AdamSmith

Yet more progress here in the Old North State... Senate votes to restrict abortion as witnesses yell 'shame' Published: July 3, 2013 By Lynn Bonner and Craig Jarvis — lbonner@newsobserver.com cjarvis@newsobserver.com The News & Observer A crowd shouts "shame shame shame" as law enforcement officers stand outside the Legislative building after the Senate gave its approval to a series of abortion restrictions Wednesday July 3, 2013. The bill, when originally introduced prohibited the recognition of foreign law, such as Islamic Sharia law, in family courts, was changed Tuesday with little public notice and the new bill titled the Family, Faith and Freedom Protection Act, added anti-abortion legislation. Senators voted 29-12 to approve House Bill 695. RALEIGH — The Senate, after a long debate that invoked faith, constitutional rights and health statistics, approved a bill that would restrict abortions by stepping up requirements for clinics and doctors. The Senate passed the bill by a vote of 29-12 as opponents filled the gallery above and hundreds more waited outside. The bill now goes to the House. After the vote, people in the hall began chanting, “Shame, shame, shame.” A woman in the gallery who yelled “Shame on you” was arrested. Lt. Gov. Dan Forest ordered the gallery cleared moments before the Senate adjourned. Supporters said the new regulations are needed for safety, while opponents said the real intent is to deny access to abortions. “This is an atrocious, shameful bill,” said Sen. Earline Parmon, a Winston-Salem Democrat. “It’s about dictating to women about very personal medical decisions that should be left to a woman and her doctor. This is going to cause more back-alley abortions whether you want to admit it or not.” Sen. Warren Daniel, a Morganton Republican, said the bill was about keeping women safe. “We’re not here today taking away the rights of women," he said. "We’re taking away the rights of an industry to have substandard conditions.” An estimated 600 people showed up to protest new abortion restrictions, filling the gallery in the Senate chamber, and spilling outside the gallery onto the third floor. Many were wearing pink. At times during the debate they raised their arms and waved their hands in what they called “silent cheering.” At one point Sen. Ellie Kinnaird, a Chapel Hill Democrat, thanked them for their “silent protest.” Many of the women gathered outside said they were outraged by the surprise Senate vote Tuesday night to add more restrictions on surgical and medical abortions. The provisions, tacked onto an unrelated bill about Islamic law, requires abortion clinics to meet standards similar to those for outpatient surgery clinics. It also requires doctors to be present when women take pills that induce abortions. The bill’s supporters say it’s about safety, but opponents said the real reason is to restrict abortions. A legislative staff member said only one abortion clinic in the state would meet the new licensing standards. A spokeswoman for Planned Parenthood said she knew of none. Women who found out about the vote on Facebook and Twitter last night came to the legislature on about 12 hours notice. By 9 a.m. the gallery was standing room only and hundreds more gathered outside throughout the morning. “I’m outraged," said Donna Bailey of Raleigh, who has been to two moral Mondays. “This is outrageous. I feel like we’re fighting the fight from 40 years ago.” “I’ve seen this happening elsewhere in the country,” said Valerie Evans of Raleigh. “I feel like we have to stand up and push back.” Evans said she knew the Senate would probably approve the measure, but she wanted them to know that many people disapprove. “It’s sneaky,” Tanya Olson of Durham said of the surprise Senate action. “It’s not right. They have to know that people know this.” Bill supporters were in the crowd too, but they were far outnumbered by opponents who could be identified by their pink shirts. “We want to protect unborn babies,” said Amy Huffman, of Alamance County Right to Life. Tami Fitzgerald, executive director of the NC Values Coalition, surveying the scene, said: “The bill today is about protecting women’s health. It’s about making abortion clinics safe. We don’t want to become the Gosnell of the South. We’re firmly behind the bill.” The Gosnell reference alluded to Kermit Gosnell, the Philadelphia doctor, who is serving three consecutive life terms for killing infants during illegal late-term abortions. The Philadelphia case has been referenced repeatedly by GOP supporters of the bill during the morning debate. While opponents of the bill argued that the state’s oversight of abortions was strict and that North Carolina was not in danger of becoming Philadelphia. http://www.newsobserver.com/2013/07/03/3007643/opponents-of-nc-abortion-bill.html#storylink=cpy

Patients HIV-free for now after transplant By Saundra Young, CNN updated 10:30 AM EDT, Wed July 3, 2013 STORY HIGHLIGHTS Two men show no sign of HIV after bone marrow transplants But experts say it's too early to know if the two are cured The transplant isn't a viable option for the vast majority of patients (CNN) -- Two more HIV patients have no signs of the virus in their blood following bone marrow transplants, according to the Boston researchers who treated them. However, experts stopped short of calling the two cured and said the treatment is not a viable option for the majority of HIV patients. The findings were presented Wednesday at the International AIDS Society Conference in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The two men, whose identities are being withheld, had been on antiretroviral (ARV) drug therapy for years before being diagnosed with lymphoma, a cancer of the lymph nodes. Both underwent intensive chemotherapy followed by bone marrow transplants to treat the cancer. They remained on antiretroviral therapy. Approximately four months after the transplant doctors were still able to detect HIV in their blood, but six to nine months later, all traces of the virus were gone. "Because of those findings, we thought it was justified to take the patients off of their therapy to see what happens," said Dr. Timothy Henrich, who conducted the clinical trial. "Now, in a normal person who has HIV, who has been on long-term antiretroviral therapy for years, usually the virus comes back within two to four weeks after stopping therapy, it comes right back. " Some patients make it up to eight weeks before the virus returns, said Henrich, a researcher at Harvard Medical School and Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston, but the virus returns eight to 10 weeks after therapy is stopped in the vast majority of patients. Not so for these two, however. "We are now recording 15 weeks after therapy and eight weeks after therapy for our two patients, and to date we are unable to detect HIV rebounding in the bloodstream after we stopped the therapy," Henrich said. "We do weekly monitoring, as well. We've been looking at the virus in the blood and the cells in the blood essentially every week since we've taken them off therapy, and we have not been able to detect virus at this time." The two men are being compared to Timothy Ray Brown, also known as the "Berlin Patient." Brown is thought to be the first person ever "cured" of HIV/AIDS. In 2007, Brown had a stem cell transplant to treat his leukemia. His doctor searched for a donor with a rare genetic mutation called CCR5 delta32 that makes stem cells naturally resistant to HIV infection. Today, the virus is still undetectable in Brown's blood, and he is still considered to be "functionally cured." A functional cure means the virus is controlled and will not be transmitted to others. The stem cell transplant procedure, however, is very dangerous because a patient's immune system has to be wiped out in order to accept the transplant. Using a bone marrow transplant to treat HIV is not a feasible treatment for most patients, and only 1% of Caucasians -- mostly Northern Europeans -- and no African-Americans or Asians have the CCR5 delta32 mutation, researchers say. The transplant is still not a practical strategy for the majority of HIV patients, and the risk of mortality is up to 20%, Henrich says. Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the National Institutes of Health, agreed. "This is not a practical approach for someone who does not need a stem cell transplant since the transplant and its preparation and its subsequent need for chronic immunosuppression is a risky procedure," Fauci said. "If you have an underlying neoplasm (tumor) like these patients had, then the risk outweighs the benefit," he said. "However, if you are doing well on ARVs and you merely want to get off antiretroviral therapy, then the risk seems greater than the benefit." Even though the two patients showed a reduction of the virus in the blood, it could still be in some tissue -- the brain or gastrointestinal tract, for instance, Henrich said. The virus "could certainly return," he said. "It's possible, again, that the virus could return in a week, it could return in a month -- in fact, some mathematical modeling predicts that virus could even return one to two years after we stop antiretroviral therapy, so we really don't know what the long-term or full effects of stem cell transplantation and viral persistence is." Still, he feels the information will help move the curative field of HIV research forward. "We're going to learn different strategies about how we can attack the viral reservoir, how we can harness the immune system better and what exactly caused the lack of virus in the two patients at least in the short term." Earlier this year, researchers said an HIV-positive baby in Mississippi was given high doses of three antiretroviral drugs within 30 hours of her birth, with doctors hoping that would control the virus. Two years later, there is no sign of HIV in the child's blood, making her the first child to be "functionally cured" of HIV. The Foundation for AIDS Research, or amfAR, helped fund the study. "These findings clearly provide important new information that might well alter the current thinking about HIV and gene therapy," said amfAR CEO Kevin Robert Frost. "While stem cell transplantation is not a viable option for people with HIV on a broad scale because of its costs and complexity, these new cases could lead us to new approaches to treating, and ultimately even eradicating, HIV." "Dr. Henrich is charting new territory in HIV eradication research," said Dr. Rowena Johnston, amfAR vice president and director of research. "Whatever the outcome, we will have learned more about what it will take to cure HIV. We believe amfAR's continued investments in HIV cure-based research are beginning to show real results and will ultimately lead us to a cure in our lifetime." In the meantime, Henrich says he and other groups are actively enrolling patients for these types of studies. http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/03/health/hiv-patients/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Strange Eats: Scientists Who Snack on Their ResearchBy Becky Oskin, Staff Writer, LiveScience A tube of saggy, bacteria-filled flesh, the deep-sea tubeworm displays a uniquely unappetizing appearance. But marine biologist Peter Girguis and his colleagues tried a morsel anyway. "We just took off a little piece and ate it raw," said Girguis, a professor at Harvard University. "It had the texture of hot dogs with match heads ground in," he said. Living next to hydrothermal vents that spew toxic water rich in heavy metals and sulfuric acid gives the worms an odd flavor. "If it weren't for the sulfur, who knows, they might even be tasty," Girguis told LiveScience. Why would Girguis even try a tubeworm? A long-standing marine biology mantra holds that scholars should taste their species of study ... or at least waste not, want not. "It's been a tradition to eat animals that we study," Girguis said. "I figured that if we're going to drag the poor creatures up, I might as well leave no tissue to spare." Marine biologist Win Watson recalls annual "Make a Dish from Your Animal" dinners at the Woods Hole Oceanic Institution in Woods Hole, Mass., during the 1970s and 1980s. And though it wasn't intentional, Watson even shared his species with his dog. Watson brought home some bioluminescent ctenophores (comb jellies) to show his wife, then left them on the lawn. His dog ate them. "The most amazing barf I have ever seen," said Watson, a professor at the University of New Hampshire. But tasting your research goes far beyond the field of marine biology. Scientists' natural curiosity has led them to put some strange things in their mouths. In the 1800s, scientists in Europe tried to eat every animal and bird they could import. Charles Darwin dined on all the species he described, including more than 40 tortoises. Technological advances mean today's scientists can sample Antarctic ice cores, ancient water, invasive species and toxic plants. Party ice At camps on sea ice, scientists drink their study subject, because there's no other source of freshwater, said Axel Schweiger, head of the Polar Science Center at the University of Washington. Terrie Williams, a professor at the University of California, Santa Cruz, recalls a gin and tonic made with Antarctic glacier ice. Climate scientists who pull up ice cores stretching back 100,000 years regularly plunk broken core pieces into their drinks. The cubes fizz like soda as they melt, because of compressed gas bubbles trapped in the buried ice. "I actually made drinking glasses out of 40,000-year-old ice by hollowing out the inside of a waste core, a byproduct of the sampling we did," said Ed Brook, a professor of geosciences at Oregon State University. As long as researchers are careful to avoid sections of ice laid down during years of nuclear testing, the oldest ice on Earth is pretty fresh and pure; it has lost its impurities through pressure squeezing. But the oldest water on Earth tastes terrible, Barbara Sherwood Lollar told the Los Angeles Times in an interview. Lollar and her colleagues discovered the 2.6-billion-year-old water in a mine in Ontario, Canada. The water had leached salt and iron from the surrounding rock and was more viscous than tap water, Lollar said. Not so-good eats Lollar is hunting for even older water, and old water is often very salty. A quick taste test is an easy way to check salt level. But geologists like Lollar also lick rocks. Tiny sediment grains (too small for the eye to see) can be sorted by your sensitive tongue into silt, clay or mud. A sample of that saliva can also help geologists get a good look at a rock with their hand lens, a portable magnifying glass. Also in the nonedible category are toxic plants. Denise Dearing, a biologist at the University of Utah, studies how herbivores deal with toxins from plants such as creosote, juniper and alpine avens, a wildflower. "I usually taste all the toxic plants that my wood rats and pikas eat. They are usually unworthy of a second tasting," Dearing said. Mammoth straddles the line between digestible and disgusting. The stories of people eating mammoth go back more than 100 years, but are more legend than truth. That's because the animals emerge from their icy tombs looking like furry, freezer-burned jerky, thanks to decomposition and multiple freeze-thaw cycles. At least one apocryphal but unconfirmed tale of mammoth eating comes from the National Geographic Explorer's Club annual dinner, and there are many unconfirmed reports from Russia. However, one true tale of a Pleistocene repast comes from the University of Alaska, Fairbanks. Paleontologist Dale Guthrie and colleagues, who excavated a 36,000-year-old steppe bison carcass called Blue Babe, stewed and ate extra neck tissue while prepping the bison for display. The meat was tough and had a strong aroma, Guthrie wrote in the book "Frozen Fauna of the Mammoth Steppe: The Story of Blue Babe" (University Of Chicago Press, 1989). Edible bugs Eating insects might also fall into the "not good" category for many Western scientists. Of course, meals from bugs are neither new nor unusual outside of modern Western cultures. Thus, many researchers make an effort to overcome their fear of eating bugs when they travel. "I felt both repulsed and attracted by the opportunity to chow down on our study organisms," said Nalini Nadkarni, an ecologist at the University of Utah. Nadkarni worked as a field assistant in Papua New Guinea during the 1970s, studying long-horned beetles (Cerambycids). The group's local assistants would collect beetle larvae during the day and roast them at night. "They weren't terribly tasty, being gristly and fatty at the same time. But it did provide a good connection with our helpers. Sometimes, as a real treat, we ate the occasional fruit bats they caught. They would singe the fur off in the fire and then skin out the meat. Tasted like chicken," Nadkarni said. On the brighter side, honeypot ants make an "out and out delicious" snack, according to Joe Sapp, an ecology graduate student at the University of California, Santa Cruz. "They are full of nectar and taste like candy," he said. But pop into any in U.S. entomology department and one will find plenty of advocates for bug eating. "As a corn entomologist, one of my suggestions to corn growers who were plagued by insects was to eat them. Needless to say, that didn't go over well," said Tom Turpin, an entomologist at Purdue University in Indiana. So Turpin concocted corn fritters laced with European corn borers for an insect-cooking demonstration. Turpin also enthusiastically eats raw insects. He recalls biting down on a raw grub for a TV show on eating insects — the cameraman fainted when juice squirted out. "After we revived him we did a second take, this time without incident," Turpin said. "This was before YouTube, but I'm sure that the first cut would have been a hit. I'm still disappointed the station did not air it," he said. Also technically a bug eater is Barry Marshall, a Nobel Prize laureate. Marshall drank a culture containing the microbe H. pylori to prove the bacteria cause stomach ulcers. About three days later, Marshall developed a stomach ulcer, a step toward proving the link. His theory had been ridiculed by the scientific establishment. Marshal and collaborator Robin Warren won the 2005 Nobel Prize in medicine for discovering the link between H. pylori and peptic ulcer disease. Safety first In case you feel the urge to emulate these scientists, remember, even self-experimenters like Marshall take care to practice common sense about what's safe. And no one is eating endangered or rare species. "I'm actually not one to enforce the 'eat what you study' rule, mostly because we're usually working far out at sea, away from medical facilities, and we have no idea what sort of toxins or allergens might be present in poorly studied deep-living species," said Brad Seibel, a marine biologist at the University of Rhode Island. Seibel's tried vampire squid — "tastes like little more than slimy salt water" — and jumbo squid, debating at first whether their photophores (light-producing organs) were safe to eat. He also studies, but has never nibbled, an Antarctic pteropod called the naked sea butterfly (Clione limacina), which makes a chemical "antifeedant" compound. The reason why? "I've kept them in small glass chambers for experiments and have found that, if I don't clean the chambers very thoroughly after use, that the next animal I put in that chamber will die," Seibel said. http://news.yahoo.com/strange-eats-scientists-snack-research-125943362.html

I did not mean the doing-good bit, but rather of course the celibacy thing. With the occasional time-out for rent boys.

You realize that you missed your true calling in life.

Pope's 'gay lobby' remarks stir up new storm of Vatican gossipPontiff's comments spark flurry of speculation about alleged 'bunga bunga' scene in the Holy See Tom Kington in Rome The Observer, Sunday 30 June 2013 10.00 EDT Pope Francis's private comments to a group of visiting South American churchmen caused a sensation when they appeared on a religious website. Photograph: Alberto Pizzoli/AFP/Getty Images A tide of lurid speculation, questionable accusations and possible blackmail attempts is buffeting the Vatican following Pope Francis's claim that he is preparing to tackle a gay lobby secretly at work behind the Holy See's walls. The new pope's private comments to a group of visiting South American churchmen, which caused a sensation when they appeared on a religious website last week, prompted blushes in the Vatican and unleashed feverish gossip in Rome regarding the contents of a report on Vatican infighting prepared last year for Francis's predecessor, Joseph Ratzinger. On his retirement in February, Ratzinger handed his Argentine successor the dossier, which reportedly describes a lobby of gay, senior churchmen inside the Vatican, running a network of patronage while fighting off blackmailers. The pope's unguarded remarks, which appeared to confirm the speculation, have fuelled a new round of accusations, beginning with a convicted paedophile priest, Father Patrizio Poggi, who last week named nine fellow prelates in Rome as part of a secret band who used a police officer to supply them with eastern European rent boys. By Friday Poggi was under arrest, accused of defamation, as investigators claimed he had invented the whole story to take revenge on fellow priests who stood by when he was found guilty of abusing children. On Thursday the anti-paedophile campaigner Francesco Zanardi posted a taped conversation on his website in which an informant told him about alleged secret sex parties inside the Vatican involving 14-year-old male prostitutes and cardinals, as well as rented apartments in Rome where prelates kept a supply of young men. The man, who claimed to be involved in organising the parties, said he wanted to expose the Holy See's own "bunga bunga" scene, offering to supply photos and videos taken by the prostitutes and telling Zanardi:: "I can give you a hand." "He named two cardinals … and the details he supplied stood up," Zanardi said. He bleeped out the names on the online recording, but has supplied all details to prosecutors, who have opened an investigation. "In another call, the man put me in touch with one of the boys, who had just turned 18 … I talked to him and believed his story. He was known as 'the blond' and was one cardinal's favourite, but when I urged him to go to the police, he just said: 'It's my living.'" Zanardi, 43, is on a mission to expose abuse and hypocrisy in the church after he was sexually abused in Liguria between the ages of 11 and 16 by a priest, Nello Giraudo, who had already been moved from one parish because of abuse allegations. The priest was later given an 18-month jail sentence. An Italian journalist, Carmelo Abbate, who was also contacted by the anonymous informant, said he had yet to be convinced his stories stood up. "He seemed like a man who wanted to take revenge … but he didn't come up with the proof," said Abbate, whose 2011 book Sex and the Vatican lifted the lid on the gay clubs and saunas frequented by Rome-based priests, including one who has held mass inside the Vatican. Abbate has since published an exposé of priestly paedophilia in Italy. "During my research into abuse I came across many blackmailers, and decided they were almost as bad as the abusers, since they are trying to make money out of victims," he said. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/30/pope-gay-lobby-vatican-gossip

Dept. of You Must Be Kidding...Clapper: I gave 'erroneous' answer because I forgot about Patriot ActIntelligence chief tries to explain false Senate testimony by saying he 'simply didn't think' of NSA efforts to collect phone data Spencer Ackerman guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 2 July 2013 15.59 EDT James Clapper said he issued his remarks because he was thinking instead of a different aspect of surveillance. Photograph: Michael Reynolds/EPA The most senior US intelligence official told a Senate oversight panel that he “simply didn’t think” of the National Security Agency’s efforts to collect the phone records of millions of Americans when he testified in March that it did “not wittingly” snoop on their communications. James Clapper, the director of national intelligence, made the comments in a letter to the Senate intelligence committee, released in full for the first time on Tuesday. Portions of the letter, in which Clapper apologised for giving “clearly erroneous” testimony at a March hearing of the committee, were first reported by the Washington Post on Monday. Clapper had previously said that his answer to the committee was the “least untruthful” one he could publicly provide. Clapper is under intense pressure from legislators displeased by his March testimony to the Senate intelligence committee’s Ron Wyden (Democrat, Oregon) that the NSA did “not wittingly” collect, as Wyden put it, “any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans.” In his newly released letter, Clapper told Feinstein that his remarks were “clearly erroneous,” and he issued them because he was thinking instead of a different aspect of surveillance, the internet content collection of persons NSA believes to be foreigners outside of the United States. “I apologize,” Clapper wrote. “While my staff acknowledged the error to Senator Wyden’s staff soon after the hearing, I can now openly correct it because the existence of the metadata program has been declassified.” In statements for the past month, Wyden and his staff have said they told Clapper before the fateful hearing that he would face the question, and contacted his staff afterward to correct the record. “The ODNI [Office of the Director of National Intelligence] acknowledged that the statement was inaccurate but refused to correct the public record when given the opportunity. Senator Wyden's staff informed the ODNI that this was a serious concern,” Wyden spokesman Tom Caiazza said on Monday. Clapper’s letter does not acknowledge that he had earlier told Andrea Mitchell of NBC News that he provided Wyden with the “least most untruthful” answer he could publicly offer, likening the question “in retrospect” to a “stop beating your wife kind of question.” A spokesman for Clapper declined to comment on the discrepancy. Clapper has said in the past that public testimony on intelligence matters places spymasters in difficult positions. “An open hearing on intelligence matters is something of a contradiction in terms,” Clapper told the Senate intelligence panel on March 12, while saying he believed it was “important to keep the American public informed.” Clapper is under fire from legislators critical of his truthfulness. On Friday, 26 senators – more than a quarter of the Senate – signed a letter to Clapper suggesting that the surveillance may go beyond phone records and online communications, extending under interpretations of the Patriot Act to “credit card purchases, pharmacy records, library records, firearms sales records” and more. But Clapper has his supporters as well. In addition to the White House, which is standing beside him, a former NSA lawyer and inspector general, Joel Brenner, wrote on Tuesday that Wyden engaged in a “vicious tactic” that “sandbagged” Clapper. Wyden “lacked the courage of his conviction,” Brenner wrote on the influential national-security blog Lawfare, and placed Clapper “in the impossible position of answering a question that he could not address truthfully and fully without breaking his oath not to divulge classified information.” It is unclear when Clapper will publicly testify next. He sat out the House intelligence committee’s June 19 hearing on the NSA surveillance. Aides to Feinstein said that no hearing with Clapper is currently scheduled, although Feinstein is open to one. The next opportunity for one might come as early as next week. Clapper told Mitchell on June 9 that Feinstein had asked him to look at “ways where we can refine these [surveillance] processes and limit the exposure to Americans’ private communications,” adding that “we owe her an answer in about a month.” A spokesman for Clapper had no comment on the director’s progress in examining restrictions to the surveillance efforts. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jul/02/james-clapper-senate-erroneous

Lacking common sense, I confess that when (if) I manage to get the dilithium re-crystallized, I will make a beeline back to that same Manahatto where containment failed the first time around. With trace elements of Thailand to be introduced into the crystal lattice.

HIAWATHA'S PHOTOGRAPHING by Lewis Carroll [in an age of imitation, I can claim no special merit for this slight attempt at doing what is known to be so easy. Any fairly practised writer, with the slightest ear for rhythm, could compose, for hours together, in the easy running metre of 'The Song of Hiawatha.' Having, then, distinctly stated that I challenge no attention in the following little poem to its merely verbal jingle, I must beg the candid reader to confine his criticism to its treatment of the subject.] FROM his shoulder Hiawatha Took the camera of rosewood, Made of sliding, folding rosewood; Neatly put it all together. In its case it lay compactly, Folded into nearly nothing; But he opened out the hinges, Pushed and pulled the joints and hinges, Till it looked all squares and oblongs, Like a complicated figure In the Second Book of Euclid. This he perched upon a tripod - Crouched beneath its dusky cover - Stretched his hand, enforcing silence - Said "Be motionless, I beg you!" Mystic, awful was the process. First, a piece of glass he coated With collodion, and plunged it In a bath of lunar caustic Carefully dissolved in water - There he left it certain minutes. Secondly, my Hiawatha Made with cunning hand a mixture Of the acid pyrro-gallic, And of glacial-acetic, And of alcohol and water This developed all the picture. Finally, he fixed each picture With a saturate solution Which was made of hyposulphite Which, again, was made of soda. (Very difficult the name is For a metre like the present But periphrasis has done it.) All the family in order Sat before him for their pictures: Each in turn, as he was taken, Volunteered his own suggestions, His ingenious suggestions. First the Governor, the Father: He suggested velvet curtains looped about a massy pillar; And the corner of a table, Of a rosewood dining-table. He would hold a scroll of something, Hold it firmly in his left-hand; He would keep his right-hand buried (Like Napoleon) in his waistcoat; He would contemplate the distance With a look of pensive meaning, As of ducks that die in tempests. Grand, heroic was the notion: Yet the picture failed entirely: Failed, because he moved a little, Moved, because he couldn't help it. Next, his better half took courage; She would have her picture taken. She came dressed beyond description, Dressed in jewels and in satin Far too gorgeous for an empress. Gracefully she sat down sideways, With a simper scarcely human, Holding in her hand a bouquet Rather larger than a cabbage. All the while that she was sitting, Still the lady chattered, chattered, Like a monkey in the forest. "Am I sitting still ?" she asked him. "Is my face enough in profile? Shall I hold the bouquet higher? Will it come into the picture?" And the picture failed completely. Next the Son, the Stunning-Cantab: He suggested curves of beauty, Curves pervading all his figure, Which the eye might follow onward, Till they centered in the breast-pin, Centered in the golden breast-pin. He had learnt it all from Ruskin (Author of 'The Stones of Venice,' 'Seven Lamps of Architecture,' 'Modern Painters,' and some others); And perhaps he had not fully Understood his author's meaning; But, whatever was the reason All was fruitless, as the picture Ended in an utter failure. Next to him the eldest daughter: She suggested very little Only asked if he would take her With her look of 'passive beauty-' Her idea of passive beauty Was a squinting of the left-eye, Was a drooping of the right-eye, Was a smile that went up Sideways To the corner of the nostrils. Hiawatha, when she asked him Took no notice of the question Looked as if he hadn't heared it; But, when pointedly appealed to, Smiled in his peculiar manner, Coughed and said it 'didn't matter,' Bit his lip and changed the subject. Nor in this was he mistaken, As the picture failed completely. So in turn the other sisters. Last, the youngest son was taken: Very rough and thick his hair was, Very round and red his face was, Very dusty was his jacket, Very fidgety his manner. And his overbearing sisters Called him names he disapproved of: Called him Johnny, 'Daddy's Darling,' Called him Jacky, 'Scrubby School-boy.' And, so awful was the picture, In comparison the others Seemed, to one's bewildered fancy, To have partially succeeded. Finally my Hiawatha Tumbled all the tribe together, ('Grouped' is not the right expression), And, as happy chance would have it, Did at last obtain a picture Where the faces all succeeded: Each came out a perfect likeness. Then they joined and all abused it, Unrestrainedly abused it, As the worst and ugliest picture They could possibly have dreamed of. 'Giving one such strange expressions-- Sullen, stupid, pert expressions. Really any one would take us (Any one that did not know us) For the most unpleasant people!' (Hiawatha seemed to think so, Seemed to think it not unlikely). All together rang their voices, Angry, loud, discordant voices, As of dogs that howl in concert, As of cats that wail in chorus. But my Hiawatha's patience, His politeness and his patience, Unaccountably had vanished, And he left that happy party. Neither did he leave them slowly, With the calm deliberation, The intense deliberation Of a photographic artist: But he left them in a hurry, Left them in a mighty hurry, Stating that he would not stand it, Stating in emphatic language What he'd be before he'd stand it. Hurriedly he packed his boxes: Hurriedly the porter trundled On a barrow all his boxes: Hurriedly he took his ticket: Hurriedly the train received him: Thus departed Hiawatha.

Daughter of the Moon, Nokomis...

Stood the wigwam of Nokomis,

By the shining Big-Sea-Water,

By the shores of Gitche Gumee,

You got something against Mary? I think the drag king Queen of Scots ought to be more widely enjoyed as a gay icon. But what with the bad press by Elizabeth, and all... As for post count, having held the lead back when it mattered to the tune of 1500 bucks, one can now graciously leave that to others. Or I could post The Song of Hiawatha, line by line...

Interesting. The 3D model of Mary, Queen of Scots is the face of a historical divide Portraits from the past reveal that medicine plus the consumer society remade human beings in the 1960s Jonathan Jones guardian.co.uk, Friday 28 June 2013 12.07 EDT A computer-generated image from the University of Dundee of the face of Mary, Queen of Scots, as she would have looked at the time of her reign. Photograph: Wilkinson/Aitken/University of D/PA Their faces look back at us out of portraits, marble busts and old photographs. The people of the past are as human as we are, maybe more so, and yet their noses are longer, their faces thinner, the skin more sallow or dry or scarred. This is not just a product of different artistic styles, but a glimpse of a great divide in history. A newly released 3D modelling of the face of Mary, Queen of Scots reveals how strange 16th-century portraits look if we see them as real faces: Mary, as in her paintings, has bags under her eyes and less-than-dewy skin. Her portrait is part of a recent vogue for revisiting portraiture in digital exercises of wildly varying scientific value, from medical reconstructions of faces to people who are descended from Napoleon and Cromwell being inserted into ancestral portraits to dressing classical statues in hipster outfits. When the body of Richard III was discovered by archaeologists in a Leicester car park, one of the studies conducted on it was a facial reconstruction of the 15th-century king based on his skull. His living descendant Michael Ibsen posed beside the model: the picture was a snapshot of two worlds. The gaunt and severe face of Richard III contrasts with the plump and well-kept features of a 21st-century middle-aged man. It's as if we are more relaxed in our skins, yet also less striking and characterful, than our ancestors. There was another remarkable thing about Richard III's scientifically modelled face: it looks just like his Renaissance portraits. Far from being invented by Tudor portraitists, the image of Richard III that has come down through history – long nose, hard features – is historically accurate. It is conventional to think of portraits before the age of photography as unreliable images, either idealising or occasionally demonising their subjects. But accuracy was highly prized. It's not only Richard III's portraits that appear to be grimly truthful. When King Henry VII, who won the crown from the slaughtered Richard at the Battle of Bosworth in 1485, came to the end of his own reign he had his portrait taken by the Italian artist Pietro Torrigiano: I say "taken" because Torrigiano's terracotta bust is an accurate replica of Henry's appearance, made by moulding a death mask on the real face. In fact, it looks very akin to a modern facial reconstruction. Faces from the past are often depicted with this kind of scrupulous accuracy in portraits, either from death masks or by acute observation, and the results are unsettling. People look less healthy, less primped, less beautified than westerners tend to appear today. Hans Holbein's portrait A Lady with a Squirrel and a Starling shows a 16th-century English woman with bad skin, fat under her chin and traces of blackheads on her nose. A bust of Michelangelo reveals the battered face of old age. Rembrandt's wife Saskia looks ill – and would die young. In general, faces look less fleshed out and smaller, and more wizened. This is not just a quality of Renaissance and Baroque art but very visible in early photographs. The camera came along in time to capture the strange, dark-eyed face of Abraham Lincoln: are there any faces today like his? The brilliance of Daniel Day-Lewis's performance as the venerated president – and that of his make-up artists – was to recreate this totally archaic-looking human being. Does anyone today look like George Orwell? Orwell was ill, and the dividing line between the present and the past that faces reveal is a gulf defined by modern medicine, health systems and an abundance of food. It is a gulf that Europeans crossed in the 60s, although North Americans got there a bit sooner. Christine Keeler in 1963 still looks modern. Mick Jagger at Glastonbury in 2013 can still live on how he looked half a century ago. Faces from the past reveal that medicine plus the consumer society remade human beings in the 60s – and are still remaking us. http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/28/3d-model-mary-queen-scots-face Mary, Queen of Scots modelled in 3DBBC There were no portraits which were painted during Mary's time in Scotland The face of Mary, Queen of Scots has been recreated in 3D by a team of experts from the University of Dundee. The team were commissioned to produce a virtual sculpture of Mary's face, for a new exhibition opening in Edinburgh. They have previously worked on major projects to reconstruct the faces of Bach and Richard III, among others. Images show her face as it would have been throughout her reign in Scotland, from the ages of 19 to 26. "The paleness of her skin, red hair, and strong features meant she had a very striking appearance” Professor Caroline Wilkinson University of Dundee Professor Caroline Wilkinson, from the Forensic and Medical Art Research Group, has created a head-and-neck model using portraits of Mary. The model was created using 3D modelling software and craniofacial templates. Digital artist Janice Aitken sculpted clothing and hair - then added textures and lighting to create the finished image. Difficult time Prof Wilkinson said: "There were no portraits painted during Mary's time in Scotland, but there were both before and after this period. "What we wanted to do was depict how she would have looked at the time she lived in Scotland. "Mary had quite a big nose and a strong chin so when you describe her verbally she doesn't sound attractive, but the paleness of her skin, red hair, and strong features meant she had a very striking appearance." Ms Aitken then put textures on the model and coloured the skin, hair and eyes to ensure it looked as realistic as possible. Religious strife Mary succeeded to the Scottish throne when her father, King James V died just days after her birth, meaning Scotland was ruled by regents for most of her early years. She was sent to live in France aged just five and remained there until she returned a widow 14 years later to find a country in the midst of serious religious strife. Following a tumultuous reign, Mary was forced to abdicate in favour of her infant son and, after an unsuccessful attempt to regain her throne, fled to England seeking the protection of her cousin Queen Elizabeth I. She spent 18 years in custody before finally being found guilty of plotting to assassinate Elizabeth and was subsequently executed. The Mary, Queen of Scots exhibition opens on Friday at the National Museum of Scotland in Edinburgh and runs until November. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-23086520

IT worker in China accidently broadcasts porn on giant outdoor screen for 10 minutes From THE SUN Last Updated: 11:12 AM, July 1, 2013 Posted: 11:10 AM, July 1, 2013 A dopey IT worker was caught watching porn at work - when he accidentally beamed it onto a giant outdoor TV screen. Passengers waiting for trains at Jilin Station in China were stunned when saucy scenes from X-rated film The Forbidden Legend of Sex and Chopsticks appeared on the huge screen, which is usually used to air adverts. The movie played for ten minutes before the plug was pulled. It turns out a technician had hooked his computer up to the screen to fix a fault - but forgot to disconnect a cable. The man then tuned into the raunchy film, unaware he was broadcasting it to hundreds of unwitting travellers. http://www.nypost.com/p/news/international/minutes_worker_accidently_broadcasts_UXbY1QE3QE9I41onbSB4NL

LOL There also used to be some thought that eating ice was a sign of sexual frustration. Allan Sherman - You Need An Analyst If you're always stealing goodies from a big department store, You need an analyst, a psychoanalyst. If your pocket's full of little things you never owned before, You need an analyst, a psychoanalyst. If somebody says "Good morning" and politely tips his hat, And you frown and say, "I wonder what he really meant by that," If you're walking down the sidewalk and you won't step on a crack, You're afraid if you step on a crack, you'll break your mother's back, If you're at the Philharmonic and you start to do the twist, You need an analyst, a psychoanalyst. (You need an analyst, you need an analyst, We really must insist that you see an analyst.) If you're freezing or you're sweating from imaginary ills, You need an analyst, a psychoanalyst. If it takes an IBM machine to classify your pills, You need an analyst, a psychoanalyst. If you tiptoe into bed and you're as quiet as a mouse, But the bed you tiptoe into is in someone else's house, If you have a brand new raincoat, and of it you're very fond, In fact, you'd rather be alone with it than with a blonde, If you wear your wristwatch on your feet and stockings on your wrist, You need an analyst, a psychoanalyst. (You need an analyst, you need an analyst, We really must insist that you see an analyst.) If you're always tearing paper into teeny weeny bits, You need an analyst, a psychoanalyst. If you've got a secret closet full of pomegranate pits, You need an analyst, a psychoanalyst. If they ask you what your name is and you answer Bonaparte, If you dig those daffy doodles that are known as modern art, If you're walking down the street and then you stop to tie your shoes, And you tie them to each other as you hum Saint Louis Blues, Or if you're forty-six years old and never have been kissed, Go kiss an analyst, a psychoanalyst. (Go kiss an analyst, go kiss an analyst, We really must insist that you kiss an analyst.) If you're always having arguments when no one else is there, You need an analyst, a psychoanalyst. And whenever you are angry, if you kick your teddy bear, You need an analyst, a psychoanalyst. If you dream you've got a purple dragon next to you in bed, And you wake up and your dragon isn't purple, it is red, If you eat those little prizes and you save the Crackerjacks, If you really think they're ever gonna cut the income tax, You need an analyst, (You need) I need (he needs) we need Everybody needs an analyst.

No joke.