To clone the Turkish Angola cats, Kong’s team used skin cells of the mother cat. They modified its genes to make them fluorescent by using a virus, which was transplanted into the ova. The ova were then implanted into the womb of the donor cat.

Do you know how cloning works? It’s a kewl thing to find out to learn more GED science. Here’s an article you can study that tells a lot about it: http://exchanges.state.gov/forum/journal/cloning.htm I guess what the scientists do, they take a cell. Then they take an egg cell from a girl animal… TMI, right? Anyway, the center part of a cell is the nucleus, and that’s where all the information is, that tells an animal how to grow. So, they take the center part of one cell and put it in the egg cell. Then, they put it back in the mom, and it just grows from there… Total science fiction, right? Or is it real GED science?

If I was reading this for the GED test, I’d be trying to figure out what’s special about how these scientists cloned the cat. I guess these people that made these cats used skin cells… then they used a virus to change its genes. That’s the part that’s different. Putting it in the ova, that’s the egg cell, like I said before. So the big thing they did is use a virus to change the genes of a cell… Now THAT’S GED science fiction. A virus is like a little ball of genes… but I didn’t know you could use it to change the genes in a cell. What if you could get a virus, and then, it would change all your genes… and maybe you’d become a giant lizard guy! How does that work anyway?

Now it’s time to do some GED critical thinking… I guess figuring out ways to change genes can help with genetic diseases, huh? I guess that’s what they mean about how their work will help out with fighting diseases. Still, do you think they’re gonna start marketing them glow-in-the-dark cats? And could they have figured out how to use viruses to change genes in some other way? And is it a good idea to start changin’ genes around anyway? I mean, lizard men are kewl, but maybe I’d rather just see em in the movies…. or on the GED test….

To find out more about the GED test and GED test preparation, visit The GED Academy at passGED.com.

http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/biz/2007/12/123_15447.html

Seriously, though, folks. They say they want to help make genetic research… but get real. How do glow-in-the-dark cats help cure diseases? They probably just want to make a lot of money selling special cats to millionaires. What do you think? Here’s what they say…

The red cloned cat research is expected to be utilized in dealing with certain genetic diseases in animals and humans. It will also help reproduce rare animals, such as tigers and wildcats, which are on the verge of extinction, the team said.

How do they figure that? Think about it… and I’ll think about it too. Next time, I’ll let you know what I figure out… cuz I’m so smart!

We all know it’s kewl… but how come scientists care that this dinosaur’s a mummy? I guess the answer’s gotta be in this paragraph:

The fossilized remains, discovered in 1999, included not just bones, but fossilized soft tissues like skin, tendons and ligaments. Most importantly, it was the first-ever find of a dinosaur where the skin “envelope” had not collapsed onto the skeleton. This has allowed scientists to calculate muscle volume and mass for the first time. The fact that the skin is mostly intact allows for the exciting possibility that some of its original chemistry is still present.

Did you make anything out of all this science mumbo-jumbo? I know what “not just bones” means! There’s all sorts of icky dinosaur bits sticking to it… like skin and stuff. “Tendons,” “ligaments,” those are other gooey stuff inside your body, right? Can’t see that stuff if all you got is bones.

And it says the skin didn’t collapse, so they can see how much muscle those dinosaurs had… like how big around they were. More stuff you can’t see just from bones.

What about that part about “original chemistry”? What’s that? I bet it means dino DNA…. yeah, Jurassic Park time, dudes! They can get that mummy dino’s DNA and then make a whole army of mummy dinosaurs… hey, maybe being a scientist would be pretty kewl…

Well, maybe it’s not exactly like that. But look at this article:

Dinosaur Mummy Found with Fossilized Skin and Soft Tissues

Doesn’t that make you think of giant T-rexes wrapped in bandages rampaging around New York? Kewl.

This dinosaur thing isn’t really an Egyptian-type mummy, it just got mummified like on accident. It’s kinda kewl that a 16-year-old discovered it (wish I’d done that!), but what’s science-kewl about it? I mean, why do scientists care? Isn’t it just another dinosaur they found? What’s the big deal that it’s got skin and tissue?

See if you can figure it out… and I’ll do the same thing, and I’ll let you know what I figured out in my next post.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/11/071119103540.htm

Here’s the first paragraph:

The earliest known use of cacao––the source of our modern day chocolate––has been pushed back more than 500 years, to somewhere between 1400 and 1100 B.C.E., thanks to new chemical analyses of residues extracted from pottery excavated at an archaeological site at Puerto Escondido in Honduras. The new evidence also indicates that, long before the flavor of the cacao seed (or bean) became popular, it was the sweet pulp of the chocolate fruit, used in making a fermented (5% alcohol) beverage, which first drew attention to the plant in the Americas.

Yeah, it’s all about chocolate, but isn’t that just the kind of thing that would be on the GED? That’s right, I said it! Chocolate covered GED! So I thought I’d make up a practice question… like this one…

The “new evidence” mentioned in the second sentence is…

1) A recipe for chocolate liquor

2) Chemical analyses of stuff from old pots

3) Sweet pulp of chocolate fruit (mmm….chocolate fruit…)

4) None of the above

What do you think? I’ll clue you in next time…now, I gotta get me some CHOCOLATE!!!1!!1!!!!111!

The earliest known use of cacao—the source of our modern day chocolate—has been pushed back more than 500 years, to somewhere between 1400 and 1100 B.C.E., thanks to new chemical analyses of residues extracted from pottery excavated at an archaeological site at Puerto Escondido in Honduras. The new evidence also indicates that, long before the flavor of the cacao seed (or bean) became popular, it was the sweet pulp of the chocolate fruit, used in making a fermented (5% alcohol) beverage, which first drew attention to the plant in the Americas.

The “new evidence” mentioned in the second sentence is…

1) A recipe for chocolate liquor

2) Chemical analyses of stuff from old pots

3) Sweet pulp of chocolate fruit (mmm….chocolate fruit…)

4) None of the above

See that “new evidence” phrase there? What’s it mean? That’s the real question… so I look at the sentence, and it says the evidence shows that people drank fermented chocolate fruit… mmmm… chocolate wine!! I bet everyone’d buy that…

Anyways, so I look at the answers. I gotta think all logically, like Curtis or someone. Which one of these things would show that people drank chocolate wine? D’oh! They all would… a recipe, or leftover stuff, or maybe they found some chocolate pulp? So, I gotta read again.

First, I think about the recipe. Nowhere does the paragraph say anything about finding a recipe! Whatever the answer is, it gotta be in the article!

Then, I think about the second thing… a chemical analysis, like with a mad scientist in his laboratory, no doubt. Talks about that in the first sentence… “thanks to new chemical analyses of residues extracted from pottery.” Then, in the second sentence, it says the new evidence ALSO says… so it must be the evidence they talked about before. Who knew? There’s like scientists, who go around figuring out what the icky stuff on the bottom of old pots is. Man, they’d like to see my kitchen.

Yeah, the answer’s gotta be B. Did you get it?

What would happen if Dwayne (that’s me!) made a new kind of lava lamp with a light on the top as well as one on the bottom?

A) When the lamp was on, the lava stuff would move twice as fast.

B) When the lamp was on, the lava stuff wouldn’t move at all.

C) When the lamp was on, the lava stuff would go to the top and stop.

D) The lava stuff would keep moving even when the lamp was off.

E) The lamp would overheat.

The answer is… drumroll please…… C! The lava would go to the top of the lamp, then stop. How come?

Well, as we figured out, the lava rises up because the lamp at the bottom get hotter, kind of like how a hot-air balloon rises because the air is hotter, and hotter stuff is lighter.

So, if there was a lamp on both top and bottom, the stuff would still get hot, and it would rise to the top… but it wouldn’t ever cool down, because the lamp at the top would keep it hot. So it would go up to the top and stay there!

Make sense to you? Ask me if you don’t get it. And I promise, next time I’ll talk about something new! Even though lava lamps are really kewl…

So, last time, I told you how a lava lamp works. Basically, the light at the bottom makes the waxy stuff get hot. When it’s hotter, it’s less dense than the liquid, so it floats up. When it gets to the top, it cools down, gets more dense, and sinks down… makin’ kewl psychedelic lava lamps.

Here’s the extrapolation:

What would happen if Dwayne (that’s me!) made a new kind of lava lamp with a light on the top as well as one on the bottom?

A) When the lamp was on, the lava stuff would move twice as fast.

B) When the lamp was on, the lava stuff wouldn’t move at all.

C) When the lamp was on, the lava stuff would go to the top and stop.

D) The lava stuff would keep moving even when the lamp was off.

E) The lamp would overheat.

Hehehehe… I’m turning lava lamps into GED preparation! Good luck on this one! Let me know what you think…

Anyway, I guess my idea about trees being aliens is bust. I looked over that article, and if you remember, I had two questions…

What makes tree leaves change color?

I guess trees start out with stuff that colors them, that pigment stuff. And “chlorophyll” is what makes them green. (I thought chlorophyll was what they call the pool guy, Phil, who puts chlorine in the pool…) Anyway, chlorophyll takes light and makes it into food for the plants. Kewl!

Then, there’s something else in leaves called “auxin.” (Hmmmm… sounds like an alien name to me…) This stuff keeps the channels to the leaf open… I think of it kind of like keeping blood vessels open. You know how leaves got little lines in them? Like little blood vessels, right? Except with no blood… weird. So, I guess auxin keeps those things open so the leaf stays connected to the tree.

When the tree stops making auxin, everything closes off, and it doesn’t get any food. Then the chlorophyll dies… and the green goes away. Then, you can see the other colors from other pigments in the leaves.

Why does it happen in the fall?

I guess all this stuff happens when it gets cold and the days get short… but how does that stop the auxin? The article doesn’t say. Maybe it is aliens after all…

What do you think?

Seriously. Did you know science was so freaky? I never thought of it until I started studying for my GED. So I decided to keep you up to date on the weird and wild world of science…

Like, I was looking out my window, and I noticed that the leaves on the trees are starting to change colors. They do that every year, yeah, sure… but how come? I started to think how the trees are probably really aliens who traveled to Earth millions of years ago, and have been quietly waiting for the right moment to take over! And changing the colors of their leaves is a secret signal to each other and to their master ship that’s rotating the Earth.

Okay, Curtis says when I get ideas like that in my head, I should look up what’s really true. So I decided to look up about leaves. First I thought up my questions.

• What makes tree leaves change color?
• Why does it happen in the fall?

Here’s a link I found to start looking up my answers:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071012104737.htm

What do you all think? Are autumn leaves a natural process? Or signs of alien communication?

I’ll let you know next time what I found out.