What's in the news?

[RedPhoenix]

For an escaped animal sure. But this animal hadn't escaped. It was still in an enclosure.

Anyways I wasn't trying to start a debate here, just venting.

[Tolvo]

I still think it was human fault that the animal died, it didn't have to. It wasn't the animal's fault. But when someone does do that, it will generally require the animal's death. Like was asked above, they want to preserve her body as much as possible even if they know she's dead, even if the animal isn't eating her and they know she's dead just it attacking the body is a problem generally. I just meant that's why they did it, the event in the first place should have never happened.

Regarding tranquilizers it's something that is in a lot of spy fiction that is actually dangerous. It's why we have specialized doctors for putting people under. Shooting a human with a tranquilizer dart can easily kill them since you have to base it on their very specific body. Anything over what it requires can kill or seriously cripple them, and below might just fail to work.

[gaggedLouise]

China is planning the landing of a rover on the far side of the Moon - the first true landing ever on that side. The far side has been photohgraphed from above, and seen by the Apollo Crews, but never visited or studied up close in this way. Landing attempt previewed to be within the next few days. The rover, if it lands safely, will be able to send back photographs and other data by uplink to an orbiter satellite.

This is SO exciting! :)

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-46724727

[gaggedLouise]

Edit: China will launch an orbiter satellite in May this year, to provide a radio/pictures link back to Earth.

[ShadowFox89]

 Who wants to bet they'll start trying to industrialize/militarize the moon? There seems to be a strong "the world is our deserved empire" sense from the current Regime.

Now, granted, the same can be said for Trump.

[Lustful Bride]

Who wants to bet they'll start trying to industrialize/militarize the moon? There seems to be a strong "the world is our deserved empire" sense from the current Regime.

Now, granted, the same can be said for Trump.

Difference is trump only has two terms, :P while Xi has set himself up to be premier for life and likely has a successor already in mind.

[Tolvo]

I really doubt they'd try that unless they made some massive discovery there. Trump is really the main person interested in militarizing space because most leaders understand there's no real benefit to. The amount of energy, resources, and manpower it takes to send such high risks missions with the machinery and tech required to do anything of worth more than research and sample taking and analysis up there is astronomical(Heh). The actual things we send into space are quite small, and are designed to recycle as much as possible and use as little as possible, because there aren't resources in space that are easy to access or often even directly useful to us. If you want to mine things in space you either have to send refineries and mining equipment and transportation and factories up there, or get it back from space to Earth. These things are technically possible but with current tech it would take hundreds of years of sending up parts rocket by rocket. The Apollo 11 Lunar Module only weighed 15103 kg(33296.415 pounds). An average Bulldozer alone is 108,000 lbs. And that is a smaller piece of machinery. Large drilling machinery for industrial drilling can weigh up to 45,500 tons(91000000 pounds, Just under the weight of the Titanic). An average tank can weigh 62 tons(124000 pounds). When things are in space and are not in the pull of planet/body and their gravity well the weight isn't as much of a problem though for propulsion and shifting mass it does, but you have to get that into space. Even on the moon these things would have so much weight and mass it creates massive difficulties. Warfare in space is hypothetical, because it hasn't happened, and outside of things like just understanding striking in martial arts would not be effective, is so different and requires such wildly different technology that could weigh even greater, it's probably going to stay in science fiction for a very long time.

[Oniya]

Even back in the beginnings of the Space Race, the moon was more of an 'Achievement' than a 'Goal'.  An orbital platform, like the ISS is much more useful for additional exploration and space-tech development (easier to maintain and supply, less gravity than the moon for future launches, etc).  We landed on the moon so that we could say we beat the Russians to it.  That's it, and that's why we really haven't gone back.

[Tolvo]

Yep! Stuff like that is way handier, and for a lot of things we'd want to build them in space with factories and engineering facilities and platforms rather than on earth and launch it up. Which is why it's done in a lot of science fiction such as Star Trek. And with how a lot of things in space are designed to be modular, you can launch up individual parts as upgrades or new functionalities and remove parts that are outdated or are damaged if you can't fix them.

Now I wish we had a Space thread in the E University section or something. I love talking this stuff.

[Missy]

Make one, it woudl be interesting

[Missy]

I really doubt they'd try that unless they made some massive discovery there. Trump is really the main person interested in militarizing space because most leaders understand there's no real benefit to. The amount of energy, resources, and manpower it takes to send such high risks missions with the machinery and tech required to do anything of worth more than research and sample taking and analysis up there is astronomical(Heh). The actual things we send into space are quite small, and are designed to recycle as much as possible and use as little as possible, because there aren't resources in space that are easy to access or often even directly useful to us. If you want to mine things in space you either have to send refineries and mining equipment and transportation and factories up there, or get it back from space to Earth. These things are technically possible but with current tech it would take hundreds of years of sending up parts rocket by rocket. The Apollo 11 Lunar Module only weighed 15103 kg(33296.415 pounds). An average Bulldozer alone is 108,000 lbs. And that is a smaller piece of machinery. Large drilling machinery for industrial drilling can weigh up to 45,500 tons(91000000 pounds, Just under the weight of the Titanic). An average tank can weigh 62 tons(124000 pounds). When things are in space and are not in the pull of planet/body and their gravity well the weight isn't as much of a problem though for propulsion and shifting mass it does, but you have to get that into space. Even on the moon these things would have so much weight and mass it creates massive difficulties. Warfare in space is hypothetical, because it hasn't happened, and outside of things like just understanding striking in martial arts would not be effective, is so different and requires such wildly different technology that could weigh even greater, it's probably going to stay in science fiction for a very long time.

There are a number of ways around that, Mountains, Skyhooks or Space Elevators for instance.

To be honest I don't really want there to be any major space project that isn't run by the UN or some bettter alternative of an international organization.

[RedPhoenix]

Rashida Tlaib is going to be sworn in on Thomas Jefferson's Quran. =]

[Callie Del Noire]

Rashida Tlaib is going to be sworn in on Thomas Jefferson's Quran. =]

I love that.

[Sara Nilsson]

Rashida Tlaib is going to be sworn in on Thomas Jefferson's Quran. =]

thats amazing :)

[gaggedLouise]

In one of the ¨

Rashida Tlaib is going to be sworn in on Thomas Jefferson's Quran. =]

And she's topping it by saying about Trump: "we're going in to get this MF impeached". Now, I love *that* too! :)

*Trigger alert: underage crime*

I was considering to post about a very weird and unsettling murder case here, with several unusual aspects (including an underage kid who says he was coerced to take part), but not sure if I can do it without breaching forum rules, even with trigger alerts posted. When I read about it I just thought: what the everloving f**k?? :(

[Flower]

This made me go wtf...

A health care facility in Arizona is under heightened security after a patient with intellectual disabilities reportedly became pregnant and gave birth Dec. 29.

Azfamily.com on Thursday reported that a woman who was left in a vegetative state after a near-drowning more than 10 years ago became pregnant while she was a patient at Hacienda HealthCare in Phoenix.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/arizona-officials-investigate-patient-nursing-000255430.html

[Callie Del Noire]

This made me go wtf...


https://www.yahoo.com/news/arizona-officials-investigate-patient-nursing-000255430.html

I foresee warrants for DNA for a LOT of male staff in the future followed by a jail term in someone’s future

[Regina Minx]

I foresee warrants for DNA for a LOT of male staff in the future followed by a jail term in someone’s future

Minor quibble. Police can't get a bank of warrants so as to go on a fishing expedition. When applying for a search warrant for someone's DNA, the police have to satisfy two prongs of requirement. One, they have to show probable cause that a crime has been committed (no trouble there), and they have to demonstrate that evidence linked to the crime will more likely than not be found with the person or place that's the subject of the warrant.

Now if there are three male workers who are potential suspects, and we have no other evidence that would favor suspect A over suspects B or C, it cannot be argued that it is more likely than not that we will obtain proof of suspect A's guilt if we grant a DNA search warrant. Ditto suspects B and C. The problem only compounds when you have dozens of potential suspects just from the staff alone, and not accounting for the possibility that this crime was committed by another resident or visitor to the facility.

What the police and nursing home could do is ask for voluntary DNA submissions. Which anyone is free to refuse. Now, Arizona is an at-will employment state, so the nursing home could well fire anyone that refuses to take the test, but it's going to be a very hard line from 'Suspect K refused to take a DNA test' to "Suspect K is probably guilty so let's get a search warrant on him.' You still have to clear that 'more likely than not' requirement to get the warrant.

Of course, all this being said, cops have lots of tricks they can use to collect DNA even without a warrant. But I felt the point was worth digressing into in response to that specific prediction.

[Callie Del Noire]

Minor quibble. Police can't get a bank of warrants so as to go on a fishing expedition. When applying for a search warrant for someone's DNA, the police have to satisfy two prongs of requirement. One, they have to show probable cause that a crime has been committed (no trouble there), and they have to demonstrate that evidence linked to the crime will more likely than not be found with the person or place that's the subject of the warrant.

Now if there are three male workers who are potential suspects, and we have no other evidence that would favor suspect A over suspects B or C, it cannot be argued that it is more likely than not that we will obtain proof of suspect A's guilt if we grant a DNA search warrant. Ditto suspects B and C. The problem only compounds when you have dozens of potential suspects just from the staff alone, and not accounting for the possibility that this crime was committed by another resident or visitor to the facility.

What the police and nursing home could do is ask for voluntary DNA submissions. Which anyone is free to refuse. Now, Arizona is an at-will employment state, so the nursing home could well fire anyone that refuses to take the test, but it's going to be a very hard line from 'Suspect K refused to take a DNA test' to "Suspect K is probably guilty so let's get a search warrant on him.' You still have to clear that 'more likely than not' requirement to get the warrant.

Of course, all this being said, cops have lots of tricks they can use to collect DNA even without a warrant. But I felt the point was worth digressing into in response to that specific prediction.

Okay point taken but I really hope there are distinct identifiers that tighten this down to someone. Cause this sort of this should be punished

[Beguile's Mistress]

The can run a DNA test on the infant, the mother, and the mother's parents/relatives and do a familial search to see if there are any results that don't match the mother and her family.  This has been done to locate suspects in other types of crimes.  It might return a result that points to one of the staff and further DNA testing can be done.

[Regina Minx]

The can run a DNA test on the infant, the mother, and the mother's parents/relatives and do a familial search to see if there are any results that don't match the mother and her family.  This has been done to locate suspects in other types of crimes.  It might return a result that points to one of the staff and further DNA testing can be done.

Ooh! I'd be very interested in reading about that. Any references or links to share?

[Nachtmahr]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6562169/Saudi-woman-trapped-Bangkok-airport-trying-flee-family-amid-fears-kill-her.html

An 18 year old Saudi woman who has renounced her fate is currently trapped in a hotel in Bangkok, awaiting deportation back to Saudi Arabia, where she's likely to be punished or, according to her own statements, killed. This isn't the first case like this, and last time it didn't have a happy ending either.

[Beguile's Mistress]

Ooh! I'd be very interested in reading about that. Any references or links to share?

I Googled 'Familial DNA Search' and came up with quite a few responses, including some scholarly articles and arguments against this type of profiling.  The following is one that covers some of the points.

https://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-rights/familial-dna-searches.html

[Regina Minx]

I Googled 'Familial DNA Search' and came up with quite a few responses, including some scholarly articles and arguments against this type of profiling.  The following is one that covers some of the points.

https://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-rights/familial-dna-searches.html

Oh! I didn't realize you were suggesting a familial DNA search from the amniocentesis. Yeah, that could be helpful if the perpetrator of a family member thereof is in the system.

[Beguile's Mistress]

I thought the baby had been born.  A small sample of blood taken from the heel could be used to check for markers that might indicate the father's line.  DNA tests are sometimes done using amniotic fluid but that can be dangerous for the unborn child.  Technology these days gives us options to be able to work around road blocks.