Artichoke

Cynara cardunculus var. slyvestrisis: the ancestor of the globe artichoke, var. scolymus, and the cultivated cardoon, var. altilis. The wild cardoon occurs across the Mediterranean Sea, as far east as the Black Sea, and as far west as the Canary Islands. Where this crop was first domesticated is unknown. Phylogenetic and evolutionary evidence points to the central and western Mediterranean basin. The ancient Greek philosopher Theophrastus (371 – 287 BCE) reported cultivation of the plant in Italy and Sicily, but the name used, “scolymos” was a description which could characterize any spiny thistle.

Artichoke is primarily grown as food crop for its edible buds. Outside of the U.S., it is also grown for stems and leaves. With a high biomass yield and oil content, it has potential applications as a biofuel, cooking oil, and paper pulp. The aboveground biomass in one study averaged 118.5 ton per acre, with only 7.4 ton per acre as the fruit.

Pharmaceutical compounds produced by the plant, such as flavonoids, silymarin, and cinnamic derivatives, are being studied as potential contributions to modern medicine. Artichoke leaf extracts have traditionally been used to alleviate irritable bowel syndrome, chronic albuminuria, dyspepsia, hyperlipidemia, jaundice, liver dysfunction, alcohol-induced hangovers, and snake bites. Clinical trials have suggested that extracts may alleviate symptoms associated with IBS and dyspepsia. No evidence supports the use of extracts for treating alcohol-induced hangovers. The role in other treatments is unclear. Studies testing the on the antioxidant defense system suggested effect of leaf extracts is correlated to higher plasma antioxidant capacity, but not to reductions in oxidative damage to erythrocytes.

Almost all commercial production of artichoke, on approximately 7,900 acres, occurs in California. 84% of production occurs in the Monterrey Bay area in the central coast region, with the rest occurring on the south coast and southern inland desert. 84% of production occurs in the Monterrey Bay area where artichoke is grown as a perennial. On the central coast, artichokes are mostly grown as perennials and ready to harvest in about 12 months after planting, usually from March to April. Grown as an annual, artichoke is ready to harvest in five to six months. Artichokes are a cool-season crop, hardy from USDA planting zone 6 – 9. In West and North Texas, where average climates are close to the optimum 45 – 85 F, there is great potential for ‘Imperial Star’ and‘Green Globe’ cultivars. The greatest limitation in Texas artichoke production is the hot, dry summers. Temperatures above 85 F are tolerated, but result in reduced fruit quality.

Artichoke is most commonly propagated vegetatively by stumps, or offsets, from the parent root systems. Offsets are placed about 15 cm below the soil surface, spaced at 3 m. Seed and in-vitro propagation technologies are currently being developed. Weed control is achieved mechanically, including hand weeding, until plant canopies fill in, when chemical control can be used. Growers use overhead sprinklers (usually for establishment of crop) and subsurface drip irrigation. Fertilizer requirements are moderate, with nitrogen and phosphorus recommendations around 160 – 200 lb N acre-1 per season from combined available sources. Fertigation is an increasingly common practice, as it allows frequent applications in increments as low as 10 lb N acre-1per week. Harvest typically occurs from April to June. Since heads are produced at varying times, hand harvest occurs about every 7 days. Gibberelic acid, applied at 1 gram per gallon, can be applied to encourage earliness and uniformity of buds to meet specific market demands. The harvested crop is quickly transported to cool storage (30 F with 90-95 % humidity). Perennial plants are mowed after harvest to encourage new fern development. The best practice is to replant fields every 5-10 years as plants lose their vigor due to root overcrowding and disease problems.

Nerd alert.

What do atmospheric transmission and the human eyeball have in common? The visible spectrum. The atmosphere transmits it well, our eyes absorb it well. No surprise on the latter part. This is the first time that I had heard about the atmospheric transmission part.

Coupled with atmospheric oxygen that's been riding along at 210,000 ppm for the past couple billion years, I'm starting to think that the atmosphere is just razors-edge perfect suited for we humans.

…I'm kidding! The take-away here is as it should always be: it’s the other way around.

A few foods we don't think about everyday

A few foods we don't think about everyday: 
 
Rice
While corn is the scapegoat for our dietary woes in the Western world, rice is out there feeding the rest of the world.

 http://www.khmer4us.com/apps/photos/photo?photoid=107493644

Cassiva
A life-sustaining root.  According to Wikipedia, it is the third-largest source of carbohydrates in the Tropics.

http://www.puttingfarmersfirst.ca/food-security-a-new-variety-of-cassava-leaves/


Wheat
Our daily bread, that doesn't get the credit that it deserves. Wheat? No, I prefer white...

http://oregonstate.edu/terra/2012/06/wheat-for-the-west/

Sweet potato
Not on the official list. Would have made it before I found out that I've been totally wrong about its nutritional content. I used to make it my mission, every time I eat it, to tell someone (usually just my girlfriend) about how it is a "complete protein" food. I learned this, I swear, at an accredited university. I was shocked, and suffered some depression, with the sudden demise of my long-seated belief about this food. Complete with sour cream, cheese, picante sauce, salt and pepper, it is one of my favorite meals under $1.

http://www.cals.ncsu.edu/agcomm/news-center/media-releases/organic-field-crop-farm-tour-is-july-19/

Artichoke
Cash crop that has uses and value (or potential value) as food, medicine, fuel, and fiber.

http://mavensphotoblog.com/2012/08/19/castroville-the-artichoke-capital-of-the-world/castroville-field-of-artichokes-may-2012-11/

Assassination of Dr. Tiller

MSNBC documentary - Assassination of Dr. Tiller.

This is a must-see.  To follow up, nothing much has changed.  Of all of the things I thought knew could go backwards, I guess social progress wasn't one of them.  It is really strange.  These two links are literally the first that I clicked on when I googled "Operation Rescue"and "Christin Gilbert":

Operation Rescue Buys Clinic
Who Cries for Christin Gilbert?

Christin Gilbert was a mentally disabled 19-year old that had been raped.  Her parents decided for her to have an abortion.  Her death, caused by complications of the abortion, was the basis for a lawsuit brought up by Operation Rescue. The article drives home the point that numbers mean nothing.  So many numbers used, but so little truth.  I understand why my doctor seems to avoid mentioning numbers.  Numbers can do more harm than good.  I would hope that the author of this were a babbling idiot and/or clinically diagnosed pathological liar.  What else on earth could it be?

Conservation agriculture in SS Africa

Responses to an overview of the controversy of conservative agriculture. 

Ken E. Giller, Ernst Witter, Marc Corbeels, Pablo Tittonell. 2009. Conservation agriculture and small holder farming in Africa: the heretics view. Field Crops Research 114 (1) 23-34.

ttp://conservationag.wordpress.com/2009/12/01/ken-gillers-paper-on-conservation-agriculture/

Walter Wagner, a high school teacher

As insane as it may be, I am considering the prospect of high school teaching.  "Why" boils down to this man: Walter Wagner and others responsible for the education of our future.

Wait for his explanation of the probability that the large hadron collider (the world's largest and highest-energy particle accelerator) will destroy the planet.

Rachel Maddow on relativism

First. I've got to say,this Rosie Perez fact check on Mitt Romney is hilarious. I'd assume this is viral by now? I think I may find a new hobby in watching homemade and independent political ads.

Second.
It drives me nuts that its impossible to find real consensus on... anything. A really good portrayal of the perplexing, just insane, ways that we try to apply relativism to science, politics, and everything else.

The unprecedented access to data and information should be the beacon that illuminates the world, once and for all. Head-spinning amount of information... enough to make you feel, on a daily basis, that personal knowledge is to the internet what a body of cells is to the entire universe. Religious universalism, cultural relativism, the like, are on the rise. No surprise there. How about more concrete things, say, science. Or even easier, he-said, she-said. We can practically rewind and replay any public statement of any high-profile politician made in the last couple of years. Consensus on things as basic as algebra should be easy! Not at all the case.

 With the help of peer review and, for the most part, the culture of integrity in the scientific community, the beacon, we'll say, has been lit a long time ago. However, on a personal and societal level, we've got a ways to go. there is no short-circuit around maturity. It seems as our society is still at a level of being awe-struck with the expanse of information. As if we all took a great "History of Civilization" course (and rightly so), and were so awe-struck at the sheer diversity of people and starting question whether we should be critical to belief structures just because they were in contrast to our own. And, then, we thought it necessary to apply the same principle to every other body of knowledge, not just that which dwells in "belief." The basis of scientific "relativism" and how it is used politically, can be summed up with a rhyme:

I'm rubber and you're glue. ...there are like a million studies out there, and they all say different things, and so anything you say bounces off of me and sticks to you.

 The way I see it, the relativism resides in two parts: 1) cultural and religious relativism and 2) The Problem relativism.

1. Good-intentioned people getting caught up in relativism as a way of achieving objectivity. Maddow, in the link above, talks about Politico's fact-checking in this respect. This is the kind of relativism that we got caught up in after that History of Civilization course.
2. People who know better are capitalizing on this approach, muddying the waters for the sake of making personal gain.

Just can't get enough

I'm coming out of the closet: I'm obsessed with this question of integrity in our political system. Is the lack of integrity a two-sided phenomenon?  At some level, I admit to the possibility of being naively and totally, completely deluded.  More often, I tend to believe that it is a one-sided phenomenon, and the mainstream Republicans are the problem. Time will tell... right?

Washington Post article: Let's just say it: The Republicans are the problem

Lie factory debute

 Upton Sinclair "was beat because he wrote books."
-Clem Whitaker

"We don't go in for that kind of crap that you have back in New York, of being obliged to print both sides. We're going to beat this son of a bitch Sinclair any way we can. We're going to kill him."
-Los Angeles Times political editor Kyle Palmer

Politics are just... maddening. How did Campaigns Inc., the political consulting firm started by Whitaker and Leone Baxter, defeat Mr. Sinclair? By little more than running a daily newspaper ad with a quote by the candidate (or one of his fictional characters, as if said by Sinclair). And with that, the ba-jillion dollar business of political consulting was born.

A good article on what Sinclair called the Lie Factory and the history of political consulting in general.



Current-day politic campaigning madness goes as far as the mud can sling. It may not be the best example, but it concerns the now-famous news of the 47-percent-of-the-people, coming-out video:

In a press conference, Mitt Romney doesn't deny, but actually rehashes what he said in the video. Then, to no one's surprise, his campaign changes that strategy to one of denial. 

This is from David Corn's article, Romney's Video-Debunking Claim Is…Debunked:
A day or so after the press conference, his campaign released these statements in an email:
Today, The Obama Campaign Leveled False Attacks Against Mitt Romney Based On A Debunked And Selectively Edited Video:
 What was the response from the Politico guy that authored the said debunking statements? 

"There is nothing in my report that 'debunks' the video."

"More mysterious still, is why the Romney campaign wants to debunk a video containing remarks that the candidate doubled-down on in a follow-up press conference."
-Politico's Dylan Byers

Slate's Dave Weigel has weighed in as well:
By calling the whole tape "debunked" and "selectively edited," the campaign's hewing closer to the Breitbart.com argument -- the real story is liberal media-Obama collusion. And the result is a sort of paradox, in which Romney stands by what he said in a video that you can't trust.
It was bizarre. After Byers and Weigel had debunked the Romney camp's debunking, Byers heard from a Romney aide who said that the campaign only takes issue with the clip regarding Romney's view on the Mideast, not the entire video.
In other words, the Romney campaign walked back the push-back. It's not challenging the "47 percent" material or anything else; only the Mideast remarks. But, as I've said a few thousand times on television these past few days, the wonderful thing about this story is that people can view for themselves. Watch Romney talking about the Mideast, and it's clear he has contempt for the peace process as it has been conceived for years; does not believe it can work; and would chart a radically different course. The few sentences not included in that clip—but which were included in the full transcript and complete tape we released—do not a debunking make. This maneuver smacks of desperation from a campaign hurt by the undeniable words of its candidate.

Another example of an attempt (a miss, actually) by the Lie Factory:
Senator Inhofe, last week, said the blame for the Libya and Egypt embassy attacks was Obama's "policy of appeasement" in the Middle East. This may be insignificant... I don't know. When I see a whacko on Fox and feel that everyone around me recognizes the same, I tend to be wrong.

Mitt Romney seems to hate apologies, even more when made to someone in or from, or resembling someone from, the Middle East. Tone-deaf and insensitive, really a throwback to the days of President Bush, he accused Obama of apologizing shortly after the attacks. I'm sick of the "apologizing isn't American" campaign. Even worse, I'm sick of lying in order to make political headway. Even after learning of the death of Ambassador Stephens, that presumably mattered most to Mitt Romney, he makes the apology comment again. Had the play been any less of total and complete miss, the Obama-sympathizes-with-terrorists story might have actually stuck. 
At any rate, who would want someone who doesn't can't apologize to have anything to do with foreign affairs, much less be the commander in chief of the country? Clinton's utterance of "sorry" for the deaths in the Pakistan airstrikes" averted a real fiasco. Sorry--the shot heard 'round the world.

NPR rocks

Simply put, NPR rocks.  I pull up the news with an app on my phone which I (admittedly shamefully) probably wouldn't read if it took any more than a fraction of a second to find.  Yesterday marked the 50th anniversary of the first admission of a black student to Mississippi State University, and the deadly riot that went with it. 

Today I'm listening to a playlist NPR has called 'Songs of the Civil Rights Movement.'  Anytime I hear these songs, I beg myself to remember to go home and download them, which, until today, I inevitably forget to do.

The most frustrating debate in history

The presidential debate was a shocker. 

Shocker # 1: Romney made some claims that were so totally off of his whole platform, so different than whats he's been saying, that you have to wonder if he thinks he'll get away with it. 

Shocker # 2: Was Obama off his game or did he plan on being that timid?  This was probably the worst public showing since the man got elected. Maybe he was ill?  Nope. The very next day, Obama was making a whole lot of sense; and no question of his oratory skill.

Politico: How President Obama's Debate Strategy Bombed.

Shocker # 3: Belief weighs more than truth. The best religious adherents  will cling to and keep espousing a belief even if it has been just doubtlessly and methodically disproven.  This is precisely how Mitt Romney won the debate.  Obama would have had to be just as persistent about exposing Romney as Romney was to clinging to his bag of lies.

I almost want to say, who cares about the debate?  But I think it makes me sound like a sore ole liberal that just wanted Obama to win.  Romney "mangled the truth" in the debate, as Dan Rather put it.  Obama had flubs as well. This, too, is important.

Politifact's fact-checking of the debate.

Read of the Day

Susan Bordo, Empire of Images in Our World of Bodies.  Great read.

Where she mentions the absurdities of our clothing sizing system and the definition of the plus-sized body, I have one note.  TMI but necessary information. At 5'6", I weigh 130 lbs and I wear "plus-size" sports bras from Lane Bryan.  The message is that it is just flat out ridiculous; not only in its distinction as a clothing sizing category, but also our perception of what constitutes "plus-size."

Vaccines are dangerous?

Blog post: Dr. Nancy Padian Study Proves HIV Is Not Sexually Transmitted

I know that this sort of thing runs rampant through the interweb.  This is part of what amazes me.  Also, that the guy wrote a book on this subject. Its a necessary evil, I guess, of the WWW. If you weren't at all scared about the potential abuses of scientific information in an ever-nonscientific world, this should scare you.