Escuela Oficial de Idiomas de Córdoba

Lo flipas

2007-11-06T07:14:52+00:00

Descacharrante

'We are the World' USA for Africa

2007-11-06T07:02:08+00:00

CLIMATE CHANGE

2007-11-06T07:02:08+00:00

This report is published as a BTO Research Report and was funded by Defra. It comprises a review of the primary literature on climatic change and its effect on migratory species. It arises from collaboration between the BTO, Aberdeen University and CEH. Extra support and information were provided by participants at the conference “Climatic Change and Migratory Species”, held at Madingley Hall, Cambridge on 16 and 17 March 2005.

Background

Our climate is changing, both naturally and due to man’s actions. There is already compelling evidence that animals and plants have been affected in both their distribution and behaviour. Migratory species are likely to be affected by climate change as their behaviour usually involves seasonal movement between different geographic areas and across national boundaries. The primary framework for migratory species conservation is the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS). Several other international policies cover some migratory species, but only the Ramsar Convention (migratory waterbirds) currently provides for climate change.

To be able to successfully predict the impacts of climate change we need a better understanding of how populations of animals and plants will respond. Effects on breeding performance and survival are crucial, yet are poorly understood. Our understanding of the likely impacts of future climate change also varies greatly between taxonomic groups, with the best information being available for birds. Of the bird species listed on the CMS, 84% face some threat from climate change. Almost half of these are because of changes in water usage; this is equivalent to all other man-made causes put together. Although it is thought that no species has yet become extinct solely because of climate change (Golden Toad is a possible exception), many extinctions (of both migratory and non-migratory species) are predicted in the near future.

Climate Change Impacts on Migratory Species

Changes in range have been widely documented in all taxa, with distributions of most shifting towards the poles. In the UK the incidence of ‘southern’ species, such as the Little Egret (a bird), Loggerhead Turtle and Red Mullet (a fish) is increasing. The wintering areas of bird populations are changing as a result of climate-driven changes in migratory behaviour. In response to warmer temperatures, many waders, such as the Ringed Plover, are now wintering on the east of Britain (closer to their breeding grounds) rather than the west coast. Increasing numbers of European Blackcaps are now migrating west to Britain rather than south to Africa, and Chiffchaffs are remaining in the UK over winter (rather than migrating south).

The act of migration itself may become more difficult due to climate change. For example, many migratory birds use the Sahel region of Africa to refuel before making the northerly crossing of the Sahara Desert. Decreased rainfall and over-grazing is causing increased desertification in this area, leading to declines in a number of species such as the Whitethroat. Further declines in trans-Saharan migrants might be expected with climate change.

Interactions between climate change and human exploitation are widespread, though poorly understood. Examples include:

changes in migratory journeys of Wildebeest in Africa are hampered by the presence of park fences.
changes in rainfall patterns in Southern America are leading to the construction of dams that are proving a major barrier to the migration of the Tucuxi (a river dolphin).
many waterbirds are reliant on a network of a few, widely separated wetland sites for migration, which are at risk from rising sea levels.
many sites also face development and increasing water removal (due to climate change), making direct climate-driven threats even worse.
A major conservation concern is for arctic and montane species (most of which are migratory), the distributions of which cannot shift further north. Many migratory waders, such as the Red Knot, face large population declines and some, such as the endangered Spoon-billed Sandpiper , face extinction. Among mammals, Polar Bear and northern seals are of key concern, due to the loss of Arctic sea ice.

Sea-level rise has the potential to affect a range of species. Examples include:

turtles could lose their nesting beaches - 32% of beaches used by nesting turtles in the Caribbean could be lost with a 50cm sea-level rise
seals need beaches upon which to raise their pups - e.g. the endangered Mediterranean Monk Seal
there could be a net loss of shallow coastal areas used by whales, dolphins, dugongs and manatees - e.g. White-beaked Dolphins require cold water less than 200 m deep

A major effect of climate on migratory (and other) species will be changes in prey distribution, some of which are already well documented. Such changes are a major threat in marine ecosystems. Changes in sea surface temperatures have already been linked to large shifts in distribution (as much as 10° latitude) and abundance of plankton communities (with declines to as little as one thousandth of former values). These changes have affected the distribution and abundance of many marine species, such as Cod, Salmon, Long-finned Pilot Whale and a number of penguin species.

Changes in the timing of parts of the life cycle are already well documented. For example, migratory British birds are arriving in their breeding areas two to three weeks earlier than thirty years ago. Laying dates have also advanced for both birds and turtles. However, changes in laying date of migratory birds (typically 2 days earlier for a rise of 1oC) appear to be less than those in the life cycles of vegetation and invertebrates (typically 6d/1oC). This may lead to a mismatch between the birds and their prey. There is also evidence to suggest that long-distance migrant birds, such as the Swallow, may be less able to adapt their timing than short-distance migrants, such as the Chiffchaff. Warmer winters are also encouraging the earlier emergence of bats from hibernation but the population impacts of this are unknown.

The breeding success of bird species is positively related to temperature, and long-term increases have been reported in many species, such as the Pied Flycatcher. In contrast, whales have lower breeding success in warmer waters (for example Sperm Whales breed less well during warm water El Niño events, which are becoming more frequent), although to what extent populations will be able to adapt to these changes by shifting their distribution is unknown. Sex ratios of hatchling turtles are temperature dependent and increased warmth could potentially lead to all-female populations.

Survival of individuals is also strongly related to climatic conditions. For birds, warmer winter temperatures are likely to increase survival for those that winter in northern latitudes, while those that migrate south in the winter are likely to suffer from reduced rainfall.

Changes in population size are a combination of changes in survival and breeding performance and the impact of climate change will depend on the relative balance of these two factors. For example, in one colony, increased sea surface temperatures meant that Emperor Penguins had to forage further from the breeding colony (reducing survival), but the penguins benefited from increased hatching success. The effects on survival were greater and colony size declined. In general, changes in survival and breeding success will interact with population density (through a process known as density-dependence), and thus scenarios where there are changes in population size require further study.

Future Priorities

On land, changes in water availability (e.g. due to increased water abstraction and drought frequency) and loss of vulnerable habitat (particularly Arctic tundra) are likely to affect the greatest number of migratory species. While adaptation (through habitat management) to climate change may bring benefits in terrestrial ecosystems, a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions will be required to achieve significant benefits in marine systems where habitat management is less feasible. In many cases, a reduction in human impacts (such as over-exploitation or habitat loss) will help animal and plants to adapt. In more general terms, the maintenance of large population sizes, in order to maximise genetic variation, will allow populations the greatest chance of adapting to changes.

Some migratory species require a coherent network of discrete sites, so site management will need to be flexible in response to changing conditions. Other species will require continuous habitat corridors and broad-scale land-use planning. Changing patterns of human exploitation in response to climate change are a major threat and conservation measures need to take these into account, both as threats and as opportunities for providing benefits through the management of habitats to benefit both people and wildlife (multi-functional ecosystem management).

It is critical that there is a commitment to long-term monitoring schemes to detect the impacts of long-term climate change and to assess the abilities of plants and animals to adapt to it. There is also a need to gather information on migratory stopover sites so as best to target conservation action. Targeted implementation and enforcement of existing measures should provide much of the protection needed, as would the broader use of existing guidance codes. However, much more detailed research is still needed to be able to make accurate predictions of the effect of climate change on plants and animals.
The full text of the report is available on the Defra web site

Citation

Robert A. Robinson, Jennifer A. Learmonth, Anthony M. Hutson, Colin D. Macleod, Tim H. Sparks, David I. Leech, Graham J. Pierce, Mark M. Rehfisch & Humphrey Q.P. Crick.

Climate Change and Migratory Species. BTO Research Report 414.

Published in August 2005 by the British Trust for Ornithology, The Nunnery, Thetford, Norfolk, IP24 2PU, UK.

The Amazing Redux

2007-11-06T07:01:45+00:00

Oklahoma Man charged with 1st Degree Murder

2007-11-06T06:59:01+00:00

enlace

The Letter

2007-11-06T06:58:46+00:00

Click here!
Click here

An Inconvenient Truth - Trailer

2007-11-06T06:58:46+00:00

The most terrifying movie of the summer. You owe it to the planet to see the truth. Pledge to see An Inconvenient Truth opening weekend.

Opening:

May 24 - New York and Los Angeles

June 2 - Boston, Chicago, Dallas, Philadelphia, San Francisco, Seattle, Toronto, Vancouver, Washington D.C.

June 9 - Atlanta, Detroit, Houston, Minneapolis, Phoenix, Denver, Sacramento, St. Louis, San Diego, Miami, Baltimore, Portland

June 16 - in theaters everywhere

Pat Metheny on Kenny G:

2007-11-06T06:58:21+00:00

Pat Metheny on Kenny G:
Question:

Pat, could you tell us your opinion about Kenny G - it appears you were quoted as being less than enthusiastic about him and his music. I would say that most of the serious music listeners in the world would not find your opinion surprising or unlikely - but you were vocal about it for the first time. You are generally supportive of other musicians it seems.

Pat's Answer:

Kenny G is not a musician I really had much of an opinion about at all until recently. There was not much about the way he played that interested me one way or the other either live or on records.

I first heard him a number of years ago playing as a sideman with Jeff Lorber when they opened a concert for my band. My impression was that he was someone who had spent a fair amount of time listening to the more pop oriented sax players of that time, like Grover Washington or David Sanborn, but was not really an advanced player, even in that style. He had major rhythmic problems and his harmonic and melodic vocabulary was extremely limited, mostly to pentatonic based and blues-lick derived patterns, and he basically exhibited only a rudimentary understanding of how to function as a professional soloist in an ensemble - Lorber was basically playing him off the bandstand in terms of actual music.

But he did show a knack for connecting to the basest impulses of the large crowd by deploying his two or three most effective licks (holding long notes and playing fast runs - never mind that there were lots of harmonic clams in them) at the key moments to elicit a powerful crowd reaction (over and over again). The other main thing I noticed was that he also, as he does to this day, played horribly out of tune - consistently sharp.

Of course, I am aware of what he has played since, the success it has had, and the controversy that has surrounded him among musicians and serious listeners. This controversy seems to be largely fueled by the fact that he sells an enormous amount of records while not being anywhere near a really great player in relation to the standards that have been set on his instrument over the past sixty or seventy years. And honestly, there is no small amount of envy involved from musicians who see one of their fellow players doing so well financially, especially when so many of them who are far superior as improvisors and musicians in general have trouble just making a living. There must be hundreds, if not thousands of sax players around the world who are simply better improvising musicians than Kenny G on his chosen instruments. It would really surprise me if even he disagreed with that statement.

Having said that, it has gotten me to thinking lately why so many jazz musicians (myself included, given the right "bait" of a question, as I will explain later) and audiences have gone so far as to say that what he is playing is not even jazz at all. Stepping back for a minute, if we examine the way he plays, especially if one can remove the actual improvising from the often mundane background environment that it is delivered in, we see that his saxophone style is in fact clearly in the tradition of the kind of playing that most reasonably objective listeners WOULD normally quantify as being jazz. It's just that as jazz or even as music in a general sense, with these standards in mind, it is simply not up to the level of playing that we historically associate with professional improvising musicians. So, lately I have been advocating that we go ahead and just include it under the word jazz - since pretty much of the rest of the world OUTSIDE of the jazz community does anyway - and let the chips fall where they may.

And after all, why he should be judged by any other standard, why he should be exempt from that that all other serious musicians on his instrument are judged by if they attempt to use their abilities in an improvisational context playing with a rhythm section as he does? He SHOULD be compared to John Coltrane or Wayne Shorter, for instance, on his abilities (or lack thereof) to play the soprano saxophone and his success (or lack thereof) at finding a way to deploy that instrument in an ensemble in order to accurately gauge his abilities and put them in the context of his instrument's legacy and potential.

As a composer of even eighth note based music, he SHOULD be compared to Herbie Hancock, Horace Silver or even Grover Washington. Suffice it to say, on all above counts, at this point in his development, he wouldn't fare well.

But, like I said at the top, this relatively benign view was all "until recently".

Not long ago, Kenny G put out a recording where he overdubbed himself on top of a 30+ year old Louis Armstrong record, the track "What a Wonderful World". With this single move, Kenny G became one of the few people on earth I can say that I really can't use at all - as a man, for his incredible arrogance to even consider such a thing, and as a musician, for presuming to share the stage with the single most important figure in our music.

This type of musical necrophilia - the technique of overdubbing on the preexisting tracks of already dead performers - was weird when Natalie Cole did it with her dad on "Unforgettable" a few years ago, but it was her dad. When Tony Bennett did it with Billie Holiday it was bizarre, but we are talking about two of the greatest singers of the 20th century who were on roughly the same level of artistic accomplishment. When Larry Coryell presumed to overdub himself on top of a Wes Montgomery track, I lost a lot of the respect that I ever had for him - and I have to seriously question the fact that I did have respect for someone who could turn out to have such unbelievably bad taste and be that disrespectful to one of my personal heroes.

But when Kenny G decided that it was appropriate for him to defile the music of the man who is probably the greatest jazz musician that has ever lived by spewing his lame-ass, jive, pseudo bluesy, out-of-tune, noodling, wimped out, fucked up playing all over one of the great Louis's tracks (even one of his lesser ones), he did something that I would not have imagined possible.

He, in one move, through his unbelievably pretentious and calloused musical decision to embark on this most cynical of musical paths, shit all over the graves of all the musicians past and present who have risked their lives by going out there on the road for years and years developing their own music inspired by the standards of grace that Louis Armstrong brought to every single note he played over an amazing lifetime as a musician. By disrespecting Louis, his legacy and by default, everyone who has ever tried to do something positive with improvised music and what it can be, Kenny G has created a new low point in modern culture - something that we all should be totally embarrassed about - and afraid of. We ignore this, "let it slide", at our own peril.

His callous disregard for the larger issues of what this crass gesture implies is exacerbated by the fact that the only reason he possibly have for doing something this inherently wrong (on both human and musical terms) was for the record sales and the money it would bring.

Since that record came out - in protest, as insignificant as it may be, I encourage everyone to boycott Kenny G recordings, concerts and anything he is associated with. If asked about Kenny G, I will diss him and his music with the same passion that is in evidence in this little essay.

Normally, I feel that musicians all have a hard enough time, regardless of their level, just trying to play good and don't really benefit from public criticism, particularly from their fellow players. but, this is different.

There ARE some things that are sacred - and amongst any musician that has ever attempted to address jazz at even the most basic of levels, Louis Armstrong and his music is hallowed ground. To ignore this trespass is to agree that NOTHING any musician has attempted to do with their life in music has any intrinsic value - and I refuse to do that. (I am also amazed that there HASN'T already been an outcry against this among music critics - where ARE they on this?????!?!?!?!, magazines, etc.). Everything I said here is exactly the same as what I would say to Gorelick if I ever saw him in person. and if I ever DO see him anywhere, at any function - he WILL get a piece of my mind and (maybe a guitar wrapped around his head.)

NOTE: this post is partially in response to the comments that people have made regarding a short video interview excerpt with me that was posted on the internet taken from a tv show for young people (kind of like MTV)in poland where i was asked to address 8 to 11 year old kids on terms that they could understand about jazz. while enthusiastically describing the virtues of this great area of music, i was encouraging the kids to find and listen to some of the greats in the music and not to get confused by the sometimes overwhelming volume of music that falls under the jazz umbrella. i went on to say that i think that for instance, kenny g plays the dumbest music on the planet – something that all 8 to 11 year kids on the planet already intrinsically know, as anyone who has ever spent any time around kids that age could confirm - so it gave us some common ground for the rest of the discussion. (ADDENDUM: the only thing wrong with the statement that i made was that i did not include the rest of the known universe.) the fact that this clip was released so far out of the context that it was delivered in is a drag, but it is now done. (its unauthorized release out of context like that is symptomatic of the new electronically interconnected culture that we now live in - where pretty much anything anyone anywhere has ever said or done has the potential to become common public property at any time.) i was surprised by the polish people putting this clip up so far away from the use that it was intended -really just for the attention - with no explanation of the show it was made for - they (the polish people in general) used to be so hip and would have been unlikely candidates to do something like that before, but i guess everything is changing there like it is everywhere else. the only other thing that surprised me in the aftermath of the release of this little interview is that ANYONE would be even a little bit surprised that i would say such a thing, given the reality of mr. gs music. this makes me want to go practice about 10 times harder, because that suggests to me that i am not getting my own musical message across clearly enough - which to me, in every single way and intention is diametrically opposed to what Kenny G seems to be after.

Broads Authority

2007-11-06T06:57:48+00:00

The Broads Authority was set up in 1989, with responsibility for conservation, planning, recreation and waterways.

The Broads Authority, a statutory body, was set up to conserve and enhance the natural beauty of the Broads, to promote the enjoyment of the Broads by the public and to protect the interests of navigation.

It must also consider the needs of agriculture and forestry, and the economic and social interests of those who live or work in the Broads.

The Broads is a fascinating area with a rich history, reflected in the many wonderful places to visit and the unique wildlife. There are restored windmills, medieval churches, beautiful gardens and great places for family visits. If you enjoy walking or cycling, there are also many routes to choose from.

For many people, a great way to explore the Broads is by water, as much of the history of the Broads revolves around the way the rivers have been used over the years. For many, the charm of the Broads rests on the illusion of remoteness you get when you're on the water. You can be near a village without knowing that there is anybody or anything for miles around. So, whatever you do, try to get afloat and you will find much to surprise and delight you.

www.broads-authority.gov.uk

"Ought to" and "Should"

2007-11-06T06:57:47+00:00

Language article reprinted with permission of
www.english-to-french-translation.com

By J. Mc Corcquodale
Legal Translator

Ought to is a very useful verb which unfortunately is very often forgotten. Here, we will look at whether there are any differences between ought to and should, and whether they be used interchangeably.

1. Expressing expectation

Ought to, should and also expect to can be used interchangeably to express expectation: the person speaking or writing thinks or supposes that this will be the case.

For example:

I'm in a meeting at the moment. We should / ought to / expect to finish by 3 p.m. and I'll call you back then.

After a disappointing year, figures for the first half of 2004 have been encouraging and we should / ought to / expect to achieve our target profit figures by the end of the year.

2. Expressing probability

Ought to and should can be used to express probability.

For example:

You should / ought to receive the goods on Tuesday.

The Chairman should / ought to have arrived at our Toronto office by now.

The suggestion here is :

You probably will receive the goods on Tuesday.

He probably is in the Toronto office, but I'm not certain.

Again, the two verbs are more or less interchangeable, although ought to is slightly stronger.

3. Expressing desirability

Another use of both ought to and should is to express desirability:

You should / ought to have stayed for the last day of the conference, it was very interesting.

4. Expressing an obligation or duty, giving advice

Lastly, ought to and should can also be used to express a duty, or to give advice.

For example:

You should / ought to look at our prices, they are very competitive (I'm suggesting, giving you some advice).

You should / ought to study the figures before the meeting (you are strongly advised to ?).

You should / ought to rewrite your presentation (indicating an obligation).

Obviously, must could also be used in this context, to express an even greater degree of obligation:

You must study the figures before the meeting.

You must rewrite your presentation (you have no choice in the matter).

Nowadays, should is used much more frequently than ought to. This is a shame, particularly as many grammarians consider that there is a difference between the two: Webster's, for example, states that "both words imply obligation, but ought is the stronger. Should may imply merely an obligation of propriety [proper or correct conduct]; ought denotes an obligation of duty."

5. Negative / interrogative form

The negative and interrogative forms of "ought to" are used only very rarely:

Such things ought not happen.

You ought not to have said that.

What things ought you to know?

It would be much more usual to say such things should not happenor you shouldn't have said that.

Finally, an interesting example of usage of the verb ought in the negative form hit the headlines in September 2001: when the FBI was asked to comment on a leaked secret memo its spokesperson said " There are lots of things the intelligence community knows and other people ought not to know."