The Importance of Reading

If we asked a teenager, how many hours he spends in the day on the Internet, especially in Social Networks, we would be surprised. And if we asked him how many books he has read so far this year, we would also be surprised.
Surely he has spent half of the day socializing on his computer, but he has hardly finished a novel since January 2012 until now. Or throughout his life.
However, perhaps it has never been so important to know how to read and understand what is read as in this era; in which information flows rapidly and requires an almost immediate understanding.
Who does not know how to analyze a text today, can hardly make good use of New Technologies, in what comprises a rational and consistent use of them.
And I would venture to say: The current society, the society of the 21st century is the society of Reading.
We can say that Reading is the most effective means for acquiring knowledge as it enriches our vision of reality, intensifies our logical and creative thinking, and facilitates the capacity for expression.
It plays a fundamental role in increasing our intellectual capacity and, therefore, our development as an independent human being.
Reading is equivalent to thinking, just as knowing how to read means being able to identify the basic ideas of a text, grasp the most relevant details and provide critical judgment about what is being read.
In short, reading involves reasoning, creating, dreaming and becoming more tolerant and respectful of each other’s differences, it consists in learning to observe society from a new, more objective point of view, away from prejudices and contradictory ideas. reality.
Developing a taste for reading, as well as encouraging the people around us to read should be a challenge that each of us should consider.
The democratic societies in which we live demand increasingly more thinking citizens and free of archaic and dangerous ideas that could harm their good functioning.

We must make reading a permanent habit, converting the act of reading into a pleasant, rewarding and shared moment.
Unquestionably, not knowing how to read in the technological society in which we live can only lead to social, cultural, political and economic exclusion; or what is worse, to an absolute banishment from the main areas in which most of the members of the society of which we are a part move.
If we want to be the owners of the New Technologies and not only their slaves, we only have one way: Learn to read and understand what we have read.
That is the main challenge that we all have today.
The importance of language is increasingly valued in modern societies. This is because it not only defines the human being, but also facilitates and perfects human relationships in themselves and the context that surrounds them.
Reading is the true path to knowledge and freedom, since it allows us to travel along the paths of time and space, as well as to know and understand different societies and their cultures.
In children, reading not only entertains and develops their vocabulary, but also encourages their imagination, increases academic and daily life knowledge, and facilitates interaction with other members of society.
In the document “Towards Societies of Knowledge” (Unesco, 2005), it is proposed that from a society as highly technological as the one we live in, both writing and accounting should be omnipresent and indispensable elements for daily life and the exercise of the citizenship.
Knowing how to read is one of the pillars for the acquisition and transmission of knowledge in our daily lives, but also in the academic world. It is important that children acquire and train this skill since they are small, because as the academic progress is made, the level of demand increases, which demands greater reading and writing skills.
Reading is one of the ways to access knowledge but it is also an activity that is involved in most activities of our daily life: Knowing how to read the prices of things, knowing how to read the signs or rules of the places to which we go, understand contracts, invoices and documents in general, access to the knowledge transmitted to us by books and stories told by novels .
The reading domain, writing and elementary calculus remain the primary objectives for “Learning to Learn” and develop increasingly as autonomous beings, and not dependent on any government or ideology of the day.
It is good for children to read; this everyone knows. In fact, there are many programs to promote reading that encourage children to start reading very soon. The key question is why it is good for children to read and why it is good that they do so as soon as possible.
That children start reading between 2 and 5 years (which is what we can consider as early ages) has many benefits, beyond preparing children for primary school.


Cryogenization is the object of cryonics science. The origin of this word is to be found in the Greek kryos whose meaning is cold. Cryogenization is a method by which a person (or animal) is subjected to conditions of intense cold in order to preserve their body in conditions to be reanimated in the future. The correct term for this process is cryopreservation.
Currently cryogenization is not a reversible process and can only be applied to people who have been declared legally dead (clinical death). So far it has not been able to repair the damage that occurs at the molecular level in the tissues produced by the process of freezing and ischemia. The nanorreparación, or repair at the molecular level, is subject to the advance of nanotechnology and nanomedicine and we can be talking about decades or centuries seen.
On this neuro-psychological and biological predisposition of the human being, the so-called cryogenization is born, understood as the technique that allows to maintain a legally dead body, both human and animal, under conditions of quasi-freezing so that at an “opportune moment” “, Can be revived with the hope that he will start a new life, possibly, eliminating or greatly attenuating the causes that caused his past death. In fact, cryogenization has as its primary objective to win the game over time, and with this, allow science to advance and discover the “cure” of multiple evils, while those who suffered and perished for them, wait in a state of conservation through extreme cold. Etymologically, cryogenization has its roots in the Greek term criónica, which means cryopreservation, that is, to avoid the progressive wearing down of a lifeless organism, from the legal point of view but not biological.
The main argument on which the cryogenicists are based to defend the possible success of the test, is that they would be able to maintain the vital functions of the cerebral biological structure, considered as the most relevant for the resuscitation instance. They add that this is achieved by administering and causing the transit and accumulation of large concentrations of cryoprotectants, which would be enough to protect the brain structure from injuries that inevitably occur in a state of natural death. The preservation of brain areas that contain memory, personality and identity are essential so that, if the intended resuscitation materializes, that human being remains this and not a vegetable. For this reason, it is vital for cryogenicists to be on permanent guard and keep away the possibility of the so-called “theoretical death of information”. This death would imply the destruction of the human hard disk, without which it would be impossible to aspire to any hope of “resuscitation”.
Cryogenization can be carried out in two different ways:


-Full body: The person without life is introduced into the tube Dewar and is subjected to liquid nitrogen allowing it to act as a preservative throughout the body and long term (referring to years).
-neuro-preservation: only the brain of the patient separated from the rest of the body is subjected to the process of cryogenization. Advocates of this option argue that, in addition to being the vital part to preserve as explained above, it is cheaper and easier to transfer.
Of course, as everything that concerns and surrounds cryogenization, this second option has also generated reactions and debates between detractors and defenders.
Deepening in the previous thing, it is necessary to say that the neuro-preservation is an especially “attractive” option for the adepts to the cryogenization, but in economic terms, since the treatment of the skull only, reduces in approximately a 50% the costs, that In itself, they are not available to everyone. In subsequent chapters this controversial aspect will be deepened for many, and for those who maintain that cryogenization is only a business, it goes to the field of the outrageous.
The first hint that human life could be conserved for centuries – but without reference to methods – dates back to 1773, and was manifested in a letter by the renowned American scientist and politician Benjamin Franklin, inventor of the lightning rod.
From this consideration it was necessary to wait almost two centuries, until 1962, so that another member of the science, in this case, the professor of physics Robert Ettinger, proposed with absolute conviction that the man could be conserved and aspire to the “eternal life” to through the freezing of the body.
Ettinger presented his theory in what is still today, one of the main scientific references of cryogenization, the book “The Prospect of Immortality”. This form was financed by himself, but it served for the physicist to make it clear in his pages that the freezing of a body was not an end in itself, but also a method that would open the doors to future medical technology in several ways. Despite this theory, Ettinger clearly emphasized that perhaps today, by 1962, the freezing of a human being is seen as mortal, but tomorrow it could be reversible. When referring to the same clinical death, the scientist uses the same argument, affirming the clear possibility of reversibility of this “destiny of man”.

Trump Defends

“I am the least racist person to interview.”

This is what US President Donald Trump told journalists this Sunday, denying accusations of racism against him for allegedly saying that El Salvador, Haiti and African nations were “shithole countries” (shithole countries).

While resting at his Trump International Golf Club in West Palm Beach, his resort in Florida, the president addressed reporters: “I’m not racist.” “I’m the least racist person you’ll interview.”

On Friday, Trump denied having made those controversial statements in a tweet. But this is the first time that the president responds directly to accusations of racism.

The dispute erupted last week after reports surfaced in the US media that during a meeting at the White House, Trump had asked: “Why are we having all these people here from” shit “countries? ?

According to information published Thursday by The Washington Post and the New York Times, cited by anonymous sources, Trump used this language in a meeting with Democratic and Republican senators to analyze a proposal for immigration reform that would benefit citizens of El Salvador, Haiti and African nations.

In recent weeks, the US government has been withdrawing Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for people of various nationalities currently living in the country.

Trump also allegedly said in that meeting that instead of granting temporary residence to citizens of countries affected by natural disasters, wars or epidemics, the US I should receive immigrants from countries like Norway.

The African Union demanded on Friday that the US president apologize after the alleged sayings, expressing his “shock, consternation and indignation” for the “clearly racist” comments.

UN Human Rights Spokesman Rupert Colville said at a press conference in Geneva: “There is no other word that can be used but racist, you can not label entire countries and continents as ‘shit’.”

The National Association for the Advancement of People of Color (NAACP) accused the president of falling “deeper and deeper into the hole of racism and xenophobia.”

Several Democratic representatives said they intend not to attend the president’s State of the Union speech later this month for his statements, accusing the president of racism.

On Friday, the president tweeted that the language he used at the meeting was “hard” but questioned the writing of the reports.

He also published another tweet in which he denied insulting the Haitians and accusing the Democrats of inventing it.

But Senator Dick Durbin said the accusations were true and that Trump had used a language “full of hate, vile and racist” during the meeting.


Several high-ranking Republican lawmakers at the meeting, including National Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen, said they do not remember Trump making the comment.

Another Republican senator who was there, Lindsey Graham, did not deny the sayings.

“After the president’s comments, I addressed him directly, and the president and everyone at the meeting knows what I said and how I feel,” he said.

Speaker of the House of Representatives, Republican Paul Ryan, said Donald Trump’s immigration statements were “very unfortunate” and “useless.”

When Trump was asked on Sunday if he considered that the comments had made it difficult to obtain an immigration agreement, Trump responded: “Have you seen what several senators said about my comments? They were not facts.”

Despite his denial, the US president has received harsh criticism from the countries alluded to, among others.

The Haitian government was “outraged and shocked” by statements that, “if true (…), would reflect a completely mistaken and racist view of the Haitian community and its contribution to the United States.”

The Government of El Salvador announced that it had sent a protest note to the United States and demanded “respect” for Salvadoran citizens.

The African Union (AU), which brings together 55 states and several governments of that continent, labeled as “racist” the comments attributed to Trump.

A spokeswoman of the UA indicated that, even though the agent chief executive has denied them, they do not stop being “worrisome” because “there is a pattern of declarations and previous acts”.

In addition, ambassadors to the UN from 54 African countries demanded an apology from Trump for the “racist” comments he expressed on Thursday.

They also condemned the “scandalous, racist and xenophobic” comments of the ruler, and claimed to be “concerned about the continuing and growing trend within the US government towards Africa and towards people of African descent denigrating the continent and people of color.”

The Evolution of the Human Being

When We Talk About Evolution We Think About Changes, In Improvements, Even In Technology, But Now We Will Talk About The Evolution The Human Being Has Had In The Fas Of The Earth.

As far as we know and seen from a scientific point and with “rational explanations” man is part of the evolution of this world in which we live and come from monkey.

In a general way, we can say that there is a common trunk between the great apes or anthropoid primates (pongidos) and humans (hominids). At some point, these two families would form and evolve in different directions: The pongids would give origin to the gorillas, chimpanzees, orangutans, etc., as soon as the Hominids would give formation, through a long evolution (austrolipithecus, homo habilis, homo erectus, homo neanderthal) to originate homo sapiens, current man.

Human beings have always not worried about the knowledge of our evolution. We can consider the evolution of man as the process of transformation that we have undergone from our first ancestors (ancestors) to modern man. In short, the explanation of how we have evolved.

To know our ancestors we have to know that we belong to the genus Homo (Homo = Human) and from there our first ascenders start.

The origin of the great family of hominids starts at the point of separation between our evolutionary line and that which leads to chimpanzees, our closest relatives, approximately 7 million years ago and precisely there are the first homos.

Reconstructing the history of the evolution of the complete man from the first homo to our days is an almost detective task that involves paleontologists, geneticists, ecologists, geologists, engineers, mathematicians and from which every day we know more data.

The different human species had brains of different sizes that endowed the human being with the necessary intelligence to build substitutes for the lack of corporeal defenses, such as shelters for the cold, weapons for defense and hunting or rooms for refuge. But this process of learning and transmission of knowledge was not continuous or homogeneous, so it took thousands of years before the human species could make complex cultural features, such as articulated language, writing, the use of metals or religious thought .

At the moment when human beings were able to avoid catastrophes through prudence, foresight and skill, a new force began to function in the selection process, something very similar to what is called human intelligence

Speech is not possible without very specific anatomical structures of the mouth and throat. The larynx is in a much lower position in humans than in other primates, which determines our ability to produce much clearer non-nasal sounds. The distance between the larynx and the nostrils makes it possible to emit certain sounds with strength and clarity, especially the vowels such as “i” and “u”.

At birth, babies have their larynx in a very high position, so they can suck and breathe at the same time. At 18 months the child’s larynx descends and allows him to make sounds of language but more danger of suffocation. So, by acquiring bipedalism to move, we gain having more back pains and difficulties in childbirths, and when we acquire speech we gain an increased risk of dying from choking, and this is not nonsense, many children and adults have deceased for this cause. If talking is such a big risk then the pressure in favor of that adaptation must have been very high.

Throughout human evolution, so many changes have happened that sometimes we find them surprising.

Such is the way of life of the ancestoric and eocénicas forms, which has imposed some evident peculiarity to all the systematic group: the locomotion is plantigrade; hands and feet are prehensible to increase safety in trees; the nails, totally or partially flat, which helps hold tiny objects

The Proconsul is a genus of the lower Miocene, perhaps representing three species of which we know quite a lot. The members and the scapular waist correspond to an animal that practices the prehensile location of the hands, but has not specialized in this way.

In any case, it is true that hominins derived from forms that practiced prehensile use of their hands, as evidenced by the structure of their shoulder girdles, the shape of the thorax, the orientation of the femurs with respect to the spine, and, according to an old idea of ​​Darwin, also the various flumina pilorum, that is, the orientation of the hairs along the limbs and trunk.

On the other hand, the ancestors of the hominids could not have no prehensile very specialized, since in recent years the relationship between the mass of the arms and the legs is inverse to that in the póngidos and hilobáticos, and the hand retains a very generalized structure. The evolution of man according to Charles Darwin On the return of his trip he married and compiled the notes of the trip, which he published between 1840 and 1843 with the title “Zoology of the Voyage of the Beagle”. In 1851 he also published a valuable study on the cirripeds (a subclass of marine crustaceans). But it was not until 1859 that he published the book he had been working on since his return almost twenty years ago: “The origin of the species.” The book contains an explanatory theory of evolution, called Darwinism, based on numerous observations, and that from the moment of its publication supposed the immersion of Charles Darwin in the ongoing debates, criticisms and confrontations with many scientists. In “The Origin of Man “, published in 1871, defended the theory that the evolution of man starts from an animal similar to the monkey. The religious authorities qualified him as an atheist and a blasphemer.