Science Idol is an editorial cartoon contest for cartoons about science and politics sponsored by the Union of Concerned Scientists. Check out the 12 finalists and vote here (voting closes on July 23, 2007).
After a slight bout of blogger’s block, I present to you the top 5 science stories I should have posted about these past two weeks:
Can you believe that, before this week, 13% of the US population hadn’t heard the phrase “global warming”? Things might be changing since those two important words have gotten a lot of coverage this week. A few days ago, we heard about the congressional hearing which gave us more details about the Bush administration’s censoring of government scientific research on climate change. (I’ll add that the phrase “climate change” has been critical to the administration’s whitewashing of the global warming crisis.) Today, we all wake up to learn that humans are “very likely” responsible for global warming. This is front page news. Wow. I’d be surprised if we hadn’t known this for years. But it’s really great that people might start to realize that, if we don’t act fast to reverse the damage we’ve done, we’ll be sacrificing the habitability of our planet - something which we should all agree is hugely important. So, thank you to everyone who worked so hard to bring attention to this critical problem. Let’s just hope it doesn’t get completely overshadowed the next time a celebrity baby is born or the release date is announced for next Harry Potter book (oh wait, that one already happened).
California is now the first state to approve a plan to combat global warming. The plan will cap their greenhouse gas emissions in 2020 to the level of emissions in 1990. In accordance with this, Paris Hilton has announced that she will cap her media exposure to 1990 levels as well. Thank you, music gods.
Soon there will be even more ads in video games. Electronic Arts had teamed up with two online advertising firms to place ads in video games which will be constantly updated from the internet. Soon, when you’re beating someone up in GTA you’ll have your choice of which brand baseball bat to use, Nike or Rawlings, and you can listen to Top 50 hits in you stolen ‘08 Ford Mustang.
The SMART-1 probe, a European Space Agency (ESA) probe which orbited the moon collecting images and data for three years, will crash land there at 7,200 km per hour tonight around 2:00 AM EDT. Amatuer astronomers can watch this from earth - it’s like watching World’s Most Outrageous Car Crashes for geeks.
Nearly half of all Americans believe that humans and dinosaurs co-existed. Or rather, that “cavemen had to protect themselves from marauding dinosaurs”. So, it caught my eye when I read new research showing that raptors may have preyed on early man. Unfortunately for about 45% of Americans, this means raptors, the birds, and not the dinosaurs. I know, America, Jurassic Park was really convincing. And the new King Kong. I mean, it didn’t even make sense to have dinosaurs on that island, and yet, there they were, plain and realistic as day. But if we did co-exist at the same time as dinosaurs, do you really think we could have made it this far? I mean, the raptors in Jurassic Park could open electric doors and communicate by raptor-style Morse code. All we can do is make the same movie over and over again (e.g. the new King Kong, Jurassic Park II, III and IV…), and that’s after an extra 65 million years of evolution.
Let’s all show our solidarity for pluto by shaving our heads, thus turning them into little planetoid-esque balls. If you can’t do that, raise a fist to show solidarity for our dissed little “dwarf” planet. It might help to actually write “Pluto” on your hand to remind everyone.
I won’t be able to post much (if any) science news this week because I’ll be on the Olympic Coast of Washington State. While on the road, I plan to be updating my random photo and observational blog, Bad Nanobot, so check it out.
A few science stories from the road:
The US lags way behind on acceptance of evolution. Only Turkey ranks lower. But when it comes to acceptance of the evils of flag burning, we’re #1 baby.
Toxic dust storms on Mars may poison any forms of life as we know it. If Bush wants a manned mission to Mars, I’m all for it… If we all get to vote on who goes. (But no votes for Florida or Ohio unless they shape up.)
Bendable cat and dog toys issued by a library to student readers were recalled after they were found to contain lead. Perhaps the children were reading a bit too well? “Good reading, Timmy, now play with this kitty and it’ll all be better soon…”
I recently saw a talk by Andrew E. Dessler, author of The Science and Politics of Global Climate Change. Dessler discusses the arguments for and against taking actions to reduce green house gas emissions. He provides evidence showing that most people who value their credibility will not argue against the proven facts that the earth is warming and that some of the change is human-induced. Instead they will argue that, given the uncertainty of the situation, the nation cannot reasonably take actions to prevent emissions.
One of the best arguments cites The One Percent Doctrine, a book by Ron Suskind named for Dick Cheney’s declaration that “We have to deal with this new type of threat in a way we haven’t yet defined. . . . With a low-probability, high-impact event like this . . . If there’s a one percent chance that Pakistani scientists are helping al Qaeda build or develop a nuclear weapon, we have to treat it as a certainty in terms of our response.” Therefore, if there is a one-percent chance of a nuclear attack, we should take action.
So, what are the chances that the global climate is warming? The chances (discussed by Dessler) are far greater, perhaps 20 to 50 percent. The dangers of global warming have been shown: wildfires, droughts, extreme weather events. Why, then, is the US government not taking action to prevent these disasters?
One problem is that the public doesn’t feel a sense of urgency to prevent global warming. People are more concerned with the immediate dangers of other threats, such as avian flu or terrorism. Someone suggested that the dead polar bear should be the mascot to get the public thinking about the dangers of global warming. It seems that Greenpeace has. Perhaps it would be more effective if it went something like this:
This polar bear died from:
a) terrorism
b) avian flu
c) gay marriage
d) flag burning
e) global warming
It might be more accurate to say that the polar bear died from poor leadership by our short-sighted politicians.
Closer to home, global warming is affecting everything from wildfires to wine, and the death toll from intensified weather events is rising along with the sea level.
What are our fearless leaders doing to solve this global crisis? Bickering. The leaders at the G8 Summit have failed to reach a consensus on the issue. I wonder who the problem children are? It’s not a stretch to say that the US is likely difficult to work with on the issue. And the typical American is more worried about immigration and terrorism (although the energy crisis is becoming an issue and is at least tied to our climate crisis).
But think of this: If the administration had devoted the same amount of resources to responding to global warming after Katrina as it did “fighting terrorism” after September 11, 2001 then we would be far better off. Just compare fatalities vs. spending in response.
It might be easy to say that Katrina is not directly related to global warming, but I’ll counter that by saying that Iraq is not directly related to September 11!
It is indeed a sad state of affairs that we live in. What happens next? If the glass is half empty, we all die from heat or nuclear holocaust. If the glass is half full, we do something to save the planet now before it’s too late. I don’t know about you, but I’m a glass-half-full kind of gal.
A new study shows that drunk people were less than half as likely to see a dude in a monkey suit than sober people. In the test, people were given drinks (or not) and asked to count how many times a ball was tossed in a video of people playing a ball game. During this engaging film, someone in a monkey suit comes to the center of the screen, beats his chest and leaves. Eighteen percent of drinkers and 46 percent of sober people noticed this.
Firstly, less than half of the people noticed the monkey to start with. I’ve heard of this before. It is called “inattentional blindness” and results from focusing too much attention on a single thing, preventing one from noticing unexpected items right in front of you. The Bush Administration knows a lot about this. They might try to get us to focus on, say, flag burning, while diverting our attention from, say, everything else (the war, loss of civil liberties, the national debt). But that’s nothing new.
Secondly, who’s to say the drunks cared about a dude in a monkey suit? Did the monkey have more booze? Were the people in the film throwing around Jager bombs? The drunks were probably like, “Who’s this boring psychiatrist dude trying to make me watch this stupid movie? I bet he never gets laid.” Yeah. Drunks rule. And pirates. Yarrrr.
P.S. Pardon the lack of posting over the past week or two. I was in Cocoa Beach, FL and I saw the (1st ever 4th of July) shuttle launch from there! It was awesome. I will post pictures once I manage to extract them from my not-so-awesome camera phone.
Bad Behavior has blocked 67 access attempts in the last 7 days.
