Rounds Budget Ignores $29 Million Funding Gap for Homestake

This week, reporter Bob Mercer declared that Governor Mike Rounds's effort to realize Bill Janklow's vision of converting the Homestake mine into a world-class research facility would be recognized as the greatest achievement of the Rounds administration. In a November 12 blog post, blogger Pat Powers pointed to the Sanford Underground Laboratory in Lead as "Mike Rounds' one crowning achievement."

The biggest jewel in Rounds's legacy crown may have just fallen out. Last week the National Science Board decided to ax a $29-million grant that the National Science Foundation it oversees had authorized for the Sanford Lab last year. The National Science Board had lots of good things to say about the lab when they visited in September, But now board member Mark Abbott says the Department of Energy, other agencies, and perhaps international sources should fund the project instead of NSF.

The Governor has spent "countless hours on the phone" with Washington trying to fix this funding flop. Losing those funds would be bad for the lab, even in the short-term. Governor Rounds says at the very least, the scientists at the lab need steady funding for job security. Ron Wheeler, director of the South Dakota Science and Technology Authority that runs the lab, told legislators last month "We’re not looking for the (South Dakota) taxpayers to cover any more expenses for the authority."

Comparison: Governor Rounds has asked for a $39 million reduction in state aid to K-12 education.

The Governor already had to cajole the Legislature to approve $5.4 million in additional funding last winter to keep the lab afloat until the NSF funding was anticipated to arrive in May 2011. The disappearance of that NSF funding could create an ugly political situation in a legislature already being asked to cut K-12 education 5%.

Significant as this decision is, it is thus surprising that Governor Rounds made no mention of it during is budget address on Tuesday. His budget proposal includes a $10.6M reduction in the Science and Tech Authority in anticipation of the NSF grant:

The total recommended FY2012 budget for the South Dakota Science and Technology Authority is $8,960,000 in other fund expenditure authority and 5.0 FTE. A decrease of $10,639,023 in other fund expenditure authority and 65.0 FTE is being recommended because the National Science Foundation (NSF) is expected to take over the Deep Underground Science and Engineering Laboratory (DUSEL) operations in the spring of 2011 [State of South Dakota Governor's Budget: Fiscal Year 2012, p. 47].

The National Science Board met December 1–2. Governor Rounds presented his budget December 7. It seems odd that the Governor would not address a significant budget setback for a project so important to South Dakota's educational and economic development, not to mention the Governor's "legacy."

I share the Governor's desire to see this project go forward. I sincerely hope that this governor's greatest legacy may be a facility for the eggheads and intellectuals who too often get short-shrift in South Dakota culture.

But if the Legislature and South Dakota taxpayers aren't going to be asked to cover the gap again, who's left? We could hit T. Denny Sanford up again... but I have a feeling we're going to enjoy the splendid irony of Republicans John Thune, Kristi Noem, Mike Rounds, and Dennis Daugaard working hard to win more money from Washington, D.C.

-----------------------------
possibly related:

While stopping all the tax hikes would be a good first step, this alone won’t eliminate the job-killing uncertainty hanging over our employers and entrepreneurs.

That’s why we need to focus on cutting spending and reducing the size of government. The American people want us to stop spending dollars we don’t have.

To do that, we need to start taking a long, hard look at the size and scope of government and find new ways to resist Washington’s urge to grow and to grow. Let’s do a better job of following the money and evaluating the effectiveness of government agencies [Kristi Noem, GOP radio address, 2010.12.11].

Update 2010.12.13 10:06 CST—Definitely related: Dr. Newquist's discussion of the Homestake Lab. He notes that the NSF may not have been authorized to make the $29-million "commitment" we thought we had for the lab.

Update 2010.12.14 11:30 CST—Mr. Kurtz was an interested party in the mine once.

From Iran to Illinois, Religious Radicals Fail to Grasp Causality, Consequences

Bob Ellis will surely consider this post treason as well.

Among the documents in the latest Wikileaks release is this August 1979 cable from the U.S. Embassy in Tehran to the State Department. Deputy Ambassador Victor Tomseth, who was among the American hostages taken three months later, wrote home with some less than flattering observations on the Persian psyche. Tomseth remarked on the incompatibility of Ayatollah-style fundamentalism and reason:

Coupled with these psychological limitations is a general incomprehension of casuality [sic]. Islam, with its emphasis on the omnipotence of God, appears to account at least in major part for this phenomenon. Somewhat surprisingly, even those Iranians educated in the Western style and perhaps with long experience outside Iran itself frequently have difficulty grasping the inter-relationship of events. Witness A Yazdi resisting the idea that Iranian behavior has consequences on the perception of Iran in the U.S. or that this perception is somehow related to American policies regarding Iran. This same quality also helps explain Persian aversion to accepting responsibility for one's own actions. The deus ex machina is always at work [Victor Tomseth, Deputy Ambassador to Iran, cable to U.S. State Department, 1979.08.13, as published by Wikileaks].

Hmm... fanatic faith clouding grasp of causality and consequences... why does this sound familiar?

The earth will end only when God declares it's time to be over. Man will not destroy this earth. This earth will not be destroyed by a flood. ... I do believe God's word is infallible, unchanging, perfect [Rep. John Shimkus, quoted in David Gibson, "Bible Protects Against Global Warming? Energy Chair Hopeful Tells Us So," Politics Daily, 2010.11.27].

That's Republican Congressman John Shimkus from Illinois, whose Lutheran (?!?) faith apparently tells him human actions don't have earthly consequences. We can emit all the greenhouse gases we want without destroying the world. By the same logic, we could stop using crop rotation and no-till farming, or unleash biological weapons, or just throw a global thermonuclear war and not see crops fail or the world end.

Congressman Shimkus also wants to be chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Expect policy based on rejection of the conservation of matter and energy.

Folks who fret that President Obama is related to Muslims are missing the point. Considering what Ambassador Tomseth said about our Iranian friends, it's the fundagelical Republicans who act more like the mullahs.

Bonus Causality Quiz: To restore your ability to recognize cause and effect, connect these dots.

...Shimkus and the Bible-believing skeptics of climate change have powerful allies in the emergent Tea Party movement, which in turn has extensive support for the oil and coal industry [Gibson, 2010].

Bloggers Killing Trees? Dutch Study Says Wi-Fi Harms Plants

Here's something to drive a stake through a green blogger's heart: researchers from Wageningen University in the Netherlands have found that wireless Internet signals may harm plants:

The study exposed 20 ash trees to various radiation sources for a period of three months. Trees placed closest to the Wi-Fi radio demonstrated a "lead-like shine" on their leaves that was caused by the dying of the upper and lower epidermis of the leaves. This would eventually result in the death of parts of the leaves. The study also found that Wi-Fi radiation could inhibit the growth of corn cobs [René Schoemaker, "Wi-Fi Makes Trees Sick, Study Says," PC World, 2010.11.19].

Corn cobs?! Could we bloggers be reducing crop yields? Oh no!

But hold the iPhone: the media is headlining these results a little more confidently than are the Dutch researchers. Lead researcher Dr. Andre van Lammeren says the results are preliminary:

I think it's too early for alarm about this. The study that we have completed was a pilot study over three to four months, and we want to continue work on the issue now with more controls [Dr. Andre van Lammeren, in Greg Wiser, "Wireless Internet Hubs May Damage Trees, Study Finds," Deutsche Welle, 2010.11.26].

The research summary notes that the leaves manifesting the apparent damage sat 50 cm away from the Wi-Fi source for a few months. So even if this study demonstrates actual harm, it just says don't set your houseplant on the same table as your router.

Deutsche Welle also reports contradictory prior research from a Swiss forestry agency that found wireless Internet signals causing harm to spruce and beech trees only when researchers cranked up the wattage past elgal levels... and even then the harm came from thermal effects, not the signal itself.

Also not addressed in the Dutch research: the comparative harm to trees if we converted all our e-mails and blog posts and research reports back to paper.

Lake Herman Dirtiest in October, Still Safe

We volunteers in the Dakota Water Watch bacteria monitoring project took our last samples for 2010 on October 12. The biology lab at Dakota State University just sent back the draft results for the season.

Charlie Stoneback and I sampled five different sites on our Lake Herman through summer and fall. The highest E. coli ratings for the year came this month, in that warm October weather. Charlie got the highest bacteria reading, 210 colony-forming units per 100 mL, at the sample site right next to his house, at the mouth of the golf course creek. That was over twice as high as the reading he got at the same site in July.

The next highest October readings were at my two sites: 144 cfu/mL at the mouth of the stream on the south tip of the lake, 100 cfu/mL at the mouth of the stream that runs into the lake from the southwest, next to Camp Lakoida. I never got a reading over 100 in any of my other 2010 samples.

What do these numbers mean? Well, there's some E. coli in Lake Herman, and the little buggers apparently enjoyed the warm October weather that didn't really break until this weekend. But even Charlie's high number doesn't exceed the Environmental Protection Agency's single-sample maximum for immersion recreation of 235 cfu/mL (environmental scientists, check that number for me!).

In other words, swimming in Lake Herman is still relatively safe. And we're still filtering nutrients and keeping the water a little cleaner and the property values a little higher at Lake Madison.

Catangui Firing Threatens Academic Freedom, May Earn Censure for All SD Universities

The SDSU Collegian reports that the university's possibly improper firing of tenured professor and Extension Service entomologist Mike Catangui could have repercussions for the entire South Dakota public university system:

Political science professor Delmer Lonowski, SDSU's AAUP representative said the AAUP is waiting for the grievance process to conclude before deciding whether or not to investigate a possible censure.

However, [SDSU labor union COHE president Bill] Adamson said an investigation is very likely.

"If you read between the lines, the AAUP will probably conduct an investigation," he said. "They won't censure just SDSU. They'll censure all the universities in the entire BOR system" [Emma DeJong, "Faculty Reviews Dismissal," SDSU Collegian, 2010.09.15].

According to DeJong, Catangui is asking the Board of Regents to review SDSU's decision to dismiss him. So if the Board of Regents gets it wrong, the AAUP could well drop the hammer on the whole system.

Upholding SDSU's decision looks more and more like the wrong decision. DeJong reports that the university is confirming that Catangui's research was part of the reason for his firing:

SDSU officials have declined to comment about personnel matters, but Rich Helsper, SDSU's attorney, made a general statement that SDSU "follows the COHE agreement to the letter," and "every faculty member is afforded all due process rights, not only under general law, but under the COHE agreement."

The BOR fired Catangui June 21 for reasons that have not been completely made public. Helsper confirmed that part of the reason for Catangui's termination is that he followed his own research, instead of a mandated requirement, in deciding when to spray for the removal of soybean aphids.

"Really it's becoming a public issue at this point because there is a serious threat that the university is going to get a censure from AAUP," said Bill Adamson, president of the SDSU chapter of COHE [DeJong, 2010.09.15].

Yikes. A professor gets fired for following the results of his research. That's a textbook definition of violation of academic freedom.

DeJong reports that Catangui had an opportunity to address the SDSU Acaademic Senate at its regular meeting yesterday. No word yet on the outcome of that meeting. The professors' governing body is waiting until its September 28 to make a decision as to what if anything it will do concerning Catangui's dismissal. The profs are waiting to act because they think there's more to this case than the university is letting on... and they're saying it publicly:

Senators Sandy Smart, animal and range sciences associate professor, and Patty Hacker, a health, physical education and recreations professor, said they think there is information that they likely won't be able to know.

"There's something darker under the surface," Smart said. "Somebody's out to get somebody." Hacker agreed.

"There is a distinct possibility that there is something under the surface we will never be privy to because it's a personnel issue," Patty Hacker said. "…I would hesitate to push something forward for immediacy knowing what the ramifications are going to be down the road" [DeJong, 2010.09.15].

Somebody's out to get somebody—that's a pretty serious statement to put on the record. But one can perhaps understand strong feelings from professors who look at a colleague's dismissal and see no reason given other than a pretty clear statement that speaking and acting on the basis of freely and fairly conducted research can get you fired.

What is the deep dark something under the surface? Is it manipulation or suppression of research unfavorable to Monsanto, whose executive board member David Chicoine also serves as SDSU president? Is it something else? Is there some other ethical, financial, oor political issue afoot?

Lest our state's entire university system suffer AAUP sanction, SDSU and the Board of Regents had better lay out the full story and either make clear they have done the right thing or quickly rectify any errors they have made.

Catangui Research Shows Monsanto Corn Helps Spread Pests

South Dakota State University's firing of entomologist Mike Catangui has struck me as odd from the beginning. The Extension Service advocates a regional standard for spraying soybeans for aphids. Dr. Catangui declines to advocate that standard, pointing to his research that suggests South Dakota farmers should follow a different standard. SDSU and the Board of Regents decline to continue Dr. Catangui's employment.

Monsanto executive board member and SDSU president David Chicoine has provided no explanation for Catangui's firing or for the university's apparent violation of due process that could get the university in hot water again with the American Association of University Professors.

A professor is fired for expressing views based on his peer-reviewed, published research. It just doesn't add up. That's why I've kept wondering if this case is revealing the fruits of Monsanto's corporate control over our land-grant university. Is there some way in which Catangui's research could be damaging to Monsanto?

Stop right there. I rail against other conspiracy theorists for seeing plots and cabals (and liberal media monsters) where there are none. But we all see what we want. I may be looking for a grand design where there is none. Cantangui's dismissal could well be just what the university said it was: "performance deficiencies" and insubordination. For all we know, Catangui may have mooned the boss.

So let me be clear: I have no documents to prove that Monsanto ordered Catangui's dismissal. I only have some casual Googling and reading well out of my field that establish that Catangui's research includes some findings relevant to a Monsanto product. I have pieces, but no finished puzzle... and not even evidence that there is a puzzle to finish.

But there are pieces. It's a lot of science, so I'll boil it down and then provide you with the bibliography.

Dr. Catangui has done research on the spread of western bean cutworm. This pest used to be no big deal. But since the introduction and widespread planting of Monsanto's genetically engineered Bt corn, western bean cutworm has been cropping up in higher numbers and in new places. Bt corn also appears to be an inviting home for corn leaf aphids. The western bean cutworms and corn leaf aphids appear to be benefiting from pest replacement: the toxins in Bt corn wipe out targeted competitor species, allowing previously minor pests to pig out and flourish. Monsanto and other corporations then trap farmers on a treadmill of new pesticides and seeds engineered to tackle the new pests... and all the while we dine on a revolving smorgasbord of tasty toxins.

Now Catangui isn't the only guy saying these things, so one could argue that Monsanto wouldn't benefit by targeting one professor in South Dakota. But Monsanto does have a history of going after small operators, and corporations do profit by maximizing every marginal percentage. When Monsanto wants 100% control and zero competition, even one less set of critical scientific eyes on their products may be worth the effort. And hey, you don't buy control of a major land-grant university for nothing.
-----------------------------------------
Read more:

• Catangui, M.A., and Berg, R.K. (2006). "Western Bean Cutworm, Striacosta albicosta (Smith (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae), as a Potential Pest of Transgenic Cry1Ab Bacillus thuringiensis Corn Hybrids in South Dakota," Environmental Entomology, 35(5): 1439–1452.
• Collins, S. (2003 Aug 3). "Bt Doesn't Control Me," Corn & Soybean Digest.
• Faria, C.A., Wäckers, F.L., Pritchard, J., Barrett, D.A., Turlings, T.C. (2007) "High Susceptibility of Bt Maize to Aphids Enhances the Performance of Parasitoids of Lepidopteran Pests," PLoS ONE, 2(7): e600. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0000600
• Schafer, S. (2010 Mar 27). "Insect Outlook," Farm Journal:AgWeb.
• SDSU (2008 Jul 21). "Corn Producers Now Should Scout for Leaf Aphids," Plant Management Network: Plant Health Progress.
• Then, C. (2010 Mar). "New Plant Pest Caused by Genetically Engineered Corn," TestBiotech report.
• Tonneson, L. (2009 Feb). "Corn Leaf Aphids Threaten Corn," DakotaFarmer.com.

Green Notes: Bikes, Solar, Good Sense Challenged

Buried in browser tabs! Time to clear the queue!

Colorado is seeing a weird outbreak of velophobia. Some folks have a Sibby-Ellis-tinged idea that promoting Denver as a bicycle city is part of the United Nations' sinister agenda to enslave us all. The tiny casino town of Black Hawk, Colorado has banned bicycles: a new Colorado law requires motorists to give bicycles at least three feet when passing, and Black Hawk reasons that complying with that law would be just too hard for the big tour buses bringing gamblers to town. Riding your bike through town now gets you a $68 fine (to make up for cyclists not spending as much on booze, I guess).

Green power is ugly. Or so goes the thinking, apparently, in Hanover Township, Northampton County, Pennsylvania. Township supervisors there have imposed restrictions on solar panels: tucking panels away beside or behind the house is fine, but if you happen to have a south-facing abode and want to place your panel out front where it will do the most good, you need to get a conditional permit, which will take $800, two months, and all sorts of paperwork. Says a state township association official, "A lot of people have a problem with placing solar panels on the front of their homes for the simple reason...solar panels are distracting and take away from the value of [their] house.... Elected officials are hearing that and they're taking that into consideration." Once again, obsession with appearance trumps environmental sense and property rights.

Solar power is making progress in California. Regulators there have approved the first solar thermal plant in the U.S. in two decades. Ah, good old American innovation... maybe we'll catch up with Portugal after all.

But not if boneheads like Don Kopp stay in office. One of South Dakota's most embarassing legislators provides a teabaggers' splinter group in Rapid City with a slideshow assortment of decontextualized quotes—prooftexting at its finest (and a popular pastime among the non-thinkers in the Tea "Party"). The slides flog the U.N.-evil meme and insisting environmentalists are out to lynch America (yes, slide #10 includes a noose). I'm sure Kopp et al. consider this Kansas City artist's work on sustainable buildings an effort to destroy America, too.
------------------------------
But think positive: Lester R. Brown sees renewable energy booming worldwide and thinks we can "replace all coal- and oil-fired electricity generation with renewable sources." There is life after oil and coal, people. The sooner we get serious about making it happen, the easier it will be... unless of course you think living like Mad Max would be cool.

Contra Kopp, Climate Change Stunts Global Flora

Remember Don Kopp? You know, the Rapid City Republican legislator who made us South Dakotans look like meatheads with his anti-science resolution about "astrological" forces causing global warming? (Oh yeah, HCR 1009, the crazy resolution GOP House candidate Kristi Noem voted for, too. Thanks for reminding us, Badlands Blue!) Rep. Kopp backpedaled madly from that embarrassing mistake, but he averred in other interviews that global warming, if it happened would be a good thing. Knowing just enough science to be dangerous, Kopp talked about carbon dioxide as the gas of life and suggested that increased CO₂ would make more plants grow.

Too bad any green gains in currently marginal areas are wiped out by drought decimating plant life elsewhere:

Research over the past two decades had shown terrestrial plant growth on the rise, with higher temperatures and longer growing seasons linked to a 6 percent increase in global plant productivity from 1982 to 1999. Between 2000 and 2009, terrestrial plant growth declined by 1 percent.

“This is a pretty serious warning that warmer temperatures are not going to endlessly improve plant growth,” Steven Running, a biologist at the University of Montana in Missoula and co-author of the report, said in the NASA statement [John Collins Rudolf, "Earth’s Plant Growth Fell Because of Climate Change, Study Finds," New York Times: Green, 2010.08.23].

My plan to haul seed corn north and buy a quarter section in the Yukon might still work... but I'll be competing with a few hundred million refugees from the new South American desert. Dang.
---------------------------------
Learn more (yes, I'm talking to you, Don and Kristi):

1. NASA's statement on the research (with map, chart, and video!)
   
2. Read the abstract: Zhao, Maosheng, and Steven W. Running. “Drought-Induced Reduction in Global Terrestrial Net Primary Production from 2000 Through 2009.” Science 329.5994 (2010): 940-943. (Silly academic journals, charging people to read science When will they learn?)
   

Catangui Dismissal Raises Academic Freedom Questions

I continue to read up on the science and politics surrounding the contested dismissal of entomologist Dr. Mike Catangui from South Dakota State University.

Catangui's predecessor at the Cooperative Extension Service, Professor Emeritus Ben Kantack, says SDSU gave Catangui the boot for refusing to advocate soybean-aphid-spraying guidelines from other states for South Dakota. Catangui's research indicates that following different spraying guidelines in South Dakota will increase South Dakota farmers' yields and income.

Kantack says Catangui's dismissal violates academic freedom. Readers may wish to review the statement on academic freedom in the collective bargaining agreement our profs sign:

The parties to this agreement recognize and accept the importance of academic freedom to teaching and learning. Academic freedom includes the right to study, discuss, investigate, teach and publish. Academic freedom applies to both teaching and research. Freedom in research is fundamental to the advancement of truth. Academic freedom in its teaching aspect is fundamental for the protection of the rights of the teacher in teaching and of students to freedom in learning. It includes the freedom to perform one's professional duties and to present differing and sometimes controversial points of view, free from reprisal. The faculty unit member is entitled to freedom in research and in the publication of the results, subject to the performing of other assigned academic duties [2008-2011 South Dakota University Faculty Collective Bargaining Agreement, 14.1.1].

This academic freedom statement makes it pretty clear that SDSU can't fire a professor for publishing and discussing the results of his or her research. But I wonder: does work in the field for the Extension Service fall under "other assigned academic duties"? Is there some clause that excludes those public outreach activities from the academic freedom clause?

Worth noting: SDSU Extension entomologist Kelley Tilmon quite firmly advocates the 250-threshold and regional aphid guidelines in this July 27 Extension Service article. Tilmon and Catangui have disagreed on aphid recommendations previously and publicly. Catangui has recommended treatment at one to five aphids per plant, a threshold challenged by other researchers. Some questions about Cantangui's research center on caging soybeans, which prevents beneficial insects from helping control aphids. But cage studies are used regularly in entomology, and subsequent field research seems to show better yields under the lower aphid thresholds.

Scientists have honest disagreements. They deal with complicated questions like when to spray soybeans for aphids—at least it seems complicated to me, what with a range of variables like soybean growth stage, yield potential, spraying cost, soybean market value to consider. They come up with different answers. That's why we have academic freedom: to protect professors' right to challenge the prevailing wisdom when their research (not to mention their conscience) says a challenge is warranted.

(Hmm... Dr. Blanchard, care to offer a turn on this topic on climate change?)

Meanwhile, outside the halls of academia, what are you farmers up to? Are you spraying for aphids? Do you follow the Extension guidelines? Are they working in South Dakota?

Climate Change Notes: Russia Hot, Like Everywhere Else

Climate change? Yup (hat tip to an eager reader for much of this collection):

1. Russia is experiencing its hottest summer on record. Wildfires this summer have scorched nearly 2.5 million acres—that's equivalent to a fire wiping out all of the Black Hills, then having a prairie fire burn up all of Union, Lincoln, Minnehaha, and Moody counties. The Russian heat wave has also wiped out 24 million acres of Russian grain. (Compare: USDA says South Dakota's total crop acreage this year is 16.5 million acres.)
   
2. Of course, one hot summer in one country (even the largest country in the world) does not a trend make. Data from 300 scientists in 48 countries on ten different metrics saying it's gotten warmer each decade since the then-record heat of the 1980s does. Read the new report from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. I'm sure Don Kopp will be visiting your school to make sure your teachers cover this information.
3. We can just turn up the air conditioner: the American pika has to climb to cooler, higher ground. But mountains only go so high. As temps climb, the pika may become the second species added to the endangered list due to global warming.
4. The Ice Age is ending: There were 150 glaciers in 1850 in the Montana area that is now Glacier National Park. The park is now down to 25 glaciers. But hey, at least the melting glaciers will help archaeologists find stuff.
   

SDSU Cans Catangui for Defending SD-Specific Science?

Professor of Plant Science and Extension Entomologist Mike Catangui has been dismissed by South Dakota State University. South Dakota farmers and gardeners may recognize Dr. Catangui as a regular panelist on Garden Line on SDPB.

Professor Catangui's dismissal may have an interesting states-rights twist. Catangui has done research on aphids and soybeans and finds that the regional recommendations made for spraying soybeans with insecticides to get rid of aphids don't work in South Dakota's climate. Dr. Benjamin Kantack, SDSU professor emeritus of plant and bug science, apparently agrees. Kantack is telling the press that Catangui's firing is a result of his resistance to those regional recommendations.

"He was told he would accept the recommendations from these other states, which do not fit South Dakota weather conditions or growing conditions and so forth, which his own research showed do not fit," said Kantack, a professor emeritus and retired Extension entomologist at SDSU. "He was told if he didn't accept them he would not keep his job.

"He has defended the ag interests of South Dakota and saved them a lot of money over the years. He's being discharged, in my opinion, unjustly" [Wayne Ortman, "SDSU Dismissal of Longtime Extension Insect Specialist under Fire," AP via Rapid City Journal, 2010.07.27].

I'm not up on my aphid science, and I'll appreciate any enlightenment my farm neighbors can offer. But I am curious as to whether there is some Monsanto angle to this story, since SDSU is run by a highly paid member of Monsanto's executive board. Monsanto does cite in its aphid-management literature the 250 aphid-soybean threshold that Catangui and Kantack appear to challenge, but Monsanto take its info cue from extension services in neighboring states. If anything, Catangui's science seems to recommend more aggressive use of pesticides against South Dakota aphids, something Monsanto shouldn't mind. If Kantack is correct, Catangui's dismissal appears to be politics within the Extension Service trumping science that makes sense for South Dakota's unique growing conditions.

Everyone else from Catangui to the SDSU president is keeping mum, since this is a personnel matter and legal wheels are a-turning. As a teacher who's been there, I do appreciate Professor Kantack's willingness to speak out on behalf of a colleague he feels is being mistreated. I hope Catangui can come out with a fair resolution of the situation and continue his research on behalf of South Dakota's farmers.

Why Kill All the Lawyers? Just Buy All the Scientists

Classic Big Oil playbook: BP is trying to stifle science. As it rounds up experts to help build its defense against over 300 lawsuits stemming from the Deepwater Horizon explosion and oil spill, BP is trying to get academics under contract not just to testify on their behalf, but to prevent them from offering any testimony for plaintiffs against BP. Those contracts include confidentiality clauses that would restrict scientists on BP's payroll from publishing any research results on the oil spill for three years.

Anyone care to speculate how many of the 3% of active climate scientists who still deny anthropogenic climate change have been similarly bought by Big Oil? Or how many of these educated folks who helped prepare the inadequate draft environmental impact statement for the Keystone XL pipeline may have contracts to ensure they never say a discouraging word about the designs of Big Oil?

Worth noting: Entrix, the consulting firm TransCanada paid to write the DEIS and lowball the risk of pipeline rupture, is also BP's go-to team for environmental consulting. Also, one of the Entrix folks in charge of oil spill risk assessment in the DEIS has as her highest degree an MBA from questionable for-profit online University of Phoenix.

Hospitals Resist Industrial Livestock Antibiotics

Pro-industry blogger Troy Hadrick asserts that the livestock industry never misuses antibiotics. Everyone else—over-prescribing doctors, dopey patients—is to blame for any problems with antibiotic resistance, not the members of his industry.

I thought Hadrick was a cattle rancher, not a fish farmer. But his mastery of the red herring says otherwise. Medical professionals, the people who study and deal with the consequences of heavy antibiotic use in our agricultural system, will tell you the problem is not a handful of ranchers misusing antibiotics. The problem is an entire system of meat production that relies too heavily on antibiotics.

This Chicago Tribune article notes that 300 hospitals across the nation are working to improve the health and sustainability of the food they serve. For many of these hospitals, that includes serving only antibiotic-free meat:

Administrators say they hope increased demand for those products will reduce the use of antibiotics to treat cattle and other animals, which scientists believe helps pathogens become more resistant to drugs. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimate that antibiotic-resistant infections kill 60,000 Americans a year.

Although the U.S. doesn't keep national records on antibiotic use in animals, the Union of Concerned Scientists estimates that up to 70 percent of all antibiotics used in the U.S. are administered to healthy animals to speed growth and compensate for crowded living conditions. Some of these drugs, such as penicillin and tetracycline, are also used to treat sick people [Monica Eng, "Meat with Antibiotics off the Menu at Some Hospitals," Chicago Tribune, 2010.07.20].

Antibiotics essential to agriculture? Only if you insist on pushing unnatural growth rates and crowding thousands of animals into feedlots that don't have enough space for their own filth.

But oh, that fancy-pants grass-fed beef costs a lot more, doesn't it?

Diane Imrie, director of nutrition services at Fletcher Allen Health Care in Vermont, also started serving antibiotic-free beef at the hospital in recent years as part of her plan to switch to local, seasonal, sustainable food.

"When we started a sustainability council at the hospital a few years ago, antibiotic reduction was one of the first things on my list," she said. "I think it has the most impact on farming, the environment and public health."

Imrie estimated that her food costs rose about $67,000 last year when she switched to antibiotic-free chicken from conventional. "But that's also about the same cost as treating a single MRSA infection," she said, referring to drug-resistant staphylococcus bacteria [Eng, 2010].

So let me see if I have this right: ranchers could spend a little more to raise beef without antibiotics, charge a little more in the market, still come out even... and we could reduce the cost and death of antibiotic-resistant infections? Sounds like the only people who could be against that are the mouthpieces of an ag-industrial complex that relies too much on antibiotics and disregards any consequences beyond the speed and profit of their own business model.

High Water at Lake Herman: Algae, Weeds, Snails!

I got to break out the waders and boonie hat and play Junior Science Ranger again yesterday: we had another round of water sampling as part of our area lake bacteria monitoring project yesterday. Samples so far this year have come in relatively clean. Bacteria counts have been well below the maximum state and EPA standards for safe swimming and other recreation. (You still take a swig at your own risk.) We've had some soupy and stinky algae days, but yesterday the water seemed remarkably clear—not northern Minnesota clear, but we'll take what we can get.

Lake Herman has dropped significantly in the past dry week, perhaps as much as a foot. But the lake is still remarkably high at my home shoreline and at my two water sampling sites at Camp Lakodia and, pictured above, the south tributary on Rick Doblar's land. (Click each photo for bigger view.)

Looking north toward the state park... see the brown triangle beyond the tree? Usually, that's all green grass. But the water was high enough in June to inundate that low ground alongside the tributary and drown the grass.

That usually dry ground is still plenty wet. Out at the tip is the point where I usually drop my gear on dry ground and wade in to take samples.

Lake Herman's south bay is about a meter deep just off shore and stays that depth for quite a ways out. The water is rife with what my biologist friends say is sago pondweed. Good for ducks and geese, bad for your boat prop.

Snails dig sago pondweed, too.

Climate Science Consensus Strong as Ever

State Representative Don Kopp (R-35/Rapid City) wanted to force South Dakota teachers to teach "the skeptical view of climate change." In this year's Legislative session, he sponsored an embarrassing resolution to that end... a resolution that, to our state's great discredit, passed thanks to the votes of folks like GOP House candidate Kristi Noem and my Democratic neighbor and candidate for re-election Gerry Lange.

If Kopp hasn't completely backpedaled from his absurd Big Brother anti-science position, he'd better write that alternate curriculum fast: he's running out of skeptics to cite. New research from Stanford University finds the consensus on climate change is as strong as ever:

...[T]he vast majority of the world’s active climate scientists accept the evidence for global warming as well as the case that human activities are the principal cause of it.

For example, of the top 50 climate researchers identified by the study (as ranked by the number of papers they had published), only 2 percent fell into the camp of climate dissenters. Of the top 200 researchers, only 2.5 percent fell into the dissenter camp. That is consistent with past work, including opinion polls, suggesting that 97 to 98 percent of working climate scientists accept the evidence for human-induced climate change.

The study demonstrates that most of the scientists who have been publicly identified as climate skeptics are not actively publishing in the field. And the handful who are tend to have a slim track record, with about half as many papers published as the scientists who accept the mainstream view. The skeptics are also less influential, as judged by how often their scientific papers are cited in the work of other climate scientists [Justin Gillis, "Study Affirms Consensus on Climate Change," New York Times: Green, 2010.06.22].

In short: the scientists doing the hardest, most regular and reliable work agree we're changing the planet. The deniers do less science and less good science. Rep. Kopp would have us place our educational bets on scientific third-stringers and retirees who aren't keeping up with reality.

----------------------
Update 12:45 CDT: Possibly related—79% of Europeans say they are moderately or very interested in science; 65% express the same interest in sports. In America, more people say they follow sports very closely than say they pay the same attention to science. Plus, the percentage of Americans following science news very closely has dropped by more than half since the 1980s.

Naked and Nuked: Airport Scanners May Increase Cancer Risk

Conservative friends, Gordon Howie followers, and other wingnuts, if you want to foment anti-government paranoia, then froth up over this one: the Transportation Security Administration may be giving you cancer. It's bad enough the federal government wants to electronically strip you naked at the airport; now scientists at university of California San Francisco say full-body scanners may hit travelers with enough X-rays to "increase the risk of cancer and other health problems, particularly among older travelers, pregnant women and people with weak immune systems."

But why worry? Homeland Security's chief medical officer Alexander Garza says he feels perfectly comfortable nuking his family in the scanners, so so should you, right?

Of course, TSA and other experts will tell you that you get the same dose of radiation from a full-body scanner as you do from two minutes up in the air. (And what do you think that phone in your pocket is doing to your groinal region all day?) But you choose to nuke yourself by flying. The full-body scanners are the government choosing to nuke you against your will, and that's not right, right?

Come on, Tea Party, this could be your next big issue, one that could really get traction, like fears of vaccines causing autism. Latch on, fight the scanners!

Plug BP's Gulf Leak... with a Nuclear Bomb

Of course the Russians would come up with a plan like this: plug BP's runaway oil leak at the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico by dropping a bomb on it. A nuclear bomb.

Russian science journalist Vladimir Gubarev says this trick worked more than once in the Soviet Union:

The USSR had a sad experience in containing oil-well flowing in Central Asia. Two breakdowns occurred almost simultaneously. One of them took place in Urtabulak, where a gas torch was burning. The other one took place in Pamuk – a breakdown at an oil well. The two giant flames were extinguished with the help of nuclear explosions. They drilled two wells to approach the emergency wells under the ground and lowered nuclear devices into the wells. The troubled wells were blocked as a result of the explosions.

The work was extremely hard, but it was worth it. I took direct participation in the experiment and was personally present there during the explosions. The experiment was a success. The exploitation of the Pamuk oil well was launched again and nothing could remind of the disaster which had been liquidated with the help of nuclear explosions [Vladimir Gubarev, "Nuclear Explosion Can Heal the Bleeding Wound in the Gulf of Mexico," Pravda (English translation), 2010.05.13].

Wow. That might be the best use I've heard of for a nuclear bomb short of the Orion Project. (Read Niven and Pournelle's Footfall—and take that, you stinkin' Fithp!)

Christians, Get with the Program: Ditch Creationism for Real Science

More agreement from unexpected quarters....

Last month I noted the anti-science brainwashing that dominates the religiously influenced textbooks available for homeschoolers. In particular, I cited a biology textbook that claims a "Christian worldview ... is the only correct view of reality; anyone who rejects it will not only fail to reach heaven but also fail to see the world as it truly is." I said that anyone who thinks my daughter's eternal salvation hinges on her answers on a science test is peddling bad theology.

Pastor Shel Boese appears to agree. He contends pretty strongly that choosing creationism over evolution is not a salvation issue. He also points to Internet Monk, who points to Biblical scholar Bruce Waltke, who says the Church must come to accept evolution:

Waltke cautions, “if the data is overwhelmingly in favor of evolution, to deny that reality will make us a cult…some odd group that is not really interacting with the world. And rightly so, because we are not using our gifts and trusting God’s Providence that brought us to this point of our awareness.”

We are at a unique moment in history where “everything is coming together,” says Waltke, and conversations—like those initiated by BioLogos—are positive developments. “I see this as part of the growth of the church,” he says. “We are much more mature by this dialogue that we are having. This is how we come to the unity of the faith—by wrestling with these issues.”

Waltke points out that to deny scientific reality would be to deny the truth of God in the world. For us as Christians, this would serve as our spiritual death because we would not be loving God with all of our minds. It would also be our spiritual death in witness to the world because we would not be seen as credible ["Why Must the Church Come to Accept Evolution?" The BioLogos Foundation, 2010.03.24].

If you believe in God, then you have to believe in the whole package. He isn't just bunnies and rainbows and the occasional plague on your enemies. He is in the Pythagorean Theorem. He is in quarks and DNA. He is in every atom of the world, and you have to understand that world in full, through science, not just through your pre-conceived notions.

As Internet Monk says to his fellow believers, "I am so over this aspect of culture war Christianity. Let’s grow up."

Online Crackerbarrel: Lange and Sly on Global Warming Resolution

...and further commentary on blogging and online crackerbarrels!

Here's the first installment of responses to the online crackerbarrel questions you readers submitted last week. I present legislator responses unedited, uneditorialized.

First up, Curtis Price's question:

For Rep Jackie Sly (and any others that wish to comment)

Why did you vote in favor of equal time for "astrological causes" for global warming?

District 8 Rep. Gerry Lange replies:

Good question, Curtis Price, on the global warming issue. Sometimes, I sign on to bills by friends across the aisle in the hopes of getting some "reciprocral" consideration for some of our bills. HCR 1009 attracted national attention, much like the Skopes "Monkey" Trial did back in the 1920's. In speaking on the floor, my point was that there is no harm in exposing students to sharply contrasting views on what most of us consider "conventional reality." Like William Jennings Bryan, who was vilified by the intellectuals backing Darwin's evolutionary theory, some of us got e-mails with words describing us as "archetypical Neanderthals. No problem in a nation where we believe in First Amendment rights, but it does raise a question as to whether we can carry on a "civic dialogue" or not. "Party-line" voting has been less frequent this session; and I think that's a good thing. Resolutions are not law and are sometimes characherized as a chance for someone to do a bit of "grandstanding!"

District 33 Rep. Jackie Sly replies:

Thanks for the email. Normally, I do not get involved with blogging. Mr. Price is free to contact me regarding HCR 1009. I would be more than happy to email him directly or talk to him personally. I am the only "Sly" in the RC phone book. Plus, he has emailed me previously so knows how to get in contact with me.

I look forward to seeing new farmer's markets open up throughout SD and working to help make the existing ones grow. We have a potential for strong local producers and local markets to continue meeting the needs of local buyers.

This comment is in regard to a local cracker-barrel in your area. Do you have a Chamber of Commerce or some service group that would sponsor cracker-barrels? In the RC area we have several during each legislative session. They are planned well in advance, so the legislators know when they need to try to keep their calendars open. The forums here are mainly sponsored by the Chamber of Commerce, but a local service group, Democracy in Action, organized one for an area that did not have one previously. They are a great way for the citizens to interact with the legislators during the time we are in session. By this time, the votes have been taken and many of the bills are already signed.

Resolutions do not require anyone to do anything. They are used as a way to address a concern. One legislator suggested that we have a resolution to not have any more resolutions. If one takes the time to look over the resolutions submitted, they are almost always divisive. Thus, the testimony on the floor is usually of opposing viewpoints.

Again, thanks for contacting me. We will soon be back in Pierre making some tough decisions. Ones that will once again have a variety of viewpoints, but at some point decisions will need to be made.

Respectfully,
Rep. Sly

Stay tuned: more legislator responses to your questions coming up today!

Video: Two Centuries of Science Support Anthropogenic Global Warming

Hey, teachers! Planning to modify your science curriculum to satisfy the South Dakota Legislature's nutty global warming resolution? Play this video from debunker Peter Sinclair for the kids:



Remember, kids, the Legislature wants you to discuss both sides. So yeah, those 19th century scientists, plus the birds, fish, flowers, and glaciers must all be part of the Bolshevik plot, too. Man, if I had the power to build a conspiracy that vast, I wouldn't monkey around with Al Gore and his slideshow; I'd just take over the world and be done with it!