A "job" well done
A pair of boffins are in hot water after the image of president Donald Trump made an unexpected cameo in a paper on how to gather animal DNA from their poop at scale. The paper, which was published in Scientific Reports, discusses the difficulties of gaining high-quality DNA samples from wild animals in a non-invasive way. …
"Someone really had to give a shit to find that image. If it had been Trump's telltale orange color, it would be understandable."
As everyone knows, the color of shite darkens when exposed to the atmosphere. It probably did come out orange, but turned brown by the time they posted the report.
If they had been monumental steaming dumps I would have laughed and upvoted it, but Obama actually was pretty good and well received around the world. Neither of them made enemies of their allies, start trade wars, separate babies from parents, tear gas immigrants, bend the law to suit his needs and tear up international treaties on short range nuclear weapons, climate and the Hague.
Not to mention he (and his policies) has been laughed at twice by the UN.
@bombastic bob - "what would happen if I'd put Obama's face on a turd in a scientific journal? Or Mrs. Clinton? Or Nancy Pelosi? And so on"
There would have been an article reporting that someone put their picture on a turd in a scientific paper, you would have made some triumphant smug comment in the accompanying thread, and the world would continue to revolve as before, much like now.
The only difference would be that Trump actually is a steaming turd.
If you beat the insurmountable odds to become a scientist, capable of writing papers (not doodling with crayons) and a Trump supporter, that in and of itself would be news worthy and I'd gladly eat crow. But lets be honest for a second. Trump supporters "ain't got's the time for all that science kinda stuffs".
No, not really. Bush put American prestige in the ground, and Obama covered it over.
Still, the question is an interesting one. Any society can easily determine its rulers by understanding who they're not allowed to mock. People have been brutally mocking Trump since before he was even elected and nobody's been sent to jail for it, so it's pretty obvious that he's not ruling anybody.
So if not him, who exactly is ruling you?
as if Repugnants haven't been mocking Obama's Tan Suit, his choice of mustard and Michelle's bare shoulders
Ah, right, I forgot, people in science and entertainment are allowed to have an opinion on politics only if it agrees with Repugnant world-view.
> Any society can easily determine its rulers by understanding who they're not allowed to mock
> So if not him, who exactly is ruling you?
clearly, it's the kids with stage three cancer
"Any society can easily determine its rulers by understanding who they're not allowed to mock. People have been brutally mocking Trump since before he was even elected and nobody's been sent to jail for it, so it's pretty obvious that he's not ruling anybody.
So if not him, who exactly is ruling you?"
Erm, just because he cannot jail you for mocking him, doesn't mean he isn't abusing his power. It's actually the other way round, where he's trying to get people who should be in jail out of it. Like Flynn, and more recently, himself.
Any society can easily determine its rulers by understanding who they're not allowed to mock. People have been brutally mocking Trump since before he was even elected and nobody's been sent to jail for it, so it's pretty obvious that he's not ruling anybody.
Being a leader is completely different from being a ruler. (Edit: not defending our current Pres at all, just pointing out that "leader of the free world" would be an entirely different thing from the slightly oxymoronic "ruler of the free world.")
People have been brutally mocking Trump since before he was even elected and nobody's been sent to jail for it, so it's pretty obvious that he's not ruling anybody.
It's not because he won't but because he can't do that. Othewise, a certain late night Saturday comedy show would have it's cast behind bars if Mr. Presidents Tweets are to be believed.
FTR, it is quite acceptable to hate the person in the office as long as you respect the office. I've hated more than one President from both parties. Much like the military, you may hate the guy with the gold on his collar but you do respect that position.
>Because the republicans were SO respectful of Obama when he was president...
Not my country so I don't care, but I don't remember Obama being the subject of playground slurs.
They certainly disagreed with his politics, but I don't really remember such childish behaviour.
Don't get me wrong, it is funny, but in a way appreciated by those in kindergarten.
I'm no fan of Trump, but IGnatius is right. There's lack of respect (and make no mistake, I have no respect for Trump) and there there's juvenile disrespect. This, though funny, is an example of the latter and in my opinion has no place in any dignified publication. Scientific papers should be above this sort of nonsense.
Also, just because Republicans were turds to Obama does not make it cool for Democrats to be turds to Trump. No matter how much of a turd Trump himself may be.
I almost upvoted you until I considered the disrespect our Mango Mussolini has shown *science*. And journalism. And democracy ....
I don't think respect is earned. I grant a modicum of respect to everyone I meet. I give them the benefit of the doubt. Disrespect is earned, and the Don has been earning it since the beginning of his public life, and continues to do so with every speech, every tweet.
> "Obama wasn't a steaming pile of shit."
Correct, and neither is Trump, but you would not know that from reading this thread. The prank itself is pretty harmless, if juvenile in the extreme for supposed scientists, but the response here is a bit more interesting. It's like some people just can't get their day started without a good Trump bashing session.
If that's so, then I hope they have a fine day for it, but I wouldn't wish that kind of life on anyone.
I apologise for being a libtard snowflake that actually gives a shit about the planet and everything else. It's just that I can't say fuck you to the rest of my fellow humans. Keep that special place close because at some point socialism or communism is going to get the better my american fiend.
Socialism and Communism have proven themselves to be brutal, dystopian, totalitarian systems of government. Dont tell me. They weren't "real socialism" or "real communism".
Communism, yes. Socialism, no. They are not the same thing, and many socialist nations function quite well. In fact all of the top 10 happiest nations on Earth according to the 2018 World Happiness Report are socialist democracies. So no, socialism is not brutal, dystopian, or totalitarian.
None of the top 10 are socialist. They are capitalist democracies with extensive social programs. There is a significant difference between the two systems.
Sweden in particular is known for vehemently denying that they are socialist.
/note to self, do not feed trolls
Socialism and Communism have proven themselves to be brutal, dystopian, totalitarian systems of government
As have many right-wing governments - many of them supported by the US..
Hint: It's not the political system that's at fault - it's the people ruling. Power corrupts and all that..
They weren't "socialism or communism". No "real" required. The problem with communism is it's unstable because there is nothing to stop one guy from taking all the cookies at which point it is no longer communist. Libertarians have the same problem, everyone is supposed to be free but it applauds taking all the cookies as a sign of success and you are back to your dystopian wonderland.
"I apologise for being a libtard snowflake that actually gives a shit about the planet "
So the fact that the USA is the only industrialised country to REDUCE CO2 emissions must please you? (Yes I know Trump is not responsible, but capitalism is: it is cheaper and cleaner to frack gas and turn your back on coal. Yet members of your beloved EU get to build coal fired power stations: Poland, Germany. So get a grip.)
"So the fact that the USA is the only industrialised country to REDUCE CO2 emissions must please you?"
Please note, this isn't Fox forums. You can't get away with posting bullshit.
Readers here will either know it's bullshit, or will fact-check your claim.
https://www.wri.org/blog/2016/04/roads-decoupling-21-countries-are-reducing-carbon-emissions-while-growing-gdp - 21countries! Yes, USA is one of them (just), but you 'forgot' the other 20.
https://www.cntraveler.com/gallery/countries-doing-the-most-to-fight-climate-change - USA not mentioned at all.
But don't worry, the USA isn't the only country to not meet its own climate goals
However, Trump must be number 1: https://climateactiontracker.org/countries/usa/:
"The Trump Administration has spent 2018 systematically gutting US federal climate policy. If the proposed actions are fully implemented, greenhouse gas emissions projections for the year 2030 could increase by up to 400 MtCO2e over what was projected when Pres. Trump entered office. That’s almost as much as the entire state of California emitted in 2016.
0/10 - Must try harder
"So the fact that the USA is the only industrialised country to REDUCE CO2 emissions must please you?"
That sort of claim is so easy to debunk. When you say "only industrialised country to REDUCE (sic) CO2 emissions" all someone needs to do is to provide evidence that a single industrialised country has reduced CO2 emissions and you end up with egg on your face. Not only that, but if the USA has actually increased its CO2 emissions you end up egged from head to foot.
Consider yourself egged. The UK has reduced its CO2 emissions from 600Mt to 379Mt, a 36% reduction, and is on target to meet its Second Carbon budget (internationally agreed) emissions. Meanwhile the USA's CO2 emissions have *increased* from the 1990 baseline (5 billion tonnes in 1990, 5.2 billion tonnes currently).
I suggest that you do a little bit of research before making bold statements and that you cease obtaining your news from the US propaganda machine.
" Even in Orwell's dystopian nightmare the hate sessions were only two minutes, [...]"
Charlie Chaplin made a 2 hour feature film in the USA mocking the leader of another country in 1940***. It cost $2m and grossed $11m - with five Oscar nominations.
***at which time the USA was a neutral country.
"To be fair I don't think you'd find many people willing to defend the particular leader he was mocking, [...]"
The parallels are there. Appealing to a section of a population suffering economic hardship - and blaming that deprivation on minorities and other countries. Promising to make the country great again. Regular rallies of supporters with inflammatory speeches. Trying to suppress any criticism in the press. Trying to override the independence of the judiciary. Hiring and firing people on a whim. Breaking international trade and arms control agreements. Faking news.
"To be fair I don't think you'd find many people willing to defend the particular leader he was mocking, especially in hindsight."
The key word there is hindsight. If you look at 1940 you would be surprised at the support. Look at some of the stuff coming out of America First at the time for instants. There were a lot of people who thought he was on the right track. The "alt right" of the time was alive and well much like today and that movie pissed off a lot of people.
Ten years ago, and even in San Francisco, folks wouldn't lower themselves to this kind of scatological humour. But now we have the twitters, facebooks etc...
p.s. If I recall correctly, the engineers who designed the aforementioned sewage plant were quite miffed at the thought of their highly advanced treatment plant being used as a put-down.
edits? What edits?! This never ever happened. And that piece in the dropbox, well, that's obviously FAKE NEWS! Anybody can take a piece of freely available data and make anything out of it, right?! So you'd better stop suggesting / reporting anything, or else our lawyers should write you an angry, angry letter.
p.s. and no, there's no place for humo(ur) in the world of science. Particularly when it's about flow of money from the baboons to the world of science!
I have a slide of a maturing secondary myotube (immature embyronic muscle fibre) in cross-section in the electron microscope. I talk about the fact it is a maturing secondary, then pause and say ‘it’s also a duck in an egg’ which lets the audience laugh. The nucleus has in x-section taken on the shape of a duck (rubber variety) sitting in an egg shaped cell. It even has an eye spot, condensed chromatin (protein wrapped dan) is dark and a spot of it is in the right place for an eye.
I have a set of large format negatives, all show different nucleus animals, I have a goldfish with flowing fins and a rhinoceros amongst others. All were found in muscle cross sections of the mouse mutant I was studying. So they are my micro mutant muscle menagerie.
It demonstrates the human tendency to pareidolia and that if you never see the light side of life in your work you are a very sad sap.
14 December 2018 Editors’ Note: The editors have become aware of unusual aspects to the ‘Extract fecal DNA’ illustration in figure 1. We are investigating, and appropriate editorial action will be taken once the matter is resolved.https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-20427-9#change-history
Reading these comments I now more fully understand why so many in the UK fear self-government. Most here are juvenile morons in need of an adult from the continent to tell them how to live. How sad that a once-proud, small island country that once ruled over much of the world has fallen so low.
Yes,in line with the subject matter a lot of the comments on this thread are purile. What that has to do with our politics I have no idea.
It doesn't take a European to point that out. West or East.
You need a far better command of the language to avoid your trolling attempt being so obvious.
I'm willing to bet you probably had 'must do better' on your school report.
I agree (sort of) totally with your post and so would many UK citizens ..... BUT that is because WE can/do laugh at ourselves or how others see us without getting upset.... (most of the time, although some do lose their sense of humour sometimes.)
If you understood 'British Humour' you would understand we say worse things about our politicians !!!
This has been the case for centuries and is part of our national character, ditto the Aussies :)
Anyone who is worth being 'bought down a peg or two' is open for attack.
One of the greatest indicators of friendship in much of the UK is that you can totally talk to your 'Best Friends etc' in a way which would get you a 'broken nose' anywhere else.
You 'get' as much as you 'give' and everyone laughs it off.
(Many a foreign visitor has thought there would be a fight when two or more friends greet each other in this way in say a pub or club. !!!)
The US of A has always been sensitive to political criticism and/or lampooning, particularly in jest, laughing it off would cost nothing and totally defuse the situation whereas 'Mr Trump' is known for his less than thick skin.
A 'Crappy' joke ;) will not hurt him, while an over reaction does.
Would have been more fun to take advantage of Trump's comprehensive and wide-ranging ignorance: the 'man' has to be one of the least knowledgeable and dumbest in history to have achieved federal elected office, and in the USA, whose politicians are even more clueless than here in the UK, that is scraping the bottom of a startlingly deep barrel.
I'd have gone for a serious article discussing shit in such a way and using such terminology that a semiliterate layman wouldn't immediately realise that the central topic was, indeed, shit. Then find an excuse to put a flattering picture of Trump on the cover (there has to be one, somewhere ... perhaps captured in soft light on one of the rare occasions when the anus-cum-mouth is not vomiting spite and lies), justified by a vaguely supportive, anodyne caption like "Importance of science in the Trump era" or somesuch.
Now Trump is so egotistically needy that he has concocted fake Time magazine covers of his face to be displayed at his buildings—I mean, how much more pathetic can you get?—so he'll surely want these latest important publications, apparently featuring his imprimatur, prominently framed at his premises.
An enlarged copy of the cover of American Faecal Research Papers IV (headline article: The Effects of Excess Bilirubin Levels on Human Skin Tone), in the lobby of Trump Tower, with the Orange Cretin's face gurning out from it? C'mon, science: there's still time for a Christmas present to the world ....
... nil constipandum.
"This was just an unfortunate accident. We wanted to draw out the common sequence of breaking wind, in which there is little DNA, followed shortly by a number two, in which there is plenty. They can feel a lot the same while they are on the way, and sometimes even arrive almost simultaneously. So we searched online for an image of a "fart or trump" and photoshopped it onto the end of a faecal stool. We had absolutely no idea that the image bore the slightest resemblance to our esteemed President, this has come as big a shock to us as to everybody else. Now, can we please keep our jobs, Your Honour?"
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019