Interesting reading at a time when the nuclear power PR people are getting lots of positive stories in the popular press:
“If you believe newspapers and watch the news, nuclear power is part of the answer to global warming. Nuclear power is greenhouse-gas emission friendly, we’re told.

But nuclear power only looks greenhouse-friendly from a distance. If you take a closer look, it’s far from a solution to the climate crisis.
The first problem is the widespread idea that most greenhouse gases come from electrical power. Unfortunately for all of us, that’s not the case. In 1999 the International Energy Agency estimated the world emissions from electrical networks at less than 39 per cent of total emissions.

Going on the figures on the World Nuclear Association website, if the present global output of electricity were obtained entirely from nuclear reactors, and as efficiently as best practice allowed, the uranium in all the known rich-ore bodies in the world that they list would keep them going for just under nine years. Thereafter, the world would have no nuclear power stations operating and therefore no power stations at all.

In other words, nuclear power isn’t neutral when it comes to greenhouse gases. On the contrary, greenhouse gases are emitted at every step along the way to generating nuclear power.
In dismissing solar power, Homer has to overlook the recent United Nations report saying that an 800-square-kilometre area of the Sahara could generate enough electricity for the whole world. He is, of course, still entitled to his opinion that solar is a pipedream. But so too is the popular notion that nuclear power is greenhouse-gas friendly.”
Debunking nuclear myth of greenhouse friendliness, The Age.

I thought this was relatively old news, but it never hurts to see it again:
“The clitoris rivals the penis in size.
“The vaginal wall is, in fact, the clitoris”

Frustrated that [Australian urologist, Dr Helen O’Connell] kept failing a medical exam, she went back to the anatomy books for answers. She discovered they were wrong.
“They left it out,” she said. “It boils down to rivalry between the sexes: the idea that one sex is sexual and the other reproductive.””
Time for rethink on the clitoris

A collection of articles about the gay marriage ban in Australia:
“Australia’s conservative national government has overruled a local law allowing gay unions.
The Australian Capital Territory (ACT) became the first part of the country to legally recognise gay relationships when it voted on the issue last month.
But now the federal government has stepped in to invalidate the new law.”
Australia overrules gay union law, BBC.
The latest:
“The Australian Greens and Democrats tomorrow will seek to overturn the federal government’s decision to block ACT laws allowing same-sex civil unions.
This morning Federal Attorney-General Philip Ruddock announced that Governor-General Michael Jeffrey had agreed to use his powers to disallow the ACT law, which would have allowed gay couples to have their relationships registered and legally recognised.”
Minor parties fight gay marriage ban, The Age.
“Coalition Senators are being urged to cross the floor and over-ride the Government’s move to disallow ACT civil unions laws.

ACT Attorney-General Simon Corbell has attacked the Governor-General’s decision, calling it arrogant and undemocratic.
Mr Corbell says the issue of same sex unions will not go away and he will continue to push for legal recognition for gay couples.
“We will pursue all options to provide for equality under the law for people in same sex relationships,” he said.”
Senators urged to protect civil unions, ABC.
One reason Australia needs to allow gay marriage:
“Mr Walters said the inability of gay people to have their relationships formally and legally recognised caused great damage.
“The implication that (homosexuality) is in some way shameful or second class cannot be avoided when we treat people in this way,” he said.
“We have a high rate of youth suicide in Australia – one of the highest in the world – and one reason for that is where people’s sexuality is not accepted by the wider community and the message that sends is very damaging to those who are just finding out about their sexuality,” he said.”
Rights group slams gay marriage ban, The Age.
And a bit of a conspiracy theory:
“The federal government’s decision comes just after a push by United States President George Bush for a constitutional ban on gay marriage.”
Gay couples to lose right to say ‘I do’, The Age.

“US politicians have rejected attempts to enshrine the principle of net neutrality in legislation.
Some fear the decision will mean net providers start deciding on behalf of customers which websites and services they can visit and use.

An amendment to the Act tried to add clauses that would demand net service firms treat equally all the data passing through their cables.
The amendment was thought to be needed after the FCC ripped up its rules that guaranteed net neutrality.
During the debate House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi, said that without the amendment “telecommunications and cable companies will be able to create toll lanes on the information superhighway”. ” BBC

“Gay couples will be able to say “I do” in Canberra within two weeks, after the ACT yesterday fast-tracked its civil union laws in defiance of the Commonwealth’s decision to scuttle them.
ACT Attorney-General Simon Corbell said the Government would reduce the notification period for people wishing to enter into civil unions, to enable ceremonies to begin within a fortnight.
The new laws

We were evil, Google founder admits
“Google Inc. co-founder Sergey Brin acknowledged the dominant internet company has compromised its principles by accommodating Chinese censorship demands. He said Google is wrestling to make the deal work before deciding whether to reverse course.” SMH

“”The proposed television version of How to Furnish a Flat has now fallen through owing to unavailability of the furniture,” a committee noted.” The BBC on the bad old days of British television.

“The mysterious “London stone” is going to be rescued from a building due to be demolished. Does it mean that London is going to be saved from an ancient legend?
…the London Stone – an ancient and mysterious object mentioned by Shakespeare, William Blake and Dickens, which has been seen as one of the capital’s greatest relics since at least the Middle Ages and probably much earlier.” BBC