Why some people are conservatives?

Link Economist article reports on a Thornhill and Fincher study which showed that kids with difficult childhoods end up as liberals. Those with sheltered ones end up conservatives. It's clear this matches with the stereotype. The kids of wealthy parents who have been to the country clubs, have the fancy BMW and trust fund are probably conservatives.

It has been hypothesized in a recent New York Times article (link) that wisdom comes from setbacks early in life. Perhaps the type of setbacks which go along with 'difficult childhood' mentioned above. So,

liberal = difficult childhood
difficult childhood = wisdom

by associativity

liberal = wisdom

And since its literally true that liberals are wiser than conservatives, it all makes sense. Notice wisdom != intelligence, but I'd say it's on a similar axis.

# # #

(12/29/07) A recent NYTimes piece says that binge drinkers -- even if they haven't done so in years -- tend "to poor decision-making. [As a binge drinker] one can easily fail to recognize the ultimate consequences of one’s actions." In a study done on rats made to binge drink and later kept sober for equivalent rat years, there was "a tendency to stay the course, a diminished capacity for relearning and maladaptive decision-making." Doesn't that sound like George W. Bush?

So is that possibly the correct explanation for it all: that ex-frat boy binge drinkers are conservatives because of the science of their self-inflicted brain damage? And this is the cause of our country's last 7 years of pain and suffering. We should think twice about hiring one of those assholes for the job next time.

# # #

(05/20/07) NYTimes runs a piece on how two conservatives fell this week. Falwell and Wolfowitz. The author goes on to say that the conservatives seem so far undeterred by the recent Wolfowitz setback. He makes a comparison between McNamara and Wolfowitz, but says history somewhat forgives McNamara because wasn't an ideologue.

Arctic Ice Dramatically Receded this Summer

NYT It was beyond even pessimistic projections.

Last few hundred years of evolution civilized humans

Link Shit. I wouldn't have thought such a short time scale could impact genetics significantly. But a theory is presented which the rich English tended to survive in greater numbers and these were the more literate and non-violent folks which allowed the industrial revolution to happen.

Case against genetic engineering

Link I agree.

HIV or PtERV1

Link Apparently, humans are immune to PtERV1, a monkey virus. Some monkeys are immune to HIV. It's theorized that for humans to be immune to PtERV1 they lost the capability to be immune to HIV.

Not sure if I understand why that must be from the article, but perhaps some of the proteins needed to be immune to PtERV1 are different from what's needed for HIV, so a 'normal' evolutionary process would only protect against one or the other. I don't think it means that eventually some humans wouldn't eventually get immunity from HIV, but it would take thousands of years and sustaining medicines might confound the Darwinian process. Of course, in the process tens of millions would die.

Fallacy: Trading safety versus fuel efficiency in cars

Link Interesting that Honda agreed that no such tradeoff was necessary. The US automakers are pushing back hard. Probably Toyota is quietly in the same camp as Honda.

Seeing oneself in third person indicates positive personality

Link One of those strange psychological studies which tries to explain something you might know intuitively. That is, if you can see something bad which happened to you objectively rather than personally, you will be happier. Time probably naturally helps this process. But some people have the ability to step back and evaluate experiences with some distance.

Food subsidies lead to obesity

Link In a piece written by the author of 'The Omnivores Dilemma', we understand how the food subsidies in the farm bill cause the cheapest food to be the least healthy -- explaining why the poor are also the most obese.

Brain genes on the X-chromosome

I've read that researchers had found that many genes for intelligence are actually on the X-chromosome, and since males only have one copy of that chromosome, any mutations which might be recessive in girls are expressed in boys. This could be the reason behind the wider variance in intelligence in males compared to females -- supposedly males can be really smart or really dumb. Lately, I've found mostly evidence of the latter. Also, it means that these particular X-chromosome brain genes come from the mother only. No wonder I don't have my dad's gift for math.

-- Updated 5/1

Link It seems what I said above was not quite correct. Apparently, one of the X-chromosomes is mostly shut down in girls as well. Hmmm.

Article tries to explain the reason why CT screening for lung cancer isn't good for you

Permalink The complexities of overdiagnosis and mortality rate improvement are explained.

Biofuels could be created efficiently by adding hydrogen

Link Hmmm, interesting ideas on biofuels. You could perform electrolysis on water to get hydrogen and then use it to convert biomass to alcohol?