"Gore"-ing the IPCC: How U.S. Conservative Media Has Framed the Climate Change Debate

The purpose of the study is to examine the conservative U.S. media's response to global climate change in 2007 and 2008, focusing on manifest claims that emerged after the awards and nominations achieved by Al Gore and the IPCC. This analysis highlights the general topics mentioned and counter-claims made by conservative syndicated columnists when discussing global warming.Over the two-year period from January 2007-December 2009, the conservative syndicated columnists were consistent in how they mentioned the topic of global warming. The columnists chose "global warming" to define the phenomenon more often than "climate change." This would allow for single-year data to appear more credible in refuting long-term trends. They also frequently connected Al Gore to their discussion of global warming and proceeded to attack his credibility instead of attacking the scientific evidence or claims made by climate scientists. Finally, the two least used counter-claims by the columnists were the two claims that admitted (to some extent) that anthropogenic global warming is indeed occurring. This study provides a small window into the denial machine against climate scientists and shows a need to further examine the power and influence conservative syndicated columnists have as a member of the conservative media.Department of Sociolog

Anaerobic digester use in dairy farms in the United States

Anaerobic digestion is a highly efficient process, trapping the methane gas from cow manure and processing it into energy. The steep initial capital costs make anaerobic digesters short-term liabilities, but the long-term benefits far outweigh the long-term costs. An anaerobic digester unit will begin to show a profit after approximately five years of operation. During the lifetime of the unit, estimated at 15 years, the digester will have produced about $ 1,000,000 in profits for the dairy farm, while also providing invaluable benefits to society as a whole

2005- 2008 UNLV McNair Journal

Journal articles based on research conducted by undergraduate students in the McNair Scholars Program Table of Contents Biography of Dr. Ronald E. McNair Statements: Dr. Neal J. Smatresk, UNLV President Dr. Juanita P. Fain, Vice President of Student Affairs Dr. William W. Sullivan, Associate Vice President for Retention and Outreach Mr. Keith Rogers, Deputy Executive Director of the Center for Academic Enrichment and Outreach McNair Scholars Institute Staf

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field