasn't anything unusually amazing, just good and compelling, although limited in scope to (more or less) one species. The comments made of the down-grade from national Endangered Species List to state-by-state regulated hunting, and the swift decimation of formerly protected wolves, and especially that the wolves may have to return to Endangered status in short order because of this, is worthy of note. It's important to keep this situation in mind when other animal populations recover from a vulnerable status. Perhaps a Limited-Recovery-with-Ongoing-Monitoring status should be created, and I see no reason hunting licences couldn't be "taxed" to pay for this monitoring. Another factor that suprised me a bit was how very little respect these guests had for the wild dangerous character of their charges. I consider it careless and overconfident. I suppose I applaud their bravery in the search for scientific advance, but I wouldn't have done it. The lady guest spoke how she crawled into the tight, narrow den of a savagely protective mother wolf to examine her pups. True, the mother wolf DID apparently seem to be okay with this, but I myself wouldn't feel too confident with knowing the intentions of a wild animal when in such a literally tight spot. Also, I was uncomfortable with the authors' anthropamorphised treatment of the wolves, despite all their assurances to the contrary. Their use of pet names bothered me, but that is a matter of taste if abandoned in the feild. I'm not convined the pet sentimentality did not carry over into their study. While it is very true that wild animals can have personality and even "friendships" in a sense, the humans' level of trust and familiarity was a decidedly unnatural situation. Which brings us to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, again I'm afraid.

Do you read comics?

Recently, I found a resource for some cheap entertainment: old comic books (specifically, the 90s run of Valiant Comics). I have never been a comic book fan, and until this month owned a grand total of two. But that has grown dramatically, and I am discovering that the "reading" is enjoyable, although not "literature" exactly. I began with Turok: Dinosaur Hunter, and have now begun to follow his cohorts occupying the same "universe" of Valiant Comics. I found this article about Turok fun and enlightening. http://pwrcords.com/2012/06/18/just-who-is-this-turok-guy-anyway/ Especially the above article was useful because the publishing history of these characters, and of Valient itself, was pretty confusing to me. They appear, seem to die, then reappear, only to die again, and once more be reborn in a new guise. And that can either refer to some of the comic book characters, or to the publishers. Anyway, my real point here is that I was taken by suprise at some of the sophisticated ideas interwoven in these comics. The depth was quite unexpected, and a nice suprise. Specifically, I refer to a few complex sci-fi ideas. Ideas that I have rarely seen elsewhere. Firstly, artificially-sentient animals. In this case, dinosaurs, which is a rather sensational use of the concept, and is more used to further the adventurous story, but nonetheless it's nothing shallow in sci-fi terms. Second, moving a moon from Jupiter into a habitable solar orbit to create a new planet. Wow, that takes some sci-fi balls. Thrid, an entire nation taking up residence in a space station orbiting Earth, rather than face Earth-conditions. In this case, Japan as an artifical moon. Well, I have a substantial sampling of the Turok series, and I am starting to pick up others, and especially the "armored Visigoth" XO Manowar catches my interest. Actually, pretty much all their character are good, with Magnus Robot Fighter not being ridiculus such as I had feared, and Solar suprising me also.