Except for a small unclassified cluster of tiny sunspots near the sun's southwestern limb,
the Earth-facing side of the sun is almost completely blank. The solar wind is 358.8 km/sec
and the proton count is still very high at 6.4 per cubic centimeter.
Fly me to the Moon – for £100m
By Hannah Kuchler
Britain could become the first country to fly a tourist around the moon, after an Isle of
Man-based company announced that it would be ready to take passengers on private
lunar expeditions by 2015.
Excalibur Almaz will charge wannabe astronauts an average of £100m for a six-eight
month journey exploring deep space.
More
ON THIS STORY

Isle of Man confirmed as space race leader

One small step for the Isle of Man

Space tourist numbers set to rocket

Space shuttle leaves trail of opportunity in its wake
ON THIS TOPIC

Isle of Man benefits economy
IN UK BUSINESS

UK risks losing investment crown to Germany

Rooney tweet falls foul of ad watchdog

May attacks business on immigration

Executive pay battles damaging, says IMA
Three wealthy individuals, or astronauts from emerging powers will be crammed into a
reusable capsule the size of a waste skip and launched by rocket to a space station. After
the two vehicles link up, they will travel on to the Moon.
“It is like how private British companies led expeditions to the South Pacific in the 17th
century,” said Art Dula, founder of Excalibur Almaz. “We’ve just gone from seafaring to
spacefaring.”
The company, run by Americans, chose to be based in the Isle of Man because of the
island government’s commitment to the space industry, which ministers forecast will
soon make up more a third of its gross domestic product. The lack of corporation tax
and proximity to the City are also advantages.
Unlike SpaceX, its US rival, Excalibur Almaz has not received any American government
subsidies. Its biggest advantage is its second-hand Soviet spacecraft which have helped
Excalibur Almaz avoid the laborious process of developing and testing new equipment.
Mr Dula, a long-time space enthusiast, bought the kit from Russia after working as a
patent lawyer in the industry. He and his business partner are the only investors in the
company, which started in 2005.
The entrepreneur says this should help the company take passengers deeper into space
than competitors such as Virgin Galactic. Sir Richard Branson’s venture will only allow
tourists to orbit the earth, though its price is also less stellar, at £200,000.
James Oberg, a space flight consultant, said there were other companies exploring lunar
missions, including as yet anonymous players but that none could start sending people
as early as 2015.
However, Ken Pound, a professor of space physics at the University of Leicester, said the
company would have to make remarkable progress to fly around the moon by then.
“I would put my money on China getting there sooner,” he said, adding that as the
original Soviet designs are old, safety will be an especially key issue for a commercial
enterprise.
Everyone has to remember that space is aggressive, it is not our mother planet. If you
make a mistake in space, it will kill you.
- Valery Tokarev, cosmonaut
Assuming wealthy passengers are keen to blast off, the Soviet spacecraft could also help
the company break even quickly, Mr Dula said. The start-up costs should be covered
between the first and second flight, he said, after which it targets a 50 per cent return on
investment in three years.
Tickets for the historic first flight will cost about £150m, with the price falling to about
£50m after 10 years. Adventurers will have to submit to six months of full-time training
with the Californian company XCorp.
As well as marketing to rich space fanatics, the company is in talks with three emerging
economies who want the prestige of sending someone to space without the expense of
developing their own space programmes.
The company also hopes to drive revenues by emblazoning adverts across its space
station, conducting research for universities and pharmaceutical companies and
allowing other expeditions – including government astronauts from countries like China
– to rent the space station.
But space brings a new universe of risks for investors.
“Everyone has to remember that space is aggressive, it is not our mother planet,” said
Valery Tokarev, a Russian cosmonaut who advises the company.
After two journeys into space, he has one key lesson: “If you make a mistake in space, it
will kill you.”
Drone Wars Continue
WASHINGTON (AP) — The prospect that thousands of drones could be patrolling U.S. skies by
the end of this decade is raising the specter of a Big Brother government that peers into
backyards and bedrooms.
The worries began mostly on the political margins, but there are signs that ordinary people are
starting to fret that unmanned aircraft could soon be circling overhead.
Jeff Landry, a freshman Republican congressman from Louisiana’s coastal bayou country, said
constituents have stopped him while shopping at Walmart to talk about it.
“There is a distrust amongst the people who have come and discussed this issue with me about
our government,” Landry said. “It’s raising an alarm with the American public.”
Another GOP freshman, Rep. Austin Scott, said he first learned of the issue when someone
shouted out a question about drones at a Republican Party meeting in his Georgia congressional
district two months ago.
An American Civil Liberties Union lobbyist, Chris Calabrese, said that when he speaks to
audiences about privacy issues generally, drones are what “everybody just perks up over.”
“People are interested in the technology, they are interested in the implications and they worry
about being under surveillance from the skies,” he said.
The level of apprehension is especially high in the conservative blogosphere, where headlines
blare “30,000 Armed Drones to be Used Against Americans” and “Government Drones Set to
Spy on Farms in the United States.”
When Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell, a Republican, suggested during a radio interview last
month that drones be used by police domestically since they’ve done such a good job on foreign
battlefields, the political backlash was swift. NetRightDaily complained: “This seems like
something a fascist would do. … McDonnell isn’t pro-Big Government, he is pro-HUGE
Government.”
John Whitehead, president of the Rutherford Institute of Charlottesville, Va., which provides
legal assistance in support of civil liberties and conservative causes, warned the governor,
“America is not a battlefield, and the citizens of this nation are not insurgents in need of
vanquishing.”
There’s concern as well among liberal civil liberties advocates that government and privatesector drones will be used to gather information on Americans without their knowledge. A
lawsuit by the Electronic Frontier Foundation of San Francisco, whose motto is “defending your
rights in the digital world,” forced the Federal Aviation Administration earlier this year to
disclose the names of dozens of public universities, police departments and other government
agencies that have been awarded permission to fly drones in civilian airspace on an experimental
basis.
Giving drones greater access to U.S. skies moves the nation closer to “a surveillance society in
which our every move is monitored, tracked, recorded and scrutinized by the authorities,” the
ACLU warned last December in a report.
The anxiety has spilled over into Congress, where a bipartisan group of lawmakers have been
meeting to discuss legislation that would broadly address the civil-liberty issues raised by drones.
A Landry provision in a defense spending bill would prohibit information gathered by military
drones without a warrant from being used as evidence in court. A provision that Rep. Rush Holt,
D-N.J., added to another bill would prohibit the Homeland Security Department from arming its
drones, including ones used to patrol the border.
Scott and Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., have introduced identical bills to prohibit any government
agency from using a drone to “gather evidence or other information pertaining to criminal
conduct or conduct in violation of a regulation” without a warrant.
“I just don’t like the concept of drones flying over barbecues in New York to see whether you
have a Big Gulp in your backyard or whether you are separating out your recyclables according
to the city mandates,” Paul said in an interview, referring to a New York City ban on supersized
soft drinks
Never-before-seen microbes found in Chile’s desert
THURSDAY, 21 JUNE 2012 11:54
WRITTEN BY SUMY SADURNI
8 COMMENTS
SHARE ON FACEBOOKSHARE ON TWITTERSHARE ON EMAILMORE SHARING SERVICES0
Rare find in Atacama desert could be linked to Mars research.
Chile's Atacama desert. Photo courtesy of University of Colorado-Boulder.
A team led by University of Colorado-Boulder has found extremely rare life on the soil at
the top of two volcanoes in Chile’s Atacama desert. Results from the 2009 expedition,
released last week, said unique microbes were discovered that may be linked to research
on Mars.
Team member Ryan Lynch, a doctoral student at CU-Boulder, explained the significance of
this discovery to The Santiago Times in an interview Wednesday.
“Mars is pretty different from Earth,” he said. “But one of the things this research could do
is help us understand and find the limit to life here, how Mars could be favorable to life.”
The driest desert on earth, the Atacama is one of the most uninhabitable environments on
earth. The desert spans 600 miles and is located from Peru’s southern border into northern
Chile. During winter, temperatures can go as high as 79 degrees Fahrenheit but as low as
45 degrees Fahrenheit.
The microbes were discovered at around 6,000 meters elevation on Volcán Llullaillaco and
Volcán Socompa. The thin atmosphere and high radiation in the volcanoes make them
some of the most similar places on Earth to Mars. CU-Boulder Professor Steve Schmidt, who
led the expedition, is also working with astrobiologists to model what past conditions were
like on Mars.
What is most interesting to the researchers is the non-complexity of the new organisms.
The researchers say they are capable of converting energy in a completely different way
compared to known species.
“But these are very different than anything else that has been cultured,” Lynch said.
“Genetically, they’re at least 5 percent different than anything else in the DNA database of
2.5 million sequences.”
The bacteria discovered have not yet been identified, as scientists continue to examine the
organisms.
“The process of identifying microbes is a long one, but our next steps are to grow them in
labs and test them,” Lynch told The Santiago Times. “We are making progress sequencing
genes.”
House bill extends TSA intel sharing to mass
transit
Friday - 6/22/2012, 1:20pm ET
By Jolie Lee
@jleeWFED
Listen
Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Calif.)
Download
The Transportation Security Administration already shares intelligence it collects with airports. Now a
House bill would expand TSA's intel sharing to local mass transit systems as well.
Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Calif.), the bill's sponsor, said the legislation is a "common sense approach"
to fighting terrorism. The House passed the bill May 30 and the Senate Committee on Homeland
Security and Governmental Affairs is now considering the bill.
In an interview with The Federal Drive with Tom Temin and Emily Kopp, Speier said the bill
creates "fusion centers" where TSA can provide intel to local law enforcement and emergency
management officials.
"We have put in place through TSA a very elaborate system [in airports]. We all go through those
metal detectors and those secondary searches. And we've put a lot of focus on the airlines for good
reason. But we have neglected the mass transit components, generally speaking," she said.
Speier said 2 million people fly each day compared with more than 5 million who ride the subway
each day in New York City alone. She pointed out that the most recent terrorist attacks have been
on mass transit. Also, when U.S. Special Forces raided Osama Bin Laden's compound last year,
intelligence gathered revealed the next attack was intended for mass transit.
"The writing is on the wall. We need to be better prepared than we are right now," Speier said.
Transit riders probably won't see more TSA agents in subways or bus stops, though, Speier said.
The expanded TSA role falls more on analysts, she said.
73.65 percent of people out of 2429 votes believe we are sitting ducks for an asteroid, while 13.22
percent are not sure. About the same amount at 13.13 percent believe scientists have things under
control.
Big Bang Could have Popped into Existence with no help from God.
Our universe could have popped into existence 13.7 billion years ago without any divine help whatsoever,
researchers say.
That may run counter to our instincts, which recoil at the thought of something coming from nothing. But
we shouldn't necessarily trust our instincts, for they were honed to help us survive on the African
savannah 150,000 years ago, not understand the inner workings of the universe.
"The Big Bang could've occurred as a result of just the laws of physics being there," said astrophysicist
Alex Filippenko of the University of California, Berkeley. "With the laws of physics, you can get universes."
Filippenko spoke here Saturday (June 23) at the SETICon 2 conference, during a panel discussion called
"Did the Big Bang Require a Divine Spark?" [Images: Peering Back to the Big Bang]
Quantum fluctuations
In the very weird world of quantum mechanics, which describes action on a subatomic scale, random
fluctuations can produce matter and energy out of nothingness. And this can lead to very big things
indeed, researchers say.
"Quantum mechanical fluctuations can produce the cosmos," said panelist Seth Shostak, a senior
astronomer at the non-profit Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI) Institute. "If you would just, in
this room, just twist time and space the right way, you might create an entirely new universe. It's not clear
you could get into that universe, but you would create it."
"So it could be that this universe is merely the science fair project of a kid in another universe," Shostak
added. "I don't know how that affects your theological leanings, but it is something to consider."
Filippenko stressed that such statements are not attacks on the existence of God. Saying the Big Bang —
a massive expansion 13.7 billion years ago that blew space up like a gigantic balloon — could have
occurred without God is a far cry from saying that God doesn't exist, he said.
"I don't think you can use science to either prove or disprove the existence of God," Filippenko said.
The origin of the laws of physics
If we're after the ultimate origin of everything, however, invoking the laws of physics doesn't quite do the
trick. It may get us one step closer, but it doesn't take us all the way, Filippenko said.
"The question, then, is, 'Why are there laws of physics?'" he said. "And you could say, 'Well, that required
a divine creator, who created these laws of physics and the spark that led from the laws of physics to
these universes, maybe more than one.'"
But that answer just continues to kick the can down the road, because you still need to explain where the
divine creator came from. The process leads to a never-ending chain that always leaves you short of the
ultimate answer, Filippenko said.
The origin of the laws of physics remains a mystery for now, he added, one that we may never be able to
solve.
"The 'divine spark' was whatever produced the laws of physics," Filippenko said. "And I don't know what
produced that divine spark. So let's just leave it at the laws of physics."
Julian Assange for Nobel Peace Prize
Obama’s Bottom Up Plan
U.S. President Barack Obama told a campaign rally in Florida Friday the country needs
"some middle class-out economics, some bottom-up economics."
Speaking at Hillsborough Community College in Tampa, the president said the economy
is growing, following the worst downturn since the Great Depression, "but it needs to
grow faster."
He said what's holding back growth is "a stalemate between two fundamentally different
views in Washington about which direction we should go in." He told his audience
Republicans, including presumptive presidential nominee Mitt Romney, "believe that
we should go back to the top-down economics of the last decade."
"They figure that if we simply eliminate regulations and cut taxes by trillions of dollars,
then the market will solve all of our problems," Obama said.
"They argue that if we help corporations and wealthy investors maximize their profits by
whatever means necessary -- whether through layoffs or outsourcing or union-busting -that it will automatically translate into jobs and prosperity that benefit all of us.
"I believe we should do everything we can to help our entrepreneurs succeed," the
president said. "I want our companies to be as profitable as they can be. But that alone is
not enough. Because the central challenge we face right now -- the challenge that we've
faced for over a decade -- is that bigger profits haven't led to better jobs. Bigger profits
haven't led to higher incomes."
The president said American prosperity has always come from "a strong and growing
middle class, and all those people who are striving and working to get into the middle
class."
"We don't need more top-down economics," he said. "What we need is some middle
class-out economics, some bottom-up economics."
State Sovereignty
The supreme, absolute, and uncontrollable power by which an independent state is governed and from
which all specific political powers are derived; the intentional independence of a state, combined with the
right and power of regulating its internal affairs without foreign interference.
Sovereignty is the power of a state to do everything necessary to govern itself, such as making,
executing, and applying laws; imposing and collecting taxes; making war and peace; and forming treaties
or engaging in commerce with foreign nations.
The individual states of the United States do not possess the powers of external sovereignty, such as the
right to deport undesirable persons, but each does have certain attributes of internal sovereignty, such as
the power to regulate the acquisition and transfer of property within its borders. The sovereignty of a state
is determined with reference to the U.S. Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land.
representatives – and ask them to introduce this legislation in your state.
AN ACT concerning Public Safety – National Guard Deployment – Governor’s Powers
SUMMARY
FOR the purpose of requiring the Governor to withhold or withdraw approval of the transfer of this State’s National
Guard to federal control in the absence of an explicit authorization adopted by the Federal Government in pursuance
of the powers delegated to the Federal Government in Article I, Section 8, Clause 15 of the U.S. Constitution.
A BILL ENTITLED __________
WHEREAS, Under the Constitution of the United States, each State’s National Guard is a defensive force controlled
by the governor, but can be called up for federal duty by the federal government, provided that said duty is pursuant
to the Constitution of the United States; and
WHEREAS, Article I, Section 8, Clause 15 of the Constitution of the United States delegates to the Congress the
power to provide for “calling forth the militia”• in three situations only: 1) to execute the laws of the union, 2) to
suppress insurrections, and 3) to repel invasions; and
WHEREAS, James Monroe, member of the Virginia Ratifying Convention, 7th U.S. Secretary of State, and 5th
President of the United States, wrote in 1815, “Congress shall have power to provide for calling forth the militia to
execute the laws of the Union; what laws? All laws which may be constitutionally made”•; and
WHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads as follows: “The powers not
delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States
respectively, or to the people”•; and
WHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being that which has been delegated
by the people of the several states to the federal government in the Constitution of the United States; and
WHEREAS, Daniel Webster, in his 1814 speech on the floor of Congress, said, “The operation of measures thus
unconstitutional and illegal ought to be prevented by a resort to other measures which are both constitutional and
legal. It will be the solemn duty of the State governments to protect their own authority over their own militia, and to
interpose between their citizens and arbitrary power. These are among the objects for which the State governments
exist”•; now, therefore,
SECTION 1. BE IT ENACTED BY THE (GENERAL ASSEMBLY/HOUSE/SENATE) OF THE STATE OF (enter state),
That the Laws of (enter state) read as follows:
(enter section of state code here)
THE GOVERNOR SHALL WITHHOLD OR WITHDRAW APPROVAL OF THE TRANSFER OF THE NATIONAL
GUARD TO FEDERAL CONTROL IN THE ABSENCE OF:
a) A military invasion of the United States, or
b) An insurrection, or
Questions for Amit Goswami
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Welcome to X-Squared Radio, Dr. Goswami. I have to tell you my mind is always
opened to limitless possibilities when I read your books. This book, God is not Dead is
no exception. I picked up right away three main concepts we can discuss. The first one
is probably the most elusive. Even after a logical syllogism, one is left with an empty
plate, it seems. Everyone up and down the scientific community is struggling with it. It
is the subject of consciousness. Tell us some of the considerations science has made to
try to define it and find a possible origin.
Of all the creatures that we have studied or dissected in some way or another, man is
the only one with free will. Why? What are we supposed to do with it?
Sir Roger Penrose stated that consciousness was the result of quantum gravity, and I
maintain that quantum gravity is the result of consciousness. Who is right?
Do you there is a difference between sentient consciousness and non-sentient
consciousness?
Is that just because we think we are the most advanced observers and therefore more
qualified than say a Dolphin or a Whale?
Since we appear to have free will, and can thus choose while we are making our
observation, are we involved in the ongoing creation of the universe?
Do you think the Higgs event that got the Big Bang to occur is consciousness?
8. You probably have the most developed argument for downward causation as opposed
to the alternative. Help us understand what this means? Where does cause come
from?
9. If religions have not settled the question amongst themselves, What is God? How can
science do any better?
10. Is the soul of the individual person eternal or nearly so?
11. From a scientific point of view, is it legitimate to say that since the soul is eternal, that it
has the opportunity to interact with the universe through mortality many times? Or do
we get just one mortal life and then we’re done?
12. How can we explain the social mess our species seems to make when it swells to
society? Why do we tend to allow the most diabolical of traits to gain power and then
keep electing it to power over and over again?
13. Are we evolving as a species of soul?
14. Do you think the neuronetwork of the internet is contributory to this evolution?
15. What is it that moves us as a species to seek God?
16. Why do so many traditions have such radically different discoveries when it comes to
God?
17. Why does religion play such an integral role in our relationship with God? I mean, isn’t
this an individual process?
18. How important is the music, the harmonic vibration of voice or instrument in the God
experience?
19. Is there a God consciousness that can be tuned to resonate in each of us, or is God an
external concept to the individual soul?
20. Can we consider the photon for a moment? It travels at the speed of light, and
therefore all time slows to a moment, and therefore all distance in the universe become
the same place. In other words, at the speed of light, the entire universe becomes local.
At the speed of thought, perhaps the entire universe and all time in it is negotiable by
the individual consciousness. What are your thoughts on my concept here?
21. So, if there are possibilities here, why does social man surrender to pride and lust and
greed? Why do we not see that possession of the physical universe is irrelevant to the
good of the soul?
22. It is inevitable when we discuss consciousness that we come to the distinction between
the mind and the brain. What are your thoughts on this impasse?
23. I get the feeling that the mind not necessarily reliant upon the body at all. Is it
something completely independent and we just think that it is on the body because by
the time we become self-aware in the body we have been walking around in it since
birth?
24. Is there only one mind?
25. Why does the mind lust after power through the death and dominion of others? I mean
the awake mind sees that life is a fleeting quantum possibility, so why waste it killing
other people? I suppose that is a strange question, but after all, do we not read that
God himself killed every living thing on Earth because he was jealous? Of what?
26. Why is it important for the mind to process meaning?
27. Is it possible for the soul the transform? Or is the being made of the soul and body that
transform? I mean, with each body, there are different potentialities.
28. I used to ask God if this mortal life was the awake state of being or the asleep state of
being. I came to the conclusion that the soul can choose to be awake in any form. It
can also choose to be asleep, relinquishing every care and need to someone else. Is
mortal life an accelerated version of soul evolution?
29. As a disembodied soul, do we know everything, and then we forget when we come
here? Or is the soul seeking experience and knowledge toward transformation through
mortal lives?
30.