"CONTENTdm"@en . "http://resolve.library.ubc.ca/cgi-bin/catsearch?bid=1229713"@en . "University Publications"@en . "2016-07-19"@en . "1988-01-06"@en . "https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/the432/items/1.0000496/source.json"@en . "application/pdf"@en . " ^ ^y\na) ^'d\nC \u00C2\u00A3 Tj\nU O !fl\nm P! U\n^ aj cC\ncC > v\noo .59\nen\nO\n\u00C2\u00A3\n3\nCO\nJ-l\n3\nb P^ 3\nCO O)\nOJ cfi\n* g u\n\u00C2\u00A3 a .a s o \u00C2\u00A7 \u00C2\u00A7\n\u00E2\u0096\u00A02S\n0>\nen\ns\nO\nu .\nUJCVJ\nrr :\n3 :\ncoo\n;\u00E2\u0096\u00A0\u00E2\u0096\u00A0'\"-' , \u00E2\u0096\u00A0;'.. ,'t\n\u00E2\u0096\u00A0 ;-r*v \u00E2\u0096\u00A0 ':\u00E2\u0096\u00A0,\u00C2\u00BB\u00E2\u0096\u00A0:\ne\nCO\nCO\nCO\nm\n>.\nja\no\no\nsz\na.\nCO\nUJ\n>\n-I\no>\nrr ii\nUJUJ\nho\ncon;\nO-i\no\n0)f\u00C2\u00A3\nUlH\nX\nCO CO -\u00E2\u0096\u00A0\n* >:\no^<\nUJ\nO\nUJ\nO\nCO\nUBC SCIENCE WEEK\nMtiMittHttUittMittMiM\n\wwiMHmMmmmwHM**mmM*i*wwmimHtimiMm\nSUN\nMON\nTUES\nWED\nTHU\nFRI\nSAT\n24\nDAY\n25\n*Departmental\nDisplay in SUB\nConcourse _\n26\n\u00C2\u00BB\n*Chem Magic\nShow\n27\n*Blood donor\nClinic in SUB\nConcourse\nGive a little, Save a\nLife.\nGive Blood during\nthe Science Week\nBLOOD DRIVE\nDaily Draws and\nGrand Frizes from:\nFiasco, Arts Club\nTheatre, Jerry's Cove\nand many more.\n28\n*Paper Airplane contest\n12:30 Hebb\nTheatre\n29\n>\n*Departmental\nTricycle Race\ndown Main\nMall\n30\nNIGHT\n*Films\n-Blade Runner\n-Holy Grail\n*Car Rally\n*Broomball\nTournament\n(sign up a\nweek before)\n*Dance\n-Wall Street\n-Tickets $5\n-Sub Ballroom\n-2 for 1 BZZR\n(7:30-8:30pm)\n*Scavanger\nHunt CRYSTAL\nTREASURE\nmo Cwmmmlty Relations\nAt* &feM*3oj&ed jtnine i\u00C2\u00BB &\u00E2\u0082\u00AC/*\nInterior will sooa. fcecome a asas-\nur& grove for UBC Instead, ftf\n~1 the treasure Is\nUnder a feceftt!f<8lg\u00C2\u00BBed ajgree-\nmenf, 1$BC will gain access to- the\nmine to recover top^mlM^ \u00C2\u00ABm*\ntals\u00E2\u0080\u009E ltfs all part of a dealittvolviflg\nan Aimeric&n. entrepreneur, a &C\nMining Oompaayi M\nComposed of green colored or\npurple flourlte, golden, yellow or\ngrey barite, and white quartz\ncrystals, they are bought as often\nby individual to display in an\noffice or on a coffee table, as they\nare by collectors or museums.\nby David Suzuki\nThe headlong rush to industrialize the university is being done under\nthe assumption that it is the economic\nengine of free enterprise. This assumption has been questioned many times\nby academics.\nFor example, free enterprise,\nlike most economic systems, is based\non the unquestioned necessity for\nsteady growth in gross national product, consumption and consumer goods.\nSteady incremental growth\nwithin a given interval is called \"exponential growth.\" Any scientist knows\nthat nothing in the universe grows\nexponentially indefinitely. Yet economists, business people and politicians\nassume the explosive increase in\nincome, consumer goods and GNP\nCanada over the imminent industrialization of academe.\nThe activity and knowledge of\nour university scientists are paid for by\nthe public and should be available for\nits benefit, not hidden behind a curtain\nof classified information, profit priorities or patent secrecy.\nAcademics who accept grants\nor investments from the military or the\npharmaceutical, forestry and computer\nindustries, for example, will be reluctant to jeopardize that support by criticizing those industries when necessary.\nThere is another consequence\nof the increased industrialization of our\nuniversities that stems from the mentality of scientists themselves. Among\nscientists there is a hierarchy of position that is directly correlated with\nIn a number of international\nmeetings held at universities to discuss\nthe future of biotechnology, none has\nseriously considered the potential\nmisuses or hazards of the technology.\nSurely an academic community of\nscholars that maintains an arm's-length\nrelationship with vested interests of\nsociety should be expected to raise\nhistorical and ethical matters that impinge on the field.\nOne of the claims made to\nencourage greater investment in biotechnology is its potential to \"feed the\nworld's hungry.\" It is a self-serving,\nshallow justification. Starvation on this\nplanet is a consequence more of political and technological factors than a\nshortage of food. Even if it weren't, the\nexponential growth of our species'\nEconomic course can't be\ncharted at the university\n(and inflation) of the past decades must\nbe maintained to sustain our quality of\nlife.\nHistorians know that this\ngrowth is an aberration, a blip that\nmust inevitably stop and reverse itself.\nBut how can the fallacy of maintainable\nexponential growth be seriously challenged when the university is busy\nselling the myth that it can help maintain such growth?\nScholars in universities represent tiny islands of thought in society.\nThey are sufficiently detached from the\npriorities of various interest groups\nsuch as business, government and the\nmilitary to point out flaws in our\ncurrent social truths. But by focusing\non issues that are socially relevant or\neconomically profitable, we lose sight\nof the broader context within which\nthat activity falls; we forget history; we\nbecome blind to environmental and social costs of our innovations.\nIn the United States, a significant portion of the budgets of such\nuniversities as the Massachusetts\nInstitute of Technology, Harvard,\nStanford and the California Institute of\nTechnology comes from private investment. This has split their faculties in\ndebate over whether there should be\nsuch close ties with private enterprise.\nBut while those institutions are\nprivate, most of Canada's major\nuniversities are publicly supported.\nYet there has been little debate in\ngrant size and continued research output.\nA scientist has to keep his\n\"hand in\" to maintain status and credibility with his peers. Anyone who decides to look at a wider range of social,\nenvironmental or ethical matters\ninstead of focusing with tunnel vision\non specific problems at the cutting edge\nof research, loses status in the scientific\npecking order.\nAs university scientists become\nbound to private enterprise more\ntightly, their horizons will be restricted\neven further and they will be far less\npatient with those who raise social and\nethical implications of their work.\nLet me be specific by considering one of the hottest areas of applied\nscience -biotechnology- genetic engineering of organisms for commercial\npurposes.\nnumbers, which has already doubled\nthe global population twice in the past\ncentury, will far outstrip any increase\nin food production brought about by\nbiotechnology. Scientists anxious to\njustify their research for more grants\nare resistant to such objections.\nToday, biologists propose to\ndetermine by the end of the century the\nentire sequence of chemical \"letters\" in\nthe hundreds of thousands of sentences\nor genes in the genetic blueprint of a\nhuman cell.\nThe most immediate application of the sequence of human DNA\nwill be to diagnose defective fetuses for\nabortion and to identify people in high-\nrisk categories for various problems.\nBut the definition of \"problem\" depends on who is doing the defining.\nBesides finding the relationship\nbetween medical defects and DNA\nsequences, the easiest use of this\ninformation will be to show statistical\ncorrelations of genetic similarities between people with common socioeconomic problems.\nA university is the one place in\nsociety where there should be scholars\nready to point out the hazards of rushing to apply these new insights. Canadians should be wary of the uncritical\npush to increase the links between\nuniversity academics and private\nindustry.\nGlobe & Mail October 3,1987\nCongratulations to Andrew Weaver, Rob\nSwiniarski and Jonathan Berkowitz. Your\nentries were the first three submitted with\nthe solutions to the Grid Word Contest correct. So come on down to Scarfe 9 and pick\nup your Beer Mug. To everyone who gave it\na shot, better luck next time. For more\ncontests and prizes, THE 432 has it.\nUBC Kaon Factory\nThe B.C. construction industry is\nthrowing its weight behind the kaon\nproject planned as an addition to the\nUniversity of B.C.'s TRIUMF facility. The\nfacility's director, Eric Vogt is currently on\na worldwide tour to raise the money to\nbuild a kaon factory which would cost\nabout $500 million. The GVRD Board of\nDirectors has unanimously endorsed the\nProvincial Government's efforts to obtain\nfunding assistance for the Kaon Factory'.\nThe Province, which has committed $87\nmillion toward the project, is seeking\nfunding assistance from the Federal\nGovernment and other countries. In\naddition to creating an estimated 19,000\nperson years of direct and indirect\nemployment, the Kaon Factory will boost\nindustrial production across canada by an\nestimated $1.2 billion over a five-year\nperiod.\nThe Vancouver Sun / GVRD News\nDecember 1987\nRecent Studies\nProbe...\nScience Council of Canada\nThe Council is about to publish\nthe two discussion papers described\nin this article as part of its \"University\nScience and Technology and Canadian Economic Renewal\" study. They\nwill soon be available from the\nPublications Office, Science Council of\nCanada, 100 Metcalfe Street, Ottawa,\nCanada, KIP 5M1.\nMany Canadian universities now\noffer students cooperative education\nprograms made up of alternating terms\nof formal instruction and on-the-job\nexperience.\nBecause of the popularity of these\nprograms and the paucity of reference\nmaterial about them, the Science\nCouncil commissioned surveys of\nparticipating faculty member, employers, and students as the basis for a\ndiscussion paper on their worth.\nThe survey show that co-op\neducation is valued highly by all\nparticipants. It enriches both the\neducation of the student and his or her\nability to be an effective employee. Its\ngrowth is impeded by lack of resources\nand lack of support by senior admini-\nstration and faculty. The author of\nPostsecondary Cooperative Education\nin Canada, Robert J. Ellis, praises its\nusefulness in bringing our universities\nand colleges together with industry so\nthey can all participate more effectively\nin economic renewal.\nResearch and development links\nbetween firms and universities in\nCanada are not new. What is new is\ntheir larger number and growing\nimportance to the collaborators.\nIn R&D Links between Firms and\nUniversities: Six Case Studies, William\nHutchison, Peter Milley, Neil Baird,\nand Donna Bevelander discuss factors\nthat cause links to succeed. For ex\nample, in all the cases that they\nlooked at, one highly motivated\nperson was critical to the success of\nthe collaboration. The authors also\nconclude that the benefits or R&D\nlinks should flow both ways and that\nkey persons must be committed to\nseeing a project through to its conclusion. Funding must be flexible:\nserious problems have been caused\nby rigid administration of grants.\nThe authors urge universities to\nregard industrial R&D as a legitimate\nactivity and provide academic\nrewards for this work.\nIn Touch November 1987 Forestry Biotechnology Established\nThe federal government, provincial government and B.C. Research\nhave concluded an agreement to\nestablish a Forest Biotechnology\nCentre at B.C. Research.\nThe Centre will make a major\ncontribution to forest productivity\nand reforestation in British Columbia. Its establishment is consistent\nwith recommendations made in two\nreports last year, one by the then\nMinistry of Universities, Science and\nCornmunications, and the other by\nthe Forestry Industry Task Force of\nthe B.C. Science Council. Both\nidentified the need for research in\nforest biotechnology.\nThe work of the Centre will be\noriented to the Forest Sector's needs,\nand closely linked with related\nresearch in industry, the universities,\nand government.\nThe staff of the Centre comprises\n12 scientists with expertise in mo\nlecular biology, biochemistry, tree\nphysiology, tissue culture, microbiology, plant pathology and ecophysiol-\n\u00C2\u00B0gy-\nThis group provides a major\naddition to B.C. Research's technical\ncapability, increasing the technical/\nprofessional complement to 95 individuals, or a total of 130 including\nsupport staff.\nThe Centre's core research program\nfocuses on: Genetic transformation of\nconifers, Conifer tissue culture, Development of bio-fertilizer and biological\ncontrol, Ecophysiological assessment of\nsuperior stocktypes and genotypes.\nThis work will lead to increased\nsuccess in reforestation, greater productivity from forest stands, and reduced\nlosses due to insects and disease.\nSuperior genotypes will be selected\nfrom traditional breeding programs\nand propagated by tissue culture.\nThrough genetic engineering, valuable\ntraits will be introduced: for example, improved tolerance against\ninsects and disease.\nBeneficial microbes will be used\nto improve root development, plant\ngrowth and the control of fungal\npathogens.\nEcophysiological methods will\nbe used to monitor nursery and field\nperformance of seedlings and other\npropagates to assess their success in\nimproving reforestation operations.\nThis integration of basic research\nand intensive field assessment will\nenable rapid incorporation of\nresearch results into forest production.\nFor more info, contact Paul\nWebb, B.C. Research, 3650\nWestbrook Mall, Vancouver, BC\nV6S2L2 (2244331)\nBC Research Newsletter No.2/1987\nQuadra\nLogic\nTech-\nPairs\nwith US\nBiotech\nGiant\nby The Discovery Foundation\nRegulation of the immune system\nto treat diseases such as cancer, multiple sclerosis, and arthritis is now on\nthe horizon. Genetech, the US biotechnology giant, has signed a collaboration\nagreement with Quadra Logic Technologies (QLT) Inc. of Vancouver, BC.\nThese two leaders will concentrate on\ndeveloping for commercialization,\nfactors effective in the regulation of the\nimmune system. \"Finding the key that\nunlocks the mysteries of immune\nsystem regulation is the most needed\nbreakthrough in medicine today\" says\nQLT President Dr. James Miller. \"We\nhave made significant discoveries that\ncan be used to turn the system up or\ndown\".\nQLT's leading edge developments\nin immunobiology and the production\nof monoclonal antibodies, paired with\nGenetech's expertise in genetic engineering will produce essential im-\nmunosuppressor factors able to fine\ntune the body's immune system. \"We\nhave been approached by several\ncompanies to collaborate in this area,\nbut we chose Genetech because its\nworld renowned expertise in the field\nof genetic engineering,\" explained Dr.\nMiller.\nThe therapeutic products being\ndeveloped will allow physicians to\nregulate the immune system much like\ncontrolling a thermostat on a furnace.\nDoctors will be able to up regulate or\ndown regulate the body's response\ndepending on the particular disease\ncondition.\nIn diseases such as cancer, QLT's\nimmune modifiers would act to turn up\nthe immune system, and in auto\nimmune conditions such as arthritis\nand multiple sclerosis, the system could\nbe turned down to avoid harmful over-\nresponse by the body. QLT has already\ndemonstrated the effectiveness of their\nproprietary monoclonal antibodies for\nthe treatment of cancerous tumors in\ncertain experimental conditions. It is\nestimated that the market for biological\nresponse modifiers will be in excess of\n$2 billion by the late 1990's.\nSupport for these new developments has come not only from the\nbiotechnology industry, but also from\nthe Medical Research Council of\nCanada. The MRC has awarded DR.\nJulia Levy, QLT's Vice President of\nResearch and Development, the First\nIndustrial professorship which provides $750,000 over three years. Dr.\nLevy will work in conjunction with\nscientists from the University of British\nColumbia to complete the clinical\napplication research for the immuno-\nsuppressor factors. This includes\nhuman trials and the studies necessary\nfor approval by regulatory bodies.\nGenetech is the leading pharmaceutical\ncompany both in developing recombinant DNA technology and in bring to\nmarket pharmaceutical products based\non this technology.\nQuadra Logic Technologies is a\nCanadian biotechnology company\nfocused in the development and\ncommercialization of diagnostic and\ntherapeutic products for human and\nveterinary medicine. Details: Quadra\nLogic Technologies, 520 W. 6th Ave,\nVancouver, BC V5Z 1S6 (872-7881).\nBC*R+D September 1987\nThe 432\nJtanntty$,1966\nVail, Issue #3\n1D1T0&\nPRODUCTION\nfeat* Quay\n' WMXIKS ,\nToddAbktt\nMer MaeDougaS.\nI1UISTRAT0K$\n. Km Otter -\nFHOTOC3EAPHER\nBarry Sfcaaka\ncomiuturcms\nDr> Dmid Suzuki\nmc Coirommity Motions\nBC Research\nThe Discovery Foundation\nScience Council o$ Canada\nTYPESETTING\nfaster Pfcmd*\nPeter Lankester\nDISTRIBUTION\nH&V-L*\nADVERTISING MANAGER\nJean Guay\nSubmissions and inquiries should\nbe sent to;\nThe 432 c/O Ifw Science Under-\ngraduate Society of UBC\nim Main Mm (Scarfe 9>, Vancouver, BC Canada\nT4k (604)228-4235\nThe 432 te p&tehed hi-weekly fey\nthe Science Undergraduate Soei\nety of UBC The submission\ndeadline for the next Issue is\nThawte January 14, 1988\n<4;30pm)* The paper fe distributee\non the following: Wednesday, Departmental news, tetters, creative\nwork*, short t&mp md announcements are welcome.\nSubscriptions are encouraged,\nTwe1v*i$sue&$7, MakemoMy\norder or certified cheque payable\nto the SUS'.\nADVERTISING:\n1/2 page $140\nV4 page $75\n1/8 page $40\n1/16 page $25\n228-4235\nBigger Fish Could Mean Bigger Profits for BC Fish Farmers\nby The Discovery Foundation\nThat's why research now underway at Quadra Logic Technologies, a\nVancouver biotechnology firm, is being\nwatched with interest by the province's\nfast-developing aquaculture industry.\nThe Chairman of the Science Council of\nBritish Columbia, Dr. Denis Connor,\nhas announced that a $25,000 Industrial\nPostdoctoral Fellowship has been\nawarded to QLT. The Fellowship has\nenabled the company to hire Dr. N.E.\n\"Ted\" Down, a specialist in fish physiology. Dr. Down is a graduate of the\nUniversity of Guelph.\nA hormone called somatostatin is\nresponsible for regulation growth in\nsalmon. Working under research\nsupervisor Dr. James Raybold, Dr.\nDown will try to develop a monoclonal\nantibody to suppress the effects with\nanti-somatost8tin. With the somato\nstatin neutralized, the fish could put on\nup to 25% more flesh that it would\nnaturally. Cooperating with Dr. Down\nand QLT are the University of British\nColumbia and the West Vancouver,\nLaboratory of the Federal Department\nof Fisheries and Oceans.\nIndustrial Postdoctoral Fellowships\nare another method used by the Science\nCouncil to encourage the private sector\nto expand its vital research and devel\nopment activities in the province.\nIndustrial Postdoctoral Fellowships are\nfor one year, and may be renewed once.\nDetails: Science Council of BC, 100-\n3700 Gilmore Way, Burnaby, BC V5G\n4M1 (438-2752) or David Rodger,\nSCBC Information Officer (986-0836), or\nQLT, Barbara Kelly (875-0836).\nBC*R+D September 1987 A\nThe\nH\nOW could so many authors\nbe so thoroughly out of touch? The answer lies in\nthe dramatic changes that have taken place over\nthe past quarter-century in the way textbooks are\npublished. The repetition in text after text of discredited data is part of a larger trend - a trend toward greater emphasis on packaging and less concern with content. Today's textbooks are thicker,\nslicker, more elaborate, and more expensive than\nthey used to be. They are also more alike. Indeed,\nmany are virtual clones, both stylistic and substantive, of a market leader. These trends are not\nunique: in fact, cribbing - authors' borrowing liberally from other textbooks - is widespread.\ns recently as the 1960s, textbooks tended to be idiosyncratic,\nreflecting the author's own approach in\nboth style and substance. Their singularity was not surprising, since authors\nwrote texts mainly to impress their\nstamp on a field.\nThe trend toward homogenization\nbegan with the enrollment surge of the\nsixties. During that decade, the number of undergraduates in U.S. colleges\nmore that doubled. The most rapid rise\noccurred in state schools, particularly\nin two-year community colleges, in\nwhich nationwide enrollment rose from\nfewer than half a million in 1960 to\nmore than two million in 1970. The\nexpansion opened a whole new market,\nwhich textbook publishers moved\naggressively to exploit. Two-year\nschools became a mainstay of the\nindustry, and remain so today, enrolling more than forty percent of all\nundergraduates.\nBut community colleges demanded\ntextbook editor describes them, are\nexpensive. Professionals in test construction, for instance, charge three to\nfive dollars for each of the one thousand to two thousand questions in a\ntypical test bank. Technical illustrators\nmay charge as much as four hundred\ndollars for a single drawing. And\nquarter-page photographs, of which\nthere are often hundreds in a basic text,\ncost as much as two hundred and fifty\ndollars each, just for permission to\nreproduce. As a result, publishers\ncame to spend increasing amounts of\ntime and money on packaging. Today,\nthe prevailing belief is that a basic\nscience, social science, or business text\nthat does not include the standard\nsatellite material will fail - regardless of\nits other virtues - since many instructors look first at the supplements and\nonly later at the text itself.\nAs the market grew and textbooks\nchanged, some publishers started\nlooking for a different kind of author.\nThey became less interested in a\nwriter's scientific expertise and more\nMARKET\na new sort of textbook. In many ways,\nthese institutions were more like high\nschools than like traditional four-year\ncolleges. Faculty members were not\nexpected to do research and so were\ngive heavy teaching loads: four, five,\neven six courses a semester, sometimes\ncovering every subfield of a discipline.\nSince instructors were not well\nequipped to handle such wide range of\nsubjects (few had Ph. D.'s and many\nwere part-time), they looked for texts\nthat came with teaching manuals and\nready made tests. Indeed, some\ncommunity college instructors were\nformer high school teachers who had\ncome to expect such satellite materials.\nMeanwhile, the changing demands\nand increasing volume of the college\ntextbook market attracted a new kind\nof publisher - one with a heightened\nconcern for the bottom line.\nThe new players were prepared to\ninvest huge sums in texts, and this had\nthe effect of reducing competition by\nraising the costs of production and\ndriving smaller presses into specialized\nniches or out of the market altogether.\nPublishers dressed up their books with\nphotographs and full-color figures;\nTEXTS\npackaged them with such accessories as\ninstructors' manuals, slides (with\naccompanying lecture notes), and\ntutorial programs on floppy disks; and\neven offered subsidies for the purchase\nof educational films. Large banks of\ntest questions, sold with the texts, were\noffered in a variety of formats: on\nfloppy disks, formatted for the\ninstructor's personal computer; on\nmagnetic tapes, for use on the campus\nmain frame; or as separately bound\nbooklets. With these test banks,\ninstructors could generate tests on\nspecific chapters or topics or to fit\nparticular course objectives, which\nsome publishers offered to print.\nSuch \"bells and whistles,\" as one\nconcerned with his ability to reach a\nmass audience. Hence, many publishers stopped recruiting authors from\nprestigious universities - where professors may not have taught introductory\ncourses in years and were more prone\nto write for their peers than for students - and began to look for successful\nteachers of larger classes at state\nschools. But, in the end, this development was probably less significant than\nchanges in the authors' own motivations.\nSome textbooks are, of course,\nstill written out of authors' beliefs that\nthey have something important to offer,\nand these authors have no incentive to\ncopy other texts; indeed, it would\ndefeat their purpose. But some editors\nsay that a new kind of writer has\nemerged: one motivated more by\npotential profit that by the desire to\nleave an intellectual legacy. Writing\ntextbooks had never conferred great\nprestige, but as enrollment rose during\nthe sixties, it suddenly became a\nplausible route to wealth. As a result, it\nbegan to attract authors who have little\nemotional involvement with the text\nand few ideas of their own - authors\nwho draw inspiration from editors and,\nespecially, from other textbooks.\nThe incentive to borrow from other\ntexts is heightened by the need to cover\nan expanding number of topics. Since\nthe mid-sixties, biology textbooks have\nincreased in length by about two-thirds\n(most are now between eight hundred\nand twelve hundred pages long), and\nthe average length of psychology\ntextbooks have grown from fewer than\nfive hundred pages to more than seven\nhundred. This is partly due to the\nexpansion of knowledge - many of the\ntopics in current texts, such as genetic\nengineering or sociobiology, scarcely\nexisted twenty years ago - but it is also\npartly the result of marketing considerations. Publishers trying to capture\nthe largest possible market are loathe to\nOLD TEXT omit anyone's pet topic. Professors\nasked to review manuscripts often\nagree that the text is too long but many\nnot agree on what should be cut.\nHence, the safest policy is to leave\neverything in, and textbooks grow\nwithout evidence that students are\nactually reading more pages.\nOf the multitude of topics covered\nin contemporary textbooks, the author\nis likely to have expertise in only a few.\nOne way to master the unfamiliar\ntopics, of course, is to read the professional literature - to comb through\nspecialized monographs and journals.\nSome authors do this. But it is much\neasier to borrow predigested material\nfrom other textbooks. And with so\nmany text books currently in print -\nmore than a hundred in introductory\npsychology alone - authors who crib\ncan feel secure that their sources will\nnot be easily identified.\nEven when authors want to be\noriginal, publishers may pressure them\nto conform. At times this pressure is\nquite overt; the publisher explicitly sets\nout to mimic the style and content of\nthe most successful text in the field. In\na 1974 lawsuit, Harper & Row charged\nthe Meredith Corporation with plagiarizing its developmental-psychology\ntext \"Child Development and Personality\", which at the time was enjoying\napproximately a thirty-percent market\nshare. The suit unearthed internal\nmemorandums indicating that\nMeredith had hired free-lance writers,\nmany having no background in psychology, and had provided them with\ndetailed chapter outlines of the Harper\n& Row text, on which they were to base\ntheir drafts. (These draft chapters were\nto be edited by a well-known psychologist, the official \"author\" of the text.)\nOne memorandum even warned\nwriters to \"resist the temptation to\nimpose your own view of the subject\nmatter; the model (Harper & Row text)\nand the marketing report are the\narbiters combined with your own\ncommon sense.\"\nSuch extensive copying of a single\ntext is unusual. What is not unusual,\nhowever, is a fear of deviating from the\nmainstream - from textbook formulas\nthat have already proved successful. It\nis not uncommon today for a press to\ninvest as much as half a million dollars\nin a single text. To protect that investment, the publisher relies heavily on\nthe results of market research and\nmanuscript reviews to ensure that the\nproduct is salable. These results, as it\nturns out, almost inevitably prod the\npublisher to produce a textbook that\nresembles all others in the field.\nVirtually all publishers use the\nsame forms of market research -\nprincipally questionnaires that ask\npotential adopters of a text how much\nemphasis various topics should receive,\nin what sequence they should appear,\nand how the book in question compares with others. The research typically indicates that most college teachers will resist any change in a text book\nthat necessitates revising their lecture\nnotes.\nIf the guidelines an author receives\nfor writing his book are based largely\non market research, the editing of the\ntext depends largely on manuscript\nreviews. Two types of reviewers are\nused: experts, chosen for their ability\nto judge the accuracy of the text, and\n\"market knowledgeable\" reviewers,\nselected not for their expertise but for\ntheir preferences as consumers.\nThe larger and more competitive\nmarket for a text, the greater the\ndependence on market-knowledgeable\nreviewers; for an introductory text in a\nfield such as psychology, market-\nknowledgeable reviewers often outnumber experts by two to one. Such\nreviewers naturally reflect the market's\nconservatism, and when they dislike\nwhat is original in a new book's\norganization or approach, the editor\noften responds by encouraging the\nauthor to \"study\" other texts. Thus, the\nwhole process of textbook development\nconspires to wash out any substantive\ninnovation, even in books that were\noriginally attractive because they\nappeared to offer something new. Of\ncourse, publishers must do something\nto distinguish their texts from the\ndozens of others on the market, so\nwhile meaningful innovations are\neliminated, novelty is introduced in the\nexternals - the color illustrations,\nteaching manuals, lecture slides, and\ntest banks. Originality is thus restricted\nto areas in which it is trivial, and it\nbecomes little more than a strategy for\nmarketing the same old book under a\nnew author's name.\nThe pressures that have produced\nso many meaningless variations on\nstandard textbooks are, if anything,\nincreasing with hard times in the\nindustry. College enrollment stabilized\naround 1981 and is expected to decline\ngreater use of color...The ancillary\npackages will become more comprehensive, resembling the elementary-\nhigh school materials, and more\ncostly... New, more aggressive marketing plans will be needed just to maintain a company's position. The quality\nof marketing will make the difference.\"\nOne could argue that these developments are really no cause for\nalarm. After all, not every textbook\npublished before 1970 was a model of\nwit, clarity, and scholarship. Some of\nthe old, idiosyncratic texts were genuinely inspiring to students, but others\nwere simply exercises in self-indulgence: poorly written, lightly edited,\nand unintelligible to anyone but a\nspecialist. The prose in today's homogenized primers may be bland, but\nin most cases its is clear. And there is\nno denying that lavish use of photo- \u00E2\u0080\u00A2\ngraphs, figures, and illustrations has\nmade textbooks more engaging. Nor is\ntheir substantive similarity a bad thing,\nper se. The purpose of an introductory\ntext is to summarize the central facts\nand theories of a discipline, not to\nbreak new ground or convey novel\ninsights. Books covering the same\nmaterial are bound to be similar. So\nwhat is the problem?\nIf the leading texts were ideal, there\nwould be not problem. But when the\nmodels are flawed, imitating them\nstifles development of better ones. And\nto the extent that imitation consists of\ncribbing information or insights, it\nguarantees that textbooks will become\nless reliable as a field advances. An\nauthor working from the professional\nliterature is not likely to fill a text with\ndated ideas and discredited data. But\nan author drawing from existing\ntextbooks, even good ones, has no way\nof knowing whether he is describing\nthe current state of a discipline. Rather\nthan discard worthless remnants from\nthe past, he gives them a new air of\nauthority.\nIt is doubtful that authors still\npublishing such data are trying to\nmislead their readers; more likely, they\nare simply playing by the industry's\nPUBLISHING\nby ten percent by the end of the decade,\nand a growing used-book industry has\nadded to the strains on publishing\nhouses. The number of hardbound text\nsold declined by three and a half\npercent in 1985 and by another three\npercent last year. The conglomerates\n(ITT, IBM, CBS, RCA, Raytheon Company, Bell & Howell and Xerox Corporation) that bought out so many\ntextbooks publishers twenty years ago,\nwith visions of virtually risk-free profit\nhave now begun to sell them. Textbook\npublishing, in short, has become an\nintensely competitive business.\nThis competition might have\ninspired greater innovation in the\nwriting of texts. Instead, it has created\na situation in which textbooks are being\nproduced and sold like toothpaste. In\n\"The Book Publishing Annual\" of 1.984,\nindustry analyst Thomas W. Gornick\nsummed up the new ethic with his\nprediction that future textbooks will\nhave \"more elaborate designs and\nnew rules - modeling their textbooks on\nothers and ignoring the literature they\nclaim to be summarizing. References\nare essentially decorative; indeed, one\neditor at a major publishing house calls\nthem \"window dressing.\"\nReliable textbooks are especially\nimportant, and shoddy ones particularly invidious, in the sciences. For\nwhereas humanities professors often\nassemble reading lists from current\npaperbacks, a textbook is still the\ntypical gateway to biology or chemistry\nor physics. As the sciences explode\ninto subfields - making it less likely that\nany give professor will be expertin all\nthe subjects he must teach - reliable\ntextbooks become all the more important. In short, circumstances are\nforcing us to place ever greater faith in\nscience texts, and fewer and fewer seem\nto warrant it.\nThe Sciences May/June 1987\nApologies to Diane B. Paul\nOOKS NEVER DIEMThey just get paraphrased cientist\nPacific\nMonster\nDoes the Loch Ness Monster have a\ncousin in the Straight of Georgia?\nFrom the Oregon coast to the coast\nof Alaska, including B.C.'s Georgia\nStrait, at least 20 people have reported\nsighting a sea monster with a giraffe,\ncamel or horse-like head; a long neck; a\nmane; and humps on its back.\nIn Victoria in the 1930s, the apparition was named \"Caddy\" because it\nsighted in Cadboro Bay. The most\nrecent sightings were recorded at\nEnglish Bay in Vancouver and in the\nSechelt area of the Sunshine Coast.\nPeople who claim they have seen\n\"a large, unidentified marine animal\"\nare absolutely convinced it is real,\naccording to Dr. Paul LeBlond, head of\nOceanography at the University of B.C.\nand the author of a recent federal\nreport on West Coast lighthouses.\nLeBlond is a director of the International Society of Cryptozoologists,\nestablished to investigate reports of\nunidentifiable species.\nThe earliest in a series of sightings\nreported to LeBlond took place in 1906.\nHe said he does not necessarily believe\nthe reports, but he does not disbelieve\nthem either.\n\"In the sense that I do observations\non the oceans, I wouldn't have to go on\nthe basis of belief or disbelief that I'm\ngoing to find something, and yet, the\nword belief smacks too much of\nacceptance without sufficient proof.\"\nColin Cole is a believer. On a\nsummer day in 1985, Cole was sitting\non his waterfront veranda at Roberts\nCreek near Sechelt, eating a late afternoon meal.\n\"About a half mile our from shore,\nI saw a six foot long neck,\" he said.\n\"The thing's head looked something\nlike a dinosaur's and it had about a 12\nto 14 foot long body.\"\nCole said he lived in his waterfront\nhome for years and can identify sea life,\nbut he had never seen anything like\nthat.\n\"As far as I'm concerned, there's no\ndoubt there's something out there,\" he\nsaid. \"I still look for it.\"\nLeBlond has never seen a sea\nmonster, although he has travelled to\nScotland and to B.C.'s Okanagan,\nhoping to catch a glimpse of the Lock\nNess monster and the Ogopogo. He\ncompares looking for sea monsters to\npiecing together a puzzle, but in this\ncase, \"they don't show you the final\nimage on the box.\"\nIf once a year people saw a dozen\nof them, it would be easier to live with\nbecause then you could say, well,\nthey're migratory animals and they'll\ngo back to the bottom of the ocean\nsomewhere. But, we have one here this\nyear and one there the next, so what are\nthey doing?\nLeBlond published his first report\non the strange sighting 14 years ago.\nSince then, he has pursued numerous\nleads and is currently investigating two\nsightings.\nThe Vancouver Courier December 13,\n1987\nDo you have any photos worth publishing? The 432 will print them in the\nJanuary 20th issue of the paper. This is your chance to show everybody the\n'shutterbug' in you. Prizes may even be awarded for the best three entries.\nPhotos will be returned and credits will be given. Please put your name and\nphone number on the back of each photo submitted. Color as well as black\nand white photos will be accepted. The deadline is January 14,4:30pm. So\nget those cameras out and make those shots count!\nTo all Students, Staff, and Faculty;\nTogether, everyone in the Faculty of\nScience constitutes a vast body of\nknowledge. The 432 is the forum for\nthat knowledge. The editors and\nwriters of the 423 are looking for our\nsupport, our theses, our research and\nexperiments, and our ideas. They are\nlooking for news and reports that show\nthe usefulness of the scientific method\nand sheer ingenuity in solving problems. They are looking for cross-\ndiscipline applications of ideas.\n(They're looking for good jokes too!)\nSimply, they would like us to write for\nthe 432 about what we know and love.\nThe 432 does not exist for its own\nbenefit (Hell, none of us gets a salary,\n'cept perhaps the typist). It exists as a\npopular forum for our ideas and points.\nI am a fourth year Biochemistry\nstudent (Ed's note: Peter M.) who\nwrites for the 432 for the fun of it (As I\nsaid, I ain't getting paid). The 432 is\ninviting anyone (You're right; this\nmeans you) to write for the 432 about\nanything they want. Take me for\nexample; although I am sure that\nsome of the other members of the\nScience faculty know more about and\nhave a better understanding of some of\nthe subjects I write about than I do, like\nanyone else can, I've been writing\nabout subjects I am interested in.\nFurthermore, anyone who knows better\nis invited to write in and set the record\nstraight. The 432 is a chance for you to\nget your ideas, thoughts, and knowledge published and read by thousands!\nWrite to the 432 and the faculty of\nScience. Argue with the other writers.\nVolunteer your own ideas; what may\nbe good for your discipline may be\ngood for others! Send us your letters.\nDepartmental Displays\nhis year Science\nWeek is the last week of\nJanuary, the 24th to the\n30th. We have already\nbooked space in the Student union Building concourse on Monday and\nTuesday (Jan. 25th and\n26th) for Departmental\ndisplays.\nWhat are these displays you ask?\nThese Displays are\nusually done on a departmental basis and the idea\nis to show off some aspect\nof your department or\nfield of scientific study. It\ncan be an interesting lab or\nexperiment, an example of\nsome research project, an\ninteresting machine or\ndevice or almost anything\nthat you wish to show off.\nNow you want to\nknow who can get involved?\nAny science undergraduate or graduate student or member of the faculty. We have asked the\ndepartment heads for their\nsupport. But if you have an\nidea then go ask the professor involved. Don't be shy\nabout it and remember\nmany professors and graduate students are very busy\npeople but wtith your help\nand support a display can\nbe fun, interesting, a chance\nto learn how to deal with\npeople, or show off something that interested you\nand yet not terribly time\nconsuming. The Science\nUndergraduate Society wrill\ntry to help you find anything you need whether it is\nequipment or students or\nwhatever it takes to get\nspecial note to any professors or grad students; If\nyou are interested but require some student support please leave a message at 228-4235 and we\nwill find some willing\nvolunteers.\nThese Displays will\nbe booked on a first come\nfirst serve basis. The display can be shown on\nmonday or tuesday or both\ndays. The approximate\ntimes are from 10:00am to\n2:00pm but you can go\nlonger. Tables will be\nprovided but please tell us\nof your approximate space\nrequirements. So if you or\nyour department would\nlike to confirm space\nplease contact the Science\nUndergraduate Society\noffice at 228-4235 (re: Science Week Displays )as\nsoon as possible as space is\nlimited. EARTHQUAKES: Whose Fault?\n1 Earthquake prediction\nappears in press.\n2 Alarmed public starts\n\"earthquake-proofing\nhomes, buildings.\nThe Rictus Scale\nIn order to describe the intensity of earthquakes objectively, scientists use a scale of numbers based on\nobserved phenomina.\nMAGNITUDE\n0-3\n3-5\n5-6.5\nEFFECTS\nSmall articles in\nlocal papers.\nLead story on local\nnews; mentioned on\nnetwork news.\nLead story on network news; wire\nservice photos\t\n3 Birds and animals,\nsensing fear among\nhumans, and upset by\ncommotion of increased\nconstruction work,\nbecome agitated.\nappear mnewspers\nnationally, governor\nvisits scene.\nNetwork correspondents sent to scene;\nprime minister visits\narea; commemorative\nT-shirts appear,\nCovers of weekly\nnewsmagazines;\nnetwork specials;\n\"instant books\"\nappear. * Vibration from\nconstruction and from\no \u00E2\u0096\u00A0 \u00E2\u0080\u00A2\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 j <-.! -j \u00E2\u0096\u00A0_ -T- ,.f \u00E2\u0080\u00A2, animals jumping up and\nScience Made Stupid by Tom Weller down on surface i.\ntransmitted to fault.\n \u00E2\u0080\u0094 i\n6.5-7.5\n7.5 up\nI by Art Gfhgson\nI\n1st year rep*.\nIf you have never seen, the\nf Science IJndtfrgradaate office, let\nI me describe it to you in.one word;\nI \"crowded\". Coiislderalg that the\n| , office accommodates one of the\nlargest undergraduate societies on\ncampus, and serve as m editorial\noffice for the 453:, this 3 X 5m rtoovn\nbrings ait of us closer together\n{UteraUyX\nSTOP\n(PUSHING!\nI\nI\n1\n1\nI\ni\nI\n1\nI\n1\n1\n1\ni\nOnly Time Will Tell\nThe office also serves a& Our\nsales showroom and in impossible\nto see some of our clothing merchandise hanging from the walls.\nLike the Japanese, we must utilise\nall the space as efficiently as\npossible. Even our ceiling shows\nthe stark sophistication or a tyo.4-\nding Mkhaelangelo*\nAs one walks into the office,\none will see the famed SUS notice\nboard on the right Vk this\nremarkable organ of commurtiea-\ntiort, it is possible to send a mes*\nsage to yo\u00C2\u00ABr favorite, or rjerhaps\nmost \n\u00E2\u0096\u00A0I'm trying to write j\nby Todd Abiett -SUS President\nAn important event took place in\nWashington D.C. between the two most\npowerful nations on earth; it was the\nsigning of the missile treaty between\nthe USSR and the United States.\nBasically, this agreement called for the\nelimination of all medium range\nnuclear missiles, stationed mainly in\neurOpe.\nEven with total elimination of this\nclass of missiles, both sides still have\nthe capability to annihilate each other\nseveral times over with long range\nmissiles, which are far more destructive. Since past arms limitation treaties\nhave been violated by both sides, who\nis to say that this agreement will not be\nrescinded if an international crisis\narises somewhere concerning these two\nparties.\nNevertheless, this is the first time\nan arms elimination, not a restriction of\nnumbers, has ever existed between\nRussia and the United States. It is a\nprecedence that talks has existed on the\npossibility of reducing the number of\nlong range missiles. It is also a first that\neach side has allowed for verification,\nensuring the terms of the treaty are not\nbroken. In short, the elimination of\nthese missiles may reduce the tension\nin Europe and the chances for a worldwide nuclear holocaust.\nThe treat of a nuclear war still\nexists in all its fuiy but if these two\nsuperpowers actually begin a total\nnuclear arms reduction, think of the\nconsequences. This agreement may\nopen a new chapter in human history.\nImagine if the budget allocated to\nthe buildup of these expensive implements of destruction were spent on\nreducing government deficit, health\ncare, welfare, education and research,\nreducing taxes, and other worthy\ncauses. Though there will always be\nresearch money spent by the military, it\nwill not be the only route available to\nmany top scientists. The economic\npressure to perform controversial\nmilitary research would be at least\nneutralized, if not eradicated.\nDo you realize that in 1969, Neil\nArmstrong was the first man to set foot\non the surface of the moon? It has been\nover a decade since anyone has been\nthere. What if more funding were\nchanneled to space exploration?\nThe moon is only a stepping stone\nto other planets and beyond. It is a\nwhole new world with resources\nuntapped and areas undiscovered.\nDespite its harsh environment, the\nprospects of settlement is not impossible, only difficult; it is much like the\ndiscovery of the new world by early\nexplorers. Maybe the timing is right as\nthe Shuttle Program starts and we once\nagain look towards the heavens to\nwonder and dream...\nOnly time will tell if the excitement\ncreated by the signing of this new\ntreaty is premature. For us, it is one of\nthe brightest hopes we can cling to. I\nhope that we will be remembered as\nthe first generation of space and not the\nlast generation of mankind.\nDoomsday Receding?\nWe're three minutes further\nremoved from nuclear annihilation.\nThat's the good news from a\nscientific magazine whose doomsday\nclock has been a 40 year symbol of the\ndangers of the nuclear age.\nEditors of the Bulletin of Atomic\nScientists, keepers of the clock, yesterday set it at six minutes before midnight, signaling optimism for warmer\nsuper-power relations after last week's\nsummit between U.S. President Ronald\nReagan and Soviet leader Mikhaii\nGorbachev.\nThe clock had stopped at three\nminutes to midnight since 1983.\nEditors of the scientific magazine\nsaid the move was a result of the\nmedium-range missile treaty signed at\nthe summit \"combined with an im-\nprovedment in U.S.-Soviet relations\nand a greater concern about common\nsecurity matters.\"\nThe clock, which has appeared on\nthe cover of the Bulletin since 1947, has\nbeen as far as 12 minutes from midnight in 1963 and 1972 and as close as\ntwo minutes in 1953.\nThe clock announcement came as\nthe Soviet Union's ruling Politburo\ngave its formal approval to the missile\ntreaty. The 12 member Politburo said\nthe accord, which would eliminate\nmedium-range nuclear missiles is \"an\nimportant milestone in international\ndevelopment.\"\nThe Politburo also called for closer\nconsultations between the Soviet Union\nand its East bloc partners in future\narms agreements with the U.S. and its\nNATO allies.\nThe Province December 18,1987\nby Ky|e R. Kirkwood\nRiley was a film major at the\nUniversity of, well that doesn't\nmatter. Suffice it to say Riley\nwas a film major and he was on\na mission. A gaeas of sorts for\nprofessor Hardy. And Riley\ndidn't like it.\nHardy had sent him to the\nphysics department because\nsome old doddering fool wanted\nto video tape some experiment.\nRiley was an artist, not a video\ntechnician. Riley fluffed himself\nup and brushed past the doors of\nDr. Eziekel Vander Starre's\nlaboratory.\nThe room was bare except\nfor a large awkward looking\ncamera, a cross on the far wall\nand a picture of Stephen Hawkins with a dart in the nose. Riley\nhad never seen anything like it;\nthe camera looked like a Well-\nsian war machine, a Martian.\nThe huge bulbous lens, the head\nof some alien carnivore while\nstrewn below the camera hung\ntentacles that flowed with electricity and power. Riley was a\nlittle scared.\n\"Ach, mien boy, blessed are\nte meek, eh?\", the professor\nleered over the young film\nstudent.\nRiley gulped, \"Yup.\"\n\"Ah, little, one, come here\nand I vill show you te project I\nstarted as a choir boy in te olden\ncountry. See, it is a camera, but\nit is more. All my life I have\nwondered about the mysteries of\nGott.\" The professor swung his\narms about the room, one of\nthem lacing under Riley's elbow\nand drawing him nearer the\ncamera. \"Do you feel it? Destiny.\"\n\"No, I'm an atheist.\" The\nwords seemed to drool out of\nRiley's mouth, each syllable\nsqueezing out between his\ndiastem.\n\"At least you are a existentialist, no?\"\n\"No.\" Riley mused that\nHardy must have really hated\nhis last film, to punish him like\nthis.\n\"Never mind. Ve vill carry\non and see if maybe you are\nright and I am wrong, eh?\" The\nprofessor's eyes gleamed like a\nchild about to do something\nreally naughty. \"The camera\noperates like this, and here, and\nthere. Okay? Good. Any\nquestions before we begin our\nepic?\"\n\"Urn, what does it do?\"\nqueried Riley.\n\"It films time my boy, very\nslowly, so very slowly. It vill let\nus see te mysteries of te universe.\nGott, maybe. That vould'be nice\neh, to see the hand of Gott at\nwork?\" The professor crossed\nhimself and stepped to the cross.\n\"Film me from here. I shall valk\nacross te room, turn and valk\nback.\"\n\"Sure, I think.\" The professor had already focused the\ncamera on the cross, Riley made\na slight fine tuning and released\nthe filming trigger.\nThe sky split asunder, angels\nwept in multitudes, as saintly\nolcf figures beat on brassen\ngongs. An Archangel fluttered\nin front of the camera and a\nvoice boomed from the heavens.\n\"CUT. GET THAT IDIOT OUT\nOF THERE.\" A demon leaped\nthrough the floor and rapped the\nArchangel on the head with a\ncueing board while another\nshuffled cue cards just out of\nsight.\n\"OKAY. FROM THE TOP.\"\nRiley was a film major at the\nUniversity of, well that doesn't\nmatter. Suffice it to say Riley\nwas a film major and he was on\na mission. A gaeas of sorts for\nprofessor Hardy. And Riley\ndidn't like it. |elcome back to another year of Science in Sports.\nRemember that science students who participate in any intramural\nevent for SCIENCE are eligible for a 2/3 rebate of the event cost.\nTo sign up or for more information, come and see the sport coordinators at SCARFE 9. Register early to ensure your placing and do\nit for the glory of your Faculty:\nSCIENCE\nPORTS\nLEAGUE SPORTS\nBASKETBALL: Women.\nRegistration: January 4-8.\nFee: $75/term\nVOLLEYBALL: Women. Corec.\nRegistration: January 4-8.\nFee: $65/term\nHOCKEY: Women. Men.\nRegistration: January 4-8.\nFee:Women, $225/term\nMen, Div 1: $325/term\nDiv 2: $275/term\nDiv 3: $250/term\nBALL HOCKEY: Men. Women.\nRegistration: January 4-8.\nFee:Men, $85/team\nWomen, $65/team\nSPECIAL EVENTS\nGROUSE MOUNTAIN\nSKI CHALLENGE.\nThursday, January 21.\nRegistration: January 4-15.\nFee: $35.\nTHE CENTIPEDE\nCHAMPIONSHIPS.\nThursday, February 11 (12:30pm).\nRegistration: January 25-February 5.\nFee: $25 Women's team,\n$30 Men's team.\nSPANISH BANKS\nDOWNHILL DERBY.\nSunday, February 28 (8:00am-)\nRegistration: February 1-17.\nFee: $35/team in soap box.\nCO-REC SPORTS\nBROOMBALL BASH Part II.\nThursday, January 28.\nRegistration: January 11-22.\nFee: $25/team.\nCURLING.\nThursday, February 11.\nRegistration: January 25-February 5.\nFee: $25/team.\nINDOOR CRICKET.\nSaturday, February 27.\nRegistration: February 8-17.\nFee: $15/team.\nTOURNAMENT\nSUB 6 FT. BASKETBALL\n(Men & Women).\nFriday and Saturday, January 29/30.\nRegistration January 11-22.\nFee: $30/team.\nRACQUET SPORTS\nPAN AMERICAN OPEN (Doubles).\nJanuary 29-30.\nRegistration: January 11-22.\nFee: $4/round\nEUROPEAN OPEN.\nFebruary 26-27.\nRegistration: February 8-17.\nFee: $4/round\nAUSTRALIAN OPEN (Doubles).\nFebruary 2-7.\nRegistration: January 18-29.\nFee: $4/tourney\nUS OPEN.\nMarch 1-6.\nRegistration: Feb. 15-26.\nFee: $4/tourney\nGREAT PLAINS OPEN.\nJanuary 22-23.\nRegistration: January 4-15.\nFee: $10/tourney\nMARITIMES OPEN.\nFebruary 12-13.\nRegistration: January 25-February 5.\nFee: $10/tourney\nLU\no\nz\nUJ\n<\nX\no\nat Scarfe #9\n(downstairs, across from Edibles)\nONLY 20 SPOTS LEFT\nCOST $35.00\nfor a full day of\nskiing, lunch, dinner\nand dance\nNote: Science Students who\nparticipate for Science\nare eligible for a $20\nrebate after the even!.\nActual cost: $15.00\nWANTED\nJ Typists\ni Writers\nJ Illustrators\nAd Salesperson\nIf you wmi to help, come to Scarfe 9\nand see Vince or Jean.\nOur meetings are every Friday and our\nnext production day is January 13,\nWhy not drop by*\ni If you have any ideas for feature articles or photo essays, jot them down. If\nyou have any comments or complaints With what we are doing right or\nwrong, lefs here from you. It is your paper. The more input we have, the\nmore we'll know of what you expect.\nGROUSE\nMOUNTAIN\nTHURSDAY, JANUARY21 8:30 \u00E2\u0080\u0094 MIDNIGHT\nDUAL GIANT SLALOM\nAttention:\nScience Students. Do you want to\nplace an advertisement? For the\nnext issue, the 432 will not charge\nyou. It must be 25 words or less.\nHere's your chance to impress\nsomebody. Get those pens and\npencils going and let's here from\nyou. Get rid of those old boots and\nskis...\nIts FREE!!!!!\nEMINARS\nWednesday, January 6\nRichard Hebda: The Brooks Peninsula:\nA Unique Area on the West Coast of\nVancouver Island. Vancouver Museum and Planetarium Auditorium,\n8:00pm.\nDr. Morteza Ghomshei: Natural\nPiezoelectric Fabric, an Evidence for\nPaleoelectrification. Geophysics and\nAstronomy Building. Room 260,\n4:00pm.\nThursday, January 7\nDr. John E. Carlson: Genetic Engineering for Herbicide Resistance in Canola.\nIRC. Lecture Hall 3,4:00pm.\nDr. J. Richard Bond: The Dilemma of\nLarge Scale Cosmic Structures: Great\nAttractors, Cluster Islands and All That.\nHennings Building. Room 201,\n4:00pm.\nMonday, January 11\nCarol Christopher: Food Security.\nIRC (Woodward Building). Room 1,\n7:30pm.\nDr. Gordon Keller: Gene Transfer into\nHoempoietic Stem Cells. Biochemistry\nDepartment. Room 4210,10:30pm.\nDr. M. Bolte: Globular Clusters , Some\nNew Results. Geophysics and Astronomy Building. Room 260,4:00pm.\nTuesday, January 12\nDr. Louise Glass : A Molecular Analysis\nof Mating Type in Filamentous fungus\nNeurospora crassa. Biological Sciences\nBuilding. Room 2000,4:00pm.\nDr. William Graham: Carbon-Hydrogen\nActivation by Transition Metal Complexes: Recent Developments. Chemistry\nBuilding. Room 250,1:00pm.\nDr. P. Budgell: The Kolaman filter/\nsmoother for Ocean Data Assimilation.\nBiological Sciences Building. Room\n1465,3:30 pm.\nThursday, January 14\nDr. Werner Israel: From White Dwarfs\nto Black Holes: The Story of a Revolutionary Idea. Hennings Building. Room\n201,4:00pm.\nTuesday, January 19\nDr. Harry Wasserman: A New Look at\nthe Chemistry ofCarbonyl Compounds.\nChemistry Building. Room 250,\n1:00pm.\nDr. D. Jacobson: Feeding Biology of\nThecate Heterotrophic Dinoflagellates.\nBiological Sciences Building. Room\n1465,3:30pm.\nAnnouncements are welcome. Please\naddress submissions to: The 432 c/o\nThe Dean's Office, Faculty of Science.\nThe next submission deadline is\nJanuary 14,1988.\nI.N. STEIN by Ken Otter\n...When suddenly, two beavers with a tranquilizer gun jumped\nout from behind the tree..."@en . "Periodicals"@en . "Vancouver (B.C.)"@en . "LE3.B841 A12"@en . "LE3_B841_A12_1988_01_06"@en . "10.14288/1.0000496"@en . "English"@en . "Vancouver : University of British Columbia Library"@en . "Vancouver : University of British Columbia. Science Undergraduate Society"@en . "Images provided for research and reference use only. Permission to publish, copy, or otherwise use these images must be obtained from the University of British Columbia Science Undergraduate Society: http://www.sus.ubc.ca/"@en . "Original Format: University of British Columbia. Archives"@en . "University of British Columbia"@en . "The 432"@en . "Text"@en . ""@en .