A Problem at Nature Magazine

Ars Technica has an article about something I can only call The Article That Shouldn't Have Been. This article was published in Nature earlier this year about what, if it had been real, would have been a breakthrough in "reprogramming" adult cells to work as stem cells. But the article was quickly discredited. Then the authors retracted it. That wasn't the end of the story, though. The question that then arose was how did it even get published if it was so easily disproved? It recently came to light that the paper was rejected by Cell and Science and Nature's own reviewers were highly critical of it. How it still managed to get published is still an open question. The mystery continues.

Proof is Always Good to Find

For years I've read how the best explanation of the origin of the Earth/Moon system is that early in the Earth's existence it was struck by another planet and the Moon was formed from part of the Earth and the other planet, which was named Theia. Now further analysis of rocks from the Moon provide proof of that theory. The people who originally developed the models of that idea of the origins of the Moon have got to be happy about this discovery. No matter how good the models explain something I would imagine the discovery of physical proof to back them up is very satisfying.

A New Supernova That Doesn't Fit Is Seen

The latest supernova to be observed with modern instruments doesn't quite fit with earlier theories. But that makes it like the last supernova astronomers were able to observe. While the differences these two supernovae seem to have from earlier observations and theories might cause astrophysicists to come up with new ideas on the processes taking place so far it doesn't seem that they will cause any changes in the usefulness of Type 1A supernovae in determining large distances in our observations of the universe.

The James Webb Telescope Looks Amazing

The Verge has a very nice article about the successor to Hubble, the James Webb. It's got nice details on the construction of the scope and why it's highly anticipated by scientists who found that Hubble couldn't quite get all the information they'd hoped it would provide because the light from parts of the universe they'd hoped to observe with Hubble has red-shifted to the point of being outside its detectable spectrum. Given the images we've gotten from Hubble there ought to be some beautiful and surprising images coming once it's been launched in 2018.

A Possible Breakthrough on Understanding Aging

While it is true that there is no way to know when or if treatments for the diseases associated with aging will come any time soon from this research at Harvard Medical School it seems that it would hold some promise because it does reveal some of the most basic causes of them.

Miniaturization Comes to Particle Accelerators?

After reading this article on Red Orbit my first thought was that if it pans out the implications for fusion power could get very interesting.

Q: What Likes Global Warming? - A: Pests.

redOrbit passes along news of a study from Nature Climate Change about a study that indicates that as global warming continues to increase the spread of pests that aren't very good for food crops. As far as what data supports their conclusion, the article gives us a pretty good example, IMO.

The researchers based their findings on 50 years of data that included global temperatures and the range of crop pests, which includes fungi, bacteria, viruses, insects, nematodes, viroids and oomycetes. They said the diversity of crop pests continues to expand and new strains are constantly evolving.

A good first step for asteroid mining

It was just a short while ago that Planetary Resources was in the news for it's crowdfunded telescope project. Now astronomers have identified a dozen asteroids that would make good targets for the company's goal of moving asteroids into an orbit that would make it easily accessible from Earth.

First-ever high-res photos of chemical bonds breaking - Boing Boing

This is an amazing image. Since I haven't posted nearly enough lately and certainly not nearly enough geeky stuff here we go. More to follow soon.

Will Business Step In to End a Sequester-Driven Research Funding Gap?

A writer on Scientific American blogs asks the question. I feel fairly safe in saying the answer is no. Even if they did fund more research, the nature of research for private business where discoveries become trade secrets, means that it won't contribute to science the same way more open scientific research does.

Weird Anti-Science

Two different articles on Slate point out different aspects of Republican dislike of science. First Phil Plait on his Bad Astronomy blog addresses the broad anti-science agenda expressed by multiple GOP politicians, especially Lamar Smith who apparently thinks that peer review is highly overrated when compared with political review. The other article is actually linked to by Plait's article but is more focused on the dislike of research in the social sciences.

I consider it reasonable to judge some of those attitudes by those who hold them and one of the Republican members of the house mentioned in the article on the attacks on social science research is a real gem. When Rep. Bill Posey had been in office for a whole two months he became the first Republican to propose a birther bill, one of those masterpieces of legislation whose sole purpose was to legitimize those who thought Barack Obama was the result of a strange conspiracy to put a non-citizen in the White House. Basically he criticized multiple research studies on the basis of them not being vital to national security or our national interest. Apparently the concept that learning new things is inherently in our best interest lies somewhere beyond the ability of his mind to grasp. It's also rather sad that apparently Posey believes this doozy of a claim:

Posey slightly softened his tone. “I'm not advocating we stop all the social-science study spending,” he said. “I just think it might be appropriate that much of that be left to the private sector.” How much, though? Someone should probably conduct a study.

I'm not aware of any private sector funding for real research in these fields that isn't interested in predetermined answers, are you?

Cosmological Speculation on Things We Might Never Know

What is outside our Universe? We have no idea. But that's never stopped active human minds before and it still doesn't. Speculations are varied and the ones in this article aren't the only ones out there. I love reading about cosmology and theoretical physics including books like The Elegant Universe: Superstrings, Hidden Dimensions, and the Quest for the Ultimate Theory and The Fabric of the Cosmos: Space, Time, and the Texture of Reality by Brian Greene. If you haven't seen the PBS shows based on these books do yourself a favor and look them up.

Hubble has given us so many beautiful images

In its 23rd year it gives us a new and amazing look at the Horsehead Nebula, which has been an iconic astronomical image for many years. Gorgeous. Simply breathtaking.

Nat Geo fact checks some science conspiracy theories

National Geographic does rational people bombarded with misleading claims about several issues in science a favor with their article Fact Checking 6 Persistent Science Conspiracy Theories. Back in 2009 Scientific American had a piece about why people believe in conspiracy theories.

In the age of internet research being so easy it would also help if people would ask themselves if an idea really passes the smell test, do some research on it and not accept one source as being authoritative and consider the reputation of every source they find while doing their research.

More evidence for bad climate news in the Arctic

redOrbit notes that new satellite data backs up earlier research that Arctic sea ice is thinning. Combined with a lessening area being covered by that ice, especially in the summer, it could mean worse news coming along even faster than most climatologists and Arctic researchers feared.

Is there a "New Normal"?

A blog on the Discover Magazine has a good post on the question of how climate change and weather events are now framed and how they will likely be framed in the future. The point Kevin Trenberth is quoted as making makes sense. Climate change, by definition, will affect all weather events. The question is just how.

Great-grand^10000 Dad!

Wired, as well as many other media outlets, have picked up on this story about an attempt to reconstruct what the last common ancestor of all current mammals might have looked like. I suppose there's a family resemblance to some people.

When there are no good options left...

The MIT Technology Review features a story about a potentially cheap and easy plan to stop global warming. Or at least that's the headline. It's about the suggestion that's been around for a while that sulfur injected into the upper atmosphere could form sulfate particles that would reflect enough energy back into space to make up for the GHGs that are being pumped into it by other processes. The article focuses on David Keith, a physicist who thinks that we need to at least seriously research whether or not it's doable and if there are unintended consequences that would make it an untenable solution.

Keith wants some limited field tests to move past the computer models that have already been run. Some think that field trials are the slippery slope that would lead to such a system being fully deployed. Supporters of Keith's position acknowledge that extreme caution needs to be taken and that even if deployment was actually decided on at some point in the future it's not an all or nothing proposition. It could be implemented on a limited basis and consequences watched for. Still there are those that object, of course. But those who oppose any research and experimentation seem to be assuming that those proposing it think it's a good idea. As this article makes clear, they don't. They do, however, see that it is far too likely that when it comes to heading off the consequences of our carelessness with the environment we are far too likely to need a solution of last resort.

We do learn more and more. It's called science.

In the realm of very vaguely related news stories, 8 days before we are due for a cosmic close shave so close that it could whack an orbiting satellite or two, we read that there is even more evidence that the massive impact that produced the Chicxulub crater was in fact if not the sole cause almost certainly a contributor to the massive extinction event whose most famous victims were the dinosaurs. Gotta love it. This is the way science works when dealing with questions about real world events that can't be answered in repeatable laboratory experiments though some don't seem to appreciate it. Scientists have to not only ask not only the questions concerning the event they are researching but what kind of traces are there to help them find those answers. This is what climatologists do in order to try and find the answers concerning climate change. In spite of what some whose fashion sense should include tinfoil hats claim, they are not involved in a massive hoax or conspiracy. They ask questions and go where the evidence takes them. As they should.