It’s an annoying feeling when the media tricks you into reading a story. Here’s an example. ABCnews.com is currently running a story on their Website with this headline: “Envisioning a World Without Men, Scientist Says Female-Only Reproduction Is Only a Few Years Away.”

The article is about the eventual extinction of men (and only men). To read the headline you’d think all men are doomed, and is suppose they all are, but it’s certainly not going to be within our lifetimes.

According to Professor Bryan Sykes, a worldwide authority on genetics at Oxford University, the Y chromosome that’s responsible for determining male gender in the womb is fatally flawed, and will disappear entirely 125,000 years from now.

That’s hardly cause for panic, but that cheap shot headline notwithstanding, it’s still a pretty interesting development. Even though male extinction is a ways down the road, there’s been plenty of evidence to back it up.

Sykes is basing his prediction on some rather disturbing biological developments when it comes to reproduction. “Every generation, one percent of men will have a mutation which reduces their fertility by 10 percent,” Sykes told the media. “So of that goes on for generation after generation, eventually there are no Y chromosomes left.”

In fact, recent studies have shown that men have a more pressing problem. According to several medical studies, average sperm counts are steadily declining.

The bulk of this research has been published in the British Medical Journal, when researchers in Edinburgh, Scotland, reported that men born after 1970 had a sperm count 25 percent lower than those born before 1959. That works out to be an average decline of 2.1 percent annually.

A worldwide comprehensive analysis conducted by Danish scientists involving males from 21 countries found an alarming plunge of 50 percent in average sperm counts over the past 50 years.

So far, scientists haven’t been able to explain a reason for this decline in fertility. The only thing we know for certain is that if it keeps up, males will eventually go the way of the Dodo.

The harsh reality is that Mother Nature has apparently decided men are expendable. When she makes her mind, that’s the end of it. There are already plenty of organisms on this planet that are perfectly happy to reproduce without male assistance.

The process is called parthenogenesis, and it’s a system that works very well for creatures like the hammerhead shark and certain wasps. Now, the process has been successfully completed with mice—the genetic material from one female was used to impregnate the other.

How long the process takes to perform on human females is, I suppose, directly proportionate to how much longer women are willing to put up with men.

But if this news worries you, gentlemen, remember that genetic mutations are lethargic—almost as lethargic as some of your friends when they’re sitting on your couch eating all your nachos.

In the end, this discovery should be a lesson for men everywhere to make the most of time. So this Fall, watch all the football you possibly can.

There’s only 125,000 seasons left.

–Joey Alfino, RED Editorial Staff

It’s been widely noted that the biggest reason why the Pittsburgh Penguins are resting on a 2-0 series lead over the New York Rangers is because the Penguins are beating the Blueshirts at their own game.

Hockey gurus all over the nation have spent the season watering down Pittsburgh’s defensive mettle. New York is supposed to be the hard-nosed defensive team, but since the playoffs, the Penguins have turned an about-face in that department.

The Pens rank first in defensive parsimony, allowing only nine goals in six playoff games (all of them ending in a win). The Pens have also shed their inconsistency in penalty kills after denying all six power play attempts by the Rangers last Sunday.

So needless to say the pressure is on at Madison Square Garden tonight for game three of this series, but picking up a win is well within reason for New York. If the Blueshirts can manage to take their offense that generated 4 goals in the series opener and parlay that with the defense they played on Sunday, the odds of New York holding their own ice are palpable.

But it’s hard to ignore the frustration that seems to be seeping out of the Rangers’ organization as of late, not only for its irony, but also its comedic value.

There’s been a war of words and accusations swirling around both of these teams recently about Sidney Crosby’s performance on the ice—specifically his dramatic performances.

After the series opener last Friday, Rangers coach Tom Renney and his team was clearly upset with an interference call against Martin Straka for obstructing Crosby as the Penguins looked to have a 2-on-1 break with the score tied at 4.

Straka went to the box, and next thing you know, Crosby set up the winning goal by beaming a slap shot off teammate Evgeni Malkin.

In short, Tom Renney thinks Crosby took a dive, and he thinks it’s dirty pool. Before Friday’s game, Renney said Crosby’s diving would be a talking point during his meeting with the series’ supervisor.

When asked about the call against Straka after the game, Renny didn’t specifically cry foul, but you’d have to have a head like a hockey puck to not notice the innuendo.

I’m not here to hang blame on any specific player (that call against Straka could have gone either way), but for the Rangers to blow a 3-0 lead and then gripe about a penalty doesn’t project the greatest image for New York.

Especially with Sean Avery on the roster.

–Joey Alfino, RED Editorial Staff.

If you’ve got a last minute itch to head off to Louisville Kentucky for the 134th Run for the Roses this Saturday, chances are slim that you’ll score tickets at this late date. Tickets for the next year go on sale on Monday, and all 55,000 seats are usually gone by September and cost from $50 to $600.

And get this: you must write to Churchill Downs for tickets and mail it in the postal mail, the snail mail. Tickets are not sold on-line or over the phone. How’s that for tradition?

Your best chance for getting into the Derby this year is to show up at Churchill Downs in the wee hours Saturday morning and wait for approximately 30,000 tickets to go on sale. These tickets don’t include a seat, just standing room in the infield and paddock area. It’s been described as a place where spring break meets Mardi Gras. As one Derby goer observed, “you see a lot in the infield, but not a lot of horses.”

But all of that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t head for Louisville anyway. There’s more to enjoy in Louisville than mint juleps and big hats. More than 70 events in the weeks leading up to the Derby, including North America’s largest fireworks display, which was actually held on April 12, brings more than 1.5 million people to the city to celebrate. Come for the steamboat race, the parade, the marathon or the balloon festival, along with dozens of luncheons, dances and social hoopla.

Of course, throughout the year, you can visit Churchill Downs and pay $1 to sit in the grandstand and watch horses work out. Or pay $10 to visit the museum that documents the life of a Kentucky Derby winner from the day of birth to old age. The $10 admission fee is well-worth it just for the introductory film that brings some visitors to tears with the singing of “My Old Kentucky Home,” a tradition to be sung on race day.

You can also climb up on horses in the starting gate or race against a friend on plastic store-front style horses on an interactive track. Or get up close and personal with the real thing on a “Barn and Backside Tour” offered March through November, with the exception of a few race weeks. And plan for lunch at the Derby Café where mint juleps are sold year round, unlike at most other restaurants and bars in the city.

But if you are planning to head out this weekend and wager a bet at the track, remember to take cash, and plenty of it. Bets are made in cash only from $2 to, well, just how lucky are you feeling?

To answer any question other than that, visit www.gotolouisville.com.

–Diana Lambdin Meyer, RED Travel Writer

For as dissimilar as they are, Sens. Obama and Clinton are beginning have the same problem, but exactly what that similarity was hasn’t been clear until just now.

After the Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s speech at the National Press Club today, it’s obvious that Clinton and Obama’s political voice will always be trumped by those closest to them. It’s an analogous problem between the Democratic candidates; Bill Clinton is to Hillary as the Rev. Wright is to Obama.

The parallel is obvious. Every time Hillary gains ground, her husband promptly loses it by saying something inevitably offensive to someone, leaving Sen. Clinton’s campaign to resemble a modern version of the myth of Sisyphus.

And now the same fate has befallen Obama in this Democratic contest. Now the Rev. Wright is the one nudging that boulder down the hill for Obama to shoulder again.

It’s gotten to a point where people who aren’t running for office supersede the messages coming out of a candidate’s mouth. There are plenty of voters who don’t like Hillary because of what her husband says, or don’t like Obama because of what his pastor says.

The problem here is, who’s to blame? For Pete’s sake, there has to be somebody to blame for this, right? Do we hold Hillary Clinton responsible for failing to keep a muzzle on her husband? Do we hold Barack Obama responsible for associating himself (albeit distantly) with a Reverend of radical ilk?

What about the media? It’s usually their fault anyway, can’t we blame them? The answer, reader, is none of thee above. I’m afraid this one might be our fault.

Neither Rev. Wright nor President Bill Clinton are evil people, and I doubt anyone here would be so doltish as to question their patriotism. They are outspoken people to be sure, but they aren’t wrong-headed.

Despite jokes and jibes to the contrary, Bill Clinton is not trying to sabotage his wife’s political career, and I doubt Rev. Wright is trying to do the same to Obama.

What they are doing (and this is especially true with respect to the Reverend) is using their exposure to express an agenda, and as troublesome as that might be to the political longevity of Clinton and Obama, there’s nothing we can do to stop it.

In fact, there’s nothing we SHOULD do to stop it. It’s our responsibility to be able to compartmentalize what the media throws at us. Are President Clinton and Rev. Wright’s remarks often inflammatory? Absolutely, but neither man is on the ballot.

If we are going to continue this habit of judging a politician by who they associate with (or have associated with in the past), then we’re all in for a letdown of epic proportions. Call me bitter, but I’m fairly certain it’s the business of a politician to shake hands and befriend people I’d rather not know.

And that goes double for the President.

–Joey Alfino, RED Editorial Staff

It seems that “change”, one of this years most famous verbs, isn’t limiting itself strictly to politics. Calls for change have managed to find their way to basketball commissioner David Stern’s ears in reference to the NBA playoffs.

Born largely out of the stark disparity between the Eastern and Western conferences, commissioner Stern announced that certain changes to the NBA’s playoff system would be considered in the coming months.

“Although I think it’s unlikely anything will happen,” Stern told the media, “I think we’re going to explore it fully.” That might be what Stern told reporters, but here’s what was really going through the commissioner’s head. “Alright, alright, fine! If I look into it, will that shut you up?”

Does the NBA have room for improvement when it comes to the playoffs? Maybe a little, but everything that’s wrong with the playoffs can be collectively dismissed with one blanket statement: Nobody’s perfect. Deal with it.

As was mentioned earlier, the steadily increasing calls for change in the playoffs are largely driven by complaints.

The West is overwhelmingly more talented than the East, and this is where most of the complaints are coming from. The West has so many good teams while the East barely has a handful, so the argument is that the playoffs don’t give us the best possible matches.

For example, Golden State didn’t make the playoffs this year despite their 48-win season. The same is true of Portland’s 41-wins. Yet in the East, Philadelphia and Atlanta got in with 40 and 37 wins respectively.

This disparity in talent has led some to believe the NBA playoffs should include the top 16 teams regardless of conference. That’s a great plan if you’re the Golden State Warriors, but to everyone else it should sound like pity.

If this is about being fair to the best 16 teams by eliminating conferences in the post season, then you have to eliminate them in the regular season as well. Now we’re talking about a heck of a lot more than changing the playoffs. Now we’re looking changing the NBA itself.

No conferences equal no conference schedules, and no conference schedules means that each team has to play an equal number of games. There are 30 teams in the NBA, so if every team were to play each other three times, that’s an 87 game season. If the NBA wants to keep its four-game series philosophy, that’s 116 games.

Good luck taking that one to the Players Association.

The simple fact is, you can’t make everyone happy. If you listen closely, you’ll notice that the only people complaining about this aren’t in the playoffs right now. I’m no athlete, and I’m no basketball guru, but I have a piece of advice for all those teams who feel slighted over not making the playoffs.

Win more games next year.

–Joey Alfino, RED Editorial Staff

–The New York Post reported that O.J. Simpson has asked Donald Trump for an appearance on NBC’s Celebrity Apprentice. Apparently, O.J. heard the business world is a back stabbing place and he got excited.

–More than 85,000 people have applied to be Paris Hilton’s new best friend. In case you don’t know, “Paris Hilton’s My New BFF” is a reality show where contestants vie to be Paris’ new buddy. It’s also the first program in reality show history where the losers are the real winners.

–Yoko Ono is suing the producers of a new film called Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed for using her late husband’s song “Imagine” without permission. Ono said the film gave the impression that she was “selling out”, which she would never do. The last thing Yoko wanted the Beatles to do was to keep making music, so the idea of her “selling out” is absurd.

–Filming for a new biopic comedy about Adolf Hitler (yes, a comedy about Hitler) began filming in Vienna this week. If you’re wondering what kind of twisted group of individuals would think this is a marketable idea, here’s your answer: The film is being produced by the same people that brought you “American Idol”.

– Russia’s Mikhail Prokhorov, who’s estimated wealth is at $22 billion, plans to spend $150 million to start up a new magazine for rich snobs called “Snob”. Not only will the magazine be filled with useful articles about how dumb poor people are, but you can also roll the magazine up and use it club the homeless.

–News correspondents in Beijing are reporting that China only has about 12 days worth of coal left in reserve, but they aren’t worried. When China runs out of coal to burn, they’ll just switch to burning U.S. Dollars. They’ve got plenty lying around.

–Ex SNL star Jimmy Fallon will reportedly succeed late night talk show host Conan O’Brien on the “Late Show” at some point next year. It’s a strange twist for Fallon, making a career out of talking to movie stars about what it’s like to do what Fallon could never do—be in a lot of movies.

–Harvard graduate David Rockefeller recently gave his alma mater a gift of $100 million, the biggest gift ever by an alumnus. Harvard is overjoyed, and says it will use the money to expand the university’s arts program and help more students study abroad. I guess the $35 billion that Harvard already has in reserve wasn’t enough.

–Joey Alfino, RED Editorial Staff

After that sneaky last minute trade of last year’s sack leader Jared Allen to Minnesota for a first round and two third round picks, the Kansas City Chiefs are headed into the weekend with 13 picks—more than any other team in the league. Still, the loss of Allen is a devastating blow to a Chiefs team that had little to brag about last season.

On the upside, Chiefs Coach Herm Edwards and GM Carl Peterson are in a position to frustrate a lot of people, but we wont know until Monday who those frustrated people are going to be; the rest of the league, or Kansas City’s own fans. It could go either way.

The Chiefs are in a rebuilding year, and they’re going to have to find three killer prospects to make up for the loss of Allen. Six of Kansas City’s picks come in 82 choices, and their picks outnumber Oakland and San Diego by three to one. Kansas City will have made six choices by the time the Raiders and Chargers make one.

But with all those picks in Kansas City’s back pocket, they have one of the worst first round positions imaginable—fifth. Sure, it looks high on paper, but being fifth on draft day is like being late off the starting block in the 400-meter relay—you’ve just got to close your eyes and hope the guy ahead of you trips.

Who Kansas City picks in the first round will hinge entirely on the St. Louis Rams. In a perfect world, the Chiefs want DE Chris Long out of Virginia. Long is ready to play right out of the gate and his dominance at DE will justify Kansas City’s loss of Jared Allen in one pick.

It’s doubtful the Rams would let Long pass. If they do, then the Chiefs’ hopes rest on how desperately the Atlanta Falcons want to patch up that messy QB rift. If Atlanta drafts Matt Ryan out of Boston College, then Kansas City could actually end up with Long—miracle of miracles for Kansas City fans.

In reality, the Chiefs will likely be forced into signing OT Ryan Clady from Boise State, and that’s still good. Not as good as Long, but it’s still good.

It won’t fill the hole left by Allen, though, and with their 17th pick the Chiefs will be on the hunt for a DE. Phillip Merling out of Clemson could be a good choice here. He’s no Allen and most likely wouldn’t hit his stride until 2009-10, but he’s still a great player.

Outside of that, the Chiefs should really look for a QB to give Brody Croyle some competition. Last season, Herm Edwards was convinced that Croyle was his golden child, but by the end of the season it was apparent to everyone how the QB position was in pretty bad shape. Look for Joe Flacco from Delaware to take this spot in the second round.

Flacco is 6’6”, 236 lbs. He’s had some trouble with his footwork and he takes too long to get set, so he’d be vulnerable when rushed, but he’s got good vision and a strong arm. Most importantly he’s more durable than the Croyle, who can look like a stick figure in the pocket at times.

Above all else, Kansas City needs to make sure of one thing: draft athletes that are ready to go from day one. Anything to the contrary is too risky, and even if Kansas City gets what it needs there’s still no way to be sure of success.

The draft holds no guarantees, no matter how many picks you’ve got.

–Joey Alfino, RED Editorial Staff

With the electric blues of Texas bluebonnets, rich reds of Indian paintbrush and mustard yellow of coreopsis scattered across Texas Hill Country, it doesn’t take much to entice travelers to keep driving or peddling. The view changes with each roll and curve of the road—especially in April, the peak month for wildflowers.

Domestic crops add their own beauty to the mix and extend road trip season. In the past eight to 10 years, a growing number of vineyards and lavender fields have joined the area’s peach and wildflower seed farms. Grapes and heat-loving lavender grow with tenacity in the rugged landscape. They bring picturesque scenes of Provence, France, to this region west of Austin and north of San Antonio.

“There are now 16 to 20 lavender farms in Texas,” says Billy Johnson of LLL Farms, about nine miles outside Fredericksburg. They sell at the local farmer’s market and open for a cut-your-own weekend in mid-June.

The hot climate brews extra-concentrated oil, and its heady scent wafts through the farms that are concentrated between Fredericksburg, Johnson City and Blanco. Eight of those farms comprise the Lavender Trail, hosted by Blanco, the proclaimed epicenter of Texas lavender, June 14-15. In addition to farm visits that weekend, the Lavender Market at Blanco’s historic courthouse offers everything from expected soaps and delicate wreaths to surprises such as the popular lavender lemonade.

At Becker Vineyard, hints of lavender lace salmon quiche, salads, grilled chicken breasts coated in honey, lemon scones and dark chocolate Pots de Crème on breakfast, lunch and dinner menus for its 10th annual Lavender Festival. At their biggest event of the year, visitors can buy their own lavender plants, learn how to cook or bake with the herb and shop for indulgences with a twist (think lavender soap scented with chocolate).

Mostly, though, it’s the atmosphere that draws thousands of mostly city residents: purple fields, wines to sample on a shady veranda, and live music most Saturdays throughout the summer.

“It’s a great retreat,” says Michael Page at Becker Vineyards. “You’re out in the country with the beauty of the landscape.”

And while many places do mimic the famed fields of France, there are usually enough Lone Stars, hints of cowboy décor, log cabins or hunting trophies to keep the area distinctly Texas.

–Lisa Meyers McClintick, RED Travel Writer

It shouldn’t surprise anyone that the Toronto Blue Jays released Frank Thomas earlier in the week—including Frank Thomas. He was in a slump. When the Big Hurt signed with Toronto in November of 2006, he happily inked his name on a two-year $18.12 million dollar contract. When you’re making that kind of money, you don’t slump. Period.

Thomas might still be a good acquisition for someone in need of a DH, but while we’re at it, so would Barry Bonds. So let’s play the “What if?” game for just a minute. If you need a DH, who’s the better choice: The Big Hurt . . . or The Home Run King?

First of all, neither of these guys would be the feel good acquisition of the year. The Big Hurt has baggage, and that goes double for the interim Home Run King. Both of these players have an uncanny ability to disrupt a clubhouse faster than the flu, but they do it in different ways.

With Bonds, the media would turn his new team’s clubhouse into a beehive, but Barry’s one saving grace is that he prefers to be a recluse. He hates the media, but I can’t fault him for that. It’s no surprise that he wants to keep to himself. I’d go so far as to say he wouldn’t even talk to his teammates that often. Say what you want about Barry (I have), but he rarely goes on the offensive.

Frank Thomas, on the other hand, in an extrovert. If he’s not happy, everyone knows in a heartbeat. In fact, the Big Hurt can be a big pain in the neck. He’ll badmouth anyone, including his teammates, if he feels the least bit tread upon.

Second, there’s the price tag. You know Barry is going to be expensive. Towards the end of his time with the Giants his salary was so high it looked like he was holding San Francisco for ransom. Bonds made $20 million in his 2006 contract year and $15.5 million in 2007.

Thomas is another story. Toronto cut him, but the Jays still owe Thomas over $7 million in guaranteed money no matter what, so for all of Thomas’ complaining he’s still getting paid—even he spends his time on the couch watching American Idol.

That means that a team could sign Thomas for the price of ham sandwich, and that’s a big issue. Plus, Thomas is 39 years old and Barry is 43. Thomas had 95 RBI’s in 2007; Barry had 66. Thomas had 26 home runs last season; Barry had 28.

You’ve also got to consider how long these two are going to be around after you sign them. Bonds’ legal troubles are scheduled to resume in June, so you know you’ll lose him. Unlike a regular injury, there’s no way of knowing how long that headache will last, and with a high asking price a club could lose a mint on Bonds.

Thomas might not work out either, but if he gets cut again you’re only out a ham sandwich. No biggie. So, the smart choice? It has to be Frank Thomas.

As long as you give the rest of the dugout some earplugs.

–Joey Alfino, RED Editorial Staff.

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) just cut a $3.8 million dollar check to fund the first phase of a super cool new toy. All right, so calling it a “toy” is a little diminutive.

If DARPA is funding it I’m sure it’s a very important addition to our national defenses. But it’s still pretty cool, and in comparison to what this country has built in the past to aid in national defense, it’s dirt cheap to boot.

Boeing has been awarded the $3.8 million contract for Phase 1 of the Vulture air vehicle program, an effort to create a new category of ultra-long-endurance aircraft. The Vulture is an unmanned aircraft that bends the rule of “What goes up must come down”.

When the Vulture goes up, it will come down eventually—it just might take five years to do so.

In it’s best military jargon, DARPA describes the Vulture as having “persistent pseudo-satellite capability in an aircraft package”, and it will be able to loiter uninterrupted over an area for more than five years at a time while performing intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, and communication missions.

The best way to classify the Vulture is in shades of grey. It’s an aircraft, but it will rarely fly anywhere. It will station itself at altitudes as high as 90,000 feet, so it’s almost a proper satellite, but not quite. The only thing we know for sure is that it’s a cost effective way to spy on bad the guys.

In order to effectively serve its purpose as a communications and reconnaissance device, Vulture’s designers will have to find a way to include a 1,000 lb payload aboard the craft while it fights the elements in order to remain suspended in air.

There’s obviously plenty of work to be done, and at this stage everything is theoretical, but the Vulture is a far cry from being an impossible endeavor. The technology is there, it just hasn’t been implemented in this fashion before.

While the Vulture would run a higher risk of being targeted by anti-aircraft missiles, the disparity in cost might nullify that fact. For example, in November of last year the Associated Press reported that a next generation spy satellite is expected to cost between $2 and $4 billion dollars.

That’s a lot of lettuce, and if the government has estimated that cost with the same caution they’ve estimated costs in the past, it could end up costing us three times as much. Plus if anything goes wrong with those satellites, it costs a lot to shoot them down—a cool $60 million last time.

Compared to that, the Vulture is already saving us money.

–Joey Alfino, RED Editorial Staff.