Venus and Mercury over Japan on March 30th. Image: Mitsuo Muraoka via Science@NASA

UPDATE: This is a VERY nice pairing.  Mercury popped out nicely at 7:52 pm EDT.  Look more to the northwest at around  7:52  your local time.  They pair are much closer than in the image above.

There will be a great chance to see a great pairing of  Mercury and Venus coming up very soon.

Both planets are reaching eastern elongation.  That is the point in their orbits where they appear to reach the point in their travels furthest east of the sun.  When that happens the planets are visible after the sun sets for a few days either side of the elongation.  Venus is visible for quite some time, Mercury not so much, so be sure to have a look and don’t forget to point it out to the kids.

Dates of Eastern Elongation:

• Mercury:  09 April 2010
• Venus:  20 April 2010

Look to the western horizon as light fades some, you will pick up Venus first, it will be well above the horizon.  Mercury will become visible shortly afterwards and a bit lower in the sky.  The two planets will get as close as 3^o so as I said they will make for a great sight.   April 3rd and 4th is probably the best nights to look to see the close pairing.

The Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter has been circling the red planet doing NASA’s work since 2006. Now, it’s finally following your direction. Using the HiWish page, Mars enthusiasts have been requesting sites for the HiRISE (High Resolution Imaging Science Experiment) on board the orbiter to photograph. This week, NASA released the first batch of images from what it’s calling “the people’s camera.”

This image of an area, Deuteronilus Mensae, shows high mesas surrounded by buildups called lobate debris aprons. These are particularly interesting as they seem to contain nearly pure ice.

All images: NASA/JPL/University of Arizona

With so much personal information floating around the Internet, managing an online reputation can be a challenge, especially for people looking for a job or hoping for a promotion. Professional networking sites like LinkedIn have helped people manage their reputations by allowing them to post tightly controlled professional profiles–on LinkedIn, users can request recommendations from colleagues, which they can first approve before posting them on their profiles. But while those profiles are useful, some people see them as a little more than organized puffery.

Soon, however, more daring professionals can also use the services of Unvarnished–a controversial new Web site where users can leave anonymous reviews of a person’s work. Billed as Yelp for people, the site is built on user-generated reviews, and it aims to present an “unvarished” picture of a worker’s strengths or weaknesses. So far, the reviews of the beta version of the site have been scathing. Apart from being named “2010’s worst startup” [Econsultancy], the site has also been described as a “clean, well-lighted place for defamation” [Vator News].

The site, created by Peter Kazanjy, is currently available by invitation-only and was released in its beta form a few days ago. You can either join a waiting list or wait for someone to send you an invite via Facebook, asking for a review. Once you connect, you have to submit a review for your account to be activated; that allows you to “claim” your profile–because if someone has already submitted a review of you, your profile already exists. Once your profile exists you can request reviews of your work. And of course, you can submit as many anonymous reviews as you like.

If someone posts a nasty review of your work, however, the site does not allow you the option of removing the post or deleting your profile, leading some to worry that the anonymous reviews opens the forum up to personal vendettas and amplifies everything that is awful about the web right now: anonymous, drive-by, ad hominem attacks that can’t be erased or edited and that live in search forever [CNET].

There is also no way of judging the value of the reviews left on a user’s profile, which some people argue diminishes the value of the whole site. After all, an endorsement from a top executive at a well-known company is going to be far more compelling than a negative review by a former entry-level co-worker who never worked with you directly. In the absence of any ability to truly assess a reviewers credibility (either through identity or review history), Unvarnished anonymous reviews have little to no inherent value [Econsultancy].

Other critics worry that Unvarnished may do more harm than good to professional reputations as people tend to magnify the negative; an employee with 50 extremely positive reviews and 5 very negative reviews would be at a disadvantage against someone with no Unvarnished profile [Techcrunch].

Creator Peter Kazanjy stands by his decision to allow anonymous posts which cannot be deleted by the user, pointing out that other review sites such as TheFunded.com, where people can rate venture capitalists and Tripadvisor, where people rate hotels and vacation spots would be useless, if the business owners could delete negative reviews. “The idea is to create a place, not where people only give F-minuses, but a place where people can feel comfortable to give B-pluses or A-minuses,” Kazanjy said. “Reviews then actually mean something” [Los Angeles Times].

There are some brave souls who are willing to give the new site a shot, describing it as a LinkedIn with teeth: minus the sappy reviews people post to each others’ profiles on that site. LinkedIn with teeth makes it seem more mundane, and that is the truth of the matter. Browse around a little and you’ll calm down pretty quickly. Come back later when you’re considering working with someone and you may find it useful [ReadWriteWeb].

Related Content:
80beats: Some M.D.s Try to Amputate Online Reviews
80beats: Hey Perp: That Facebook Friend Request May Come From the FBI
Discoblog: Class-Action Lawsuit Accuses Yelp of Extortion
Discoblog: Worst Science Article of The Week: Facebook Causes Syphilis

Image: Unvarnished

[Note: This post honors the day that is April 1.]

I have posted many a picture purporting paranormal parts that are actually just our minds playing tricks on us. But this one really puts us to the test. Or testis.

Yes. It’s a haunted scrotum.

It looks more like a monkey to me than a ghostly face, and there’s a vas deferens between them. Maybe you see something different. Leave a comment if you do, and please keep it clean… but have a ball.

Tip o’ the urethra to Dr. Joe Albietz.

I met Kirk Crippens at the Photo Alliance portfolio review in San Francisco a few weeks back, and was psyched to view his project Pixel Nation. I liked that the images in this series isolate everyday textures we take for granted, revealing the unexpected.

Crippens reports that while photographing pixels he discovered an ornate world of color and structure that he photographed at varying magnifications. Crippens: “Many of the photographs were taken with long exposures while the images on the screen were changing. This process meant that I did not know what the photo would look like until after the image was captured. With analog television ending in 2009, I decided to include the patterns of older screens, the pre-pixel screens. Changes have occurred in pixel design over the years – from the simple dashes and dots of early color TVs and computer monitors to plasma’s gaseous pixels and HD television’s intricately designed pixels. The ubiquitous pixel has been transforming just under our gaze.” Behold, the lowly pixel!

Sony Trinitron

Images courtesy Kirk Crippens

Greg Laden posted the Wikio science blogs rankings for this month. Here they are:

First, where’s Pharyngula? Like him or hate him P. Z. Myers has to be high on this list. Where’s Cosmic Variance? Not Exactly Rocket Science? Perhaps some of these weblogs opted out of the rankings, I don’t know. But whatever is going on, something doesn’t pass the smell test here. For what it’s worth, my own weblog is ranked highly, but at the old URL, so I assume I’ll slowly start journeying south on the rankings as people start switching links.