Saturday, May 1, 2010

DareDevil anyone?

A BLIND British boy, 4, uses echo-location to "see" the same way dolphins navigate murky waters. 

Full article here:

Wednesday, April 21, 2010

Saturday, April 10, 2010

Reel and real..

it is sometimes shocking to know when reel stuff becomes real.But it is most gratifying in some cases.
most people like cats and i guess that anyone with adequate neuron connections love of my favourite post was this caped avenger strip..

Now see this :
Now that is cool

Sunday, February 7, 2010

Random quote

You love playing with that. You love playing with all your stuffed animals. You love your Mommy, your Daddy. You love your pajamas. You love everything, don't ya? Yea. But you know what, buddy? As you get older... some of the things you love might not seem so special anymore. Like your Jack-in-a-Box. Maybe you'll realize it's just a piece of tin and a stuffed animal. And then you forget the few things you really love. And by the time you get to my age, maybe it's only one or two things. With me, I think it's one.
(from Hurt's locker)

Wednesday, January 27, 2010

Integrity in science

The recent frenzy regarding the demand for resignation of IPCC chairman(?) Dr.Pachuri over errors on its report caught my attention.This post is neutral regarding the climate change phenomenon.But i try to think out loud my views on this issue.

Here is a brief on the issue .The problem is the IPCC in its report ( predicted that tis highly probable that Himalayan glaciers would melt by 2035.These were based on report by " Syed Hasnain" of JNU Delhi in New scientist (
Chk here for a detailed explanation( havnt gone through this fully.(Sue me for being lazy.)

The point is the IPCC report was containing a statement not made on facts.It was loose talk.The article being scientific report is to be perfect.This error in my view is equivalent morally to a petty crime, a con job. So now is who is to be held responsible for this error.Should it be the person (Hasnain) who made a careless statement(I assume) or the reporter (Pearce) and the magazine (New scientist) who published the article without verifying the facts,or the scientists at various positions whose assent was given before the final IPCC document was made including reviewers and the chairman also.In what proportions they share the responsibility of the error and how they are going to be accountable to this....I am unsure.Logical views on what should be done over this are welcome..