Advertising News

Edge interviews Jonah Lehrer:

The paradox of modern neuroscience is that the one reality you can't describe as it is presently conceived is the only reality we'll ever know, which is the subjective first person view of things. Even if you can find the circuit of cells that gives rise to that, and you can construct a good causal demonstration that you knock out these circuit of cells, and you create a zombie; even if you do that... and I know Dennett could dismantle this argument very, very quickly ... there's still a mystery that persists, and this is the old mind-body problem, but it?"s an old problem for a reason: we don't simply feel like three pounds of meat.

Tom Goldstein of SCOTUSblog studies Sotomayor's abortion rulings:

In another nearly orgasmic tribute to The One, in its Arts section The New York Times published a May 30 story buoyantly jubilant over the fact that Obama's face "rules the web." The story is in glee over how the Obammessiah's portrait fills the web and that some folks are even making a bit of cash off the deal.

To my mind, though, the amusing thing about the piece is that, if read closely, it appears that only schlocky Obama art can bring any sales for any serious artistic efforts are going unsold. I don?"t know what that says about Obama art aficionados, but there you have it. Obama schlock rules.

The first Obamanist cum arteeste the piece reveals to us is one Mimi Torchia Boothby of Seattle who was so inspired by The One that she painted a "contemplative, sun-splashed portrait" of Obama that she is now selling on the web. And she was excited that a whole 24 takers was dredged up.

Sadly, there is no sense of proportion about this whole phenomenon and there just is no real effort to place this phenomenon in any historical perspective. Obama is ranked with John F. Kennedy in the excitement for his portrait but, there is no sense that the Times understands that Kennedy's portrait didn't become ubiquitous until his assassination. Yes there were many portraits of him just after he got elected, but his assassination spurred that displaying of his image a lot more than his mere election. On the other hand, Obama's portrait is everywhere despite his relative lack of accomplishment as president.

There is no discussion of other presidents that enjoyed popularity in portraiture. George Washington was hugely popular for generations of Americans including those first American voters of the late 1700s. Just about every American had a portrait of Washington somewhere. Abraham Lincoln was also everywhere in his day and after and was one of the most photographed president's of his era and on into the next. Teddy Roosevelt was the people's president and found great popularity as a subject of portraits. Original images of Teddy are still easy to find on ebay or in antique stores. In his turn, Franklin Roosevelt's image became popular everywhere, as well. But does the Times talk of any of this? Nope.

Finally, one might think that a thoughtful piece on the widespread appearance of Obama's portrait might include some words of caution, some perspective, or some effort to look deeper into the matter. But, I guess that is far too introspective for the Times, sadly. No effort was made to make this piece a serious treatment of the matter.

What does it say, for instance, about people so taken by this man even though he has yet to actually achieve any major effort (shy of getting elected, no mean feat, to be sure), has not faced any significant challenge or emergency, and has yet to be proven to have succeeded in his goals?

But, let?"s not worry about reality, shall we? Unfortunately, it's all about the slavish sycophancy for The One as opposed to any serious treatment of the subject.

Sigh.

In 1927, General Electric introduced the "Monitor Top," the first commercially successful home-use refrigerator (the unit was so-named because the motor sat on top of the fridge). This marked the beginning of a near-wholesale change in the eating habits of Americans and, eventually, the entire industrialized world. It also represented a major shift in the way we define food products as "fresh." As Susanne Freidberg writes in Fresh: A Perishable History, the introduction of home refrigeration (buoyed by the proliferation of electricity in urban neighbourhoods) reflected a new idea "that freshness depend[ed] less on time or distance than on the technology that protect[ed] it."

Before the Monitor Top, most households employed ice boxes to keep food fresh. But the ice box was never a particularly useful contraption: As the ice inside melted (and was replaced, often multiple times daily, with new ice), the temperature would fluctuate dramatically -- food might initially freeze and then rapidly thaw. This created an awful mess, not to mention a toxic environment in which the natural bacteria and enzymes in various foods mixed and melded to create unnatural smells and unhealthy tastes.

An ice box would be considered a serious health concern these days. But the upshot of owning one in the late-19th century and early-20th century was that you were more likely -- specifically because of the technological limitations -- to eat food that was fresher. You had to eat local -- because there was a serious possibility that anything grown or raised outside your neighbourhood (or on another continent) would be spoiled or even poisonous by the time it reached the market.

Ironically, the refrigerator, an appliance designed to keep our food fresher for a longer period of time, has actually meant that we eat things that are not at all, in the classic sense, fresh.

The advent of cold storage (refrigeration on an industrial scale) in the mid-to late-1800s

also meant that food producers gained a stronger hand in what we eat and when we eat it. Cold storage even gave manufacturers power over how much we pay for our food. When U. S. food prices rose dramatically in 1910-11, many argued that cold storage was the culprit -- now that producers and marketers had the power to keep meat, eggs and produce "fresher" for extended periods, it was argued, they could manipulate the laws of supply and demand to drive up prices. (U. S. lawmakers would eventually step in to regulate the cold storage

industry and how much product manufacturers could stockpile at a given time.)

Then there is the matter of whether refrigeration really does maintain freshness. Answer: It depends. Milk and eggs will stay fresher for longer, but meat and fish might not (especially the latter). As for fruits and vegetables, oftentimes sticking them in cold storage will do more harm than good. According to Freidberg, "refrigeration slows wilting and rot," but "it can damage the flavour, texture and appearance" of vegetables. Same thing goes for many fruits, which are often the most tasty just before they rot.

There are good and bad sides to using a refrigerator. But in a very real sense, the rapid globalization of the food industry from the mid-1800s on has made having a refrigerator at home--not to mention those massive walls of cold storage at the supermarket --a necessity. The food we buy comes from all over the world, partially because we demand greater variety than our great-great-grandparents, but more significantly because the cheapest places to grow produce, milk cows and slaughter chickens are quite often very far away from where those products are eventually consumed. Keeping all that food edible as it crosses land and sea on the way to your dinner table necessarily involves keeping it cold.

There is only one alternative, and it's a throwback to the days before the Monitor Top: Buy local. This might be perfectly plausible for farmers and environmentalists, but for average people, exclusively eating food grown within a 20-kilometre radius of your house is inconvenient and culinarily limiting.

"Nothing is as pure or natural as we'd like," writes Freidberg at the end of Fresh. This is very true -- who wouldn't want a glass of freshly milked milk and a couple of just-hatched eggs in the morning? Alas, those items aren't on the menu.

Refrigeration doesn't mean freshness -- not by a long shot. But at least it allows us to eat the food we want, when we want it. This is, I suppose, the next best thing to slapping a juicy steak cut from a newly slaughtered cow on the grill at supper time.

ygoldstein@nationalpost.com

Barack Obama's radical cousin Prime Minister Raila Odinga of Kenya held meetings with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad this weekend.

Capital News reported:

Kenya and Iran have agreed to establish Specialised Working Groups to accelerate the implementation of signed agreements and memoranda of understanding between the two countries.

These include Economic, Trade and Banking Co-operation, Agricultural and Educational Cooperation, Energy, Oil and Industry Cooperation; and Political, Cultural, Health and Housing Cooperation.

The two countries also underscored the importance of expanding economic, political, cultural and international ties and welcomed the exchange of high-ranking delegations.

The resolutions are part of a joint communiqu? signed by Kenya and Iran to further consolidate and strengthen relations between the two countries. The first vice-president Dr Parviz Davoudi signed on behalf of Iran while Prime Minister Raila Odinga committed Kenya.

Mr Odinga concluded his two-day official visit in Tehran by holding talks with the President of Iran Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

In the meeting, Odinga referred to Ahmadinejad's recent visit to Kenya in February, terming it a new chapter in the two countries' relations.

In 2006 Barack Obama took a trip to Kenya at US taxpayer's expense.
While visiting Kenya as a guest of the government Obama campaigned with opposition leader socialist Raila Odinga, who also happens to be his cousin (says Odinga):

Odinga's party lost the 2007 election in Kenya.
His party claimed the election was rigged in favour of President Mwai Kibaki.

Odinga's thugs then went on a rampage killing hundreds of Kenyans and burning churches. At least 600 people died in rioting after the election and 250,000 were displaced. Odinga was accused of ethnic cleansing during the clashes.

Atlas has more on Odinga's trip.

The Dish was all over yesterday's big story - the assassination of George Tiller by a crazed Christianist. We traced O'Reilly's troubling rhetoric here, here, and here, and readers checked my reaction here. We chronicled the disturbing role of Operation Rescue here, here, and here, and commentary from the far right here, here, here.  A noteworthy voice on the far-right was Robert P. George, who struck the perfect chord. We also aired personal accounts of abortion here and here.

A traumatic Sunday, to say the least. For the right approach to religion, listen to Bob Wright.