Sometimes the littlest things in life can be the most dangerous. Look at the size of a germ, it is microscopic, yet it can kill you. Before these organisms were discovered, people must have been wondering what was causing the deaths when some mysterious illness appeared and their friends and relatives just got sicker and sicker, until they just died. Well there is a new theory in town and it has to do with tiny creatures killing very big ones, ones that were much bigger than we are. The theory states that the dinosaurs didn't die because some heavenly body crashed into the earth causing darkness for years and killing off the dino food supply, it claims that insects killed the mighty creatures. So why is this theory being put forth when many thought that the riddle of their demise had been solved? It seems that there are a lot of scientists that didn't buy the theory that a meteor crash caused dinosaur extinction. Why would this be? Well a meteor extinction event would have caused the dinosaurs to die too fast and that didn't happen, according to some scientists, that is why they never accepted the theory. They felt that the time periods stated just didn't agree and that the dinosaurs died out more slowly. Because of this, there have been many other theories put forth, such as the dinosaurs died from allergies. I don't mean to laugh, because this was a serious suggestion, but it just sounds so silly. Then there was the idea that maybe they were wiped out by volcanic activity. It is hard to imagine that every dinosaur would be wiped out this way. A certain type of insect has recently been found in amber, it has also been found in dinosaur excretion. All sorts of insects have been found in dinosaur waste and it is felt that an insect epidemic struck the dinosaurs and eventually killed them. Is this theory absolutely air tight, no, but it is a distinct possibility. One of the things that sort of puzzles me about it is, why would just the dinosaurs be wiped out by such a thing and all other life be left untouched?

It is being claimed that a breakthrough has been made in developing stem cells. Scientists state that when human cells are put into a certain type of chemical solution that contains four genes, the resulting cells that develop resemble those cells called stem cells that can only come from human embryos. The amazing thing is that not only one group is claiming this breakthrough, but two groups are. Collecting stem cells from human embryos has caused all sorts or ethical and political concerns. Many religions are against the idea. There is a connection in their collective minds about babies being aborted so that their cells could be harvested by the people that need the cells. Would babies ever be sacrificed this way? Nothing is beyond the realm of possibility, I am sure we all know this by now, but I am not sure if a wholesale slaughter of fetuses' would ever occur at least I would hope not. As far as these new procedures are concerned, one scientist has stated, "The long run's getting a lot closer, I do believe this is the beginning of a great change." Remember the people that cloned Dolly the sheep? They feel that this new process is so promising that they are getting out of the cloning business. It is beginning to become obvious that science has opened up a doorway to a new source of stem cells that will be used to help people with such injuries and diseases as diabetes, spinal injuries, ms and Parkinson's disease, just to mention a few. What is actually happening is that cells are being reprogrammed and that means that this technique can be used for other things such as reprogramming cells to detect harmful side effects of new medicines. The researchers are warning us though that the new cells might have some unknown quarks and further testing is needed.

Things just keep changing. We have all been carefully instructed over the years in the workings of black holes. We turn on the tv and watch shows that are entirely based on the workings of black holes. We read about more of them being discovered every day and how we have a giant one at the center of our very own galaxy and it is gobbling up any planets and stars that get in it's way. Then there are all those Science Fiction movies and their depictions of black holes. Well if scientists at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio have their way, all that stuff will have to be deleted from the textbooks, because black holes will no longer exist. There has always been a problem with the theory of black holes. Let me explain it as best I can. Stephen Hawking, the famous physicist proved that there was something that was later named Hawking radiation. Hawking radiation relates to matter being sucked into a black hole. It shows that matter can escape and that over a period of billions or trillions of years a black hole would evaporate, thus cause a problem for scientists that state that nothing can escape a black hole. Now you have to admit that the idea of a black hole is bizarre and yet it was almost universally accepted. The people in Cleveland don't adhere to this theory and they think that they have discovered what is really there. It is nothing more than the super gravity from collapsed stars. Their calculations show that a black hole can't exist, because time would have to stop at the event horizon. Well the people at NASA just don't buy this. They say that even though no one has seen a black hole, they have seen material disappearing in the center of the galaxy where they presume a black hole exists. They also add that even though no one has actually seen a black hole, neither have they ever seen Hawking radiation.

2007 has seen big breakthrough in the field of human genomics. Scientists have found out that there are 15 million different places in our genetic makeup where we can differ from each other. They have managed to map over 3 million of these single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) so far. A project called the HapMap Project is being carried out that seeks to compare the SNPs of people to see what makes us different. This can lead to finding out such things as to why some people get a certain ailment and others don't and they are beginning to get answers. Last year they were able to link over 12 diseases to 50 genes. I know that this is only a drop in the bucket so far, but it is a very good beginning. Many diseases are suspected of being heredity and thus genetic. An example of this might be what is commonly known as color blindness or color deficiency. There are many other diseases that are considered to have a genetic connection and the study has show that type 1 and 2 diabetes, Crohn's disease, heart disease, breast cancer, restless leg syndrome, atrial fibrillation, glaucoma, multiple sclerosis, rheumatoid arthritis, and colorectal cancer, among others are either caused by genetic defects or are easier to acquire in people that have certain genetic defects. Some people are not happy about human gene sequencing, they feel that this might be used against a person someday, who is applying for life insurance or medical insurance and such. I guess tighter laws will be needed in this area.

A new technology is being explored by the U.S. Air Force. If it is successful, it could save the U.S. Taxpayer a bundle of money. As you all know, when we launch a satellite, we either send up a rocket, or put it on the space shuttle which is really a rocket also. Each launch costs a fortune of money, as they say in Brooklyn. The fuel from the rocket engines pollutes the atmosphere and some of the devices have to drop tanks back to earth. The new method that is being considered is to launch our satellites, using magnetism. The idea is to build a circular track and put the object that you want to launch on it. The object would be sped up by increasingly accelerating it around the track by magnets. When it was going fast enough, you would allow it to launch. The momentum from the acceleration would allow it to achieve orbit. All this without a rocket engine being fired. A similar method was tried in the past, but it didn't work. The drawback to it was that a straight track was being used and to get the payload going fast enough in such a short distance, excessive G forces had to be used and they damaged the satellite that was going to be launched. This is not a problem with the new round track. There are still problems with this procedure, but the Air Force has awarded a two year contract to work them out.

Scientists are now telling us how lucky we are. Actually they are telling us that they are lucky too. According to them, if the earth was only slightly smaller, life would not have developed on this planet. They state that the smaller a planet is, the thicker the plates are and that plates have to move and create the dynamic effects that are conducive to life. Because of this, they say that if the earth had been a little smaller, the plates would have been too thick to move. They claim that the bigger a planet is, the thinner the continental plates are. I never heard that plate tectonics were responsible for life before, but these guys are firm believers in this. They claim that plate tectonics are responsible for what we call the carbon cycle on earth,which in turn is responsible for all life. I can't help but wonder, does this mean that if we find a planet that is a rocky planet like earth, but slightly smaller, that it is precluded from having life? How do we even know that some other form of life would need a carbon cycle, or even be carbon based? According to these scientists, the earth almost didn't make it, as far as developing life was concerned. To prove their point, the scientists point to Venus,which is slightly smaller than earth. It has no plate movement. The scientists feel that super earths, that is a rocky planet that is 2 to 3 times bigger than earth, have a much higher chance of containing life. I haven't heard anything about how the increased gravity would effect life yet, but I have to wonder. The scientists also say that super earths are a lot more common than earths are in the universe. Somehow I have to wonder if the simulation that they used didn't take all of the facts into consideration.