Angst over a ten-year killing spree by a neo-Nazi group THE murderers' boasts are as chilling as their crimes. From 2000 to 2006 the "National Socialist Underground", an unknown group with just three core members, apparently killed nine people, eight of them of Turkish origin. In 2007 they shot a policewoman in the head. They claim credit for a 2004 bombing in Cologne that injured 22 people, mostly Turkish. A mocking video celebrates all this but has little to say about the group's goals, promising "deeds, not words".
The end came on November 4th when Uwe Mundlos and Uwe Bohnhardt staged the last of some 14 bank robberies in Eisenach, in Thuringia. They set their mobile home on fire and apparently shot themselves as the police closed in. Be ate Zschape, their female comrade, turned herself in after torching the group's house in Zwickau in Saxony. Yet this was no triumph for the law enforcers. The far-right trio were long known to Thuringia's intelligence agency. They disappeared in 1998 on the point of being arrested. Nobody linked them to the "doner murders", so called because two victims worked in kebab shops.
The authorities "trivialise" right-wing violence, says Hajo Funke, who studies it. Today's violent right is the offspring of unification in 1990, which disrupted the eastern economy and traumatised families. The Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution, the domestic intelligence service, thinks 25,000 people belong to far-right groups, of whom 9,500 could be violent. Mr Funke says they have committed more than 100 murders since 1990. Yet the authorities worry more about Islamist terrorists, who have done less damage.
The don er killers may force a reassessment. Their decade-long career exposes weaknesses in detection and prevention. Undercover informants can be more useful to the groups they monitor
than to their paymasters. The interior ministry now plans a new centre to co-ordinate work on far-right violence by Germany's many police forces and intelligence agencies. The ruling Christian Democratic Union is reconsidering its opposition to a ban on the far-right National Democratic Party, which is said to have links to more extreme groups. The Thuringian gang which made video jokes about its victims was itself no joke.
Source of Information : [The Economist] Volume 401 Number 8760 Nov 19th - Nov 25th 2011
2012年1月31日
2012年1月28日
Russia and NATO - An absence of trust
Why Russia is no closer to working with NATO on missile defence
THE hopes at NATO'S 2010 Lisbon summit that Russia might be a partner in the missile-defence system meant to protect Europe from a nuclear-armed "rogue" state are looking increasingly forlorn. NATO governments had promised "to explore opportunities for missiledefence co-operation with Russia in a spirit of reciprocity, maximum transparency and mutual confidence." But at his Valdai dinner on N ovembernth, Russia's prime minister, Vladimir Putin, claimed that the Russian ambassador toN ATO, Dmitry Rogozin, had been told by an American senator that missile defence was aimed at Russia's nuclear deterrent. Mr Putin even drew a diagram on a napkin to make his point.
At this week's meeting of the NATORussia Council, a body meant to improve relations, Russia's deputy defence minister, Anatoly Antonov, was equally blunt. He complained that NATO was pressing ahead even though Russia's conditions for co-operation had not been met. Chief among his gripes was America's refusal to give Russia a legal guarantee- in effect a treaty-thatNATo's missile shield would never be used to protect Europe or America from Russian nuclear weapons. He suggested that Russia might take "military-technical measures".
The heart of the problem is a lack of trust, made worse by what Russia sees as NATO'S cynically broad interpretation of the UN Security Council resolution on Libya-a "betrayal", say some Russians.
Russian leaders cannot bring themselves to believe repeated Western assurances that plans to defend Europe against nuclear missiles are aimed solely at irrational states with a handful of weapons (diplomat-speak for Iran), and are not meant to blunt the effectiveness of Russia's array of nuclear weapons.
Russian military analysts concede that the phased approach to European missile defence adopted by the Obama administration is less threatening than George Bush's plans for a shield based on long-range interceptors and radars in Poland and the Czech Republic. They also accept that, even in its final phase of deployment, the system would be overwhelmed by any Russian attack. But they persist in seeing missile defence as part of a long-term American plot to undermine Russia's nuclear arsenal.
Source of Information : [The Economist] Volume 401 Number 8760 Nov 19th - Nov 25th 2011
THE hopes at NATO'S 2010 Lisbon summit that Russia might be a partner in the missile-defence system meant to protect Europe from a nuclear-armed "rogue" state are looking increasingly forlorn. NATO governments had promised "to explore opportunities for missiledefence co-operation with Russia in a spirit of reciprocity, maximum transparency and mutual confidence." But at his Valdai dinner on N ovembernth, Russia's prime minister, Vladimir Putin, claimed that the Russian ambassador toN ATO, Dmitry Rogozin, had been told by an American senator that missile defence was aimed at Russia's nuclear deterrent. Mr Putin even drew a diagram on a napkin to make his point.
At this week's meeting of the NATORussia Council, a body meant to improve relations, Russia's deputy defence minister, Anatoly Antonov, was equally blunt. He complained that NATO was pressing ahead even though Russia's conditions for co-operation had not been met. Chief among his gripes was America's refusal to give Russia a legal guarantee- in effect a treaty-thatNATo's missile shield would never be used to protect Europe or America from Russian nuclear weapons. He suggested that Russia might take "military-technical measures".
The heart of the problem is a lack of trust, made worse by what Russia sees as NATO'S cynically broad interpretation of the UN Security Council resolution on Libya-a "betrayal", say some Russians.
Russian leaders cannot bring themselves to believe repeated Western assurances that plans to defend Europe against nuclear missiles are aimed solely at irrational states with a handful of weapons (diplomat-speak for Iran), and are not meant to blunt the effectiveness of Russia's array of nuclear weapons.
Russian military analysts concede that the phased approach to European missile defence adopted by the Obama administration is less threatening than George Bush's plans for a shield based on long-range interceptors and radars in Poland and the Czech Republic. They also accept that, even in its final phase of deployment, the system would be overwhelmed by any Russian attack. But they persist in seeing missile defence as part of a long-term American plot to undermine Russia's nuclear arsenal.
Source of Information : [The Economist] Volume 401 Number 8760 Nov 19th - Nov 25th 2011
2012年1月25日
A self-sufficient Isle of Wight - Green and pleasant island
The Isle of Wight wants to become self -sufficient in energy
ECOISLAND is a group so green that the invitations it sent to an event at Britain's House of Commons were printed on recycled paper embedded with meadow-flower seeds Gust plant, water and watch them grow). Its aim is to make the Isle of Wight, off Britain's south coast, energy-independent by 2020. The island is often viewed as a quaint place a decade or so behind the times. But if the project, launched on November 15th, comes off, the Isle of Wight could be in the vanguard of an environmentally friendlier future. Ecoisland plans to install solar panels on roofs (the island is one of the sunniest places in England), insulate houses better, make greater use of geothermal, wind and tidal energy, and generate power from waste. There are also plans for electric vehicles that residents and visitors alike can hire. Locally grown food would be delivered through island-wide supply hubs. A concerted effort is under way to reduce water use and capture more rainwater (about one-third of the island's fresh water at present is pumped from the mainland). This all seems very cosy, but what gives Ecoisland an edge-apart from its
energetic and auspiciously named chief executive, David Green-is the array of national and international companies which have agreed to take part. These include IBM, Cable &Wireless and Silver Spring Networks, which together with Toshiba, will be working on smart-grid technology and energy-storage systems. Toshiba is doing similar work for the
Japanese island of Miyako.
British partners include Southern Water, a utility, SSE, an electricity supplier, and ITM Power, which makes electrolysis systems that generate hydrogen from water. The hydrogen can be used as an energy store and to power cars and vans. Graham Cooley, ITM's chief executive, says an island provides a natural boundary within which the benefits of integrating sustainable services can be more easily explored. Mr Green says that the partnership has already raised £2oom ($315m) in private funding. Ultimately, he hopes, the acquired eco know-how can be exported to other places. By then his business cards, which are also meadow-seeded, could be blooming all over the place.
Source of Information : [The Economist] Volume 401 Number 8760 Nov 19th - Nov 25th 2011
ECOISLAND is a group so green that the invitations it sent to an event at Britain's House of Commons were printed on recycled paper embedded with meadow-flower seeds Gust plant, water and watch them grow). Its aim is to make the Isle of Wight, off Britain's south coast, energy-independent by 2020. The island is often viewed as a quaint place a decade or so behind the times. But if the project, launched on November 15th, comes off, the Isle of Wight could be in the vanguard of an environmentally friendlier future. Ecoisland plans to install solar panels on roofs (the island is one of the sunniest places in England), insulate houses better, make greater use of geothermal, wind and tidal energy, and generate power from waste. There are also plans for electric vehicles that residents and visitors alike can hire. Locally grown food would be delivered through island-wide supply hubs. A concerted effort is under way to reduce water use and capture more rainwater (about one-third of the island's fresh water at present is pumped from the mainland). This all seems very cosy, but what gives Ecoisland an edge-apart from its
energetic and auspiciously named chief executive, David Green-is the array of national and international companies which have agreed to take part. These include IBM, Cable &Wireless and Silver Spring Networks, which together with Toshiba, will be working on smart-grid technology and energy-storage systems. Toshiba is doing similar work for the
Japanese island of Miyako.
British partners include Southern Water, a utility, SSE, an electricity supplier, and ITM Power, which makes electrolysis systems that generate hydrogen from water. The hydrogen can be used as an energy store and to power cars and vans. Graham Cooley, ITM's chief executive, says an island provides a natural boundary within which the benefits of integrating sustainable services can be more easily explored. Mr Green says that the partnership has already raised £2oom ($315m) in private funding. Ultimately, he hopes, the acquired eco know-how can be exported to other places. By then his business cards, which are also meadow-seeded, could be blooming all over the place.
Source of Information : [The Economist] Volume 401 Number 8760 Nov 19th - Nov 25th 2011
2012年1月21日
Regional drink and drug trends - Sober London
Why young people in the capital shun drink and drugs
"TOP BOY", a drama shown on Channel Four earlier this month, depicted a London housing estate awash with guns, gangs and illicit substances. Almost every young person who was not selling drugs seemed to be buying them. As television, it was rather good. As sociology, it was questionable. Compared with other English youngsters, Londoners are oddly abstemious.
Surveys by the National Health Service show that Londoners aged between nand 15 are less likely to smoke than are youngsters in every other English region. They drink alcohol much more rarely Qust12% did so in the week before the survey, compared with between 19% and 26% in the other regions) and are no more likely to take illicit drugs. Another largescale survey for the Department of Education rolls drink and drug use among young people into a single measure. Again, London stands out for its sobriety.
London's teenagers may be lying. Other surveys show that people in their late teens and early 20s are slightly more likely to take drugs if they live in the capital (although, confusingly, Londoners become abstemious again in their 30s). Another explanation is that the capital contains a lot of immigrants from places where youthful drinking and smoking are rare-particularly the Indian subcontinent. Ealing, which is heavily Asian, has London's lowest rate of youthful substance abuse. But if stricter Asians were the explanation, northern cities like Bradford would also be abstemious. They are not always. London's odd social make-up may help to explain the pattern. In addition to an immigrant-heavy working class, the capital has a lot of affluent professionals, who may be unusually keen to steer their children away from mind-altering chemicals. Wealthy counties like Buckinghamshire and Hertfordshire also have belowaverage rates of youthful drink and drug abuse, although not as low as London's.
There is a more startling possibility: London represents the future. Alex Stevens, a criminologist at the University of Kent, points out that the capital generally leads drug trends. Heroin emerged in London and a few other large cities in the 1980s, then spread. So did cocaine. Home Office surveys show that adults in the capital were twice as likely to take powder cocaine as were adults elsewhere in the late 1990s. Having declined in London and risen everywhere else, the drug is now as popular in the far north of England as it is in the capital.
Britons have been hooked on drink and drugs for so long that it is hard to imagine them dropping the habit. But if the country were to become less intoxicated, the earliest signs of change would probably appear in the city.
Source of Information : [The Economist] Volume 401 Number 8760 Nov 19th - Nov 25th 2011
"TOP BOY", a drama shown on Channel Four earlier this month, depicted a London housing estate awash with guns, gangs and illicit substances. Almost every young person who was not selling drugs seemed to be buying them. As television, it was rather good. As sociology, it was questionable. Compared with other English youngsters, Londoners are oddly abstemious.
Surveys by the National Health Service show that Londoners aged between nand 15 are less likely to smoke than are youngsters in every other English region. They drink alcohol much more rarely Qust12% did so in the week before the survey, compared with between 19% and 26% in the other regions) and are no more likely to take illicit drugs. Another largescale survey for the Department of Education rolls drink and drug use among young people into a single measure. Again, London stands out for its sobriety.
London's teenagers may be lying. Other surveys show that people in their late teens and early 20s are slightly more likely to take drugs if they live in the capital (although, confusingly, Londoners become abstemious again in their 30s). Another explanation is that the capital contains a lot of immigrants from places where youthful drinking and smoking are rare-particularly the Indian subcontinent. Ealing, which is heavily Asian, has London's lowest rate of youthful substance abuse. But if stricter Asians were the explanation, northern cities like Bradford would also be abstemious. They are not always. London's odd social make-up may help to explain the pattern. In addition to an immigrant-heavy working class, the capital has a lot of affluent professionals, who may be unusually keen to steer their children away from mind-altering chemicals. Wealthy counties like Buckinghamshire and Hertfordshire also have belowaverage rates of youthful drink and drug abuse, although not as low as London's.
There is a more startling possibility: London represents the future. Alex Stevens, a criminologist at the University of Kent, points out that the capital generally leads drug trends. Heroin emerged in London and a few other large cities in the 1980s, then spread. So did cocaine. Home Office surveys show that adults in the capital were twice as likely to take powder cocaine as were adults elsewhere in the late 1990s. Having declined in London and risen everywhere else, the drug is now as popular in the far north of England as it is in the capital.
Britons have been hooked on drink and drugs for so long that it is hard to imagine them dropping the habit. But if the country were to become less intoxicated, the earliest signs of change would probably appear in the city.
Source of Information : [The Economist] Volume 401 Number 8760 Nov 19th - Nov 25th 2011
2012年1月18日
What dinosaurs ate - The belly of the beast
A chance discover y from China suggests some dinosaurs lived in trees
WHAT dinosaurs ate is, of course, a question as interesting and illuminating as what ate dinosaurs. In the case of one particular dinosaur, Microraptor, the matter was addressed in a presentation to the annual meeting of the Society of Vertebrate Palaeontology by Jingmai O'Connor of the Institute of Vertebrate Palaeontology and Palaeoanthropology, in Beijing.
Microraptor (see photograph) is one of many small, feathered dinosaurs found in what is now China that were alive during the Cretaceous period more than 66m years ago. Being feathered, it and its kind were cousins to birds. The actual split between the two groups, though, had happened much earlier, during the Jurassic period (the first known bird is Archaeopteryx, from 150m years ago), and by the late Cretaceous there were many species of bird around. What Dr O'Connor and her colleagues have found is the remains of one of those birds, of an as-yet-unidentified species, in the stomach of a specimen of Microraptor.
That is interesting. Discovering direct evidence of what a fossil animal ate, rather than having to infer it from details such as the shape of its teeth, is always valuable. But the find's true significance is a small detail of the prey's anatomy: the third toe of its foot. The size of the prey's third toe is important because, among birds, long third toes are helpful for grasping branches and perching in trees. Indeed, the trait is so useful for arboreal life that it is used by many avian palaeontologists to decide whether newly excavated species of fossil birds lived in trees or on the ground. And the last meal of this particular specimen of Microraptor did, indeed, have a long third toe.
That elongated toe suggests to Dr O'Connor that Microraptor, too, was arboreal, and hints that its feathers may have helped it to move through an environment where hops, jumps and flaps between branches were a regular part of its daily activity. Whether the first birds evolved from arboreal or terrestrial ancestors is a matter of lively debate among palaeontologists. A fossil formed so long after birds emerged does not, in truth, shed much light on that debate. But it does suggest feathers may have helped promote life in the trees, even for creatures that could not actually fly.
Source of Information : [The.Economist] Volume 401 Number 8759 Nov 12th - Nov 18th 2011
WHAT dinosaurs ate is, of course, a question as interesting and illuminating as what ate dinosaurs. In the case of one particular dinosaur, Microraptor, the matter was addressed in a presentation to the annual meeting of the Society of Vertebrate Palaeontology by Jingmai O'Connor of the Institute of Vertebrate Palaeontology and Palaeoanthropology, in Beijing.
Microraptor (see photograph) is one of many small, feathered dinosaurs found in what is now China that were alive during the Cretaceous period more than 66m years ago. Being feathered, it and its kind were cousins to birds. The actual split between the two groups, though, had happened much earlier, during the Jurassic period (the first known bird is Archaeopteryx, from 150m years ago), and by the late Cretaceous there were many species of bird around. What Dr O'Connor and her colleagues have found is the remains of one of those birds, of an as-yet-unidentified species, in the stomach of a specimen of Microraptor.
That is interesting. Discovering direct evidence of what a fossil animal ate, rather than having to infer it from details such as the shape of its teeth, is always valuable. But the find's true significance is a small detail of the prey's anatomy: the third toe of its foot. The size of the prey's third toe is important because, among birds, long third toes are helpful for grasping branches and perching in trees. Indeed, the trait is so useful for arboreal life that it is used by many avian palaeontologists to decide whether newly excavated species of fossil birds lived in trees or on the ground. And the last meal of this particular specimen of Microraptor did, indeed, have a long third toe.
That elongated toe suggests to Dr O'Connor that Microraptor, too, was arboreal, and hints that its feathers may have helped it to move through an environment where hops, jumps and flaps between branches were a regular part of its daily activity. Whether the first birds evolved from arboreal or terrestrial ancestors is a matter of lively debate among palaeontologists. A fossil formed so long after birds emerged does not, in truth, shed much light on that debate. But it does suggest feathers may have helped promote life in the trees, even for creatures that could not actually fly.
Source of Information : [The.Economist] Volume 401 Number 8759 Nov 12th - Nov 18th 2011
2012年1月14日
What ate dinosaurs? Old crocs
Even in their heyday, dinosaurs were not quite as dominant as popular myth makes th em out to be
0NE answer to the question, "What ate dinosaurs?" is, obviously, "Other dinosaurs." Theropod predators like Tljrannosaurus and Allosaurus loom large in the imagination of every lover of prehistoric monsters, and their animatronic fights with the likes of Diplodocus and Stegosaurus are the stuff of cliche. Science, though, tries to look beyond the obvious, and at this year's meeting of the Society of Vertebrate Palaeontology, held in Las Vegas, some of the speakers asked whether the top predators of the Mesozoic era really were all dinosaurs. Their conclusion was "no". Another group of reptiles, until recently neglected, were also important carnivores. And it is a group that is still around today: the crocodiles.
That the past role of crocodiles (or, strictly, crocodilians, since they came in many sizes and shapes, not all of which resemble the modern animals) has been underestimated was suggested a few years ago by Paul Sereno. Dr Sereno, a palaeontologist at the University of Chicago, uncovered a crocodile-dominated ecosystem from about 1oom years ago (the middle of the Cretaceous period), in what is now north Africa. Besides water-dwelling giants similar to (though much bigger than) today's animals, he found a range of forms including vegetarians and species that ran on elongated legs- more like dogs than crocodiles. That discovery has prompted other fossil hunters to look elsewhere. As a result, even the well-studied rocks of North America are revealing that dinosaurs did not have it all their own way in the ecosystems of the Mesozoic- as Stephanie Drumheller of the University of Iowa and Clint Boyd of the University of Texas at Austin explained to the meeting.
The Cretaceous equivalent of zebra and antelopes- the victim species in every wildlife documentary about the dramas of the African savannah- were herbivorous dinosaurs called ornithopods. Frequently, these were taken by theropods. But not always. When Ms Drumheller and Mr Boyd examined the bones of juvenile upperCretaceous ornithopods dug up in Utah they saw marks on one skeleton that looked suspiciously like those modem crocodiles inflict when biting and tearing at their prey. On examining these marks more closely, they found a crocodilian tooth stuck in one of them.
Crocodile tears
It was not a large tooth. Its size suggests the animal which made it was no more than a metre and a half (about 5 feet) long. Such a predator would have been unable to take on an adult ornithopod. Nevertheless, this tooth is the first unarguable proof that crocodilians did indeed snack on dinosaurs. Moreover, it helps to confirm suspicions that the other crocodile-bite-like marks that Ms Drumheller and Mr Boyd have discovered really are what they look like. By combining that with an analysis of the whole site, the two researchers argue that what they have discovered is a dinosaur nesting ground that was being raided by crocodilians.
Such suspicions have been aroused before. Other sites in Utah are known to be
dinosaur nesting grounds, since eggs are found there. Crocodilian bones frequently turn up at such sites. Ms Drumheller and Mr Boyd, however, seem to have nailed the connection down. Juvenile dinosaurs, at least, were indeed the prey of crocodilians. But what about adults?
More than mere morsels
To investigate that question, Martin Lockley at the University of Colorado, Denver, and Spencer Lucas of the New Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science, turned to one of the most famous fossil phenomena on the planet- the dinosaur freeway that runs through Colorado, New Mexico, Kansas and Oklahoma. This collection of tracks, scattered over several sites of the same age along the coast of an inland sea, is thought to mark an ancient migration route. The traces of more than 1,380 individual animals can be distinguished. Most, but not all, were omithopods. Some were small carnivorous dinosaurs-the sort that might pick off young stragglers in the way that the crocodilians identified by Ms Drumheller and Mr Boyd did. But there is, Dr Lockley and Dr Lucas realised, something missing from the picture. When they looked for traces of big predatory dinosaurs, they found none.
That is ecologically absurd. Unless, of course, the top predator of the system- the one that could hunt down adult ornithopods-was not a dinosaur at all. And, when Dr Lockley and Dr Lucas re-examined the tracks they found that that was exactly what was going on. Instead of therepod footmarks, they found those of crocodilians. More than a quarter of the places where the dinosaur freeway sur- faces have yielded signs of crocs. And they
were big: sometimes more than four metres long. That is certainly large enough to
take on an adult ornithopod. Such megacrocs, then, could easily have acted as top predators in this ecosystem. But that does not completely explain the absence of theropod tracks. Modem migrating herbivores fall victim to many sorts of carnivore: big cats, wolves and hyenas, to name but three. The marshy conditions of the dinosaur freeway (the reason its footprints formed, and have survived) may, though, have favoured crocodilians over predators that had evolved on drier land. In that sort of environment even a big theropod would constantly have been looking over its shoulder. Perhaps the real reason why they did not plant their footprints on the dinosaur freeway is that they might have ended up as prey, as well.
Source of Information : [The.Economist] Volume 401 Number 8759 Nov 12th - Nov 18th 2011
0NE answer to the question, "What ate dinosaurs?" is, obviously, "Other dinosaurs." Theropod predators like Tljrannosaurus and Allosaurus loom large in the imagination of every lover of prehistoric monsters, and their animatronic fights with the likes of Diplodocus and Stegosaurus are the stuff of cliche. Science, though, tries to look beyond the obvious, and at this year's meeting of the Society of Vertebrate Palaeontology, held in Las Vegas, some of the speakers asked whether the top predators of the Mesozoic era really were all dinosaurs. Their conclusion was "no". Another group of reptiles, until recently neglected, were also important carnivores. And it is a group that is still around today: the crocodiles.
That the past role of crocodiles (or, strictly, crocodilians, since they came in many sizes and shapes, not all of which resemble the modern animals) has been underestimated was suggested a few years ago by Paul Sereno. Dr Sereno, a palaeontologist at the University of Chicago, uncovered a crocodile-dominated ecosystem from about 1oom years ago (the middle of the Cretaceous period), in what is now north Africa. Besides water-dwelling giants similar to (though much bigger than) today's animals, he found a range of forms including vegetarians and species that ran on elongated legs- more like dogs than crocodiles. That discovery has prompted other fossil hunters to look elsewhere. As a result, even the well-studied rocks of North America are revealing that dinosaurs did not have it all their own way in the ecosystems of the Mesozoic- as Stephanie Drumheller of the University of Iowa and Clint Boyd of the University of Texas at Austin explained to the meeting.
The Cretaceous equivalent of zebra and antelopes- the victim species in every wildlife documentary about the dramas of the African savannah- were herbivorous dinosaurs called ornithopods. Frequently, these were taken by theropods. But not always. When Ms Drumheller and Mr Boyd examined the bones of juvenile upperCretaceous ornithopods dug up in Utah they saw marks on one skeleton that looked suspiciously like those modem crocodiles inflict when biting and tearing at their prey. On examining these marks more closely, they found a crocodilian tooth stuck in one of them.
Crocodile tears
It was not a large tooth. Its size suggests the animal which made it was no more than a metre and a half (about 5 feet) long. Such a predator would have been unable to take on an adult ornithopod. Nevertheless, this tooth is the first unarguable proof that crocodilians did indeed snack on dinosaurs. Moreover, it helps to confirm suspicions that the other crocodile-bite-like marks that Ms Drumheller and Mr Boyd have discovered really are what they look like. By combining that with an analysis of the whole site, the two researchers argue that what they have discovered is a dinosaur nesting ground that was being raided by crocodilians.
Such suspicions have been aroused before. Other sites in Utah are known to be
dinosaur nesting grounds, since eggs are found there. Crocodilian bones frequently turn up at such sites. Ms Drumheller and Mr Boyd, however, seem to have nailed the connection down. Juvenile dinosaurs, at least, were indeed the prey of crocodilians. But what about adults?
More than mere morsels
To investigate that question, Martin Lockley at the University of Colorado, Denver, and Spencer Lucas of the New Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science, turned to one of the most famous fossil phenomena on the planet- the dinosaur freeway that runs through Colorado, New Mexico, Kansas and Oklahoma. This collection of tracks, scattered over several sites of the same age along the coast of an inland sea, is thought to mark an ancient migration route. The traces of more than 1,380 individual animals can be distinguished. Most, but not all, were omithopods. Some were small carnivorous dinosaurs-the sort that might pick off young stragglers in the way that the crocodilians identified by Ms Drumheller and Mr Boyd did. But there is, Dr Lockley and Dr Lucas realised, something missing from the picture. When they looked for traces of big predatory dinosaurs, they found none.
That is ecologically absurd. Unless, of course, the top predator of the system- the one that could hunt down adult ornithopods-was not a dinosaur at all. And, when Dr Lockley and Dr Lucas re-examined the tracks they found that that was exactly what was going on. Instead of therepod footmarks, they found those of crocodilians. More than a quarter of the places where the dinosaur freeway sur- faces have yielded signs of crocs. And they
were big: sometimes more than four metres long. That is certainly large enough to
take on an adult ornithopod. Such megacrocs, then, could easily have acted as top predators in this ecosystem. But that does not completely explain the absence of theropod tracks. Modem migrating herbivores fall victim to many sorts of carnivore: big cats, wolves and hyenas, to name but three. The marshy conditions of the dinosaur freeway (the reason its footprints formed, and have survived) may, though, have favoured crocodilians over predators that had evolved on drier land. In that sort of environment even a big theropod would constantly have been looking over its shoulder. Perhaps the real reason why they did not plant their footprints on the dinosaur freeway is that they might have ended up as prey, as well.
Source of Information : [The.Economist] Volume 401 Number 8759 Nov 12th - Nov 18th 2011
2012年1月10日
Asia's rice bowls
How serious w ill the impact of the Thai floods be on Asian tables?
IN ASIA kingdoms are said to rise and fall with the shifting price of rice. So the continent's rulers presumably ought to be worried by the effects of disastrous floods in Thailand, the world's biggest exporter of the white grains (see chart).
Last year Thailand provided about a third by volume of all internationally traded rice- around 10m tonnes. Thailand's government reckons that some 5m-6m tonnes (nearly a fifth of the country's total produ ction) might have been destroyed by the deluge. Some analysts say that the damage could be even more severe. Pessimists worry that Thailand's exports could be cut by 3m-4m tonnes. With the world trade in rice expected to hit over 33m tonnes in 2011 this could take around 10% out of the market. If the same thing happened with oil or wheat the results would be calamitous.
But the nature of the rice market means that the consequences may not be as severe. Rice is a resilient crop, and the floods may not do as much damage as some fear. Although rice is a staple for half the world's population, international trade is small compared with the 451m tonnes that will pop out of the ground in the 2010-u growing season. Only about 7% of the total crop hits global markets, compared with 20% or so for wheat.
Politics and tastes mean that rice is mainly consumed where it is grown. Rice is such a vital foodstuff in Asia- some 90% is grown and eaten there- that policies aim at self-sufficiency. Domestic markets are usually heavily regulated and protected. It is one of the most politicised of commodities, according to Concepci6n Calpe of the Food and Agriculture Organisation. Moreover rice comes in many varieties: longgrain, short-grain, sticky, fluffy and so on.
Consumers want their customary sort, not an unfamiliar rice from far afield. The result is that many rice-eating countries are detached from the price swings in global markets, according to Darren Cooper of the International Grains Council, a research body. Others aim to be. China, the world's biggest producer at around 130m tonnes a year, is largely self-sufficient. The Philippines, the world's biggest importer, plans to cultivate all its own rice by 2013. What's more, it has been an excellent year for rice crops on the whole. Droughts in Arkansas, America's main rice-growing area, have hit the crop: exports will be closer to 3m than 4m tonnes this year. Butbumper cropsinlndia and Pakistan should help offset a shortfall in Thai exports.
The excellent harvest in India convinced politicians, once fearful of food inflation,
to lower protectionist defences. The government lifted an export ban on white rice in September, allowing 2m tonnes to be exported before Thailand's floods. Indian traders, worried that the decision will be reversed, have quickly sold almost all the allowance at rock-bottom prices. This has proved good news for African countries, which import around 10m tonnes annually, a third of the global trade.
The floods will have some impact. Thailand's benchmark rice is currently fetching around $630 a tonne, roughly what it cost at the start of September. Credit Suisse thinks prices might hit $700 before the end of the year. More gloomy forecasters say that it could even top $8oo. But kingdoms will not totter.
Source of Information : [The.Economist] Volume 401 Number 8759 Nov 12th - Nov 18th 2011
IN ASIA kingdoms are said to rise and fall with the shifting price of rice. So the continent's rulers presumably ought to be worried by the effects of disastrous floods in Thailand, the world's biggest exporter of the white grains (see chart).
Last year Thailand provided about a third by volume of all internationally traded rice- around 10m tonnes. Thailand's government reckons that some 5m-6m tonnes (nearly a fifth of the country's total produ ction) might have been destroyed by the deluge. Some analysts say that the damage could be even more severe. Pessimists worry that Thailand's exports could be cut by 3m-4m tonnes. With the world trade in rice expected to hit over 33m tonnes in 2011 this could take around 10% out of the market. If the same thing happened with oil or wheat the results would be calamitous.
But the nature of the rice market means that the consequences may not be as severe. Rice is a resilient crop, and the floods may not do as much damage as some fear. Although rice is a staple for half the world's population, international trade is small compared with the 451m tonnes that will pop out of the ground in the 2010-u growing season. Only about 7% of the total crop hits global markets, compared with 20% or so for wheat.
Politics and tastes mean that rice is mainly consumed where it is grown. Rice is such a vital foodstuff in Asia- some 90% is grown and eaten there- that policies aim at self-sufficiency. Domestic markets are usually heavily regulated and protected. It is one of the most politicised of commodities, according to Concepci6n Calpe of the Food and Agriculture Organisation. Moreover rice comes in many varieties: longgrain, short-grain, sticky, fluffy and so on.
Consumers want their customary sort, not an unfamiliar rice from far afield. The result is that many rice-eating countries are detached from the price swings in global markets, according to Darren Cooper of the International Grains Council, a research body. Others aim to be. China, the world's biggest producer at around 130m tonnes a year, is largely self-sufficient. The Philippines, the world's biggest importer, plans to cultivate all its own rice by 2013. What's more, it has been an excellent year for rice crops on the whole. Droughts in Arkansas, America's main rice-growing area, have hit the crop: exports will be closer to 3m than 4m tonnes this year. Butbumper cropsinlndia and Pakistan should help offset a shortfall in Thai exports.
The excellent harvest in India convinced politicians, once fearful of food inflation,
to lower protectionist defences. The government lifted an export ban on white rice in September, allowing 2m tonnes to be exported before Thailand's floods. Indian traders, worried that the decision will be reversed, have quickly sold almost all the allowance at rock-bottom prices. This has proved good news for African countries, which import around 10m tonnes annually, a third of the global trade.
The floods will have some impact. Thailand's benchmark rice is currently fetching around $630 a tonne, roughly what it cost at the start of September. Credit Suisse thinks prices might hit $700 before the end of the year. More gloomy forecasters say that it could even top $8oo. But kingdoms will not totter.
Source of Information : [The.Economist] Volume 401 Number 8759 Nov 12th - Nov 18th 2011
2012年1月7日
A very short history of the crisis - To understand the politics of the euro, it is necessary to look at its causes
IN GERMAN EYES this crisis is all about profligacy. Greece set the tone when it lied about its circumstances and lived beyond its means. There is no disputing Greek dissipation, nor the fact that the euro zone's troubled members, which also include Portugal, Ireland, Spain and Italy, must now pay a heavy price. But those other troubled countries were not exactly profligate. Before the crisis the governments of both Ireland and Spain ran budget surpluses.
Both meticulously kept within the limits for deficits and debts set down by the stability and growth pact- unlike Germany, which flouted the rules for four years from 2003 (and avoided punishment). Nor did Italy lurch into extravagance. Debt in these countries has become a burden not because of government profligacy but because each enjoyed a decade of low interest rates and was then hit by the financial crisis. Easy credit fuelled debt in households and the financial sector. The European Central Bank oversaw a binge of cross-border lending. In the crisis unemployment and hardship have deepened, increasing the bill for welfare. Some countries, such as Ireland and Spain, have needed to find money to prop up their banks. These new expenses fell on the state just when tax receipts collapsedcatastrophically in countries that had seen a property boom.
At the same time interest rates surged. Before the crisis investors assumed no euro-zone government would default on its debt. However, as Peter Boone and Simon]ohnson of the Peterson Institute in Washington, DC, explain, Germany then signaled that defaults could happen and that investors would have to bear a share of the losses-a reasonable demand, but a hard one to introduce in the middle of a crisis. Some investors asked to be rewarded for the extra risk and others, unwilling to start paying for credit research, just walked away. This set off a spiral of falling bond prices, weakening banks and slowing growth. Even where troubled euro-zone countries had not been profligate, they have been running unsustainable current-ac- count deficits. Low interest rates fuelled domestic spending and spurred inflation in wages and goods, which in turn made their exports more expensive and left imports relatively cheaper. But it was also because Germany was recycling the surpluses produced by its export machine, financing their consumption.
Germany's economy is remarkable in many ways, but it was as unbalanced as the euro zone's peripheral economies. In their determination to save, Germans seemed to forget that in the long run the point of exports is to pay for imports. They must now regret having invested their savings abroad in American subprime mortgages and Greek government debt.
Your debt, your fault
To end the crisis, the euro zone members agreed last month to write down half of the Greek debt owned by the private sector, recapitalise Europe's banks and boost the fund created as a firewall to protect solvent euro-zone governments. It is an ambitious plan, but Greece may need even more help and the firewall does not look strong enough to withstand a bout of contagion.
And even when the crisis has abated, restoring Europe to health will take many years. That is because the troubled countries need to control their government deficits and to re-establish sound current accounts by improving their competitiveness. Germans feel that the responsibility for this lengthy adjustment lies exclusively with borrowers, which must urgently restore budget discipline. Significantly, the German word for debt, Schulden, is the plural of Schuld, meaning guilt or fault. However, this strategy risks being self-defeating. By pushing for immediate austerity the euro zone is deepening recession in the troubled economies, which will only make their debt harder to service. Germany's approach suffers from a fallacy of composition. lt is not possible for everyone to save their way to prosperity. As Keynes argued after the Depression, someone, somewhere must be consuming. In Europe that should be countries such as Germany and the Netherlands that were running vast current-account surpluses during the boom. But the creditors are loth to accept that they are part of the problem.
Creditor governments, most of all Germany, face a dilemma. They need to save troubled governments in order to prevent contagion. On the other hand they also want to keep up market pressure for reforms and to establish the principle that governments are on their own- so that German taxpayers will not be landed with the bill every time some EU country goes on a spending spree. So far Germany is trying to have it both ways, and succeeding only in getting everyone deeper into the mire.
Source of Information : [The.Economist] Volume 401 Number 8759 Nov 12th - Nov 18th 2011
Both meticulously kept within the limits for deficits and debts set down by the stability and growth pact- unlike Germany, which flouted the rules for four years from 2003 (and avoided punishment). Nor did Italy lurch into extravagance. Debt in these countries has become a burden not because of government profligacy but because each enjoyed a decade of low interest rates and was then hit by the financial crisis. Easy credit fuelled debt in households and the financial sector. The European Central Bank oversaw a binge of cross-border lending. In the crisis unemployment and hardship have deepened, increasing the bill for welfare. Some countries, such as Ireland and Spain, have needed to find money to prop up their banks. These new expenses fell on the state just when tax receipts collapsedcatastrophically in countries that had seen a property boom.
At the same time interest rates surged. Before the crisis investors assumed no euro-zone government would default on its debt. However, as Peter Boone and Simon]ohnson of the Peterson Institute in Washington, DC, explain, Germany then signaled that defaults could happen and that investors would have to bear a share of the losses-a reasonable demand, but a hard one to introduce in the middle of a crisis. Some investors asked to be rewarded for the extra risk and others, unwilling to start paying for credit research, just walked away. This set off a spiral of falling bond prices, weakening banks and slowing growth. Even where troubled euro-zone countries had not been profligate, they have been running unsustainable current-ac- count deficits. Low interest rates fuelled domestic spending and spurred inflation in wages and goods, which in turn made their exports more expensive and left imports relatively cheaper. But it was also because Germany was recycling the surpluses produced by its export machine, financing their consumption.
Germany's economy is remarkable in many ways, but it was as unbalanced as the euro zone's peripheral economies. In their determination to save, Germans seemed to forget that in the long run the point of exports is to pay for imports. They must now regret having invested their savings abroad in American subprime mortgages and Greek government debt.
Your debt, your fault
To end the crisis, the euro zone members agreed last month to write down half of the Greek debt owned by the private sector, recapitalise Europe's banks and boost the fund created as a firewall to protect solvent euro-zone governments. It is an ambitious plan, but Greece may need even more help and the firewall does not look strong enough to withstand a bout of contagion.
And even when the crisis has abated, restoring Europe to health will take many years. That is because the troubled countries need to control their government deficits and to re-establish sound current accounts by improving their competitiveness. Germans feel that the responsibility for this lengthy adjustment lies exclusively with borrowers, which must urgently restore budget discipline. Significantly, the German word for debt, Schulden, is the plural of Schuld, meaning guilt or fault. However, this strategy risks being self-defeating. By pushing for immediate austerity the euro zone is deepening recession in the troubled economies, which will only make their debt harder to service. Germany's approach suffers from a fallacy of composition. lt is not possible for everyone to save their way to prosperity. As Keynes argued after the Depression, someone, somewhere must be consuming. In Europe that should be countries such as Germany and the Netherlands that were running vast current-account surpluses during the boom. But the creditors are loth to accept that they are part of the problem.
Creditor governments, most of all Germany, face a dilemma. They need to save troubled governments in order to prevent contagion. On the other hand they also want to keep up market pressure for reforms and to establish the principle that governments are on their own- so that German taxpayers will not be landed with the bill every time some EU country goes on a spending spree. So far Germany is trying to have it both ways, and succeeding only in getting everyone deeper into the mire.
Source of Information : [The.Economist] Volume 401 Number 8759 Nov 12th - Nov 18th 2011
2012年1月3日
All too friendly - The war may be over but foreign powers are still busy in Libya
THE Libyan rebels who triumphed in their six-month uprising against Colonel Muammar Qaddafi could not have prevailed without arms, air-cover, funding and diplomatic support from NATO and Arab allies. Even so, victory belonged to them. No foreign ground troops were deployed.
Brave Libyans protected Benghazi, defended Misrata and captured Tripoli. The country's new rulers emerged from the war with hard-earned legitimacy, giving them a decent chance of setting up a unified national government. Last month they thanked their foreign allies and bid them goodbye. Most allies in turn stressed that the Libyans were in charge. Time to go home, they said: this was not Iraq in 2003. However, since the fighting ceased some allies have become more involved in Libyan affairs, not less, according to Western diplomats.
Libya is a small, rich and homogenous country. None of its political factions and fledgling parties are dominant. To gain influence (and wealth) they know they must co-operate. A successful post-war political system will be based on competition. But it can only work if no one group gains dominance. Some could potentially make a bid for hegemony, but only if they have access to outside resources. Parts of the new establishment are worried when they see foreign powers giving selective backing to their opponents- often those prepared to do their bidding. This not only undermines the new republic's aura of legitimacy, but risks igniting internecine conflicts beyond the messy politics that is already playing out in Tripoli.
The worst offender is Qatar, according to several Tripoli-based diplomats. The small Gulf state was instrumental in arming the rebels. Earlier this year it sent hundreds of weapons shipments and military advisers to Libya and lobbied hard for international intervention. Not surprisingly, the Qataris are revered among Libyans. All over lhpoli, squares and districts have been renamed in their honour. Yet the Qataris are now supporting the political ambitions of hand-picked leaders and commanders, undermining attempts to form a unified military command. Some members of the National 1i"ansitional Council are seething. They say even during the war the Qataris bypassed them, sending weapons directly to favored units at the front. To a lesser extent some Western powers are also pushing their own men or models.
This is not a new phenomenon in the Middle East. In Lebanon and Iraq, two volatile Arab democracies, outside powers run democratic proxies and interfere in national affairs at will- often out of self-interest. One political group is in the pockets of the Saudis, another is paid by the Iranians. If Libya wants to have a better future it must avoid going down that road, wise heads in Tripoli warn. Neighbours like Egypt have so far stayed out of Libya. But they will not want to be outflanked by Gulf states on their own doorstep.
Thankfully, Libya is coping well with liberation. Shops and cafes are once again open late, celebratory gunfire has died down, concerts are held in Tripoli's Martyr's Square, known as Green Square under previous management. Life has returned to normal. Admittedly, heavily armed groups from different parts of the country still control overlapping turfs. One 1i"ipoli militia comprising about so gunmen is operating out of an appropriated computer-showroom decked out with revolutionary tricoloured flags. The militia was recently involved in a firefight with rivals.
A squabble outside the Central Hospital between fighters from Zintan and Misrata left one dead. But such skirmishes will not undermine the new order, says Bashir ai-Sweie, a commander based in a governmentowned arboretum, who would like to return to business once the security forces are in place. Many young men, said another commander, are frustrated that they risked their lives on the battlefield but have yet to be rewarded. A plan to educate and rehabilitate soldiers will probably take months. Outsiders who want to help could offer to support that, instead.
Source of Information : [The.Economist] Volume 401 Number 8759 Nov 12th - Nov 18th 2011
Brave Libyans protected Benghazi, defended Misrata and captured Tripoli. The country's new rulers emerged from the war with hard-earned legitimacy, giving them a decent chance of setting up a unified national government. Last month they thanked their foreign allies and bid them goodbye. Most allies in turn stressed that the Libyans were in charge. Time to go home, they said: this was not Iraq in 2003. However, since the fighting ceased some allies have become more involved in Libyan affairs, not less, according to Western diplomats.
Libya is a small, rich and homogenous country. None of its political factions and fledgling parties are dominant. To gain influence (and wealth) they know they must co-operate. A successful post-war political system will be based on competition. But it can only work if no one group gains dominance. Some could potentially make a bid for hegemony, but only if they have access to outside resources. Parts of the new establishment are worried when they see foreign powers giving selective backing to their opponents- often those prepared to do their bidding. This not only undermines the new republic's aura of legitimacy, but risks igniting internecine conflicts beyond the messy politics that is already playing out in Tripoli.
The worst offender is Qatar, according to several Tripoli-based diplomats. The small Gulf state was instrumental in arming the rebels. Earlier this year it sent hundreds of weapons shipments and military advisers to Libya and lobbied hard for international intervention. Not surprisingly, the Qataris are revered among Libyans. All over lhpoli, squares and districts have been renamed in their honour. Yet the Qataris are now supporting the political ambitions of hand-picked leaders and commanders, undermining attempts to form a unified military command. Some members of the National 1i"ansitional Council are seething. They say even during the war the Qataris bypassed them, sending weapons directly to favored units at the front. To a lesser extent some Western powers are also pushing their own men or models.
This is not a new phenomenon in the Middle East. In Lebanon and Iraq, two volatile Arab democracies, outside powers run democratic proxies and interfere in national affairs at will- often out of self-interest. One political group is in the pockets of the Saudis, another is paid by the Iranians. If Libya wants to have a better future it must avoid going down that road, wise heads in Tripoli warn. Neighbours like Egypt have so far stayed out of Libya. But they will not want to be outflanked by Gulf states on their own doorstep.
Thankfully, Libya is coping well with liberation. Shops and cafes are once again open late, celebratory gunfire has died down, concerts are held in Tripoli's Martyr's Square, known as Green Square under previous management. Life has returned to normal. Admittedly, heavily armed groups from different parts of the country still control overlapping turfs. One 1i"ipoli militia comprising about so gunmen is operating out of an appropriated computer-showroom decked out with revolutionary tricoloured flags. The militia was recently involved in a firefight with rivals.
A squabble outside the Central Hospital between fighters from Zintan and Misrata left one dead. But such skirmishes will not undermine the new order, says Bashir ai-Sweie, a commander based in a governmentowned arboretum, who would like to return to business once the security forces are in place. Many young men, said another commander, are frustrated that they risked their lives on the battlefield but have yet to be rewarded. A plan to educate and rehabilitate soldiers will probably take months. Outsiders who want to help could offer to support that, instead.
Source of Information : [The.Economist] Volume 401 Number 8759 Nov 12th - Nov 18th 2011
订阅：
博文 (Atom)