text:
When you believe strongly in an idea, how do you shepherd it into being? As senior editor Trent Gilliss explains, sometimes it takes years of perseverance and framing.
Share Episode
Shortened URL
Lawrence Krauss is Foundation Professor in the School of Earth and Space Exploration and Physics Department, and Inaugural Director of the Origins Project at Arizona State University. His books include The Physics of Star Trek and A Universe from Nothing.
Pertinent Posts
Kindred Episodes
About the Image
A woman walking near the world's largest superconducting solenoid magnet, at the European Organization for Nuclear Research's Large Hadron Collider particle accelerator in Geneva.
Episode Sponsor
Share a Reflection
Dr. Krauss reminds me much of
Dr. Krauss reminds me much of a gentleman I knew well as a child. Both are engaging, interesting, and entertaining. And both have the ability to charm people into kindly smiling upon their deep-seated contempt and hatred for a large group of their fellows. Mr. X's racism, fortunately, can now only be smiled upon in the darkest of corners. Dr. Krauss'--a word as handy as 'racism' hasn't come into usage yet, but let's call it a philosophical materialism deeply contemptuous of and aggressive towards religious thought and believers--though, is still smiled upon under the stage lights of all our elite institutions. It's really a shame to see it on this show (though to be fair, Krista did seem somewhat embarrassed at points by Krauss' sneering and attempted to either steer him to other topics or weakly challenge him on his ignorance and prejudice).
Dr. Krauss' perspective on what he actually knows something about was both enlightening and entertaining. Still, though, he is perhaps the worst guest you have ever had on this show.
I must agree. I myself am
I must agree. I myself am somewhere between agnosticism and atheism, but I am sometimes moved to consider spiritual possibility by Krista Tippett's guests. This particular interview was different. Lawrence Krauss has a clearly antagonistic attitude towards the general premise of the whole program. The message "Religion is crap," fails to inspire me.
You choice of words in
You choice of words in describing Dr. Krauss' view on theists says much more about you than an accurate portral of his views, i.e. "deep-seated contempt and hatred for a large group of their fellows". To then equate Dr. Krauss' position on theism as being similar to racism is intellectually dishonest and utterly shameful. Apparently since you are unable to make sound arguments as to why you disagree with Dr. Krauss' positions, you find the need to resort to character assassination and slimy distortions and misrepresentations of his position. This is shameful behavior and I recommend you amend your post to correct it. Please address what Dr. Krauss said in the interview with a reasoned argument and not an emotional attack.
I had little to say about
I had little to say about Krauss' views (other than that they were intelligent, interesting, and well-presented). To boil down my observation: Krauss exhibited a belligerent and closed-minded bigotry that is out of step with the purpose and ethos of On Being. It made for a bad show.
I agree. It was a bad show.
I agree. It was a bad show. He was so interested in badmouthing religion, that it diminished any respect I might have for his opinions on the area he was actually qualified to speak. That he is an atheist doesn't bother me at all. That he spent his time being an anti-theist quickly got very boring and tedious. It seriously diminished his contribution to what makes "On Being" is a show I enjoy. I found his anti-theism to be as boring as people who are anti-atheists. Tell us what IS meaningful to you, and stop attacking what might be meaningful to someone else.
Phil,I do agree with you. I
Phil,I do agree with you. I see a stark contrast between Dr. Krauss' approach and sensitivity to other worldviews than Krista's other guests. There's an edge of underlying hostility and anger toward the spiritually minded that he seems to have no problem showing. His affect is pretentious and haughty. To me there is no separation between the sciences, philosophy and religion. The pursuit of truth and knowledge is our aim. I like your comment "philisophical materialism". There is a lack of honesty and integrity in the scientific community about presumptions and what is truly observable. For example: quarks. We must approach life with humility and openness else we become inaccessible. However, I so greatly admire Krista's grace and trust of her listeners. She doesn't ever need the last word. She trusts us to draw out our own conclusions. What a fantastic example of journalism at it's finest.
I think what he is trying to
I think what he is trying to discover/explain is the process as to how it is that we are dust and to dust we shall return. If everything in the universe is composed of matter; in the biblical sense what we know as dust. Scientifically, how and why does this occur in the universe? Krista kept pushing on the question of origin; so if we originate from dust/matter and we and everything else in the universe becomes a form of life and death only to start the process again. Why do we think as humans that we are so unique if we have/are a source of matter in all of its different stages? Does origin really matter and how can we not love one another and the universe knowing that is part of oneself. Surely, we speak of things we do not understand, things too wonderful for us to know.
I would not discount him as a crazy Galileo. I think he is on to something, perhaps and appreciation and more diplomatic approach towards the beliefs and views or interpretations of different religions trying to understand the complexities of our universe would serve him better. Great shows Krista, please keep doing what you are doing, I love your work.
Great show! There was no
Great show! There was no 'choir' here. It seems that everyone was challenged including the guest and the host. I loved the way you ended the program, Krista. Thank you for your willingness to take real risks.
What a wonderful program! I'm
What a wonderful program! I'm glad to see that Dr. Krauss was allowed to actually share his views about religion. So often in the media, any criticism of religious viewpoints about existence and meaning are stifled by the host or another guest as being intolerant or blasphemous.
The host seemed genuinely perplexed by the idea that science can have anything meaningful to say about existential questions.
Dr. Krauss made a good point when he said that "The knowledge that the meaning we have is the meaning we make should inspire us to do better. Every single thing that religion provides, rationality, empiricism, and science can provide. And not only that — they can provide it better."
The late philosopher Paul Kurtz explained this viewpoint further in his 'Affirmations of Humanism' () when he wrote that secular humanists "are committed to the application of reason and science to the understanding of the universe and to the solving of human problems."
I agree with what Penn Jillette once said on NPR's Morning Edition when he explained that not believing God means that "all the suffering in the world isn't caused by an omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent force that isn't bothered to help or is just testing us, but rather something we all may be able to help others with in the future. No God means the possibility of less suffering in the future. Believing there is no God gives me more room for belief in family, people, love, truth, beauty, sex, Jell-O and all the other things I can prove and that make this life the best life I will ever have."
I and many other human beings, including Dr. Kruass, if I'm not mistaken, embrace secular humanism as Paul Kurtz defined it, not only because much of that philosophy agrees with many wise ideas about living a good and fulfilling life but also because many of these ideas are informed by science.
An eloquent professor at Virgina Tech, when responding to an attack on atheists in the aftermath of the 2007 shooting, said "We atheists do not believe in gods, or angels, or demons, or souls that endure, or a meeting place after all is said and done where more can be said and done and the point of it all revealed. We don't believe in the possibility of redemption after our lives, but the necessity of compassion in our lives. We believe in people, in their joys and pains, in their good ideas and their wit and wisdom. We believe in human rights and dignity, and we know what it is for those to be trampled on by brutes and vandals. We may believe that the universe is pitilessly indifferent but we know that friends and strangers alike most certainly are not. We despise atrocity, not because a god tells us that it is wrong, but because if not massacre then nothing could be wrong."
It was also implied by the host that science has nothing to say about spirituality but as Kruass stated, "Spirituality isn't having the answers before you ask the questions. . . Real spirituality comes from asking the questions and opening your mind to what the answers might be."
One does not have to believe in an afterlife to find meaning in life or death.
Another meaningfull quote about spirituality and science comes from Michael Scott Earl's 'The Spiritual Atheist.' ()
"Spirituality is that dimension of the human experience arising from ones relationship with reality. Scientific exploration enhances our relationship with reality by simply introducing us to more of it. The vastness and beauty of our universe is just one of the more spectacular examples."
An open letter to NASA, ESA &
An open letter to NASA, ESA & CERN.
The paradigm of physics adopted by NASA, ESA & CERN has been shown to be fundamentally incorrect & baseless through published scientific article "Experimental & Theoretical Evidences of Fallacy of Space-time Concept and Actual State of Existence of the Physical Universe' (www.indjst.org; March2012) available at and consequently openly challenged & the open challenge is available at and also at .
Are not you under moral obligation to accept the challenge before proceeding any further with wastage of public money on the name of research?
I enjoyed hearing the show
I enjoyed hearing the show and listened to it twice so I could catch what Dr Krauss was talking about, he is a very fast talker. It was interesting but I feel he was a bit full of himself and seemed to love the word I. Thanks for keeping the show in line Kista, you are a master at that.
Rose nicely captures my own
Rose nicely captures my own experience of listening to Dr. Krauss. He's a "poster-child" for unadulterated ego.
I listen to OnBeing (usually
I listen to On Being (usually the full interviews) to hear from individuals who inspire me, who exemplify compassion, self-awareness, humility, and wisdom. Whether people interviewed are religious, atheist, or agnostic, I learn volumes from them and their ways of being in the world. Unfortunately, this guest was different--though I agreed with much of the content of what he said. He insisted on relentlessly caricaturing people of faith. Such a dynamic toward the other is the core of prejudice and bigotry, and the opposite of what I would want to emulate myself, or see emulated in others. I have to say, the impression this interview gave me was of a huge ego on a stage. Krauss' scientific knowledge and insights are fascinating. Yet I have appreciated learning from other scientists who disseminate knowledge and encourage questioning and discovery without the belligerent subtext and without characterizations lacking nuance. I am a fan both of On Being and of Ms. Tippett and have listened to essentially every interview in the archive.
Could you give us some
Could you give us some examples of professor Krauss' "relentlessly caricaturing people of faith" , "belligerent subtext" and "characterizations lacking nuance"? Making such accusations without presenting any evidence makes you appear to be caricaturing him i.e. engaging in prejudice and bigotry -the opposite of what you just got done claiming you would want to emulate yourself.
Thank you.
Unfortunately, he dismisses
Unfortunately, he dismisses as childish and meaningless the most important question of all, the question of mystics, poets, and the program On Being: "why?" I was enthralled listening to the buildup to the spiritual aspect of the discussion....and disappointed to find there's nothing there. Not even dark energy. I much prefer the universe to the empty void that the last minute of this show revealed in him. And I think Krista did a fantastic job of removing, brick by brick, the curtan wall he had erected to try and hide this....just enough for us to see there's nothing there. He is proof that we desperately need the poets and mystics like Heschel...and Krista Tippet.
He did not dismiss the
He did not dismiss the questions of why. He said the question of why makes an assumption that is not justified. There may be no reason for the the existence of the universe but simply a "how" the universe came into existence. The mystics, poets and theologians can invent any story they want as they are not constrained to provide any evidence for their stories. If their inventions give you solace, fine. But don't criticize scientists like Dr' Krauss because they wont play along with your need for emotionally satisfying stories that supposedly answer the why question. YOU desperately need the mystics and poets. I am quite fine to live in the real world and able to face reality with out the make believe of the mystics and poets.
If science has indeed won the
If science has indeed won the meaning tussle, why does Dr. Krauss have such an evidently large chip on his shoulder? Regarding novels by Joyce or paintings by Picasso, and the purported consensus regarding their intrinsic value; wouldn't that be nice if it were actually so?
Fascinating show. Loved the
Fascinating show. Loved the challenge and debate; even though I am a regular listener, I sometimes get frustrated by the lack of debate between Krista and her guests; esp. if they are "religious" or "spiritual", she too often takes them at their word. I was disturbed by Krauss's manners and absolute need to always be right and jump in and interrupt which doesn't do justice to his arguments, or his often naive faith in scientism. All of that aside, it was also refreshing to hear an atheist actually be allowed to speak; too often, atheist voices are shut down, ridiculed, and vilified, and religious/spiritual voices are given a free pass.
Dr. Kraus sounds like a
Dr. Kraus sounds like a theologian to me. He has more faith in mystery than other types of belief systems, of which his is just another religion. Religions, science included, are man made systems and are both inadequate. Spirituality exists before and without both of them. The argument between science and religion is silly and endless. Looking.for answers from man's insufficient position in the universe is the blind leading the blind
The bible is a word ship for
The bible is a word ship for exploring the inner universe that binds us all. Science will always leave the inner truths unanswered The brain is matter and mind is the dark energy.
I think we all provide
I think we all provide conduits not only for the ideas but also for the conflicts of our era. One pervasive (and very traditional) conflict in this era is the "us-versus-them" standoff between people who espouse one coherent story of existence and people who resist having such a story imposed. Both positions become reflexive. Thanks to Ms. Tippett for (as always) her consistent focus and care as an interviewer, and to Dr. Krauss for both acknowledging and reining in the passion that underlies inquiry and wonder. The conversation in this installment is enlightening both for its content and its honest struggle to step outside the traditional "science-versus-religion" frame of reference. I think that struggle will always be with us, but so will the common ground that lies beyond it: a humble respect for mystery.
Thanks for your conversation
Thanks for your conversation with Dr. Krauss. He is a highly intelligent man and I appreciated his insight, even though he (like a great deal of the scientific community) left me vexed. I am a man of faith, and the offhand arrogance that comes across as enlightenment that seeks to dampen those with spiritual pursuits denies that those very beliefs have shaped them as well, like it or not.
Let me explain. We will divorce, for a moment, the thought of "is God real" and go with the notion that "god" is a man-made concept. Yes, from a certain perspective it would be the rationalization of "bronze age thinking in understanding the universe," but this concept also assisted in maintaining the species. At some point in our evolution there needed to be that divergence that elevated humans higher than the animals. The animals procreate and the animals kill. That's natural. That's instinct. Humans needed to make that leap. Why? Because unlike the animals, we had the capacity to think our way through our instinct.
Example: a wildcat kills a gazelle for the pride to feed. They are hungry, they kill, they eat. They do not kill all the gazelle, just enough to feed. Humans, on the other hand, have the capacity to see full townships, full regions of people as "enemies." We think our way into believing it would be best that their entire pack be destroyed, not just individuals. History shows this to be true. If that is the case, then there would be no reason for the opposing townships not to believe the same. In the end, the species would kill itself off (or come very close to it) because the animalistic and humanistic tendencies would be in conflict.
God as a concept presents a fail-safe for the species. It is an outside force that sates "thou shalt not kill," theoretically impartial to one township over another. Because it is not just another human saying "I think thou shalt not kill" it is an edict over all. Without that, if it was just one "peacenik" saying you, that peacenik gets eliminated to further achieve the political goal. In a sense, the conceptual "god" has for centuries presented a reason to behave and not kill off our own with impunity.
Of course, we all all know of examples, even in the 21st Century, where that fail-safe has been superseded, but one cannot correct all the animalistic thought processes out there.
It is this notion of a heaven and hell, a god, or otherwise overseer of right and wrong that is separate from us that has fundamentally shaped our decision-making concepts over the ages; even among atheists. The idea that humans are above wouldn't exist without the conditioning experienced and integrated over time. Now, does that mean that science cannot explain away god? Not necessarily. But to claim out of hand that it was all just baseless fables for children, even though our race probably depended on it to keep us from killing ourselves into extinction, is to be short-sightedly dismissive.
I have my beliefs because I have felt things that I cannot explain through the rational. I can only square the circle through mystery. I will either have my suspicions confirmed one day, or I'll be dead and it just won't matter. But I am more likely to see a natural end than if the entire human race was conditioned to believe that there was no outside governance that forbade wiping us out with no consequences. It's just a thought.
I like the fact that you use
I like the fact that you use conditioning, the process of rewards and punishments to change a behavior and relate it to religion. I am not convinced that god exists for all species and without god people would be in chaos. I open doors and have morality and think everything religious was invented by a person at some time. Not, discovered by the chosen and forced upon polytheists. If so why are their different religions. And why do some not have god or some have several gods. Also, where in the universe is heaven? Is it above Earth, out by Pluto, the Milky Way. Is hell in the Sun, or in the rocks of the Earth? I am glad though that the idea of faith is what makes you think that you are a good person, however, it is not the only reason people are good. So if people don't kill, its because of God? What about the people who do kill? Did they not get enough God? And if Goid is there why would he allow a bunch of murders to occur in his name, crusades and such?
In Howard Gardner's model of
In Howard Gardner's model of Multiple Intelligences, he accepts a category that he called "Existential Intelligence" that others prefer to call "Spiritual Intelligence."
I suppose if neither of those labels existed, and someone asked me to come up with a name for it, I'd propose to call it Systems Intelligence.
Existential Intelligence | Wikipedia
Some proponents of multiple intelligence theory proposed spiritual or religious intelligence as a possible additional type. Gardner did not want to commit to a spiritual intelligence, but suggested that an "existential" intelligence may be a useful construct. The hypothesis of an existential intelligence has been further explored by educational researchers.
I am one of those educational researchers who, in the process of studying the interplay of emotions and learning, finds that emotions associated with spiritual states are a significant factor in the learning process.
just because something is
just because something is significant, doesn't mean that it is real. I have a hard time believing that without god, (me for example) people wouldn't feel. I just don't feel any positive emotions towards faith. So I ask, do I have existential intelligence? Or does one have to be a believer to have this type of intelligence.
I was taken by Krauss'
I was taken by Krauss' suggestion that in our culture, we often give up too soon when we are stumped by life's probing questions, especially when it comes to science. I also enjoyed how he handled her questions about religion and spirituality..and even though he cut her off (he seemed passionate about the subject) he got me with his assertion that real spirituality is asking the questions and being open to the possibilities. I agree. We don't have to have all the answers about science or religion, but does this mean we shouldn't share ideas and be open to the possibility that each side has something valuable to add to the discussion, and that answers can come from the most unlikely places....if they come at all.
In response to Mr Krauss's
In response to Mr Krauss's question "What's the point?" after Ms. Tippett quoted a rabbi, I would say religions provide a basis for community.
I believe Jesus was an
I believe Jesus was an atheist who revered our father (God as natural law, cause and effect, logic, truth). I believe he was a determinist, egalitarian and utopian ideologist who espoused that revering truth's revelations coupled with faith in love (economic and interacting system of doing as we wish others would do in our situations without ulterior motives such as prestige and pay) was the way to heaven on earth.
If one has to find their own
If one has to find their own meaning, then we live more fully, aware that we have no other chance. I do think Judea/Christian religions have a tendency to dull that "lust" for life. I also wonder if we wouldn't appreciate life more and work harder to make it wonderful for all. Probably neither atheism or religion would change a particular individuals lust for power, but I wonder if there wouldn't be more overall respect for life if we weren't relying on a spiritual Being to make sense of hardship or to provide a hereafter.
I don't think this negates the meaning that spiritual traditions could hold. I think it all depends on interpretation.
about time for a real
about time for a real conversation on a Sunday morning. Well played.
Your guest constantly
Your guest constantly contradicts himself, often over-reaches and then draws back (or vise-versa). He is a provacateur, which is fine, but his disjointed monologues,his unnecessary cheap shots, his straw-dogging of religion, conflating religion with theology (as if either is a singular) make it nearly impossible to follow whatever point he wants to make. He makes one half-cohernt criticism of faith. I wish he would have stayed at that criticism, fleshed it out, explained it, and addressed rational objections (there are some, afterall). I will read his most recent book in the hope that it is more coherent, balanced, and rational than what appears in the radio program as rather thoughtless and impolite zealotry.
He conflicts and or dismisses the question of "Why" with "How," he (rightly) notes that science is about data collection and that questions are more interesting than answers and then says it can answer theological questions better than theology. His most grave mistake is an ancient one: asssuming that "natural philosophy" can address questions unique to rational people. Human existance, for example, is not reducible to evolution, however sublime that science is at describing what happens in nature. I'd love to hear him explain and justify his reductionism. He was, if I may add, most elouqent when he demonstrated his inability to explain what he understands 'love' to be.
If science has indeed won the
If science has indeed won the meaning tussle, why does Dr. Krauss have such an evidently large chip on his shoulder? Regarding novels by Joyce or paintings by Picasso, and the purported consensus regarding their intrinsic value; wouldn't that be nice if it were actually so?
I am truly a little stunned
I am truly a little stunned about how closed minded Dr. Krauss is toward any views other than his own. He simply attacks (loudly as if he is hurrying to bury any thought or discussion). Quite frankly, I don't find anything very interesting or intellectually challenging about his points. I am certainly not a religious person, but there are questions that are worthy of discussion. Kant long ago made the convincing point that there are things outside of our ability to understand - with or without science. As Pascal said many years ago: "If one subjects everything to reason our religion will lose its mystery and its supernatural character. If one offends the principles of reason our religion will be absurd and ridiculous....There are two equally dangerous extremes, to shut reason out and to let nothing else in." (21,xix) from Pascal in Pensees. I feel like i listened to a constant whining about letting nothing else in.
Dear Krista:
Dear Krista:
I thought your show with Dr. Krauss was wonderful. More than any guest in recent memory he captures my point of view. His enthusiasm can be intimidating, but I share it. The only quibble I have is with his answer to your question about what science can give to the person who is dying. It was, I suspect, a question he hadn't pondered much but if he had I believe he might have said that neither religion or science can give much to the dying. My experience is that the dying need the presence and touch of the living, especially family and friends, or empathetic good Samaritans. It is a conceit of both religion and science that the dying need either.
I enjoyed this discussion,
I enjoyed this discussion, and more than usual Krista's questions -- though I thought she left Krauss off the hook. I think science beautiful, but, as a biologist, I am often struck by the limitations of scientific inquiry. It seems there is a rule that the more interesting the question, the less likely we are able to study it--this is simply due to the complexity of what humans tend to find interesting. Physics, of course, as the most reduced science, is driven by the quest for simplicity.
But here is my frustration with this discussion. Science is treated like a toy chest, in which various marvels can be taken out and enjoyed, but all in a very nonscientific context. The context for judging science seems to be a vague nativism or mild hedonism: science is great because it makes us feel good, feels us with awe, etc. I agree with all that, but we should be more explicit that these statements only have no real scientific meaning, and that their context is the stuff of philosophy, and perhaps theology. As Max Weber said, rationalism is a means to an end end. Science cannot supply that end.
If there is nothing to all of
If there is nothing to all of life but the things and ideas expressed by Dr. Krauss, I don't know what reason I'd have to stick around for another day. Your guest may some day understand that the enthusiasms that seem so fullfilling to him seem beyond empty to many others. If individuals like Dr. Krauss can find ample satisfaction in the life of the mind, I wish them satisfying lives and do not want to shove any other needs down their throats. However, I would like to tell the good Dr. that he should take his urge to force feed the sawdust that comprises his beliefs to all those who feel the need to reach out beyond them.
I'm very grateful to
I'm very grateful to scientists like Mr. Krauss who discover things about the natural world that help us to understand the natural world and to praise God.
But 'ravings of illiterate peasants'? Really. It's a wonder that someone can call himself educted who knows nothing of the history of religions or theology, no?
When we are caught in the web
When we are caught in the web of pairs of opposites- this makes me happy, that makes me sad- the "me" mode prevents seeing clearly. Resting in between the two could lead to creative resolution of a perceived problem or better yet to creative dissolution. A change in view can allow fear to dissolve.
Krista Tippett's discussion
Krista Tippett's discussion with Lawrence Krauss was uncomfortable partly because he kept interrupting her. Also, it is always difficult to hear someone commit the original sin belligerently. My response is to his haughty description of our earliest believers.
Those ancient "illiterate peasants" were such a blessing to us! While looking up at the stars, down at the flowers and into the eyes of loved ones, they realized this world was a gift. Air, water, night and day were all created so we would have a place to grow physically, mentally and spiritually. Spiritual evolution allowed us to bow our knee and relinquish the position of God back to our Creator. It's a choice. Once we are no longer attempting to be God, we can be forgiven and cared for by the One who is greater than ourselves. The blessing is there, just waiting to be opened. My prayer is that Mr. Krauss evolves spiritually so he can experience the love, joy and peace that have filled believers through the ages. May his head be filled with peace and his heart be filled with love.
Dr. Krauss brings up the
Dr. Krauss brings up the chances of a tea pot orbiting Jupiter. It can't be disproved but it's not likely. Well, lets take the same line of reasoning further. What then are the chances that there is a small rocky planet orbiting a star with 7 billion beings that can contemplate such a question? The odds are even more unlikely, yet here we are. Beware of loaded reasoning on either side of the spectrum.
The difference between the
The difference between the unlikely teapot orbiting Jupiter and the planet with 7 billion people orbiting our sun is that we can find proof of the latter.
Precisely David. Everywhere
Precisely David. Everywhere we look outside of our home there is no evidence of a hospitable planet like ours. There is no evidence of any life. Fermi's paradox is squarely in place... I'd say the odds of our planet is far less likely than that teapot. Yet here we are.
Actually this was proven
Actually this was proven wrong. A number of planets very similar to earth in size and temperature have been discovered.
Having grown up in a
Having grown up in a fundamentalist church, this seemed like a similar fundamentalism of a scientific stripe - the same condescension and derision towards those that disagree and the same hubris. He even spoke at a half-shout like many of the childhood preachers I heard. Neither seem like good news to me.
While I agree with Mr. Krauss
While I agree with Mr. Krauss on just about everything. I don't think his arrogant/combative approach is helpful. Furthermore, he ignores the fact that knowing that nothing you do really matters is - or can be - depressing.
Krista is such a skilled and
Krista is such a skilled and educated interviewer that most of her interviewees respond in kind with compassion and intelligence. I'm sorry to see that Dr. Krauss' vitriol was unable to be moderated, even by Krista. I had to stop the regular podcast 10 minutes in, and won't be listening to the (unfortunately already downloaded) unedited interview.
I know that there are still many scientists out there who will behave much with much more maturity, and I am sure that Krista will be able to find them. I look forward to hearing those interviews!
Recommended reading for
Recommended reading for Lawrence Kraus:
Might just expose him to other ideas regarding his apparent convictions and assumptions as to what " the real world" is.
Fabulous program ... I am so
Fabulous program ... I am so in love with it that I listened to it 5 times.... it is "reason" that breeds compassion, it is reason that displaces mythology and affiliations with arcane cultural practices that keep us wedded to a destructive and myopic zeitgeist.
Bravo! I am a fan.
Dr. Krauss says that "The
Dr. Krauss says that "The knowledge that the meaning we have is the meaning we make should inspire us to do better. Every single thing that religion provides, rationality, empiricism, and science can provide. And not only that — they can provide it better."
And how does science tell us what is "better"?
He lists accomplishments that make us nod in agreement: raising children, providing a livelihood. But unfortunately others find meaning in killing children in a daycare center and planting explosives at a marathon race. Science can describe all those behaviors, quantify them, psychoanalyze them. If we live in a universe with no ultimate purpose, science has no way of saying which way of striving for meaning is "better".
I was intrigued by what Dr.
I was intrigued by what Dr. Krauss had to say concerning his own specific scientific discipline. The knowledge he has and shared does cause one to be prompted to wonder and awe. That having been said, his vitriolic arrogance was in full display when it came to his dogmatic assertions about religion and philosophy. The entire foundation for his unlearned stand was demolished by the woman who simply asked him to give an answer for the origin of love. Obviously stumped, he stumbled back into his argument of making further dogmatic assertions about chemical processes and the like yet with no scientific evidence to support his position.
Also as I listened, I heard him at the beginning be sure to remove the possibility of meaning or reason or purpose by removing the question why from the discussion. Even later on when he inadvertently used the word why, he was quick to correct himself so as to not destroy his own presuppositions. Yet having removed meaning and reason from his own worldview, he constantly used words infused with that which he himself refused to believe. Words like important, should, ought, good , better, right, these all imply a moral imperative that answers the question why and drives the person who uses and believes in them. The question then becomes, if there is no reason or meaning or purpose, why should we even care about what he has to say? He operates in a world infused with purpose and meaning yet having discovered it himself as evidenced by his own use of language, he himself refuses to acknowledge it. That seems to be intellectually dishonest.
Lastly, in this discussion, he himself again acknowledges that there is so much that remains unknown and I assume that he means that he also has not arrived at the state of infinite knowledge. My question would be then, how can he be so arrogantly dogmatic about the existence of God. He, in his atheistic stance, presupposes that he himself has infinite knowledge.
I enjoy reading Krauss. I
I enjoy reading Krauss. I love his Passion, and dare I say his spirituality. I would count myself as a student in this school of wonder and awe. I am thankful that reality is so much more than we can imagine and I am grateful that we possess the gift of speaking nature's language and learning of her beautiful, sublime secrets. Reality truly is more than we could have ever dreamed. To be open to possibility is something my religion, my faith, teaches me. My religion and Krauss' have this in common.
Yes, I said religion, because when Krauss says that meaning is something that we create for ourselves with the love we share he reveals, not a lab report, but a faith. He says science does have something to say to a person on their deathbed and that it is this: there is no afterlife and the meaning of your life is whatever you judge it to be. Krista is correct in pointing out that this claim is a non scientific one.
I sympathize with Krauss. It is understandable to want to turn everything into science as a way of avoiding uncertainty and error but the inescapble truth is that when it comes to the most important events and experiences of our lives, we all act on faith, like it or not. To quote William J Broad, the 2-time Pulitzer Prize winning science writer of the NYTimes who rightly says, "The scientific process is unable to answer the most important questions in life."
There is no escape from the dilemma of being human.
What Krauss said about love was quite inadequate and very disappointing. He is not a neuroscientist or an evolutionary biologist so he claims he cannot speak with authority. But he believes love is largely a matter of chemistry, hormones and psychological projection. I suppose his promise in marriage would then be, so long as these hormones continue at their present levels in my bloodstream and so long as you continue to conform to my ideals I will "love" you. This is a good example of the inadequacy and inability of positivist philosophy (and the reductive religion of scientism) to fully respond to the mystery of the human being. The covenant of marriage does not depend on hormones, otherwise there is no covenant. You cannot promise your blood chemistry.
Krauss also tells us we are more insignificant than we realize. Indeed we are a speck, but the measure of mankind has never been a matter of quantitative size, or mass. Otherwise we had always been eclipsed by every small tree. It is not our size but our rational nature that makes us special. We uniquely recognize (which means to know again) the beauty and order of the cosmos. Without us, the universe would have no one to reveal herself to. Perhaps this alone explains our existence - perhaps the universe was lonely! The beloved needs the lover to share the love. Oops, I didn't mean to bring up the Trinity here, it just slipped out.
Krauss claims to believe that in the grand scheme of things we are just specks of stardust, grit for the universal mill. But what is more precious in this universe than the one speck capable of recognizing her? And surely Krauss does not mean to say that the human is so insignificant that we need not worry about suffering and genocide. Of course not. Surely Krauss knows in his heart that human life is the most precious thing in the universe. Despite what he has said, I believe he knows this.
At any rate, let us agree to be open to the possibility that there is much more to the human and to the cosmos than our little philosophies will allow. Curiosity, wonder, awe, science, religion. What special little specks we are!
I think this is the only time
I think this is the only time I have ever come away from one of Krista's interviews with an active dislike of a guest on the show. Not only did I find Dr. Krauss' eager contempt for religion annoying, but his sexism was on full display as well, as he continually interrupted and talked over Krista.
I've got nothing against atheists--it's the "evangelical atheists" (Krauss, Dawkins, etc.) I find every bit as obnoxious as fundamentalist Christians and Muslims. If you want to hear a conversation with an atheist who makes sense and doesn't have to be a jerk while he's doing it, I recommend Krista's interview with Alain de Botton.
Thank-you for this show. I
Thank-you for this show. I appreciated this impartial examination of the man. I should say I appreciate most the ability to download and re-listen to the man for any inconsistencies. Have to say I found a bunch. No worries for Lawrence, however, his book contracts must have made him a fairly rich man. I worry more for his followers missing out on religious wisdom. Now to read all these comments!
This show really stuck with
This show really stuck with me, and I truly feel it was a very good episode of this fine program. Perhaps the best of the fifteen or so episodes that I have heard.
I, too, was shocked and insulted by Dr. Krauss' provocations (the extent surprised me). I am not an orthodox practitioner of any religion, but am Jewish and am saddened by yet another fine mind of the Jewish people who has lost connection with the tradition.
On further reflection, the problem that I have with Krauss' argument has nothing to do with him personally, nor with anything akin to racism, bigotry or some other inappropriate bias. I felt he made great arguments. My problem is that I wanted to argue with him and I felt powerless to interject (because I truly was!).
To me, this is a sign of a great program, not a bad one.
For the record, my argument, after weeks of thought, is that Dr. Krauss does not engage with the essential concept of community that fosters both religion and science. After all, his love of science would have no place in a society that lacks an organized scientific community, as would someone's practice of anything resembling organized religion.
He makes reference to debates and bets he has with his friends in the scientific community, and clearly he gets tremendous value out of the sharing of scientific values and ideas. Importantly, religion has provided this service for a very long time, and people greatly value it. Some recognition of the value he gets not from science but from the community of scientists, would help reflect an appreciation for the value of religion to people.
More to the point, the uncertainty that Krauss implores us to celebrate provokes real sensations of anxiety and distress in people (not all people, but I would argue many). These feelings can cloud judgment and inhibit the ability to perform even scientific action.
It is hardly unscientific to have personal or shared explanations of the world that are not in accord with scientific consensus. It may be proven false by science, but that does not preclude an appreciation for and use of science.
It would be unscientific to present religion as science, or to use religion to silence or deny the validity of well-practiced science. I would argue on behalf of Mr. Krauss against such evidence-denying orthodoxy. But to me, this is not the norm of religiously engaged people that I know.
I don't think science precludes the use of metaphor, allegory or even myth.
It simply means that those explanations, when taken literally, will become increasingly burdensome to argue as science's explanations gain evidentiary support.
"One of the values of science
"One of the values of science is to make us uncomfortable. Somehow that's supposed to be a bad thing for many people, being uncomfortable. Being uncomfortable is a good thing because it forces you to reassess your place in the cosmos. And being too comfortable means you've become complacent and you stop thinking. So being uncomfortable should be a spiritually uplifting experience."
-Lawrence Krauss
This was one of my favorite On Being broadcasts that I have ever listened to. It could have been the fact that Dr. Krauss is a very entertaining speaker, and that many of my views align with his, but nonetheless very interesting interview that touches on various subjects including Star Trek which he is an avid fan. Lawrence Krauss is Foundation Professor in the School of Earth and Space Exploration and Physics Department, and Inaugural Director of the Origins Project at Arizona State University. From what I ascertained he is an atheist, or agnostic, but he seems to have a respect for religion and it's place in the world.
"Spirituality isn't having the answers before you ask the questions. . . Real spirituality comes from asking the questions and opening your mind to what the answers might be."
He says here what I have been trying to say for some time now, and much more elegantly I might add. There is nothing wrong with asking questions about subjects that are controversial in society. Why wouldn't you want to learn and grow in your faith (and any other area of life) by asking questions and reviewing your opinions?
I believe Krista was a little taken aback and could not keep up with the fast, informative way that Dr. Krauss talks. She would usually probe a little deeper in to the minds of her interviewees and ask them questions that make these experts in their fields of study stop and think a little deeper than they are used to, but like I said he talks way too fast and with such enthusiasm that it was probably tough for her.
I listened to this episode
I listened to this episode for no other reason than it was Krauss. I've been reading him since the Physics of Star Trek twenty years ago. In the Youtube era, though, I've heard a number of his lectures which have disillusioned me a bit on his perceived rock star status: as a science educator, I don't consider him to be all that articulate; as a de facto public representative of skepticism, I find him combative and off-putting. Richard Dawkins is another example of a scientist who openly attacks religion, but he is much more eloquent and calculating in his approach. This episode is sadly indicative of Krauss' tendency to resort to snarky asides. It's not always bad: he recently appeared at a debate at a Muslim university in Britain, and upon discovering that the audience had been segregated by gender, he walked out. That's important, but here he's just trying to construct opportunities where he can poke at religion, and that's not constructive.
As far as physics, he's definitely a deserved leader, extremely bright and poised to succeed Hawking as the public's image of "really smart science dude." At his best, Krauss can explain with excitement and passion how the frontiers of science have pushed so far into the extremes of the Universe, and answered so many questions critical to the layman's understanding of everything, that the remaining questions (of which there are impossibly many) can only best be adequately answered with a temporary "I don't know" without the need for "here's where God comes in." He, along with many other popular scientists and reasoners, are proselytizing to a congregation that finds plenty of meaning just in being alive, in experiencing the world, and learning more about it. I feel what some might call the "holy spirit" whenever I see a sunrise or understand an equation, not because I think the experience was meant for me but because I was lucky enough to be a part of such a Universe and witness this little tiny portion of it for an infinitesimal speck of time.
I found this interview to be
I found this interview to be very fascinating, mainly because I've been following him and his works for some time. I've listened to his lecture series "A Universe From Nothing" and many of his other lectures and debates, so it's always a treat to hear him speak.
I really appreciate his views and outlook on life and our understanding of it. I love how he says that science shapes our understanding and perspective of ourselves in the universe, and that's beautiful. The way he speaks, it's as if he views life as an art in our human perspective, and I couldn't agree more. He describes theology as early human's construction to understand the world and science is the final frontier to understanding the world around us. I also agree with this. I see science to be just as beautiful as any religion.
Very interesting talk, very glad I listened. Lawrence has a way of making science appear so transcending, and I love that about him.
A new book argues that the
A new book argues that the root of the conflict between science and religion is the reductive modern understanding of causality—which many scientists are now rejecting.
A new book argues that the
A new book argues that the root of the conflict between science and religion is the reductive modern understanding of causality—which many scientists are now rejecting.
I have listened to Dr Krauss
I have listened to Dr Krauss over the years, and I have appreciated his explanations of scientific phenomena. Lately, his interviews have become unbearable, and this particular one was so bad I had to turn it off half way through. I listen to all of Krista's unedited interviews, and this is the first time I have taken such displeasure in a guest. He was clearly just there to grandstand. He barely listened to her questions or let her finish them, and took every opportunity to get the conversation off the course she was trying to steer him down. He choose a very specific type of simplistic, fundamentalist religious view to argue with and can't see to understand the more sophisticated religious perspectives; to him, science is truth, and that's that. I found him disrespectful and his answers rote--I've heard them all before from Christopher Hitchens (in a MUCH more entertaining way), Richard Dawkins (in an equally annoying way), and Daniel Dennett. Boring and annoying. I felt bad for Krista; how rude he was to her.
I did a google on myself and
I did a google on myself and your named showed up. I do not agree with Lawrence Krauss. I believe in Intelligent design You are entitled to your beliefs that is fine but I am also entitled to my beliefs ultimately it comes down to faith in what you believe. Yes you have a lot of book knowledge but you lack any experience try studying ki or chi for 10 plus years coupled with Calculus which you already have also study IT networks Computer Science and you may open your eyes and gain better understanding of sub-atomic particles and metrics you will come to the understanding Energy is dynamic and Non-Symmetrical Atomic level and below not using constant motion equations with 1 space
The fact that Krista has
The fact that Krista has Atheists on On Being lends validity to her claim to explore, through her podcast, "the big questions at the center of human life." If she only included Theists and the religious, it wouldn't be a valid exploration. Similarly, only including Atheists/Agnostics wouldn't be a valid exploration. Exploring all the ideas helps the listener decide for him/herself what to think and believe.
Bare in mind, this podcast was recorded at a Theology school. They knew what they were doing when they invited a non-religious person to speak there. Krauss sought to challenge the universally religious people present at the podcast, which is valid.
I love science and the human
I love science and the human impulse to learn whether it is qualitative or quantitative ! I was attracted to this dialogue because the image (not sure if intentional) reminded me so much of the Rose Window of Chartres Full circle I suppose.
Lawrence Kraus is very
Lawrence Kraus is very tallented and I have learned much from his lectures. I love science, and DONT reject it at all BUT this atheist rant he gets on does him a diservice, I hope he gets to read this too. Why? Well, I have experience near death just like you read about, with pretty much all that one who has read up on these things would say. Now,if that hadn't happened to me, me and Dr Kraus woiuld be in lock step and accident of existence would surely be my montra too BUT can't do that now. Why? My near death occurred to me when I was very young, age 5. I am now 63 years old and have a good education MS in Electrical Engineering with a love of math and modern phyisics. At age 5, you are not filled up with ideas, god hasn't been introduced yet in school/place of worship, and at that age you pretty much see the world as a dog would (and that might be a streach too). Well what I saw/heard (and I remember every detail of it even now) went something like this. In a mater of a fraction of a second everything appeared to make sense, I was asked by an outside something (do I want to come with it or go back), I was in the presence of something so kind, understanding and in my greatest hour of terror, felt secure and in good hands. This presence I believe to be at a minimum a higher form, perhaps the classic spirit or even the (shall I say) God. Anyway, when this happens to you, you can not say with a straight face that we are an accident, a by product of plasma that turned to molecules then to something more. You are faced with a different logic, one that will not let you go, one that makes you remember that the physical reality of science is simply that, and maybe one day it can do more but when it comes to things beyond mater, dark energy, dark mater or that of this existence, one might make a real big mistake to carry on like Dr Kraus often does. Actually as a man who I have tremendous respect for intellectually, I am rather taken back by his comming into a discussion with pre-determinism (one he often blames believers for). OK I'll stop there, I really like him but it is what it is.


text:
Pain & Fever
Product results for "Pain & Fever"
- Sub-Categories
Reviews2 Stars & up
BrandMagnilife , CVS/pharmacy , BC
insights & solutions
start here
Symptom insights & solutions start here
Minor arthritis
Learn about minor arthritis pain and what you can do about it
Together, these articles from the Arthritis Foundation and product suggestions will give you a good start to coping with arthritis.
Muscle aches
Put muscle aches behind you and get more out of life
Discover products and articles that will show you how to prevent and treat muscle aches, look forward and feel better.
When backache strikes, taking care of it is a priority
As the articles and products presented on this page will show you, there's more than one way to deal with backache.
Joint pain
Get relief from joint pain
Many people suffer from joint pain, but not all joint pain is alike. Learn about joint pain and find products to calm your symptoms.
Headache relief
From chronic headaches to migraines to post-pregnancy headaches, head pain makes life difficult to enjoy. Find out more about headaches and the non-prescription relief that's available.
Every great day begins with pain relief and a good night's sleep
Use the tips and products you'll find on this page to help you get a good night's sleep every night.
Heart health
Concerned about heart health?
Get a better understanding of heart health and find the products you need.
New & trending
Shop by category
Find the products you need
Little one under the weather?
Find insights and products that will help you make them feel better as quickly as possible.
Pain relief information begins here
Learning about your pain is an essential step to properly treating it.
This infographic illustrates how different aspects of your health are affected by and related to pain.
Check out this short overview of nine distinct pain factors, such as genes, age and seven others.
Learn the differences between acute and chronic pain, and why those differences matter.
This brief article and excellent infographic explain how the nervous system controls the way you process and feel pain.
The complex relationship between pain and emotion made easy to understand.
This discussion of the different types of inflammation processing is full of valuable information for most readers.
Check possible interactions
Our drug Interaction checker provides the guidance you need.
CVS Health™ products help you and your family get well and be well.
Quality is our commitment.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
New Markdowns
view full screen
Embraceable Cool Nights
Spotted Toffee Chemise
Style: 3570048746
Out of Stock
In a feline mood, chemise with ruched bodice, feminine lace and a satiny bow. From our Embraceable™ collection featuring the soothingly soft Cool Nights™ knit you've come to love. Pair with our Spotted Toffee PJ Wrap.
- Superior to cotton in softness, our Cool Nights™ breathable knit keeps you cool and dry.
- Stretch knit retains shape and silky drape, even after countless washings.
- Adjustable straps.
- Double-layered, seamed bodice offers gentle lift and support.
- Non-cling.
- Length: 35.5" from shoulder.
- 93% Rayon, 7% Spandex. Machine wash, cold. Imported.
Read more… Read less…


text:
Ziner wrote:Edit: Fuck I brought it back on topic. I prefer Tater Tots to fries any day. Chicago is the only city that regularly has them on the menu.
Tots? What are you, a four year old girl? Thick cut steak fries or sweet potato fries. Everything else is just masturbation.


text:
Our summer-packed January issue is out now - featuring our guide to summer rieslings, strawberries and seafood recipes, as well as a look at the best of Bali.
Subscribe to Australian Gourmet Traveller for just $6 an issue - offer ends 29th January, 2017.
Subscribe to Gourmet Traveller for your iPad or Android tablet.
Beat the queues to Sydney's most sought-after table and join us for a knockout summery lunch at Fred's.
After spending the past 12 months writing books and doing one-off dinners the Australian chef is poised to open an exciting new restaurant in the Middle Eastern capital.
Ben Greeno's long-awaited side-hustle, The Chicken Shop, is opening on Australia Day, right next to The Paddington.
Dedicated to being the best guide to Australia, our latest Chinese-language edition includes a checklist of the country's essential new restaurants, our most beautiful beaches, and much more.
Bjorck describes the food as "European-style," but with "nice fresh Japanese flavours".
Glamour, sophistication and luxury have arrived on the Peninsula, with a crack-team of staff assembled to make it a success.
An Australian dining landmark rises from the ashes: the Stokehouse is back ready to please the crowds for at least another generation to come, writes Michael Harden.
French bistro classics are suddenly hotter on the Queensland dining scene than a bubbling pot-au-feu.
Spend less time cooking and more time relaxing at your next barbecue - these char-grilled meats and vegetables are low on labour but deliver big on juicy and smoky flavours.
Whether it's mixed through black rice pudding with caramelised bananas, shredded on top of mango trifle or toasted and served with coconut jelly, coconut adds tropical touch and fragrance to summer desserts.
We approach an expert on the ground in Turkey for the inside word on the Salt Bae phenomenon. Just how salty is that steak?
An Australian dining landmark rises from the ashes: the Stokehouse is back ready to please the crowds for at least another generation to come, writes Michael Harden.
Here's the story behind it.
There's never a dull moment at ultra-glam, slightly mad Pascale, QT Melbourne's dazzling flagship diner, writes Michael Harden.
New York is overflowing with so many great new places to eat – where to start? Our chief critic, Pat Nourse, checks out the greatest of the latest.
After a year of big name openings, a new Alexandria eatery arrives as a likable - and possibly lovable - local.
Celery heart salad and fried chicken give these tacos an unexpected crunch.
Note Yellow masa flour (also known as masa harina or harina de maíz) is a yellow nixtamalised corn flour. If you don't have a tortilla press, you can use a rolling pin to flatten the tortillas. Yellow masa flour and tortilla presses are available from Mexican food shops including Monterey Mexican Foods.
Featured in
Nov 2012
Sign up for the latest Gourmet news, recipes, restaurants & more
Sign up to receive the latest food, travel and dining news direct from Gourmet Traveller headquarters.×


text:
Ralph Lauren Childrenswear 6-Pack Athletic Sport Socks Girls 4-16
Price $17.00
These cozy ankle socks are crafted from a soft stretch cotton blend with an embroidered signature pony at the cuffs.
- Six pairs of socks
- Ribbed cuffs with an embroidered pony
- Cotton, polyester, spandex
- Machine washable
- Imported
Shipping & Returns
Shipping your purchase is easy on belk.com. Depending on the destination of your package, you can expect it to arrive within 4-7 business days. Shipping Information
Returns are easy on belk.com. Easy returns
Lauren translates the sophisticated luxury of Ralph Lauren womenswear into an affordable wardrobe for every occasion. From timeless essentials with special finishing touches to polished silhouettes with a chic, modern spirit, Lauren maintains an elegant, feminine heritage while making strong seasonal fashion statements.


text:
Hydrangea Petals-Blue & White-26 pk.
About this item
Blue and Whte Hydrangea Petals
Perfect for your wedding, event, resale or individual needs.
Please have someone available to receive and process the flowers on the delivery date.
For further information regarding care and handling please see our Flower Care Guide.
- Due to differences in monitor resolution, color intensity may vary from actual
- Slight shade variations from actual picture may occur
- Each Box contains 16 bags of hydrangea petals
- Each Bag contains approximately 650 to 700 hydrangea petals
- Suggested delivery date of 1 - 2 days before your event
Follow the Care Guidelines Below:
- Unpack the box by taking all the bags out
- Leave petals in the bags until use
- If condensation occurs, open the bags and wipe the condensation off with a paper towel
- Place the bags in a cool dry place or in the refrigerator if the event is not the same day
- Ensure that the petals do not freeze as they will be damaged
- Do not place petals in direct sunlight
Delivery dates and prices fluctuate with seasonal availability and demand.
Since flowers are perishable and affected by weather, please have someone present to receive the flowers between 8 am and 12 noon if you live in a metropolitan area or 8 am to 4:30 pm if you live in a suburban or rural area. This will ensure that your flowers are not left at the doorstep or sent back for next day delivery.
Additionally, shipments may be delayed by weather or other unforeseen circumstances resulting in shipping and/or delivery dates being modified.
Order Cancellation Information :
Please note that all requests to cancel a floral order must be made within 4 business days of the scheduled delivery date of the order.
For questions please contact us at firstname.lastname@example.com
No deliveries to Alaska, Hawaii, or Puerto Rico.
Assembled Country
Assembled Size
40 x 10 x 5
Component Country
Member reviews & questions
Ask & Answer
Policies & plans
Shipping Information
Shipping Information
Standard - 2 to 6 business days
Warranty Information
Sam's Club guarantees timely delivery of fresh, beautiful flowers. If you are not completely satisfied with your product please contact us immediately to request a refund or replacement. Requests for replacements must be received prior to 2:00 pm CST in order to have a replacement order sent out. Replacements will only be provided if the flowers arrive in poor condition. Images will be required for any replacement or refund and must be received within 48 hours after receiving the product. Refunds will not be given for circumstances resulting from negligence. Order cancellation requests must be received at least four days prior to the delivery date. Orders cancelled less than four days before the delivery date will not be refunded. Please call 888-746-7726 Option 3 and speak to a Member Service Representative.


text:
10 Obscure Sites For Great Holiday Shopping
All together, the 38% of American consumers who did their holiday shopping online in 2004 has grown to more than 52% this year, according to surveys from the National Retail Federation. Meanwhile, the percentage of those shunning online shopping has dropped to 16.5% from 23.5% during that span. Free shipping offers and online coupons help, but so do mobile devices that make it easy to place an online order without being tethered to the desk or couch.
The big names still grab the largest slice of the holiday pie, but even small online retailers can find a spot in a stocking or beneath a tree if their wares are worthy enough. The following 10 sites help put some thought back into holiday shopping and give gifts more memorable than a cleaned-out online wish list:


text:
Bushy Park Tennis Courts
Have you been to Bushy Park Tennis Courts?
Make RateMyArea a better place by adding a description or adding a link to this place's website
Your place?
In addition to adding a description of your business, you'll also be able to…
Post special offers, reward your customers
Increase your exposure, get featured on Competitors' Pages
Respond to reviews, customer relationship management made easy!
Enhance your profile, add Opening Hours, Parking Info and a Longer Description
…and much more!


text:
New Markdowns
view full screen
Kimono-Sleeve Tunic Visionary Blue
Style: 1570084079
Out of Stock
This top clearly belongs in the "slip into something more comfortable" category. Draping softly from an empire waist, it has kimono sleeves split to fall open over elbows. We love it over the Perfect Pant Slimming Legging.
- Live. Lounge. Wear. Our collection of luxuriously soft separates.
- Cool, lightweight jersey knit has a lush softness that drapes beautifully.
- Surplice neckline and empire waist. Split kimono sleeve.
- Approximate length: 32.5" from shoulder.
- 95% Rayon, 5% Spandex. Machine wash. Imported.
Read more… Read less…


text:
Ralph Lauren Childrenswear Navy Solid Legging
$13.12 Original Price $17.50
Savings: $4.38 (25%)
- Elasticized waist
- Tapered leg
- Our embroidered pony accents the right hem
- Cotton
- Machine Washable
- Imported
Shipping your purchase is easy on belk.com. Depending on the destination of your package, you can expect it to arrive within 4-7 business days. Shipping Information
Returns are easy on belk.com. Easy returns
Lauren translates the sophisticated luxury of Ralph Lauren womenswear into an affordable wardrobe for every occasion. From timeless essentials with special finishing touches to polished silhouettes with a chic, modern spirit, Lauren maintains an elegant, feminine heritage while making strong seasonal fashion statements.
More from: Ralph Lauren Childrenswear


text:
Live Webcasts
CPSC staff held a workshop on aspects of the Commission's proposed rule on Certificates of Compliance, which the Commission published on May 13, 2013.
CPSC staff held a workshop on aspects of the Commission's proposed rule on Certificates of Compliance, which the Commission published on May 13, 2013.
In this edition of Recall Roundup: Ace Bayou recalls bean bag chairs, Brita recalls kids' water bottles, and Dream On Me recalls high chairs.
CPSC staff briefs Commissioners on the Safety Standard for Magnet Sets - Final Rule.
This month on Recall Roundup, Buckyballs and Buckycubes are being recalled and Star Networks USA is recalling Magnicubes.
CPSC Commissioners hear stakeholder presentations concerning the Commission's agenda and priorities for fiscal years 2015 and 2016.
Alert! Middle school students wanted! Create a cool poster. Warn people about dangers of poisonous carbon monoxide (CO). Stop the invisible killer! Save lives! Win prize money!
CPSC staff briefs Commissioners on Infant Sling Carriers - Proposed Rule (Section 104)
CPSC hosted forum focused on technological means of reducing the risk of carbon monoxide (CO) exposure from vented gas heating appliances under a variety of conditions.
The link you selected is for a destination outside of the Federal Government. CPSC does not control this external site or its privacy policy and cannot attest to the accuracy of the information it contains. You may wish to review the privacy policy of the external site as its information collection practices may differ from ours. Linking to this external site does not constitute an endorsement of the site or the information it contains by CPSC or any of its employees.
Click Ok if you wish to continue to the website; otherwise, click Cancel to return to our site.


text:
Hancock, New Hampshire Military Lawyers
John Kalled
Ossipee, NH Military Law Attorney.
(603) 539-2218Albany Law SchoolUniversity of New HampshirePresident's Award, President's Award and Martindale-HubbellLaw Offices of Charles E. Snow, PC, American Bar Association...
The LII Lawyer Directory contains lawyers who have claimed their profiles and are actively seeking clients. Find more Hancock, New Hampshire Military Lawyers in the Justia Legal Services and Lawyers Directory which includes profiles of more than one million lawyers licensed to practice in the United States, in addition to profiles of legal aid, pro bono and legal service organizations.


text:
Basset Hound
Basic Basset Hound Information
- Lifespan: 12 - 15 years
- Height: 14 - 14 inches
- Weight: 40 - 60 pounds
Medical Conditions Seen in Basset Hounds
- Intervertebral Disk Disease
- Glaucoma
- Hip Dysplasia
- Von Willebrand's Disease
- Cherry Eye
- Panosteitis
- Seborrhea
- Ectropion
- Otitis Externa
- Atopy
- Bassett Hound Thrombathia
- Cataracts
- Cervical Vertebral Instability (Wobbler's Syndrome)
- Combined Immunodeficiency
- Elbow Dysplasia
- Entropion
- Gastric Dilation and Volvulus
- Hypothyroidism
- Patellar Luxation
- Pododermatitis
- Progressive Retinal Atrophy
- Ventricular Septal Defect
Basset Hound Traits
- Jogging Partner
- Lap Dog
- Good with Children
- Warm Weather
- Cold Weather
- Grooming Requirements
- Shedding
- Barking
- Ease of Training
Basset Hound History
- The word Basset comes from the French "bas," which means low thing or dwarf.
- Basset dogs were mentioned in the 1500s, but it's not known if these were the same dogs we know as basset hounds. That's because it's not known when the name began to refer to a breed, rather than to any dwarf dog. This makes tracing the basset hound's history difficult.
- Short-legged dogs were often used to hunt rabbits in situations where the hunter needed to follow on foot, such as through thick cover or if a horse was not available.
- After the French Revolution in the late 1700s, many commoners took up hunting. They needed a dog with a good nose and a slow pace because they often did not have a horse to ride. Not only could the hunter follow on foot, but it was easier to shoot game that wasn't fleeing at top speed.
- Four different versions of short-legged hounds emerged, with the basset artesien Normand the most like the basset hound.
- Crosses with bloodhounds were made in the late 1800s to increase size.
- The first bassets came to England and America in the late 1800s. The AKC recognized the breed in 1911.
- In 1928, a basset bound appeared on the cover of Time magazine, bringing the breed to the people's notice.
- The breed's most well-known example is the Hush Puppy dog. Basset hounds have also been prominently featured in several cartoons such as Fred Basset and Droopy Dog.
Basset Hound Behavior Concerns
- Makes an easygoing and amiable companion.
- Good with children, but its independent nature and low energy level may be frustrating for children at times.
- Friendly to indifferent toward strangers.
- Good with other dogs and pets.
- Likes to follow its nose, tends to wander, and does not come when called.
- Likes to hunt.
- Often barks and bays loudly.
- Tends to be stubborn and methodical. Does best with reward-based training involving food.
Basset Hound Suggested Exercises
- Makes a calm and reliable housedog.
- Although many of its physical exercise needs can be met with backyard games, it prefers to walk and sniff and explore.
- Care must be taken if allowed off leash because the basset hound tends to get caught up in following scent trails, and it's not overly obedient when it comes to returning.
- Bassets tend to do well at dog parks.
- Does best in moderate climates.
Basset Hound Grooming
- Coat is short, thick and tight.
- Brushing once a week will remove dead hair.
- Shedding is average.
- The mouth and wrinkles should be examined, cleaned and dried regularly.
Suggested Basset Hound Nutritional Needs
- Bassets have a tendency to become obese.
- Adult dogs should be fed a balanced diet, with restricted calories if the dog starts to gain too much weight.
- Puppies should be fed a large-breed growth food, which slows their growing rate but not final size. This may decrease the incidence or severity of hip dysplasia in adults.
Did you know?
- Grapes and raisins are harmful to dogs.
- Some dog parasites are transferable to humans.
- Many common pet ailments may be detected early and prevented by visiting your veterinarian twice yearly - saving both time, money, and most importantly, ensuring the best quality of life for your dog.
Come visit us, we would love to see you!
We are here to help! Book an appointment today to continue your pet on a path to great health and wellness
Ask the Vet
Have unanswered pet health questions? Dr.Donna Spector, with 10+ years of hands-on Internal Medicine experience, is here with your answers every Friday.


text:
Skip to comments.Glyphosate ("Roundup") Responsible for Modern Human Diseases
Posted on 04/26/2013 11:32:02 PM PDT by Renfield
Abstract: Glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup®, is the most popular herbicide used worldwide. The industry asserts it is minimally toxic to humans, but here we argue otherwise. Residues are found in the main foods of the Western diet, comprised primarily of sugar, corn, soy and wheat. Glyphosate's inhibition of cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzymes is an overlooked component of its toxicity to mammals. CYP enzymes play crucial roles in biology, one of which is to detoxify xenobiotics. Thus, glyphosate enhances the damaging effects of other food borne chemical residues and environmental toxins. Negative impact on the body is insidious and manifests slowly over time as inflammation damages cellular systems throughout the body. Here, we show how interference with CYP enzymes acts synergistically with disruption of the biosynthesis of aromatic amino acids by gut bacteria, as well as impairment in serum sulfate transport. Consequences are most of the diseases and conditions associated with a Western diet, which include gastrointestinal disorders, obesity, diabetes, heart disease, depression, autism, infertility, cancer and Alzheimers disease. We explain the documented effects of glyphosate and its ability to induce disease, and we show that glyphosate is the textbook example of exogenous semiotic entropy: the disruption of homeostasis by environmental toxins...
(Excerpt) Read more at mdpi.com ...
Two enviro weinies from Chicken Little U. One even has the tag of quack on the web......
Ping... (not an endorsement of findings, just advising you all of the article).
I'm all for using cane sugar.
Left out earthquakes, bad breath, global warming, and liberalism.
This is demonology, not science.
And yet people, even conservatives like rush Limbaugh, much organic as if its something stupid. There are probably some pesticides even in organic foods, but a heck of a lot less!!
Anyone with a great lawn is also in danger. My dad used to walk around shooting roundup. Now he has severe alzheimers.
Take this seriously, people.
I meant to say "mock" organics.
Keep pesticides out of your body as much as possible.
"Left out earthquakes, bad breath, global warming, and liberalism. This is demonology, not science."
Science has reached the point where we can find a single molecule of something if you look hard enough. What we don't know is whether it would have been there in 1918 or 1227. Our bodies are so large compared with the usually insignificant amounts of man made materials that the materials would most likely never have an effect. Also, our bodies are marvelously self-repairing.
These guys would probably have us ban everything man made. When I pointed out to a liberal that banning DDT had led to the deaths of a billion people (through the spread of insect born disease) he said, "Good. It's better for the planet that they died." That was my final conversation with him. Life is too short to converse with people who want us all to live in the Stone Age for the good of the planet.
This is, of course, why humans continue to liver longer, one of the few purely objective standards of changes in health we have.
It's worse than that. My dad used to eat organic carrots, and he died of Alzheimer's. Take this seriously!
My dad sprayed Roundup by the tractor-load, ate carrots, and is still living and as sharp as a tack (not to mention his eyesight and flies die when they land on him)!
PS Take this seriously!
I read the whole thing. I did not intend to do that this early in the morning.
After looking at the credentials of the authors and looking up the definition/meaning of the term "biosemiotics", heretofore not in my lexicon, I thought that this was going to be environmentalist wacko crap, pure BS.
I speak with authority as one who has joyfully sprayed gallons of Roundup over everything green that I wanted to be dead and gone. So an attack on my favorite herbicide was worth examining.
Still, there are unexplained things going on, such as the literal explosion in autism, c-diff infections, bee colony collapse, etc., so I plowed on. By page 15, they had my attention.
They had a tough case to make, over a tremendously broad spectrum of variables, but they did a good job. They tied numerous tendrils of unexplained smoke together to raise the legitimate issue of fire.
The authors are not demanding that glyphosate be banned, but they do make a compelling case that many of the biologically negative things going on may have this common link and it should be examined for causation.
I agree. I also may rethink my skepticism over organically grown food.
Nice recap - thanks Ron.
Sorry but I agree with this article. I do eat organic & all beef I consume is grass-fed, as well as only wild-caught seafood. And I avoid GMOs. If that put my 'conservatism' in question in your mind then that's your problem & not mine.
I've been a nurse for 16 years. The amount of resistant infections as well as the increase in congenital syndromes as well as autism is remarkably on the rise. I've seen it with my own eyes.
I think you meant "take this seriesly."
And, BTW, it's hugh.
It would never occur to the idiot researchers that the main Western DIET (the sugar, corn, soy, and wheat) is responsible for many human diseases.....
I skimmed over the article, and saw little of substance there.
Importantly, I did not see that the author's backgrounds qualify them to write a supposedly scholarly article on a biological subject. I have no idea what an "independent scientist and consultant" is, and I can guarantee that no one trained in computer science and artificial intelligence has any in-depth understanding of life sciences or the complex interactions of an organism with its environment.
They made a lot of assertions, none of which are backed up by experimental evidence. Despite a bucket load of references (nearly 300), they omitted any reference that supported their underlying assumptions. Their most glaring (and false) underlying assumption is that toxicity at high doses can be extrapolated down to toxicity at low doses. That is utterly untrue. No one consumes glyphosate at the quantities tested in toxicology studies. Glyphosate also breaks down fairly rapidly in the environment—it does not accumulate anywhere. The main source of toxic exposures would be among people who apply it to crops—and they should be wearing protective equipment to prevent exposure.
Some of their other assertions also show their glaring lack of life sciences education. Trying to tie glyphosate to every bad thing under the sun, especially in situations where a causative factor is already well-known, is not good science. If you want to tie glyphosate exposure at any level to an adverse outcome, you need to actually conduct a study to establish a causative relationship. Their linking glyphosate usage to C. difficile infection, and then going from there to autism is just plain torturous. It would be a beautiful example of "correlation does not equal causation", except that they don't even establish a very good correlation. Yes, autism is linked to gastrointestinal problems—but the most likely explanation for that is that the genetic abnormalities in the metabolic pathways that cause autism also cause intestinal defects. Autism behaves very much like a genetic disease, most likely controlled through the synergy of several genes. It's going to take real scientists a while to figure it all out—they're making progress, but science never works as fast as pseudoscience.
Anyway, that article is way too long to go through and criticize point-by-point, and reading all of their references to see what the references actually say is way more work than I care to do for the purpose of making a forum post.
Many orchard owners have noticed a decline in tree health after several years of using roundup to control weeds. It does build up in the soil contrary to Monsanto's claims. To deny this chemical's potential problems based on a religious type presupposition is just foolish.
This article was not written by researchers. It was written by two people who do not have any life sciences education whatsoever, who tried to link glyphosate to every bad thing under the sun (okay, I exaggerate a bit) without conducting a single experiment to support their assertions. Although this article is labeled as a review, I cannot even call it that. A review article merely compiles the known information on a specific subject. It is not a collection of extrapolations as this piece is.
Voila, your typical drainage system or runoff ditch that empties into a local river, stream or lake.........
With all that crap, I can't help but think that many illnesses just might be caused by these combined agents.........
In other words, all known illnesses are caused by glyphosphates. Not buying it. But if glyphosphates are attacked that would also be a back door attack on genetically modified seed.
I just used Roundup myself yesterday...in my garden.
Well worth examining: we have an astounding increase in autism and there is some causative factor - and this could be one of the keys.
OK. I am not so familiar with research articles and how they're written as to spot one that is not genuine.
It sounds so much like the Alar stuff, and DDT before that.
Now, mind you, I do have a problem with food companies trying to breed Round-Up resistant produce for human consumption so they can use Round up on the plants and not have them die. I don't relish the idea of eating something that has been sprayed THAT much.
HOWEVER, I certainly think the danger is overblown.
The problem is, if someone reads the Gospels at all, one can immediately see that there was no shortage of people for Jesus to heal of any number of various diseases. If the organic food people were correct in their idolization of organic foods, then theoretically, those people in Jesus' day should have been healthy as all get out. They certainly ate an all natural, no additive, high fiber, organic diet.
And they weren't.
There is no one cause for most human disease, although diet can be a contributing factor.
Just 3~4 years ago, every one out of 5 papers (it seemed) was blaming the florination process as our most toxic and carcinogenic compound, and tied to real (or imagined) human chronic diseases.
Before that, it was Splenda, the chlorification of natural sugar. A whole bunch of midddle-aged women (and others) complained all of their illness were tied to Splenda, and solemnly swore their doctors assured them 'they can not have chlorine or chloride in their body'.
Which reminds me of this article, Everything Causes Cancer!. Even though it is only about 'cancer', but the list could be extended to include all kinds of other human diseases and illness, I am sure.
glyphosate-resistant weeds resulting from wide-scale use of glyphosate. (Weeds defined as unwanted plant species growing in crops.)
Gonna be a big problem for agriculture if something doesn't change.
I'd hate for Monsanto to get hurt too bad. /s
And by the way unless 'they' can proove a direct link of such and such compound to a certain disease/illness, this is nothing hugh and series.
I can tie modern human diseases with the explosion of tv sets (or others things) using charts and statistics.
Time to stock up on Roundup concentrate. Needless to say, I have many, many, bottles. I even still have a boatload of chemicals that Clinton banned - enough to get me through my lifetime here (and they store great).
I get very suspicious when I see reports like this. Start looking for the angle.
But here is Six Reasons Organic Is NOT The Most Environmentally Friendly Way To Farm
Modern farming advancement has come a long way. For the general public, we can consume food without being made feeling 'guilty' about harming the Gaia.
Thank you.
Except that the bees are getting a fungus, not roundup.
The autism issue is interesting, but a lot of it has to do with a broader definitions and that schools get more funding for "special needs" kids (trust me, that drives some of it).
Thanks for that information!
I don't know. Studies show increased autism in babies born to older parents, in babies born to parents who are closely related and a whole bunch of other things. Also, you need to take into account the way autism is defined currently. Quite honestly, a lot of extremely bright young men I knew growing up and when my children were growing up would now be defined as somewhere on the autistic scale. It seems we want very badly to stick everyone into some little box. Not all minds are created the same. Not all minds work the same. I am not saying that autism does not exist, I am just saying that some of the things defined as autism are on the outer edges or normal not in the box of abnormal. These differences in how the mind work, have added great benefit to our society.
One of the first questions is the rate at which Glyphosate decomposes once applied to plant tissue, and the amount that is retained at harvest time. I was told that it rapidly decomposes in sunlight.
A woman who has property near our ranch near the Texas coast decided she as going to raise organic beef. She did not vaccinate her cattle for any diseases or spray her pasture for weeds or use any chemical fertilizer. All organic! With in a year she gave it up because her cows were sick and her pasture was gone.
Perhaps banning Roundup will save as many lives as banning DDT...
Did you die?
ding ding ding! Winnah!
I am dubious about this article for several reasons. The first of which is that it mentioned that it was "peer reviewed" several times. While that may have helped establish credibility in the past, the process of "peer review" has been tainted in recent years by scientific frauds. Multiple mentions of peer review are now 'red flags', and require scrutiny.
The use of techniques like "round robin" and "incestuous" peer reviews to insure that nobody outside a very small groups sees the raw data or is able to criticize it, have severely compromised it as a technique.
Another problem is that SCImago, a major, scientific journal rating organization, lists Switzerland based 'Entropy' journal as being oriented to "physics and astronomy", but also publishing "miscellaneous" articles on other subjects. It is a subsidiary publisher to MDPI, the Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute, also based in Switzerland.
This raises a question: if this research is so telling, why is it not being published in any of the dozen major scientific journals that specialize in its subject?
Thanks for a thoughtful comment, but please let me point out that virtually all food is "organic." Including the worms.
Much of the "organic" movement is money-grabbing crap.
Actually, crap is organic, too.
If you are truly concerned, just grow your own food. On a small scale, it's entirely possible to produce fine vegetables (and animals) by mollycoddling, spraying with oil and water, picking off the bugs one-by-one.
On a large scale, don't believe everything you read, but do shop with deep pockets.
Thanks for a thoughtful comment, but please let me point out that virtually all food is "organic." Including the worms.
Much of the "organic" movement is money-grabbing crap.
Actually, crap is organic, too.
If you are truly concerned, just grow your own food. On a small scale, it's entirely possible to produce fine vegetables (and animals) by mollycoddling, spraying with oil and water, picking off the bugs one-by-one.
On a large scale, don't believe everything you read, but do shop with deep pockets.
Not yet.
Agent Orange didn't get me yet, either.
If you have a feed mill (or whatever) in your area (where farmers get their materials), try "Credit" brand glyphosate.
Much less expensive. (You aren't paying for the big "Roundup" brand name.)
Is it from China?
Thank you for pointing that out. That - the authors credentials and backgrounds and their lack thereof in that particular scientific field, jumped out to me as well, although you stated it, and the reasons for your and my skepticism, much more succinctly than I ever could.
I think that a lot of people, including those in the MSM and many here do not understand is how the scientific process actually works. There are thousands upon thousands of research papers and studies published every year, some on open sites like this, ones that seem to accept nearly every research papers, and a lot of hypothesis and conclusions are reached. But what isnt always looked at or reported in the MSM or understood by anyone without an understanding of how the scientific process works, is the subsequent scientific peer reviews often tear many of these papers apart. Just because a person or a team submits a research paper to a scientific or quasi scientific website, that doesnt mean that any of the conclusions posited in that research is subsequently proven to be correct.
Unlike you, I am not a scientist, but even I understand that any legitimate scientific paper or study is submitted and then is subject to scientific peer review. Other scientists attempt to replicate the results and either prove the hypothesis to be valid and subject to further study or they find the basis seriously flawed and or invalid and or are not able to replicate any of the same results and the said research paper goes into the scientific dust bin a dead end in terms of serious research. Some so called research papers submitted are so seriously flawed, that no legitimate scientist would even waste their time with them.
But that is not what gets reported. When some researcher or a team of researchers, even if they publish a paper far afield from their area of expertise, publishes a paper, the MSM and many with no understanding of the scientific process, accepts it as being factual, when in reality, it is just an unproven hypothesis and more often than not, one that ultimately is proven flawed or false.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.


text:
Message of H.E. Mr. Ban Ki-moon on Peacebuilding Day 2014
The Peacebuilding commission (PBC)
The Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) is an intergovernmental advisory body that supports peace efforts in countries emerging from conflict, and is a key addition to the capacity of the International Community in the broad peace agenda.
The Peacebuilding Commission plays a unique role in (1) bringing together all of the relevant actors, including international donors, the international financial institutions, national governments, troop contributing countries; (2) marshalling resources and (3) advising on and proposing integrated strategies for peacebuilding and recovery and where appropriate, highlighting any gaps that threaten to undermine peace.


text:
Media critic Bob Somerby (above), a liberal, is out with a snarky attack on MSNBC pundits Chris Matthews and Lawrence O'Donnell for their ignorance of the details regarding the so-called Benghazi scandal.
There's no way I can do justice to Somerby's case with mere excerpts. You'll have to read the whole thing HERE.
Read more


text:
DaVinci Rivington 4-in-1 Crib - Coffee
by DaVinci | Item #: 527041 | Model #: M2701F |
We're sorry, this item is not available in your selected Club. Check another Club
About this item
Rivington 4-in-1 Convertible Crib by Da Vinci has a contemporary, yet classic design that is cleverly engineered to change form and function with your child's growth. Convert the crib to a toddler bed with an included safety guard rail or remove the guard rail for a charming day bed, perfect for any room. This crib is made of New Zealand pine wood from sustainable forests. Complete your Da Vinci nursery with any of the Parker case pieces.
- Features 4 level mattress spring system
- Toddler guard rail kit included to convert to toddler bed
- Converts to full size bed with K4799 rails (sold separately)
- Lead and phthalate Safe, non-toxic finish JPMA Certified
- Made of New Zealand Pine wood from sustainable forests
- 1 year limited manufacture warranty
Assembled Country
Assembled Size
58.875"L x 29.875"W x 46.0"H
Component Country
USA And Imported


text:
Sep 09, 2013
10 Things to Consider When Developing BYOD Security Policy
The bring-your-own-device — or BYOD — movement has opened up a new world of opportunities for companies and end users alike. For example, companies can reduce the costs associated with device procurement, and employees get to use their preferred devices and mobile operating systems. But with this opportunity comes a great deal of ambiguity, especially as related to security. The employee owns the device, but what about the data on the device? What happens if the device is lost or stolen? Who's liable? Can the company dictate that certain security programs be installed on a device it doesn't own?
These are but a few of the questions surrounding BYOD right now. This level of uncertainty presents a good reason for developing a BYOD security policy, but it also makes it really challenging to actually create such a policy, let alone implement it.
Also complicating matters is the fact that there are so many variables across organizations that dictate what should and should not be in any policy — BYOD or otherwise. However, there are guidelines that any company can follow in order to develop a BYOD policy that will balance flexibility and productivity with privacy and security. In this report, Dark Reading provides a list of 10 things companies should consider when setting out to develop a BYOD security policy. (S7340913)
Research Report


text:
Ages 7 and up
Enjoy Ranger Rick magazine wherever and whenever! Download the digital version of Ranger Rick's print magazine to your mobile or tablet device and have your animal fun on the run!
Ages 4–7
Fun and learning on the go! Download the digital version of Ranger Rick Jr.'s print magazine to your mobile or tablet device. All the amazing animal photos, stories and fun facts available anytime and anywhere.
Become a super sleuth and help Ranger Rick solve a mummy mystery.
Find Out More>>
Score points, learn cool bird facts, and become a star nature photographer in this action-packed game. Find Out More>>
Ages 4-8
Travel to the WILDS of Alaska and learn all about bears with Ricky Raccoon and his pal Gertie the Grizzly. Find Out More>>
Join Ricky Raccoon and his friend Lars the Lion on a wild African adventure.
Find Out More>>
Ages 2–5
Guess what crazy thing Snakey has eaten for hours of nonstop, silly fun.
Find Out More>>