Science is Cool....

[Fish]

This is a repository for all cool scientific discussion and fascination. Scientific facts, theories, and overall cool scientific stuff that you'd like to share with others. Stuff that makes you smile and wonder at the amazing shit going on around us, that most people don't notice.

Post pictures, vidoes, stories, or links. Ask questions. Share science.

Why should I care?:

[GloryDayz]

Originally Posted by notorious

Wait until we learn to bend time/space.



Humans will be able travel light years in an instant, and look back at Earth's history.



Future humans might be observing us from afar as we speak.

She's working it...

[Fish]

Maybe this should have went in the Nope thread. But it's educational kind of...

DIY Bot Fly

Entomologists are not like other people. Lucky enough to score a cool parasitic larva burrowing in your skin after a visit to Central America? The obvious thing to do is to rear your maggot out in your body until it’s an adult fly. For science.

In the last week, two entomologists proudly issued bot fly “birth” announcements of their little monsters. For one of them, it was his second try at rearing out the flesh-eating maggots to adults. (His first unsuccessful attempt at bot fly rearing in 2013 did result in a research publication, though, so it wasn’t a wasted effort.)

Piotr Nasrecki documented the entire process of his bot fly maggot rearing in a fascinating video. Yes, there is some blood. But you’ll also learn a lot about flies. And entomologists.

Below are excerpts from both scientists’ accounts of their maggoty pregnancies; I highly recommend reading both. Both Naskrecki and Wizen have written great explanations of the bot fly life cycle, with beautiful photos.

“Raising two dipteran [fly] children was an interesting experience. It was embarrassing on a few occasions, when both of my arms started bleeding profusely in public; painful at times, to the point of waking me up in the middle of the night; and inconvenient during the last stages of the flies’ development, when I had to tape plastic containers to my arms to make sure that I will not lose the emerging larvae. But other than those minor discomforts it was really not a big deal. Perhaps my opinion would have been different had the bot flies decided to develop in my eyelids, but I actually grew to like my little guests, and watched their growth with the same mix of pleasure and apprehension as when I watch the development of any other interesting organism under my care.”
Piotr Naskrecki

Sitting at my dentist chair for 40 minutes and suffering through the shrill sound of the ultrasonic cleaner, I suddenly started to feel contractions from my chest. Oh, no. Not now. Is it really happening? If it happens now this will be a visit I will never forget. Am I getting into labor?… In the end, the contractions I felt at the dentist were a false alarm, and I could not feel anything when the larva eventually emerged.
Gil Wizen

[ThaVirus]

I've seen something about that on YouTube once.

Find where the larvae entered the skin, rub some Vaseline around the area then place Saran Wrap over it. The fly apparently gets suffocated in the process and you can pull it out with tweezers as it comes up for air.

[GloryDayz]

[rico]

God I love some of the stuff in this thread...spent a few hours on 2 separate nights, reading the contents of this thread. You guys have shared some cool shit.

[aturnis]

Was this posted?

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...ience-pictures

Pictures: Nine Fish With "Hands" Found to Be New Species

Sorry, can't copy the article. On my phone and NatGeo doesn't agree.

[Fish]

Explanation: Ten Earths could easily fit in the "claw" of this seemingly solar monster. The monster, actually a huge eruptive prominence, is seen moving out from our Sun in this condensed half-hour time-lapse sequence. This large prominence, though, is significant not only for its size, but its shape. The twisted figure eight shape indicates that a complex magnetic field threads through the emerging solar particles. Differential rotation of gas just inside the surface of the Sun might help account for the surface explosion. The five frame sequence was taken in early 2000 by the Sun-orbiting SOHO satellite. Although large prominences and energetic Coronal Mass Ejections (CMEs) are relatively rare, they are again occurring more frequently now that we are near the Solar Maximum, a time of peak sunspot and solar activity in the eleven-year solar cycle.

http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/

[Fish]

Humans have only been there a half dozen times. But we've left shit everywhere...



There's Poop on the Moon

It should come as no surprise that the Apollo astronauts left a few things behind after landing on the moon. Since the lunar module could only lift so much weight off the surface, they swapped out unwanted goods and gear for moon rocks. Among those unwanted goods were all kinds of weird things. What kinds of weird things? There were 96 bags of poop, pee, and puke.

I know what you're thinking: That makes total sense. That's super gross! But it makes total sense. The Apollo missions brought back a total of 842 pounds of moon rocks, dust, and core samples on six separate missions between 1969 and 1972. That amounts to who knows how many pounds of poop—not to mention the other excrement as well as boring old stuff like tools, golf balls, photographs, cameras, a gold-plated telescope and random symbolic objects. You can get a peek at the manifests that show what the astronauts abandoned in this video:



There is, however, scientific value to the things left behind. Astrobiologists, for instance, hope to one day inspect that half-century-old feces to see if the crap has undergone any genetic mutations while in space. Even more mundane gear on the moon's surface offer a unique perspective on how different materials hold up in extreme environments like the moon, where temperatures oscillate between minus 370-degrees to 250-degrees Fahrenheit.

What kinds of mundane gear, you wonder? Well, there's actually an entire website devoted to trash on the moon. However, here's a list of the more interesting and unusual items—aside from the 96 bags of poop, pee, and puke:

• More than 70 spacecraft
• 5 American flags, all of which are now white
• 12 pairs of boots
• An olive branch sculpture made of gold:
• "Several improvised javelins"
• Used wet wipes
• Space food wrappers
• 2 golf balls
• This gold-plated telescope that was the first tool used to make astronomical observations from the surface of another planetary body:
  
• A feather from Baggin, the official mascot of Air Force Academy
• A patch from the doomed Apollo 1 mission that never launched
• This silicon disc with goodwill messages from 73 world leaders
• 12 Hasselbad cameras
• This photograph of Astronaut Charlie Duke's family from Apollo 16:
  
• Not to be repetitive or anything: 96 bags of poop, pee, and puke

[Fish]

I'll be damned.... it works....

[Fish]

[Bufkin]

https://answersingenesis.org/biology...ical-evidence/
Biological evidence cannot give specifics about how animals were originally designed. The ultimate authority is the Bible, which was written by men who were inspired of God.

What is your biological evidence that tigers and snakes were designed to be plant stalkers? I know all you scriptural arguments, In the bible we read there is a city of Jerico at such a place, we dig, we find it. We read a Hebrew was a big shot in Egypt, we dig, we find it. The bible states credible findable facts. What evidence do you see that supports your idea that animals were intended and designed to be plant only eaters? Put your self in the place of the modern lost bioligist, what would convince him you are not just presenting a doctrine of your own making? (by the way I want you to be correct, I just don't think the scriptures absolutely support you, though they do to a degree)

—R.J., U.S.
What is your biological evidence that tigers and snakes were designed to be plant stalkers?
Biological evidence cannot give specifics about how animals were originally designed. The ultimate authority is the Bible, which was written by men who were inspired of God. The Bible says:

Also, to every beast of the earth, to every bird of the air, and to everything that creeps on the earth, in which there is life, I have given every green herb for food; and it was so Genesis 1:30).
These biblical statements need to be embraced and not ignored by the biological community.

I know all you scriptural arguments,
If we refuse to accept the biblical statements, then we give up the foundation of our belief system. The non-Christian doesn’t want us to use the Bible but wants us to reject it and accept his belief system. They accept biological “evidence” as their supreme authority.

We need to be discerning and realize when others want us to give up the Bible and instead use biological (or other) “evidence” as the final authority. We need to refuse to do so, and then show the falsity in doing so (Proverbs 26:5) so that the non-Christian will not assume his position is the only correct one. Why would we want to give up our starting point and accept theirs? It should be the other way around—they need to give up their reliance on man-made ideas about the past and instead use the Bible!

In the bible we read there is a city of Jerico at such a place, we dig, we find it. We read a Hebrew was a big shot in Egypt, we dig, we find it. The bible states credible findable facts.
Archaeological findings do not provide an absolute authority. As confirmation of the Word of God, they are important, but they are secondary to God and His Word. On the other hand, lack of archaeological evidence (for example, not finding the cursed fig tree Mark 11:13-21) will not invalidate the scriptures. The Scriptures are the Word of God, which is truth and will therefore have evidence of its veracity.

What evidence do you see that supports your idea that animals were intended and designed to be plant only eaters?
Again, we accept that all animals were originally designed to eat green plants because this is what the Bible teaches in Genesis 1:30. We don’t look to the “evidence” to see if animals were originally vegetarian, and then confirm this with the Bible. That said, there have been examples of meat-eating animals that have survived on non-meat diets (e.g. the lion that refused to eat meat, the vulture that refused to eat meat, and so on). Just because an animal has a carnivorous diet today, doesn’t mean its ancestors only ate meat, or that it can’t survive on a vegetarian diet today.

The un-petition
I am so glad that AiG is standing strong and growing fast. What I read from Ken's blog about the petitions is actually encouraging. You would not be receiving so much opposition if you did not have any potential...and this also shows just how “dangerous” evangelism is to lost souls—they might be saved!!! Thank you! Thank you! Thank you!

—B.C., U.S.
Put your self in the place of the modern lost bioligist,
All of us were “lost,” before God graciously saved us, so we can sympathize with the biologist (as a matter of fact, some of us are biologists!). However, as Christians, we now have a different foundation (the Bible) from the non-Christian, even though we both study the same “evidence.” When Jesus came in human form to teach mankind, did He give up the Word of God as the authority? By no means! He used it. So, we must not ignore God’s Word, and rely only on the “evidence.”

Instead, we should ask the lost biologist to put the Bible in the position it deserves—the supreme authority in all matters on which it touches, including biology. We can also challenge his position, if it is unbiblical, so that he realizes biology makes little sense without the Bible. For example:

Why do we observe animals varying within their respective kinds and not changing into other kinds?
Why do we observe life giving rise to life (Law of Biogenesis), not abiogenesis, which molecules-to-man evolution requires?
Why are laws of nature uniform in the first place?
What would convince him you are not just presenting a doctrine of your own making?
The doctrine of animals originally being vegetarian is obviously not a doctrine of our own making, as it was given thousands of years ago by the Creator to His creation (Genesis 1:30).

We can present what the Bible says to the non-Christian, but it is not up to us to convince him to change his mind. Conviction comes from the Holy Spirit (2 Thessalonians 2:13), who opens hearts. When we witness to others, we can:

Pray that God would open that person’s heart.
Question the false foundation that the person accepts and show that it is faulty (such questions above help). This will take time.
Provide the correct biblical foundation as taught in Genesis and the rest of the Bible.
Share the gospel and show how it relates. The point isn’t to just convince someone that creation is true but to present them with the good news of salvation in Christ.
(by the way I want you to be correct,


In kindness in Christ,

Bodie Hodge

[Bufkin]

https://answersingenesis.org/astrono...onomy-article/
Many of the Bible’s statements about astronomy went against the generally accepted teachings of the past. Modern science, however, has confirmed what the Bible has taught.

Taking Back Astronomy
Editor’s note: this article is adapted from a chapter of Dr. Lisle’s new book, Taking Back Astronomy. While some people consider astronomy to be a weak area of creation-origins study, this fascinating just-released book contains enough intriguing content to cause even the most hard-hearted of our day to stop and consider the book’s eye-opening findings.

It is not commonly known that many of the Bible’s statements about astronomy went against the generally accepted teachings of the time. Undoubtedly, many of these verses would have seemed counterintuitive, and may have been difficult to believe when they were first written.

Modern science, however, has confirmed what the Bible has taught. As in all things, the Bible is absolutely correct when it teaches about the universe.

The earth is round
Consider Isaiah 40:22 which mentions the “circle of the earth.” This description is certainly fitting—particularly when the earth is viewed from space; the earth always appears as a circle, since it is round.

Curiously, many astronomy textbooks credit Pythagoras (c. 570–500 B.C.) with being the first person to assert that the earth is round. However, Isaiah is generally acknowledged to have been written in the 700s B.C.

The secular astronomers before the time of Pythagoras must have thought the Bible was wrong about its teaching of a round earth, yet the Bible was exactly right.

The earth floats in space
A very interesting verse to consider is Job 26:7 which states that God “hangs the earth on nothing.” This verse expresses (in a poetic way) the fact that the earth is unsupported by any other object—something quite unnatural for ancient writers to imagine.

Indeed, the earth does float in space. We now have pictures of the earth taken from space that show it floating in the cosmic void.

Universe expansion
The Bible indicates in several places that the universe has been “stretched out” or expanded. For example, Isaiah 40:22 teaches that God “stretches out the heavens like a curtain, and spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.” This would suggest that the universe has actually increased in size since its creation. God has stretched it out. He has expanded it (and is perhaps still expanding it).

This verse, too, must have seemed very strange when it was first written.

In fact, secular scientists once believed that the universe was eternal and unchanging. The idea of an expanding universe would have been considered nonsense to most scientists of the past. It must have been tempting for Christians to reject what the Bible teaches about the expansion of the universe. Perhaps some Christians tried to “reinterpret” Isaiah 40:22, and read it in an unnatural way so that they wouldn’t have to believe in an expanding universe.

When the world believes one thing, and the Bible teaches another, it is always tempting to think that God got the details wrong, but God is never wrong. Today, most astronomers acknowledge that the universe is indeed expanding.

The number of stars
A stellar guy!
You wouldn’t think that an astrophysicist (that’s an astronomer who’s taken a lot more math!) would be able to communicate at a level that even a young person would understand. But with Dr. Jason Lisle (the author of this article), that’s just not the case.

Dr. Lisle has been flying all over America, giving superb, well-illustrated talks on astronomy, dinosaurs and biblical authority to groups young and old. When he’s in the office, Dr. Lisle has been putting the finishing touches on the first presentation for the new planetarium inside the Creation Museum, and writing for our new magazine.

Although Dr. Lisle will be busier here in the office, he will still be available to speak on a limited basis. To inquire, go to our Request an event page.
Genesis 22:17 teaches that God would multiply Abraham’s descendants “as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is on the sea shore.” Genesis 32:12 makes it clear that this represents a number which is uncountable by humans: “the sand of the sea, which cannot be numbered for multitude.”

These are excellent analogies. Clearly the sand of the sea and the stars in the universe cannot be counted exactly by humans, though of course, they can be roughly estimated.

It was not always believed that the stars were so numerous. The astronomer Claudius Ptolemy (A.D. 150) cataloged 1,022 stars in his work The Almagest.

The total number of stars that can be distinctly seen (from both hemispheres under ideal, dark sky conditions) with the unaided eye is around 10,000.

Powerful telescopes today allow us to estimate that our single galaxy alone contains over 100 billion stars. And astronomers believe that there are more galaxies in the visible universe than there are stars in our own galaxy. Modern science certainly confirms Genesis 22:17.

Confirming the Bible
Today, the reliability of the Bible is increasingly attacked. Can we really trust it in our modern age of technology and science?

As we have seen, science is not an enemy of the Bible. On the contrary, modern science has already confirmed much of what the Bible teaches about astronomy. Many of the biblical teachings are now accepted in science textbooks.

As AiG President Ken Ham has written so often (and which is the theme of the year for AiG in 2006), Christians need to take back those fields of science, like astronomy, which have been hijacked by evolutionists in order to promote their secular worldview.

[Bufkin]

https://answersingenesis.org/human-b...y-of-evidence/
Where’s the best evidence for the Creator? You don’t have to look far! In this new 16-part video series, Dr. David Menton, former anatomy teacher and professor of the year, gives you an insider’s look at the wonders of the human body.

You don’t have to look far to find the best evidence for the Creator. In fact, your eyes are a good starting point. Or go a little deeper and check out your heart, lungs, digestive system, bones, blood, and more. With a microscope, you’ll find a billion more powerful evidences that patrol your blood every day—your feisty white blood cells, which could only be the handiwork of a Master Designer.

Body of Evidence, a new 16-episode, 8-DVD series on anatomy and physiology, explores the wonders of the human body. Your expert guide is Dr. David Menton, loved worldwide for his humorous and insightful talks that leave audiences in hushed awe at the Creator’s wisdom.

An award-winning retired Professor Emeritus who served 34 years at the Washington University School of Medicine, Dr. Menton is joined by two high schoolers and employs an amazing collection of anatomical props, models, and microscopic images to teach them (and us) about God’s amazing designs for life.

Geared for teens and adults, Body of Evidence is an excellent resource for homeschool families, Christian school anatomy supplementation, or anyone who wants to show his skeptical friends some of the most amazing designs that point unmistakably to our Creator.

You’ll be astounded as you move from organs that you thought were familiar—like the kidney—to electron-microscope views of various complex structures, such as the glomerulus. These bizarre-looking cell structures filter your blood and remove salts, metabolic by-products, and other substances far more efficiently than any filter made by human engineers.

Discover how they accomplish this vital mission in concert with an array of blood vessels, hormones, “salt sinks,” and other ingeniously designed cells and processes.

As Dr. Menton often says, “The Lord thinks of everything.”

Learn how God designed your respiratory system so that air could be heated and filtered before entering your lungs. Somehow unwanted air particles must be trapped and removed. So God designed goblet cells in the upper respiratory tract to produce mucus, which traps particles.

God also designed millions of hair-like structures, called cilia, that line the tract and push the mucus up and out. But if the sticky mucus came into direct contact with the cilia, it would gunk up the cilia. So the wise Creator added a water-like substance to protect the cilia, maintaining just the right fluid level so that the mucus can float on top of the liquid.

Over 6.9 billion “bodies of evidence” are walking the earth right now, but many of them shut their eyes to any evidence for the Creator. Dr. Menton answers their frequent demand, “What’s the best evidence for the Creator?” with, “Whatever I’m currently looking at.”

The helpful images and engaging teaching in this unique new DVD series are sure to inspire awe, leaving no doubt about the origin of these wonders.

[Fish]

Scientists are 3d printing liver cells....



Liver-like cells made with 3D printer

The exploding technology trend of 3D printing, which has already been used to manufacture everything from food to jewelry, has made its way into the realm of biomedical research, with one California company recently announcing that it had "bioprinted" 3D liver cells.

The San Diego-based company Organovo says it has used the technology behind 3D printing to create samples of liver cells that function as they would in a human.

The firm presented its findings at the Experimental Biology conference in Boston in April.

"We have demonstrated the power of bioprinting to create functional human tissue that replicates human biology better than what has come before," Organovo said in a news release.

The company's researchers used a gel to build three types of liver cells and arranged them into the same kind of three-dimensional cell architecture found in a human liver. Although not fully functional, the 3D cells were able to produce some of the same proteins as an actual liver does and interacted with each other and with compounds introduced into the tissue as they would in the body.

That means biomedical researchers could potentially use the tissue to test drugs or investigate the effect of certain diseases.

Organovo's researchers are not the first to apply 3D printing to biomedicine. Doctors at the University of Michigan last year used a 3D printer to build a synthetic trachea for a child with a birth defect that had collapsed her airway, and as scientists and engineers get more familiar with the technology its uses will no doubt grow.

To hear more about how Organovo made its 3D liver, watch the interview above with the company's CEO, Keith Murphy, on CBC's Lang & O'Leary Exchange.

[Baby Lee]

Originally Posted by Fish

Scientists are 3d printing liver cells....

Thank you Meredith Grey.