Jump to December 2008 archive page: 1 2
  • Vote for the weirdest science

    From left: Fame Pictures, Oxford U. Press, Texas A&M
    The weirdest science stories of the year included, from left, the four-eared cat who
    sparked an Internet sensation; the world's oldest marijuana stash; and the
    rediscovery of the Furby-like pygmy tarsier, which was thought to be extinct.

    How do you follow an act like glow-in-the-dark kitties? The competition for our second annual Weird Science Awards includes an ample helping of animal weirdness, ranging from see-through fish to a four-eared feline. But 2008 saw plenty of all-too-human oddities as well, including the world's oldest marijuana stash and the "lost" Amazon tribe that wasn't.

    Our awards program is meant to salute the past year's scientific foibles: the sorts of discoveries that merit a wink and a nod (such as the sex habits of spiders), a goofy smile (such as the study that found buyers prefer cars that look angry) or a roll of the eyes (such as this year's trumped-up Bigfoot hoax).

    Here's how it works: We're serving up a list of two dozen science stories from the past year that caused a spike in the weirdness meter. Do as much research as you need to do, then register your ironically unscientific vote for the story you think most deserves the Weird Science Award. Feel free to check back on the Live Vote to see how your favorite is faring. We don't mind if you recruit your friends for a little online ballot-box stuffing.

    If we've missed any science story you think is a contender for a Weirdy, feel free to cast a write-in ballot as a comment below. Get 10 other commenters (e.g., friends) to support your nomination, and we'll add it to the official ballot. The top 10 vote-getters will be celebrated in a Weirdy gallery to be published with much fanfare (and maybe even a caveman musical salute) during the week of Jan. 5.

    And so, without further ado, here are this year's 24 Weirdy finalists:

    Scientists create mind reader: Brain scans can tell what you're looking at, or perhaps even dreaming about.

    Size matters to sex-crazed spiders: Small is beautiful when you're a male spider looking for a mate.

    When pandas attack: Ah, pandas ... so cute, so cuddly, so peaceful ... Hey, he bit my leg!

    Dogs know when you're being unfair: Canines, like kids, get huffy when they're slighted.

    Oldest pot stash totally busted: 2,700-year-old grave in Gobi Desert yields almost two pounds of marijuana.

    Scientists turn into virtual body snatchers: Out-of-body experiences created in the lab.

    Male lizards do push-ups to impress the babes: Exhausting ritual serves as visual display.

    Real-life Furbys rediscovered: Rare pygmy tarsiers are spotted in Indonesia for the first time in more than 70 years. (I realize there are other, more common species of tarsiers that are native to the Philippines and other regions of the world, and are just as weird-looking.)

    Meet the Flintsteins: Scientists find the 4,600-year-old remains of a nuclear family in a German grave.

    Ancient joke book parrots Monty Python: A 1,600-year-old Greek document contains a version of the British comedy group's famous "dead parrot" sketch.

    Scientists create 'nanobama': President-elect memorialized microscopically in carbon nanotubes. Have a look.

    Original 'Gladiator' tomb found: Second-century monument honors Roman hero who inspired Russell Crowe's movie character.

    Shark's virgin birth confirmed: DNA shows that a shark pup received no genetic contribution from a father.

    People love angry-faced cars: Research reveals that car buyers humanize their purchases, and prefer a dominant, masculine look. 

    Some pig: Sow nurses tiger cubs: Ukrainian pig looks after cats abandoned by their mother.

    Whale whisperer teaches beluga to 'talk': In Japan, beluga whale makes different sounds when shown different objects. What's the whale word for "weird"?

    It's not easy being a green polar bear: After swimming in algae-laden waters, Japanese zoo animals cause a stir.  

    Four-eared feline finds fame: Yoda becomes an Internet star, but experts say four-eared furry friends are not all that uncommon.

    Bigfoot is just a gorilla suit: Big scientific find turns out to be bigger scientific fake.

    Tree shrew is a world-class beer drinker: Tiny mammals live on the equivalent of an all-beer diet but never get drunk.

    Cavemen had an ear for music: Prehistoric humans created their paintings in cave chambers where singing would sound best.

    'Lost tribe' isn't that lost: Brazilian researchers draw attention to "uncontacted" tribe that they've known about for decades. 

    Penguin gets a wetsuit: Biologists create a suit that lets an aging, balding bird swim again.

    Scientists breed see-through fish: It may sound frivolous, but these fish could help with the fight against cancer.

    NOW CLICK HERE TO VOTE FOR THE WEIRDEST

    Show more
  • Happy holidays from Cosmic Log

    Here's wishing you a joyous Hanukkah, a merry Christmas, a super solstice season, a fantastic Festivus and a Happy New Year. I'll be on break for the holidays, but who knows? Maybe I'll pop online every once in a while to pass along some wisdom or some Web links.

    In the meantime, here are some "field trips" to see you through until regular postings resume on Jan. 5:

    And in case you missed them the first time around, here are my previous year-end reviews:

  • The year in space

    From left: U. of Ariz., NASA/ESA/STScI, SpaceX
    The top space stories of 2008 include, from left: the Phoenix Mars Lander
    mission; the direct sighting of planets in the dusty disks around Fomalhaut and other stars; and SpaceX's successful orbital launch of the Falcon 1 rocket.

    What is to be done about the space shuttle fleet and the shuttle's troubled successor? Who will the next NASA administrator be? Will a new generation of spaceships actually take flight in 2009? Will shifts in the economic climate dim the prospects for space entrepreneurs, just as they did eight years ago? Or will pioneering ventures actually prove that space sightseeing isn't just for millionaires anymore?

    The questions about our future in space far outnumber the answers as 2008 morphs into 2009. But the developments of the past year suggest the likely directions for the year ahead.

    Transition time at NASA
    We've reviewed the space scene at the end of every year since 1997, but this year looms as one of the biggest transitional times ever, ranking right up there with the post-Columbia rethinking at NASA in 2003-2004. In early 2004, President Bush set NASA on a "new course," aimed at retiring the shuttle fleet by 2010 and returning to the moon by 2020 - and ever since then, the space agency has been building the groundwork for that course change.

    Now President-elect Barack Obama's transition team is asking fresh questions about where NASA's heading. By all accounts, the re-examination of space policy is among the most thoroughgoing efforts ever made by an incoming administration.

    It's been widely reported that Obama's space transition team, headed by former NASA associate administrator Lori Garver, has been asking tough questions about the cost and the requirements for NASA's Ares rocket development project. It's also been reported that the questions are bugging the space agency's current administrator, Mike Griffin - to the extent that he has questioned the transition team's expertise in turn.

    The frictions between Griffin and the Obama team are understandable: He's been gearing up for the post-shuttle era ever since he took the reins at NASA in 2005, and his own transition plan is just about to shift into a higher gear: The first test flight of NASA's Ares 1-X rocket, designed to put astronauts into orbit, is due to launch in mid-2009. To question the plan now must seem illogical to the man who prides himself on his engineering smarts and once compared himself to Mr. Spock of "Star Trek" fame.

    However, the space transition team has been reaching out to a wide spectrum of space agency officials, industry executives and space activists (including, for example, the Mars Society), and thus they are quite aware of the new players in the space game.

    If the rockets that are already being used for NASA's unmanned launches (such as Lockheed Martin's Delta 4 and Atlas 5) and the rockets that are already being developed for NASA's future use (such as SpaceX's Falcon 9 and Orbital's Taurus 2) prove adequate to put humans into orbit ... well, why should NASA spend billions of dollars to develop the Ares 1, which is facing significant design challenges?

    Granted, those are big ifs. And there may be other good reasons for NASA to go ahead with the Ares, just as there are good reasons for the Air Force to have their own planes rather than renting them. The transition team is just trying to get a sense of the tradeoffs involved.

    Another consideration is Obama's strong focus on climate change and its implications - a focus that came through loud and clear last week through his appointments to top science posts. Obama will likely want his NASA administrator to take a similarly strong stand on the importance of Earth observation and climate science.

    Griffin might not be a good fit for that role, especially considering the flap he caused last year when he told NPR, "I am not sure that it is fair to say that [global warming] is a problem we must wrestle with."

    Bottom line: Space insiders don't expect Griffin to hang on very long once Obama takes office. Check back in a year (or a month) to find out how NASA's direction has changed.

    'Go' time for private space ventures
    If 2009 is a big transition time for NASA, it's just as much a transition year for private space ventures. In fact, some of those ventures (such as SpaceX, Orbital and Planetspace) are hoping to get NASA to sign up as a customer for resupply flights to the international space station after the shuttle fleet is retired.

    SpaceX in particular has a lot to celebrate this holiday season: The California-based company notched its first successful orbital launch of the Falcon 1 rocket in September, and this month it met its delivery schedule for the bigger Falcon 9, which is destined for NASA's testing (and perhaps eventual use).

    NASA announced its picks for future space station supply contracts on Tuesday - answering at least one question about 2008's winners and losers. (SpaceX and Orbital turned out to be the $3.5 billion winners. Planetspace and its partners, including ATK, Boeing and Lockheed Martin, were the losers. See the update below for a few more details on the breakdown.)

    However, if the new players in the space game are going to succeed, they can't rely exclusively on NASA contracts. Several of the most innovative players are banking on an entirely different market: passengers who are willing to pay their own fare to get a taste of outer space.

    Three of the leading players are Virgin Galactic, XCOR Aerospace and a joint venture involving the Rocket Racing League and Armadillo Aerospace. All three had achievements to celebrate this year, and have challenges to face next year:

    • Virgin Galactic and Scaled Composites rolled out White Knight Two, the twin-fuselage mothership that eventually will carry up their SpaceShipTwo passenger rocket ship for a midflight launch to the edge of space. On Sunday, White Knight Two had its first flight. Next year will be a big one for the joint venture, which is backed by Virgin billionaire Richard Branson and draws upon the genius of Scaled Composites' Burt Rutan: We should see SpaceShipTwo itself go through its rollout and testing at California's Mojave Air and Space Port.
    • The rocketeers at Texas-based Armadillo Aerospace won $350,000 of NASA's money in the Northrop Grumman Lunar Lander Challenge, and forged deals with the Rocket Racing League to outfit rocket-powered aerobatic racing planes as well as to develop vertical-launch suborbital spaceships. Flight tests are due to begin next year.
    • XCOR Aerospace, headquartered just down the street from Scaled Composites in Mojave, revealed its plans for a two-seater rocket plane that would give adventure-seekers the feelings and vistas of spaceflight. The Lynx Mark I might not quite make it to the 100-kilometer height that marks the start of outer space, but the price for a seat is lower: $95,000 vs. $200,000 for a Virgin Galactic ride. Last week, XCOR successfully test-fired the Lynx's engine, and flight tests are set for 2010.

    If these initial ventures can build up a good record for safety, reliability and profitability, there's no question that the flow of investment will go up - and the price will come down. Will 2009 be the year when we actually see the spaceships that will give us our future ride? Stuart Witt, general manager of the Mojave Air and Space Port, is optimistic. In an e-mail sent out just after White Knight Two's successful flight, he hailed the "dawn of a new era" of flight:

    "What NASA deserted in the 1960s-2008 is simply a portion of the space sandbox left open for us to fill. New risk in this industry is being taken by people like Elon Musk at SpaceX, Jeff Greason at XCOR, John Carmack of Armadillo and Burt Rutan at Scaled. Innovation is being achieved not because they have only successes, but because they have failure on their side. Ask Elon, John or Burt about failures in the past two years. Then ask them about what they learned.

    "As America focuses on bailing out everyone who is on the brink of failure, thank God we have places where failure is still an option in order for innovation to be realized.  When you strip away a country's or individual's right to fail, you take away their ability to succeed. Let the natural forces of accountability work for all. 

    "Each morning I'm elated to make the journey to be with a collection of humans who seek to make a long-term difference and are willing to 'try,' regardless of the outcome."

    Bottom line: Space entrepreneurs, like the Chicago Cubs, are always talking about "next year" (if not "the year after next year"). At the end of this year, it looks as if "next year" is finally on the way.

    Celebration time for space scientists
    When you look beyond Earth's orbit, the biggest space mission of the year would have to be the Phoenix Mars Lander: In May, Phoenix became the first spacecraft to make a successful "soft landing" on the Red Planet in more than 30 years. (Mars Pathfinder and NASA's twin Mars rovers did it the "hard" way, using airbags.)

    Phoenix found specimens of that water (in the form of ice) literally beneath its feet. For decades, scientists knew that Mars held reservoirs of water ice, particularly in the north polar region where Phoenix landed. But no other probe had the opportunity to reach out and touch it ... and test it. The probe analyzed Martian soil to confirm the presence of water, as well as other chemicals hinting that the soil was once wet.

    "Some of these things had been predicted, but a prediction isn't worth anything if it's not checked," the University of Arizona's Peter Smith, principal investigator for the Phoenix mission, told me last week.

    Phoenix also detected the presence of perchlorate, a rocket-fuel ingredient that can be used as food by extremophiles on Earth. Scientists went round and round over whether having perchlorate raised or lowered the chances for life on Mars, and Smith sounded as if he sided with the optimists.

    "It's better than no energy source, let me put it that way," he said.

    Smith said the current models for long-term climate change on Mars can't explain the results that Phoenix sent back. For now, his favorite hypothesis is that the Red Planet had a dramatically different inclination in ancient times - a tilt that exposed the polar ice caps to greater solar exposure and released water "at a tremendous rate."

    That mystery, as well as many others about Mars' past, will have to wait for future missions. The launch of NASA's next Red Planet probe, the Mars Science Laboratory, had to be delayed until 2011 due to schedule pressures - and some experts have voiced concerns about the mission's ballooning cost.

    Smith would prefer to see more low-cost space missions like Phoenix. "We could do four of 'em, or five of 'em, for the cost of MSL," he said.

    Phoenix wasn't the only scientific game in town: India successfully sent out its first lunar probe. NASA's Messenger probe sent back pictures from its second flyby of Mercury. The Cassini spacecraft ended its primary mission in Saturnian orbit and won a two-year extension. The Hubble Space Telescope sent back still more marvels, despite a worrisome hiccup. And for the first time ever, high-powered telescopes actually spotted planets circling distant stars.

    There was so much going on during 2008, and there's so much coming up for 2009, that I'll need your help to pick the top story of this year and the top trend for next year. Here's a quick list of the choices. You can probably figure out which ones are my favorites, but I'm not the ultimate judge ... you are.

    Top story of 2008:

    Top trend for 2009:

    Study up on the choices, then cast your vote by clicking on the link below.

    VOTE HERE FOR TOP STORY AND TOP TREND

    For another take on this year's space milestones, check out NASA's top 10 stories of 2008.

    Feel free to cast an alternate write-in vote, or explain your preference at length (but not too much at length) in the comment section below. I'll update this item on Jan. 2 with the results.

    Update for 4:15 p.m. Dec. 23: NASA has selected SpaceX and Orbital as vendors for resupplying the international space station after the shuttle fleet's retirement in 2010. SpaceX is expected to provide 12 flights at a cost of $1.6 billion, while Orbital is being allotted eight flights with a price tag of $1.9 billion, said Bill Gerstenmaier, NASA's associate administrator for space operations. That makes a total of $3.5 billion for the 2009-2016 contract period.

    Update for 2:35 p.m. Jan. 1, 2009: When the New Mexico Spaceport Authority announced in December that it had received its federal license for suborbital space launches from Spaceport America, it said Virgin Galactic was expected to sign a binding lease agreement for using the spaceport by the end of the month.

    The announcement of the signing came in just under the wire, on New Year's Eve.

    "The signing of this agreement is a momentous day for our state and has cemented New Mexico as the home of commercial space travel," New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson said in Wednesday's announcement. "I want to thank Virgin Galactic for partnering with us to create a whole new industry that is going to transform the economy of Southern New Mexico - creating thousands of jobs, generating money for education, boosting tourism and attracting other companies and economic opportunities to the area."

    Virgin Galactic's projects and operations director, Jonathan Firth, was similarly upbeat about New Mexico: "The state has all the right elements for a successful commercial space operation including weather, clear airspace, beautiful scenery, great people and a fantastic location and design for Spaceport America."

    Richardson has been tapped to become President-elect Barack Obama's commerce secretary, so it will be up to other state officials to follow through on the 20-year lease. The $198 million construction project is due to begin early this year, with the terminal and hangar facility scheduled for completion in late 2010.

    In Space.com's report on the lease agreement, the spaceport's executive director, Steven Landeene, estimates that Virgin Galactic's rental payments for the terminal and other facilities will amount to about $50 million over the 20-year term. When user fees are factored in, "we're looking at probably $100 million to $200 million dollars in revenue for the state over the 20 year lease ... so $150 million to $250 million dollars of revenue for the state," Landeene told Space.com.

    As long as we're updating this year-ender, I might as well announce the top finishers in our 2008-2009 vote:

    • Top story of 2008: Planets spotted around alien stars. Your vote gave the top position to the first sightings of extrasolar planets. For years, such planets have been detected by their gravitational effects on the stars they circle, or even by the slight dimming of stars as the planets pass over their disks. In 2008, the first visual evidence came to light. The biggest fuss was made over the specks sighted around the stars Fomalhaut and HR 8799 - but a later report, relating to the star Beta Pictoris, could point the way to the future frontier. Beta Pic's putative planet was spotted about as far away from its parent star as Saturn's orbit around our own. Things could get really interesting when scientists start seeing alien planets that lie in "habitable zones" where life as we know it could take root. 
    • Top trend for 2009: Transition time at NASA. Who will be in charge at the space agency for the Obama administration? The current administrator, Mike Griffin, reportedly has been making his pitch to stay on, at least for a while, and among his supporters you can count his wife. But it's not yet clear how closely Obama will stick to the plan Griffin has crafted to retire the shuttle fleet and develop a new space system for returning to the moon. A few days ago, The New York Times' John Schwartz provided his take on the road ahead, and your vote serves as another reminder that we should be watching this story particularly closely.
  • Hope on a pale blue dot

    NASA
     Voyager's view
     of Earth as a
     pale blue dot.


    Are you celebrating Christmas? Observing Hanukkah? Marking Sunday's winter solstice? Commemorating Carl Sagan's legacy?

    Across the spiritual spectrum, this is the season of hope on our pale blue dot - even if you don't believe in God (or gods).

    During the buildup to Christmas and Hanukkah, the news media tend to turn more attention to matters of faith, delving into the historical context for millennia-old beliefs. For example, this month's National Geographic's cover story focuses on what archaeologists and historians have found out about King Herod, the bad guy in the biblical Nativity story. (We recently posted an article about the wonders within Herod's tomb.)

    But the Christmas season isn't just for Christians anymore: Even atheists are picking up on the holiday spirit, with evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins and like-minded deep thinkers putting on a show called "Nine Lessons and Carols for the Godless." The London show looks at marvels such as the big bang, evolution and the nature of consciousness from a totally secular perspective.

    Dawkins told the Telegraph that he was taking part in the show because he was "fed up with atheists being portrayed as Scrooges, trying to rain on Christmas."

    Whether you're more concerned about the soul or the solstice, December provides a good opportunity for reflecting on cosmic themes. You don't have to be a religious believer to get into that reflective frame of mind. "You just have to be an astronomical believer," Ann Druyan, the widow of the late astronomer (and agnostic) Carl Sagan, told me today.

    Even before Jesus' time, ancient cultures marked the winter solstice as a time when the world was at its darkest, a time when each succeeding day brought more light, and more hope for renewal. "It's very human to feel that way about this time of year," she said.

    The fact that this weekend also marks the 12th anniversary of her husband's death adds to Druyan's reflective mood. So does the recent passing of two of Sagan's colleagues: Steven Ostro, an astronomer at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory; and Cornell astrophysicist Ed Salpeter.

    "There's a sense of sadness, but also tremendous hope - more hope for the future than I've had for a long time," Druyan said.

    One big reason for that is last month's election of President-elect Barack Obama - the candidate for whom Druyan went doorbell-ringing this year. Obama's recent choices for science-related posts have added to her optimism. "I think Carl would have worked to get Obama elected," Druyan said. "I think he would have been very excited."

    Although it's been 12 years since Sagan left this life, his legacy is, if anything, more lively than ever. Druyan is tickled to hear that people are selling WWSD (What Would Sagan Do?) T-shirts and that there are thousands and thousands of Carl Sagan videos on YouTube. (It hasn't gotten to the "billions and billions" level ... yet.)

    Here's a holiday treat: Carl Sagan delivers the Royal Institution Christmas
    Lectures in 1977, on the topic of the planets.


    One video that Druyan is especially proud of was posted by NASA just recently, focusing on the creation of the Carl Sagan Exoplanet Fellowships. She sees the fellowship program as a vindication for Sagan's long-held belief that astronomers would discover alien planets beyond our solar system, and perhaps alien life as well.

    In the old days, the idea that astrophysicists might be studying the prospects for extraterrestrial life was "kind of scandalous," Druyan recalled. Now that quest is part of the scientific mainstream.

    Sagan's contributions went beyond the purely scientific sphere: His deepest insights had to do with humanity's place in the cosmos, and the immense array of wonders surrounding our celestial home. It was Sagan who persuaded NASA to place a record of Earth's sights and sounds on probes heading out from the solar system. And it was Sagan who suggested that Voyager 1 take a family portrait of the planets as they receded in the probe's conceptual rear-view mirror.

    When the pictures came back, Sagan rhapsodized about the smallness - and the largeness - of the "pale blue dot" where all of human history has taken place:

    "It has been said that astronomy is a humbling and character-building experience. There is perhaps no better demonstration of the folly of human conceits than this distant image of our tiny world. It underscores our responsibility to deal more kindly with one another, and to preserve and cherish the only home we've ever known, the pale blue dot."

    This mash-up is inspired by Carl Sagan's "Pale Blue Dot" lecture.


    With that, I'll open the floor for your own reflections on the interplay of science and spirituality, of faith and skepticism. For additional inspiration, here are links to online symposia from past years:

    This year, I ask that you be respectful of others' comments when you make your own. After all, this is the season of hope.


    For still more cosmic food for thought, check out Druyan's latest posting to The Observatory blog, the "Closer to Truth" Web site, this Voice of America remembrance of Sagan and this previous posting on the "gospels of science."

    Update for 1 a.m. ET Dec.20: As fortune would have it, Clark Lindsey's Space for All blog is linking to the Voyager Golden Record Web site, which offers the images and audio clips that were placed aboard the Voyager probes. Any aliens who come across Mozart's "Queen of the Night" aria and the other masterpieces would have to realize that humanity wasn't all bad.

  • The year in science

    From left: UW-Madison / CERN / Steven W. Marcus
    The year's top breakthroughs include reprogramming cells for disease studies,
    starting up the Large Hadron Collider, and reconstructing a woolly mammoth's DNA.

    Why would anyone want to create diseased cells in the lab? Because that's the best way to learn how to cure those diseases. The ability to transform a patient's ordinary skin cells into virtually any kind of tissue - including the cells that caused the illness in the first place - ranks as this year's biggest breakthrough in the journal Science's annual roundup.

    The other stars of this year's scientific show include the gene-decoders who are figuring out the instructions for making a woolly mammoth, or even a Neanderthal. Then there are the astronomers who, for the first time, spotted what appear to be planets circling alien stars. And let's not forget the biggest science experiment on the planet, the Large Hadron Collider, which started up this year (and almost immediately broke down).

    One of the year's biggest science stories is breaking too late for Science's annual list - but came to light today on the journal's ScienceInsider blog: Harvard physicist John Holdren, who is the director of the Woods Hole Research Center as well as an adviser to President-elect Barack Obama on science and environmental issues, is in line to be named the next White House science adviser, Science's Eli Kintisch quotes sources as saying.

    The report is spreading like wildfire through the blogosphere. It's worth noting that Holdren's name surfaced as one of the top prospects more than a year ago on Cosmic Log, in the midst of our discussion about future science czars.

    Physicist John Holdren discusses science policy in a video recorded for
    Science Debate 2008 early this year. The ScienceInsider blog reports that
    Holdren is President-elect Barack Obama's pick for science adviser.


    Having Holdren as science adviser "would be an enlightened appointment," Alan Leshner, the chief executive officer of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, said in a news release.

    "John Holdren's expertise spans so many issues of great concern at this point in history - climate change, energy and energy technology, nuclear proliferation," Leshner said. "He is widely respected in the United States and around the world as a science leader."

    Holdren served as AAAS's president in 2006-07 and was chairman of the association's board in 2007-08. AAAS is the publisher of Science, but today's news release emphasized that the journal's news team was editorially independent.

    Not everyone was thrilled to hear about the choice: The Competitive Enterprise Institute's Chris Horner called Holdren a "leading global warming alarmist" in a posting to the Open Market blog.

    "With a Holdren nomination, the president-elect will have made his intentions unmistakably clear," Horner wrote. "This will unleash a policy battle royale and, fortunately, likely the ultimate defeat of the alarmist agenda."

    And so it begins. ...

    Plenty to think about
    Science's annual roundup will give Holdren plenty to think about over the next year. The list serves as an annual top-10 parade for discoveries that illuminate the workings of the universe - and also set the stage for discoveries to come. Last year, human genetic variation took the top spot, but cell reprogramming was the runner-up.

    In 2007, researchers found a way to give ordinary human skin cells the transformative power usually associated with embryonic stem cells. When snippets of genetic code were added, the cells are able to transform themselves into other tissue types. Such cells are called induced pluripotent stem cells, or IPS cells.

    This year, teams of researchers built on that foundation by taking samples from patients who had diseases ranging from juvenile diabetes to Parkinson's disease and Lou Gehrig's disease - a rogue's gallery of humanity's scourges. Those samples were transformed to produce what appear to be "made-to-order" embryonic stem cells - without harming a single embryo.

    The technology could give rise to long-lasting cell lines that exhibit the disease traits, suitable for culturing and studying in the lab. That's something that, in many cases, can't be done using animal tissue or even tissue samples from living humans. Potentially risky drug therapies or gene therapies could be applied to the cell cultures for testing without subjecting the actual patient to any of the risk.

    Other researchers transformed ordinary pancreatic cells from mice directly into more specialized insulin-producing cells, and came up with a easier, safer way to make IPS cells.

    In a news release, Science's deputy news editor, Robert Coontz, said cellular reprogramming has "opened a new field of biology almost overnight and holds out hope of life-saving medical advances."

    The rest of the best
    Here's a quick rundown of nine other breakthroughs that made Science's top-10 list, with links to more information about each discovery:

    Seeing alien planets: Astronomers directly observe planets orbiting other stars, using special techniques to distinguish the planets' faint light from the stars' bright glare.

    Exposing cancer genes: Geneticists sequence the genes from various cancer cells, finding dozens of mutations that remove the brakes on cell division and send the cells down the path to malignancy.

    Making super-duper-conductors: Researchers find a whole new family of high-temperature superconductors that are based on iron compounds instead of the usual copper and oxygen compounds.

    Watching proteins at work: Biochemists use new techniques to watch protein molecules bind to their targets in the cell, switch its metabolic state and contribute to a tissue's properties.

    Storing renewable energy: A low-cost type of cobalt-phosphorus catalyst can use the excess electricity from part-time sources (such as solar cells or wind turbines) to extract hydrogen from water. The stored hydrogen can then be fed into fuel cells to produce electricity again.

    Capturing an embryo on video: Using a new laser technique, researchers record "movies" that trace the movements of 16,000 cells in a developing zebrafish embryo.

    Transforming 'good' fat: Scientists discover that they can morph "good" brown fat, which burns "bad" white fat to generate body heat, into muscle and vice versa.

    Calculating the world's weight: Physicists run the numbers to show that the observed mass of protons and neutrons can be "predicted" by theory alone.

    Speeding up the genome revolution: Aided by faster, cheaper, better gene-sequencing technologies, geneticists decipher the DNA of more and more living humans, as well as the long-extinct organisms such as woolly mammoths and Neanderthals. 

    Beyond the top 10
    In addition to the top 10, Science's editors highlighted seven trends to watch in 2009: plant genomics, ocean acidification, brain fingerprinting in criminal cases, climate-change summitry in Copenhagen, cosmic dark-matter revelations, speciation genes and the Tevatron's last chance to find the elusive Higgs boson.

    The editors' "Breakdown of the Year" was the global economic meltdown, which is likely to have an impact on fields ranging from energy and biomedical research to the financial health of the nation's hospitals and universities.

    "Luckily, scientific research did not take a direct hit, but scientists are feeling the consequences like everyone else, and research budgets could get caught in the fallout next year," Science's Eliot Marshall wrote.

    But wait: Wouldn't the scientific breakdown of the year have to be the Large Hadron Collider, which was shut down just days after its Sept. 10 startup due to an electrical fault? The $10 billion particle accelerator, which sparked a months-long doomsday debate, isn't due to start up again until mid-2009. Between now and then, Europe's CERN physics research center is expected to spend $29 million on repairs.

    The collider's ups and downs would rank as the year's top science story in my book, simply because it captured the public's attention so thoroughly. Instead, Science's editors saw the LHC as the biggest manifestation of their "phenomenon of the year": Europe's rising profile in big science projects. Other examples include Europe's lead role in the ITER fusion experiment, the addition of Europe's Columbus lab to the international space station and the projects being pushed by the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures.

    "By most objective measures, U.S. research still leads the world," Science's Daniel Clery wrote, "but in their ability to pool resources in the pursuit of 'big science,' European nations are showing increasing ambition and success."

    Will that situation change in 2009? Federal research budgets were strained even before the economic meltdown - but science fans seem to be putting a lot of faith in Obama to turn things around. Now it looks as if Holdren will play a key role in turning that faith into solid science policy.

    Feel free to weigh in with your comments on what the next year in science will bring. If you think the top-10 list has neglected any discoveries, be sure to remedy that omission below. But if you're looking for a roundup of the top stories and trends in space travel and exploration, just wait a few days. We'll take a closer look at the "Year in Space" next week. 

    Update for 8:15 p.m. ET: While we're on the subject of Obama's selections ... Oregon State University marine biologist Jane Lubchenko is said to be the president-elect's choice to head the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which has the National Weather Service under its wing. Check out this video from EnergyEnvironment.tv, in which Lubchenko offers congressional testimony on oceans and global warming.

    It sounds as if Obama is on a roll, filling out his White House team for environment, science and technology issues. So how long will it be until his plans for NASA come to light?

    While you ponder that question, check out this video that wraps up the year's top trends in science and technology.

    This report was last updated at 1:52 a.m. ET Dec. 19.

  • Genome prices slashed

    Gary Parker / Complete Genomics
    A production staff member works in Complete Genomics' sequencing instrument
    development lab. Improved tools are bringing down the cost of genetic analysis.

    How much does it cost to decode your genome? Last year, the going rate was $1 million. Now prices are plunging - and as a result, the prospects for personalized medicine and other genetic innovations are rising.

    To get a sense of how deeply prices are plunging, let's start with the whopping price tag of $3 billion for the Human Genome Project, which produced a composite readout of the DNA code from many donors by 2003.

    It took a few years more to publish the first complete genome for a single human - specifically, genetic entrepreneur Craig Venter - at an estimated cost of $70 million to $100 million. Nobel-winning biologist James Watson's genome was also done up last year at a cost of roughly $1 million.

    In the past year, genome-decoding has gone commercial - almost to the point of sparking a price war. A 2-year-old company called 23andMe is offering an analysis of 600,000 key DNA markers for $399 (marked down from $999). Other companies - including deCODE and Navigenics - are in the marker-analysis business as well, with services listed at prices ranging from less than $1,000 to $2,500.

    You can get your entire 6-billion-base-pair genome decoded by a 1-year-old company called Knome at a cost of $100,000 (slashed from $350,000). And now Complete Genomics is gearing up to provide whole-genome analysis for $5,000 a pop.

    "We are a wholesaler of complete human genomes to a variety of markets," said Cliff Reid, Complete Genomic's chairman, president and chief executive officer.

    Jorge Conde, chief executive officer for Knome, noted that the target price for decoding an entire human genome is $1,000. "At or below $1,000 for a genome, this is a technology that will have a significant benefit to individuals and will be widely accessible," he said.

    What's it worth?
    What's the point of having your genome done? All these companies are trying to offer data that can be correlated with genetic predisposition to health conditions ranging from Alzheimer's disease and heart problems to baldness and flaky earwax.

    Conde cited the example of a client whose genome pointed up a rare genetic variant for eye disorders. Even though the client had perfect vision and was experiencing no problems, he followed up on the genetic report and consulted an eye doctor.

    "According to him, the physician found the very, very early stages of glaucoma, and he was able to get it treated," Conde said.

    It's easy to oversell those kinds of stories, and this year the New England Journal of Medicine counseled doctors and patients to be skeptical of such tests. Even the gene-deciphering companies themselves emphasize that their results shouldn't be taken as medical diagnoses.

    The pros and cons of lending your data
    The biggest benefit is likely to come in the form of research that points physicians toward new avenues for fighting disease. The key is to have large databases of genotypes (genetic markers) that can be correlated with phenotypes (physical manifestations of those markers). The larger the database, the better, Reid said.

    "One genome isn't really very useful all by itself," he told me. Lower cost translates into a bigger market, which in turn yields more valuable information.

    Reid's goal for Complete Genomics is to decode 1 million genomes in the next five years. "The nice way to think of 1 million genomes is, that's 1,000 people in [each of] 1,000 disease studies," he said.

    But that raises questions about information privacy and security - issues that will have to be resolved by the time the $1,000 genome becomes a reality. Just this year, Congress overwhelmingly approved a law against genetic discrimination - a move that generated plenty of controversy.

    Knome tries to address the privacy issue by providing its $100,000-a-genome clients with an 8-gigabyte USB drive bearing the encrypted genetic code. The company itself doesn't store the data files - although they're archived by a trusted third party in case you lose that thumb drive. If researchers want access to your genetic data or medical history, Knome puts them in touch with you, and you tell them how much information you're willing to share.

    Wholesale vs. retail
    Complete Genomics' wholesale approach stands in contrast to Knome's retail approach. Reid's company merely churns out the data, using DNA arrays and code-readers that he says are 10 times more cost-effective than the industry standard, and then delivers the data to its customers. Those customers may include researchers looking for links between genetic markers and medical conditions, or pharmaceutical companies trying to figure out how different drugs affect genetically distinct populations, or private individuals trying to get a fix on their future health.

    Although the $1,000 genome is an easy-to-remember benchmark, the appropriate price points will likely depend on how the genome is used, Reid said. On one hand, the price point might be $500 or less for folks who are just trying to figure out where their families came from, based on genetic markers linked to geographic origins. On the other hand, "I think there are going to be many applications where $5,000 is going to be a fabulous price," Reid said.

    One application will be a genome-based survey of Luxembourg's population - supported by that country's government, modeled after Iceland's deCODE project and undertaken by Complete Genomics in cooperation with the Seattle-based Institute for Systems Biology.

    Reid said 100 of the 1,000 genome sequencings that his company is planning to do in the next year will be devoted to the Luxembourg project, as will 2,000 of the 20,000 sequencings projected for 2010. The partners in the project expect their work to result in scientific papers that will help plot a course for personalized medicine.

    Based on different genetic profiles, medical treatments eventually could be tailored to "get the right drug to the right person, at the right dose at the right time," Reid said.

    Faster than Moore's Law
    Knome's Conde said further advances in gene-sequencing technology, combined with higher volumes, could push down the price point faster than expected. "People talk about Moore's Law. If you look at the chart and do the math, this is happening significantly faster than Moore's Law," he said.

    "The mystical goal of the $1,000 genome is likely achievable," Conde said. "It's something we'll see in the next decade, and potentially sooner than that."

    Will the $1,000 genome make services that analyze only key portions of the genome obsolete? Rachel Cohen, manager of communications for 23andMe, said it won't. Different levels of analysis will serve for different genetic goals - for example, finding out whether you're predisposed to develop a rare disease vs. finding out where your ancestors came from. In fact, 23andMe might get into the whole-genome business itself.

    "When we're satisfied with the data quality, that's something that we'll incorporate into the service," Cohen said.

    Update for 3 a.m. ET Dec. 18: Venture capitalist/journalist Esther Dyson is an investor in 23andMe as well as a member of the Personal Genome Project's PGP-10 - a group of prominent people who are sharing their genetic and medical records with the public. I sent her an e-mail asking for her perspective on the genome market, and she wrote back from Russia (where she's currently going through cosmonaut training).

    Has her perspective on personal genomics changed, now that she's had a chance to delve into her own genome? "No, there's not much to delve into, actually, other than sharing with other people," she replied. "We don't know enough yet for it to be meaningful - unless you are fascinated with the precise chances of a particular condition.

    "I found comparing family members - even though that is also just percentages - to be far more interesting ... in part because those people are concrete, whereas the conditions are just general things."

    She also sent along the transcript of an interview she gave to the German magazine Neue Gegenwart. Here are a couple of the magazine's questions and her answers on genetic matters:

    "Q: How do you make sure that the 23andMe customer is prepared for his results? The results might change the customer's attitude to life (and 23andMe seems to be a perfect tool for hypochondriacs).

    "A: We can't make sure. ... But the more people out there who have used it, the more press there is about it, the better educated more people will be. You have to start somewhere. Meanwhile, we try to be very clear in all our communications about what kind of info we provide and what it does (and does not) mean. In a sense, we are an educational tool, using people's own data as content. ...

    "Q: Do you think that one day it will become normal to analyze (and publish) personal genetic information on the Web? (Why?) Insurance companies might be interested in the genetic information (and not only in your lifestyle).

    "A: As you know, I have published mine already. (And for what it's worth, I offered the data to my health insurance company, but they didn't want it!) But yes, I think it's wonderful to have data on the Web to be analyzed by independent researchers, each of them with different hypotheses and analytical tools. However, most genetic data will probably remain anonymized, just as most health information will. It's not important to know the identities in doing most research.

    "Q: Can't that lead to a situation where it seems suspicious if you refuse publishing your genetic information on the Web?

    "A: I doubt it. Why should everyone publish it on the Web? They don't publish their financial info on the Web either."

    To learn more about the promise (and pitfalls) of personal genomics, check out this report from Nature Biotechnology, and this one from The New York Times. Here's still more about genomics from Cosmic Log:

  • Fusion we can believe in?

    EMC2 Fusion
    A test plasma in the WB-7
    experimental reactor.


    Working on a shoestring budget, researchers have found no reason why a low-cost approach to nuclear fusion won't work.

    President-elect Barack Obama's pick for energy secretary has said he's aware of the approach, known as inertial electrostatic confinement fusion or Polywell fusion - and although it's probably not on his radar screen right now, it just might show up in the future.

    For decades, scientists have been trying to figure out how to harness the power of the nuclear reaction that sets the sun ablaze. Fusion involves smashing the nuclei of lighter elements together to produce heavier elements, plus an excess burst of energy. The sun turns hydrogen into helium. Thermonuclear bombs do something similar with different isotopes of hydrogen.

    The mainstream approaches to commercial fusion would involve heating up plasma inside a doughnut-shaped magnetic bottle known as a tokamak, or using lasers to blast tiny bits of deuterium and tritium. The former approach is being followed for the $13 billion international ITER project, and the latter would be used by multibillion-dollar experiments such as the National Ignition Facility in the U.S. or HiPER in Britain.

    Then there's the $1.8 million (yes, million) project that's just been wrapped up at EMC2 Fusion Development Corp. in Santa Fe, N.M. The experiment, funded by the U.S. Navy, was aimed at verifying some interesting results that the late physicist Robert Bussard coaxed out of a high-voltage inertial electrostatic contraption known as WB-6. (The "WB" stands for Wiffle Ball, which describes the shape of the device and its magnetic field.)

    An EMC2 team headed by Los Alamos researcher Richard Nebel (who's on leave from his federal lab job) picked up the baton from Bussard and tried to duplicate the results. The team has turned in its final report, and it's been double-checked by a peer-review panel, Nebel told me today. Although he couldn't go into the details, he said the verdict was positive.

    "There's nothing in there that suggests this will not work," Nebel said. "That's a very different statement from saying that it will work."

    By and large, the EMC2 results fit Bussard's theoretical predictions, Nebel said. That could mean Polywell fusion would actually lead to a power-generating reaction. But based on the 10-month, shoestring-budget experiment, the team can't rule out the possibility that a different phenomenon is causing the observed effects.

    "If you want to say something absolutely, you have to say there's no other explanation," Nebel said. The review board agreed with that conservative assessment, he said.

    The good news, from Nebel's standpoint, is that the WB-7 experiment hasn't ruled out the possibility that Polywell fusion could actually serve as a low-cost, long-term energy solution. "If this thing was absolutely dead in the water, we would have found out," he said.

    If Polywell pans out, nuclear fusion could be done more cheaply and more safely than it could ever be done in a tokamak or a laser blaster. The process might be able to produce power without throwing off loads of radioactive byproducts. It might even use helium-3 mined from the moon. "We don't want to oversell this," Nebel said, "but this is pretty interesting stuff, and if it works, it's huge."

    The idea is still way out of the mainstream, however. In his new book about the frustrating fusion quest, "Sun in a Bottle," Charles Seife says that WB-7 and similar contraptions, known generically as fusors, aren't good candidates for power-generating fusion - even though they've attracted "something of a cult following."

    "The equations of plasma physics strongly imply that fusorlike devices are very unlikely ever to produce more energy than they consume," Seife writes. "Nature's inexorable energy-draining powers are too hard to overcome."

    Nebel is well aware of the naysayers. In fact, that's one reason why he's being so circumspect about the results of the WB-7 experiment. When I mentioned that he'd probably like to avoid the kind of controversy and embarrassment that came in the wake of 1989's notorious cold-fusion claims, Nebel laughed and added, "That's well-put."

    Despite the skepticism, Nebel and his colleagues have already drawn up a plan for the next step: an 18-month program to build and test a larger fusor prototype. "We're shopping that around inside the DOD [Department of Defense], and we'll see what happens," he said.

    Nebel said some private-sector ventures are also interested in what EMC2 is up to, and that may suggest a backup plan in case the Pentagon isn't interesting in following up on WB-7.

    For the time being, Nebel said his five-person team is getting by on some small-scale contracts from the Defense Department (including these three). "I've got enough to cover the people we've got, and that's about it," he said. "What we're doing with these contracts is trying to get prepared for the next step."

    He's also waiting to see what the Obama administration will bring. Will the White House support EMC2's low-cost, under-the-radar fusion research program alongside ITER and the National Ignition Facility? "We just don't know," Nebel said.

    Physicist Steven Chu discusses "The Energy Problem and What We Can Do
    to Solve It" in a Google Tech Talk on Feb. 28, 2007. He was asked about
    Robert Bussard's fusion research at the 1:01:30 mark. This month
    President-elect Barack Obama selected Chu to become energy secretary.


    Obama's team has at least one person who knows about Polywell fusion: Nobel-winning physicist Steven Chu, who will be taking over the Energy Department. A year and a half ago, Chu gave a talk at Google about future power sources and was asked about the technology (about 61 minutes into the YouTube video).

    Chu responded that he had been discussing the concept with the folks at Google. "So far, there's not enough information so [that] I can give an evaluation of the probability that it might work or not," he said. "But I'm trying to get more information."

    If Chu is still interested in more information, Nebel is in a position to tell him about it.


    For even more information, check out the Talk-Polywell discussion forum and M. Simon's IEC Fusion Technology blog. Special thanks to Simon and his Polywell pals for pointing to Chu's YouTube video and the online book "Amateur Nuclear Fusion." Here are previous Cosmic Log items about the fusion quest:

  • Asia's bio-frontier at risk

    WWF / Rene Ries
    Gumprecht's green pitviper was discovered in 2002. Specimens can be found in
    Thailand, Laos, Vietnam, China and Myanmar. Click on the image to see a
    slideshow featuring the Greater Mekong region's hidden treasures.

    A new report crowns Southeast Asia's Greater Mekong region as one of the world's hottest spots for biodiversity, with more than 1,000 previously undocumented species discovered over the past decade. But it's also a hot spot for economic development, which sets up a race to protect what is clearly a biological bonanza.

    In all, roughly 25,000 species call the Mekong River basin home. On a species-per-mile basis, the region's waterways are richer in biodiversity than the Amazon, according to "First Contact in the Greater Mekong," a report released today by WWF International.

    "This region is like what I read about as a child in the stories of Charles Darwin," Thomas Ziegler, curator at the Cologne Zoo in Germany, said in a news release. "It is a great feeling being in an unexplored area and to document its biodiversity for the first time ... both enigmatic and beautiful."

    Nicole Frisina, communications officer for WWF's Greater Mekong Program, told me that "the rate of species discovery is quite prolific as you compare it with other areas of the world." The average works out to two new species every week - and if anything, the pace is accelerating.

    From war to wonder
    The Greater Mekong Program's director, Stuart Chapman, told me there are a couple of reasons for that quickening pace.

    WWF
    The colored areas represent
    different parts of Southeast
    Asia's Greater Mekong region,
    draining into Vietnam's Mekong
    Delta. Click on the map for a
    larger version.


    First, the Greater Mekong region - which takes in areas of China's Yunnan Province as well as Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, Thailand and Vietnam - includes some incredibly remote areas, such as the Annamite Mountains on the Lao-Vietnamese border.

    Under the best of circumstances, traveling to these frontiers is difficult and expensive. And during the region's decades of conflict (including, of course, the Vietnam War and Cambodia's wars), scientific exploration was nearly unthinkable.

    "In some regions, there haven't been a lot of scientific expeditions purely because there's been a lot of [unexploded] ordnance around," Chapman said.

    That's all changing now: Many parts of Southeast Asia are undergoing intense economic development. Just to cite one example, more than 150 large hydroelectric dams are being planned in the region. And that raises a huge challenge for scientists scrambling to explore the Mekong's lost world.

    The 'race against time'
    "This poorly understood biodiversity is facing unprecedented pressure ... for scientists, this means that almost every field survey yields new diversity, but documenting it is a race against time," Raoul Bain, a biodiversity specialist from New York's American Museum of Natural History, said in today's news release.

    Rising populations and greater economic development are putting wildlife habitat in danger. The World Conservation Union has already added 10 species from Vietnam to its extinction list, and another 900 species are considered threatened.

    The WWF (fomerly known as the World Wildlife Fund) issued today's report as part of its effort to preserve the region's biological riches even as the 320 million people living there reach for new economic riches. "You don't have to have people choose between the two," Chapman said. "You can have both, with careful planning."

    The organization called on the region's six governments to work together on a conservation and management plan for 230,000 square miles (600,000 square kilometers) of transboundary and freshwater habitats. Chapman said the governments already have identified corridors of land in need of cross-border conservation.

    However, he said, "having them identified on the map hasn't resulted in transboundary planning. ... That kind of thinking hasn't really taken hold yet."

    Coming attractions
    The biological riches could eventually yield new medicines and sustainable food sources for the region's needy populations - or perhaps new attractions for the world's eco-tourists. And for scientists at least, there are plenty of attractions out there, hiding in plain sight.

    ITN / NBC Newschannel
    Click for video: ITN's
    Chris Rogers reports on
    the Greater Mekong's
    biological riches.


    For example, a new rat species was discovered as a delicacy in a Laotian food market - and scientists traced its evolutionary lineage back to a group of rodents that were thought to have gone totally extinct 11 million years ago. It turned out that the Laotian rock rat (listed as Kha-nyou on the menu) was the sole survivor of that ancient group.

    Another previously unknown species of pit viper was first seen by scientists as it slithered through the rafters of a restaurant in Thailand's Khao Yai National Park.

    "These are the kinds of surprises that illustrate the diversity of this region," Chapman said.

    To get a look at these critters and some of the other oddities from the WWF's list of 1,068 species discovered between 1997 and 2007, check out our slideshow featuring the Mekong's hidden treasures.

  • Archaeology's top 10 finds

    Field Museum
    A figurine head from Mexico, dating back roughly 1,200 years, bears traces of the mysterious Maya Blue pigment.


    Archaeology magazine's top 10 finds of 2008 include Maya paint and ancient poop. And there are bonus finds as well, including a monumental discovery that the discoverers have been trying to keep under wraps.

    Most of these revelations haven't gotten the kind of hype that we saw this year for "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull."

    "But as much as crystal skulls were the year's most prominent 'artifacts,' we're more likely to remember 2008 as the Year of the Earliest North American Coprolites (ancient human feces), or perhaps the Year of the Imperial Roman Marble Heads," Archaeology's editors wrote.

    Read on for a rundown of the real-life discoveries that would make Indiana Jones jump on the next plane - plus the bonus discoveries and a sampling of other best-of-2008 lists in science and technology.

    Archaeology's top 10 for 2008:
    Mark Rose, Archaeology's online editor, is reluctant to call this list the "best of the year," but these are the reports from the past year that the magazine's editors regarded as relating to the most important discoveries: 

    • The secret of Maya Blue: Scientists analyzed bits of the sacred blue pigment the Maya used during human sacrifices and other ceremonies - and concluded that it was made through the ritual burning of a mix of ingredients, including indigo, minerals and copal incense.
    • Masked mummy of Peru: An intact 1,700-year-old mummy, bearing a wooden mask with seashell eyes, was discovered in a burial mound beneath a busy Lima neighborhood. Archaeologists suspect the remains were those of a master weaver from Peru's Wari culture, based on the knitting needles and balls of yarn that were buried along with the mummy.
    • The stone with soul: Researchers found a 2,800-year-old funerary monument in southeastern Turkey that provided a fresh perspective on ancient religious beliefs. A 13-line inscription was chiseled into the basalt stone, in which a high official refers to food offerings that were made "for my soul that is in this stele." This proves that the Iron Age culture believed the soul was separate from the body and could inhabit a monument.
    • Brown gold from Oregon: About that ancient poop ... the 14,300-year-old preserved feces found in eastern Oregon's cave provided the best evidence yet that humans had colonized the Americas that long ago. Researchers even extracted DNA from the coprolites - which could help clear up longstanding mysteries about the identity of the first Americans.  
    • Oldest oil paintings: Researchers discovered the world's oldest-known paintings in a maze of caves in Afghanistan's Bamiyan Valley - yes, the same place where the Taliban blew up two giant statues of Buddha in 2001. (You'll find more about Bamiyan below.)
    • The first European? An excavation in a cave in northern Spain turned up a chunk of a Homo erectus jawbone that has been dated back to 1.3 million years ago. That suggests that the ancestors of modern humans made their way into Europe about 500,000 years earlier than previously thought. 
    • The earliest shoes: An analysis of 42,000-year-old human toe bones from a dig in China provided evidence that the person, known as Tianyuan 1, wore some form of footwear.
    • Pristine Portuguese shipwreck: Geologists working on an underwater diamond-mining project off the coast of Namibia turned up something more scientifically valuable: a 16th-century cargo ship that was buried on the seafloor, safe from underwater treasure hunters. The find netted almost 50 pounds of gold coins, plus navigational instruments, elephant tusks and other treasures.
    • The colossal heads of the Roman Empire: Archaeologists are uncovering the monumental marble heads of Roman emperors at a dig in central Turkey, where a first-century metropolis once flourished. Last year, Hadrian's head was found at the site of Sagalassos' Roman baths. This year, the researchers recovered fragments of statues depicting Marcus Aurelius and Faustina the Elder (wife of the emperor Antoninus Pius).
    • The origins of whaling: A 20-inch-long walrus tusk, found at an archaeological site on Russia's Chukotka Peninsula, bears the carvings of a seal, a bear and a boatful of people hunting a whale from a boat. The tusk dates back about 3,000 years, which would make the carving "the earliest evidence for whaling," said Daniel Odess, curator of archaeology at the University of Alaska Museum.

    The bonus round:
    Archaeology magazine's online editor, Mark Rose, told me that the list doesn't include several important discoveries that just didn't fit the year-in-review pattern (or came to light too late to make the top-10 list). One of the most important finds is a 60-foot-long (19-meter) reclining Buddha statue that was reportedly discovered at Afghanistan's Bamiyan site.

    This discovery wouldn't measure up to the fabled 1,000-foot-long (300-meter-long) "sleeping Buddha" at Bamiyan, which was described by a 7th-century Chinese monk but has never been found. Nevertheless, there's "big, big news" out there about a monument that somehow survived the Taliban, Rose said.

    The problem is that the head of the archaeological project is trying to keep the discovery under wraps, Rose said. "It ties into a funding organization that is well aware of the marketing value of this kind of thing, as well as the entertainment value," he said. (For what it's worth, the team is funded by National Geographic and the French Foreign Ministry.)

    We'll probably hear more about the surviving Bamiyan Buddha next year. But in the meantime, Rose said, "To effectively censor is not really conscionable."

    Here are two more of the bonus selections that will be posted to Archaeology's Web site next week:

    • Disappearing glaciers = reappearing artifacts: Climate change has caused glaciers around the world to recede. During a warm spell in the Swiss Alps, the ice shrank back from the Schnidejoch Pass, revealing shoes, leggings, arrowheads and other artifacts. Some of those artifacts have now been dated back to 4500 B.C., which would make them older than the famous Alpine iceman Oetzi. Rose said the find could shed light not only on ancient cultures, but also on "the ebb and flow of climate."
    • Stone Age figurines from Russia: Archaeologists excavating a site near Moscow have found figurines and carvings dating back to the Stone Age - somewhere around 10,000 to 40,000 years ago. The artifacts include two female-looking figurines, a mammoth rib inscribed with pictures of what appear to be mammoths, and a mysterious cone-shaped object.

    Archaeology's Web site also offers year-end reviews focusing on endangered treasures and the rise of virtual archaeology.

    Other year-end lists:
    Finally, here's an initial sampling of other top-story lists from the world of science and technology. You can look forward to much, much more in the next couple of weeks, including the Scientific American 50 and Science's Breakthroughs of the Year, as well as our very own "Year in Space" roundup and Weird Science Awards:

    Correction for 9:45 p.m. ET Dec. 13: A sharp-eyed commenter noted that the account mentioning the 1,000-foot (300-meter) "sleeping Buddha" is generally seen as dating back to the 7th century, not the 9th century. I've corrected the reference to go with the earlier date.

  • Hollywood remakes an alien

    20th Century Fox
    A crowd gathers around the "Central Park Sphere" in a scene from "The Day the
    Earth Stood Still," a remake of the classic 1951 movie about alien visitation.

    Although the modern-day reincarnation of "The Day the Earth Stood Still" may not rise to the classic status of the 57-year-old original, it fortifies the science-fiction story with some fresh science facts.

    The original 1951 movie was a black-and-white, Space Age parable about a planet in peril ... from the potential threat of nuclear war. Calling the movie a "parable" is particularly apt, because veiled allusions to the Christ story are shot through the tale about an alien visitor (Klaatu, played by Michael Rennie) who brings a message of peace and unity to a world riven by the Cold War.

    The new "Day," opening Friday with Keanu Reeves as Klaatu, preserves the basic story of an alien with a mission who comes down to Earth. This time, however, the mission is not to keep earthlings from trashing the celestial neighborhood, but to keep humans from trashing Earth.

    "We can't risk the survival of the planet for one species," Klaatu explains in the film.

    Will the remake's environmental message resonate the way the original film resonated for an earlier generation? "I can't think about this movie having long-term impact in the way that the original did," Scott Derrickson, the director of the new "Day," told me this week. "If it did, I'd be shocked."

    Like the first "King Kong," the first "Day" was such a classic that it couldn't possibly be matched, "even if you make a perfect film," he said. That's the big reason why he was reluctant at first to take on the project.

    He changed his mind, however, after reading the script, which recast the 57-year-old story from a 21st-century perspective.

    "What I tried to do was take a picture of this moment in time. ... What that moment seemed to be is that we're living in an age where we've made quite a mess of things: the war, the economy, the planet, this thing that keeps us living," he said.

    And yet, Derricksen said, humanity seems to do its very best when things are at their very worst. That's when people somehow find a path to change they can believe in. "I wanted to make a film about that reality, that the precipice of disaster is sometimes the very place where transformation takes place," he said.

    That doesn't mean the new "Day" is purely a message movie. "My first job is to entertain," Derrickson said. To do that job, he built in plenty of breakneck chase sequences, big explosions and woo-woo special effects. No one will mistake the movie for a philosophical treatise - or a science documentary, for that matter. But when possible, Derrickson tried to have the movie reflect what scientists have learned about the cosmic frontier over the past half-century.

    "We went through a tremendous amount of effort to root the science of the movie in real science, and also to pay particular respect to the profession of science," he said.

    Derrickson's main ally in that effort was Seth Shostak, senior astronomer at the California-based SETI Institute. Shostak was brought in as an adviser because the film's leading actress, Jennifer Connelly, plays the role of an astrobiologist - and wanted to learn more about what such scientists really did.

    Shostak said he was impressed by Connelly's interest, and by the fact that an Oscar-winning actress was cast as an expert in a scientific discipline that is still building up its credibility. "How many movie characters can you name who were astrobiologists?" Shostak asked during an interview this week. "I think Jennifer Connelly might be the first."

    Eventually, Derrickson asked Shostak to look through the script and mark anything that didn't ring true to a scientist's ear. He got back a sheaf of papers that were covered with red marks. "So I told him, 'Can you fix it, please ... and stop being so condescending,'" Derrickson joked.

    Not all of the suggestions were taken, a fact of life that Shostak accepts. "It's Hollywood," he told me. "Their job is not to teach you science." However, there are a few scientific riffs worth paying attention to: 

    • Real astrobiology: The dialogue for Connelly's first scene, which is set in a Princeton classroom, was rewritten to reflect questions that astrobiologists might actually consider: For example, which microbe would be more likely to live on Callisto, one of Jupiter's ice-covered moons: radiation-hardened Deinococcus radiodurans, or a type of thiobacteria that can survive in sulfuric acid? (I'd go with the first choice on Mars, and the second choice on Europa or Venus. But Callisto? Feel free to weigh in with your space-geek selection below.)

    • Real nanotechnology: One of the threats that comes up in the movie is a variation of a standard nano-doomsday plot device known as "gray goo": the ability of fictional nano-bugs to swarm over their target and turn it into ... another swarm of nano-bugs. The late author Michael Crichton used this in one of his sci-fi novels, "Prey" - and although that book was never made into a movie, "Day" provides the next best thing in nano-meltdowns. Could it really happen? Almost certainly not the way Crichton imagined it. Nevertheless, experts have voiced concern about nano-safety as recently as this week.

    • No flying saucers: The original "Day" indelibly imprinted the flying-saucer image on a generation of UFO fans. The metallic, engine-driven spaceship became a cliche of outer-space operas, ranging from "Star Trek" to "Star Wars" to "Close Encounters of the Third Kind." For his new "Day," Derrickson wanted to create a totally different kind of UFO: Klaatu and his pals come to Earth in shining lights that look like globes of swirling clouds when they come to rest. "I love the idea of trying to create an alien spaceflight technology that came from an entirely different place," Derrickson said.

    • Real equations: Shostak said one of the most important things he did was to check the equations that Klaatu writes on a blackboard for a Nobel-winning professor (played in a cameo by "Monty Python" veteran John Cleese). "The equations there are in fact some of the fundamental equations of general relativity, but what happens is that Klaatu adds another term which might account for dark energy," Shostak explained. "We don't know what that term is, but he does. ... Klaatu establishes his creds by showing that he knows more about general relativity than we do."

    In his Space.com tale about being on the set, Shostak recounts how he told Derrickson that Keanu Reeves seemed to be writing the equations too slowly on the board. The way Shostak told the story, Derrickson answered that Reeves was doing it just right for the role. "Hey, Seth, he's an alien," Shostak quoted him as saying.

    For the record, Derrickson told me he doesn't remember making that crack but was happy with the way the scene turned out. He was also happy with the contribution that Shostak made to the movie.

    "It was a big lesson to me on the science front," he said.

    For his part, Shostak hopes "The Day the Earth Stood Still" will leave young viewers yearning to learn more about life on Earth and beyond. Some of them may end up starring as astrobiologists in a real-life sequel.

    "The thing I would tell schoolkids is, 'You know, there are actually people who make a modest living studying the possibility of life beyond Earth," he said.

    Update for 9:35 p.m. ET: To mark the opening of the new "Day," Twentieth Century Fox has arranged to have the whole movie transmitted via a 5-meter dish antenna (the kind used for TV uplinks) in the direction of the nearest star system, Alpha Centauri.

    The transmission will be made by Florida-based Deep Space Communications Network, a commercial venture that has been sending signals spaceward for more than three years. (One of their previous clients was Craigslist.)

    "We are thrilled about beaming this film into space," Jim Lewis, the venture's managing director, said in a news release. "This will be our first full-length movie transmission. And what could be more relevant to send into deep space than a movie about the earth's acceptance of visitors from outer space?"

    Deep Space says the transmission is due to begin at noon ET Friday, but don't expect a film review from the Centaurians anytime soon. The triple-star system is four light-years away, which means it would be four years before anything could possibly reach Alpha Centauri.

    In fact, SETI experts say it's unlikely that a decipherable signal will ever get that far. Shostak has looked into how far radio signals of various strengths could carry into deep space, and his conclusion is that TV transmissions would be drowned out by static long before they get to Alpha Centauri. Tightly focused military radar signals might carry farther, but the Pentagon has no plans to air the matinee.

    This has led NBC News space analyst James Oberg to call Twentieth Century Fox's transmission "a publicity stunt" based on "claims about interstellar communication that are really technologically strained, if not entirely bogus."

    A publicity stunt? Hatched in Hollywood? Who knew!

    Update for 8 p.m. ET Dec. 12: Our review of the new "Day" is out, and if Gort the robot enforcer really existed, he'd be seeing red right about now. Great headline, though: "Klaatu Barada Stinko."


    To keep up with Shostak's quest on the scientific frontier, tune your Web browser to his weekly radio show, "Are We Alone?"  Shostak stars in a Cosmic Log pilot podcast we put together last year. You can also click through our list of six signs that aliens might exist, and watch interviews with Keanu Reeves from NBC's TODAY Show and from "Access Hollywood."

  • To hide a hunter

    W.L. Gore & Associates
    This picture approximates a deer's-eye view of a bow hunter wearing Optifade camouflage. Click on the image to see how the scene would look to human eyes.

    To hide yourself from the deer you're hunting, do you want to dress like a tree - or become invisible? Researchers are trying to take the second approach, with camouflage clothing that takes advantage of the fact that animals don't see the world the way humans do.

    The Optifade camouflage pattern, created by W.L. Gore & Associates (the makers of Gore-Tex fabric), represents a break from the colored leaf patterns you see on stereotypical camo clothing. In fact, it looks a lot like the mostly monochromatic blocks-and-dots now used on military duds. That's no mistake: One of the advisers on the Optifade project was retired Lt. Col. Tim O'Neill, whom some regard as the father of modern-day military camouflage.

    The design includes a big, blocky "macro pattern" that is meant to make the human form hard to spot when it's on the move (just as a tiger's stripes break up its outline). There's also a smaller-scale "micro pattern" that helps hunters blend into their environment when they're waiting to ambush a deer (similar to the function served by a leopard's spots).

    But that's not all: The fabric's colors and patterns were fine-tuned to take advantage of the particular way deer and other hoofed animals (known as ungulates) process visual information. Jay Neitz, an animal vision scientist at the Medical College of Wisconsin, was called in to lend his expertise.

    One big difference between deer and humans has to do with the placement of the eyes on the head. Our maximum field of view is about 180 degrees (with 140 degrees for binocular vision), while deer can take in nearly 280 degrees at a time - thanks to the fact that their eyes face in opposite directions rather than both facing forward.

    That wider field makes it easier for the animals to get a low-resolution, all-around look at potential predators, but there's a trade-off: They can't process fine-scale detail as easily as we can. So clothing designed to mimic a deer's forest surroundings in detail doesn't work as well as you might think, Neitz told me.

    "We could put all sorts of fine, beautifully detailed leaves in a camouflage pattern," he said. "The deer's vision system doesn't pick up all that fine detail. It just picks up the coarse view of a human form, and he'll say, 'Hey, there's a guy standing by that tree over there.'"

    W.L. Gore & Associates
    The Optifade pattern uses macro and micro patterns in muted colors.


    The Optifade pattern is specifically designed to fool a deer's lower-resolution eye, Neitz said. And the color scheme does away with the usual forest green and brown. Instead, it emphasizes blue, black, white and gray - because those colors, plus yellow, are the only ones that a deer sees.

    The eyes of a deer have the receptors for blue and yellow, but not for red, Neitz explained. As far as they're concerned, red is just another shade of gray.

    From a scientific standpoint, perhaps the most interesting question is how scientists try to figure out what a deer sees. Neitz and his colleagues conduct experiments with animals who are trained to walk toward a particular type of pattern - for example, a card with black and white stripes on it vs. a gray card. The researchers modify the patterns by using different colors and widths of stripes, and eventually figure out what the animals can see and what they miss.

    Deer aren't nearly as amenable to these sorts of tests as, say, lab rats. The experiments have to be conducted outdoors, under challenging conditions. "Those are really hard experiments to do," Neitz said. But once researchers figured out the way the deer vision system worked, they could create image-processing software that fuzz and fade a picture to duplicate a deer's vision.

    Human subjects were then recruited to look at the resulting deer-cam video and pick out the camouflage patterns that maximized the wearer's invisibility. This video clip from W.L. Gore & Associates about the "Science of Nothing" provides plenty of examples.

    A segment from W.L. Gore & Associates' "The Science of Nothing" explains
    how deer-vision studies figured in the creation of Optifade camouflage.


    For more examples, check out the deer's-eye view of a hunter in the trees vs. the human-eye view - or a picture of a hunter in an open field, as seen in human vision and deer vision.

    The "Science of Nothing" video makes it look as if competing camo patterns would be much more easily seen by deer. But in this case, I suppose the true proof of the pudding is in the shooting - and I'm not aware of any scientific findings relating to Optifade's efficacy in the wild. During my youth in Iowa, I would occasionally go out hunting with my father - and I can tell you that deer-distracting camouflage wouldn't have made a bit of difference.


    Does all this put you in the mood to learn more about different levels of visual perception? For an example that doesn't involve killing other living things, check out this Web page, which ties together visual spatial frequencies, Abraham Lincoln in the rough and Salvador Dali's wife in the nude.

    Correction for 11:30 a.m. Dec. 11: I mistakenly typed "W.R. Gore & Associates" instead of W.L. Gore & Associates in an earlier version of this post. My deepest apologies to Mr. Gore ... and all his associates.

    Correction for 8:20 p.m. Dec. 11: A sharp-eyed reader (who also happens to be an eye doctor) spotted my reference to the human field of view and upgraded it from 120 to 180 degrees. After a double-check, I've corrected the reference.

  • The future of energy

    Getty Images file
    Plug-in hybrid electric vehicles took the spotlight at July's Plug-In Conference and
    Exposition in San Jose, Calif. How much will plug-ins change the energy game?

    If the plans being laid for the economy and the environment work out the way President-elect Barack Obama's advisers hope they do, the future of energy can be summed up in one word: electricity.

    That one word covers a lot of policy twists, however: What will the economic downturn mean for initiatives to cut down on greenhouse-gas emissions? What will the recent drop in gasoline prices mean for efforts to boost alternatives to fossil fuels? Can the electrical grid handle increased demand? How do you smooth out the highs and lows of power generation? Where will all that power come from?

    New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman has repeatedly cited a catalog of challenges for future energy policy, ranging from the global supply-and-demand imbalance to climate change and the threat from "petro-dictatorships." Some people might look at that list and conclude that "we're cooked ... we're completely fried," Friedman said during a conference sponsored last week by the Center for American Progress, Washington's most Obama-centric think tank.

    "That's one way to look at that list," Friedman continued. "I look at it the way John Gardner looked at a similar list - and he said, 'That list? That's a list of incredible opportunities masquerading as insoluble problems.'"

    That reflects the thinking of Obama's top advisers on energy and environmental policy, who would make "green infrastructure" a top target for next year's economic stimulus. Based on statements made during the campaign as well as afterward, they see energy innovation as a key economic driver as well as a way out of the climate-change mess.

    Some experts on energy policy, such as U.S. Rep. Steve Israel, D-N.Y., are bullish about pushing through fundamental changes in energy policy, driven by new technologies ranging from plug-in hybrids to smarter electrical grids.

    Israel compared the current situation to the promise of information technology in 1980. "I think we're on the cusp of a massive transformation in clean technologies," he told me this week.

    Others, however, are more circumspect about the prospects for developing an energy policy that boosts the economy as well as the environment - particularly in the wake of the credit meltdown that started in mid-September.

    "It was harder on Sept. 16 than it was on Sept. 14," said James Woolsey, a Democrat who directed the CIA during the Clinton administration but served as an adviser on energy and climate change issues for GOP presidential candidate John McCain. "I hope we haven't gotten to a tipping point in which it becomes impossible."

    Here's a six-point action plan for energy policy, based on past statements from Obama's energy and environment transition team as well as observations from Israel, Woolsey and other experts:

    1. Generate 'negawatts'
    The first step, and arguably the easiest step, would be to patch up the gaps in today's energy infrastructure. Federal incentives could be provided for home weatherization and better insulation, for rooftop solar cells or even low-tech energy-saving measures such as adding a coat of reflective paint to the roofs of commercial buildings. "That would employ people who normally would be building houses, but [are idle because] those types of projects are being closed down," Woolsey said.

    Some economic stimulus funding would go toward mass transit projects, with the aim of reducing gasoline consumption - as well as smart-metering systems that could make the electric grid more efficient (see No. 4 below).

    In the long run, the resulting energy savings (and reduction in greenhouse-gas emissions) could be just as important as the economic shot in the arm. Two decades ago, energy-efficiency guru Amory Lovins coined the term "negawatt generation" to describe the beneficial effect of such energy conservation.

    2. Move from fossil fuels to renewables
    Israel said the "game-changer" in energy policy will take the form of incentives to move from an economy based on fossil fuels to one that puts more emphasis on renewable energy sources. The top three items on his agenda are:

    "If we do those three things, we will have absolutely changed the game on energy after 30 years of missteps, back steps and half-steps," Israel said.

    Some have criticized cap-and-trade schemes on the grounds that they smack of socialism, or that Europe's experiment with the system just plain didn't work. Woolsey agreed that the first European effort was a "ridiculous" failure. "It's an example that things can go wrong if you go right to an international system," he said.

    But he said a cap-and-trade system can succeed if it's phased in correctly, and would be more palatable than the carbon tax that some environmentalists are now suggesting. "We've run a good cap-and-trade system with sulfur dioxide, and another good one, sort of, with chlorofluorocarbons," Woolsey observed.

    Israel said he thinks "the will is there" to approve a cap-and-trade system during the next Congress, although fixing the economy will have to come first. "Once we stabilize our economy, we can then get to work on making the marketplace [for energy] more consistent, sustainable and predictable," he said.

    3. Promote plug-ins
    When it comes to fueling the autos of the future, plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (or PHEVs)still look like the best bet. Dan Reicher, a member of Obama's transition team and one of the top prospects to head the new president's Energy Department, has proselytized for PHEVs and pioneered a plug-in project called RechargeIT at Google's philanthropic arm.

    "The moment is now for plug-ins," he said during a Brookings Institution conference this summer. The auto industry's current woes have led some to worry that the moment has passed, while others hope that lawmakers will put more pressure on carmakers to produce greener machines.

    What about biofuels? In the past year or so, the bloom has come off the rose (or should that be the cornflower?) for corn-derived ethanol, due to concerns about pollution as well as a food-vs.-fuel faceoff. And if fuel prices stay below $2 a gallon, the switch to biofuels may not make economic sense, Woolsey said. There's a danger that the biofuel boom could give way to the same kind of bust that hit the synthetic-fuel market when oil prices fell in the 1980s.

    PHEVs could make the difference this time around.

    "The thing that is different from what happened in the mid-1980s is electricity," Woolsey said. "Because electricity is 2 cents a mile, there's no way gasoline gets down there to compete with electricity."

    But increased electricity use could drive up utility costs and ultimately force the construction of new plants. If electric utilities generate that power by burning natural gas, coal or oil, shifting to plug-ins would do little to address climate change or energy efficiency. In fact, researchers at Duke University suggest that regular hybrids may be more cost-effective than plug-ins for reducing CO2 emissions (unless gasoline rises to $6 a gallon).

    That's why the Obama administration wants to make the electric grid greener - and smarter.

    4. Build a smarter, more open grid
    A smarter electric grid would use software to manage the flow of power more efficiently, evening out the load throughout the day (when there's high demand) and the night (when the demand is lower).

    "There's no reason why we can't have a lot more use of time-of-day pricing," Woolsey said. "That'll encourage people to set timers and run their dryers during off-peak times."

    Future electrical grids could also be more open to distributed generation. For example, utilities could make it easier for homeowners with solar panels to feed their surplus power into the grid and get paid for doing it.

    "In every forecast of the deployment of plug-in hybrids, the electricity consumption goes up," Israel said. "Therefore, we need to make sure that we are focusing on innovative technologies to manage that increase in electrical use by smart metering, and by integrating renewable technologies as sources of electricity."

    Israel gushed over the research being conducted at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Colorado. "One of the most fascinating demonstrations they have is a plug-in hybrid that's attached to solar panels. It's completely off-grid," he said. "That's the future. The problem is that NREL's [annual] budget is $328 million, which is equivalent to 18 hours in Iraq and Afghanistan."

    5. Solve the storage problem
    One big problem with the electrical grid as it exists today is that it's a "just-in-time" system, Woolsey said. Plenty of renewable energy may be available when the wind blows or the sun shines - but what do you do at night, or when the air is calm?

    This is why so much energy (of the mental variety) is being devoted to designing better batteries, as well as developing systems that can efficiently transform electrical power into more easily stored form of energy. Compressed-air energy storage is one of Woolsey's favored options.

    During the presidential campaign, McCain floated the idea of a $300 million prize program to encourage the development of advanced batteries. At the time, Obama criticized the idea as a "gimmick," but there's no question that better batteries are the key to plug-in progress.

    6. Boost electric production
    Nearly everyone acknowledges that more electrical capacity will have to be brought online, particularly if the plans to shift consumption away from the oil tank and onto the electric grid actually take hold. And nearly everyone acknowledges that more nuclear plants and coal-fired plants will have to be built. The question is how much progress the energy industry can make on renewables, and how much it will have to rely on dirtier alternatives.

    Some researchers, such as NASA's James Hansen, are so worried about the coming climate crisis that they are advocating accelerated construction of next-generation nuclear plants. One company has even proposed building mini-nuclear reactors that would bring electrical power to remote areas.

    Israel, however, thinks nuclear power is the "weakest link" in the energy chain. "The nuclear piece is, in my view, the most difficult - only because of the storage issue," he said.

    There are plenty of energy technologies waiting just over the horizon. OK, maybe way over the horizon: nuclear fusion, for example, or space-based solar power. Those technologies could play a significant role in the post-oil era - but probably not during the Obama administration.

    Israel said the best role for the federal government in the years ahead will be to widen the options for the energy marketplace to choose from.

    "The problem with energy policy over the past 30 years is that they let congressmen like me, who can barely operate a TiVo, pick the technical winners and losers on alternative energy," he said. "In my view, we ought to incentivize everybody and diversify our portfolio."

    Is the current angst over energy, the economy and the environment an incredible opportunity masquerading as an insoluble problem? If you buy into Israel's view, you might think so.

    "Over the past few years, our economy was riding on a real-estate bubble," he told me. "Once that bubble burst, we can now use green energy as the next bubble, and sustain it for the next several decades."


    What do you think? Is there a relatively pain-free path to the future of energy, or are we in for a rough ride? I haven't even touched upon some of the big energy debates - such as carbon sequestration and the prospects for cleaner coal-fired plants. (Here's an NBC News video about a cleaner-coal technology being developed in Germany.)

    Feel free to weigh in with your comments on these and other subjects related to the future of energy. For more on energy policy, check out msnbc.com's Oil and Energy section as well as the Green Machines archive, and take a look at former Vice President Al Gore's interview with Newsweek. President-elect Barack Obama is due to meet with Gore today.

  • The top geek gift of 2008

    xkcd
    An MIT student models xkcd's
    "Stand Back, I'm Going to Try
    Science" T-shirt in a geeky setting.


    You had to know that this year's top gift for science geeks would relate to what is arguably the top Web comic for science geeks: xkcd.

    We asked you to send in your suggestions for holiday gifts that would bring a smile to science and technology fans, and then we offered up a list of 16 suggestions for your consideration. Hundreds of Cosmic Log readers cast their ballot in an ironically unscientific Live Vote - and the top vote-getter was (drumroll, please) ... a sweatshirt (or T-shirt) inspired by the xkcd strip.

    This means that the geek who suggested the gift - Andrew Meeusen of Mesa, Ariz. - will find a couple of extra holiday goodies under his tree (or in his mailbox): the "When We Left Earth" DVD set, which features high-resolution retellings of the moonshot sagas; and "13 Things That Don't Make Sense," Michael Brooks' book about the most baffling scientific mysteries of our time.

    Other gifts, including the coffee-table books "Planetology" and "Hubble: Imaging Space and Time," will be distributed as consolation prizes.

    Meeusen was tickled to hear that the xkcd shirt was a hit - and so was xkcd's creator, Randall Munroe. For more than three years, Munroe has been serving up a comic strip that uses simple stick figures to expose the wonderful and baffling complexities of science and engineering - as well as the even more wonderful and baffling complexities of love and life.

    If you think "Dilbert" is just too mainstream, you'll love xkcd. (By the way, the lowercase letters don't stand for anything and don't come trippingly off the tongue, which is part of the joke.)

    "It actually took off pretty rapidly," Munroe told me today. "The Web has made it so that you can aim something at a niche audience. You can offer something that only 1 or 2 percent find funny - but if that 1 or 2 percent really like it, then you have a few million readers."

    Munroe, whose degree is in physics, once worked on robots at NASA's Langley Research Center in Virginia - but he now lives in Boston, "shipping T-shirts and drawing this comic full-time."

    xkcd
    The xkcd comic strip deals with affairs of the
    heart as well as affairs of the brain.


    T-shirts and other merchandise are all part of the equation for financial success: If you like the strip, you just might buy the shirt - or perhaps one of those classic posters that map online communities or illustrate cosmic orders of magnitude. The T-shirt serves as an outward sign of inward geek grace.

    Munroe likes the idea of providing something that resonates with a special kind of crowd. "It's a much more personal connection than most media," Munroe said. "People have told me, 'This is about my life.' They feel like it's very personal in a way that most media isn't, because I'm writing about something that's in their experience."

    That's definitely the feeling that inspired Meeusen's suggestion:

    "I have always wanted an xkcd sweatshirt. Those comics are tailored to the geekiest among us, from Schrodinger's cat references to dreaming about building a supercomputer out of rocks in a desert to calculate the universe while sitting in class (come on, who hasn't done that before?!). In his store, the 'Stand Back, I'm Going To Try Science' T-shirt (also one I'd like to own someday) is classic geek, and honestly, who wouldn't be proud to put up a poster of the online world, with a grossly oversized MySpace-land and a vast Noob Sea?

    "I'm not working for xkcd, but when my friend turned me on to the comics back in college, I've been a huge fan ever since! Go geeks!"

    Here's hoping somebody gives him a nice shirt for the holidays - and not the button-down variety.

    For still more suggestions, check out TODAY's list of 10 geek gifts (from Wired magazine), the top tech toys for kids, PC World's selection of tech toys for the filthy rich, and our assorted line-ups of top video games.

  • Cat vs. dog evolution

    Win McNamee / Getty Images
    A cat and a dog come face to face during a Blessing of the Animals
    ceremony at Washington National Cathedral in October 2006.

    When it comes to pursuing prey, dogs do it much more efficiently than cats. So do humans, for that matter. The fact that cats are generally considered better hunters shows that evolution doesn't always favor efficiency. It all depends on what kind of niche a species can carve out for itself.

    "It is usually assumed that efficiency is what matters in evolution," Daniel Schmitt, an evolutionary anthropologist at Duke University, said in a news release about the latest dog vs. cat research. "We've found that's too simple a way of looking at evolution, because there are some animals that need to operate at high energy cost and low efficiency."

    Take cats, for example. Schmitt and his colleagues videotaped six housecats (Felis catis) as they moved along a 6-yard-long runway in pursuit of food treats or toys. Then they analyzed the biomechanics of their gait in detail.

    The results, published Nov. 26 in the open-access journal PLoS ONE, show that cats could reduce the muscular work required to move forward by no more than 37 percent as they pursued their "prey." In a stalking posture, the cats' efficiency was even worse.

    Dogs and other species that specialize in long-distance chases can run much more efficiently, reducing their work by up to 70 percent. The researchers surmised that the feline hunting style - used by a housecat stalking a bird, or a cheetah stalking an antelope in the wild - trades off efficiency for stealth.

    "These data show a previously unrecognized mechanical relationship in which crouched postures are associated with changes in footfall pattern, which are in turn related to reduced mechanical energy recovery," the researchers wrote.

    When a cat slinks close to the ground, it moves its front and back ends in a relatively inefficient, self-canceling pattern that results in a smooth, flowing forward motion, Schmitt said. "If they're creeping, they're going to put this foot down, and then that foot down, and then that one, in an even fashion. We think it has to do with stability and caution," he said.

    Humans vs. cats vs. dogs
    Previous research has shown that humans are even better than dogs or cats at long-distance runs. In fact, Harvard anthropologist Daniel Lieberman and his colleagues have argued that the human body (with our hairless skin and sweat glands, our springy tendons and twistable torso) is uniquely suited to long-distance running under conditions that would give other animals heat stroke. That's why we're the only animals that voluntarily run marathons.

    Such findings mesh with Schmitt's research into the origins of human bipedalism.

    "It was only a little more than a million years ago that we developed the long-legged, striding gait in which we exchanged energy efficiently," he told me today. "Our early ancestors, 3 million years ago, walked along like apes with their knees bent, and they weren't able to exchange energy."

    The news that there was a hunting-related category where dogs did better than cats came as a bit of a surprise to Leslie Lyons, an expert on cats at the University of California at Davis. "Actually, I find that kind of interesting," she told me.

    But she still thinks cats hold the edge in all-around hunting skill. "Overall, they've fine-tuned their system," she said.

    Are cats a breed apart?
    What's not surprising is that dogs and humans are more alike in their hunting style than cats and humans would be. DNA analysis has shown that dogs and humans have co-evolved for tens of thousands of years - while cats appear to be more recent companions for the human species.

    "We can somewhat argue that cats are in the domestication process right now. ... Definitely the cat domestication process is more recent, occurring once agriculture got started, maybe 8,000 to 10,000 years ago," Lyons said.

    Cats are definitely a breed apart when it comes to running, Schmitt said. Most other species appear to have undergone selection for a style of locomotion that favors low-oxygen consumption and low energy use for high-yield movement. "We thought cats would be the same, but we saw that they were sacrificing this to be stealthy," he said.

    Schmitt emphasized that he and his colleagues weren't trying to set off a cat vs. dog controversy ... although that kind of debate always draws a crowd. "What really excited us about this paper is less the cat vs. dog angle, but more the idea that animals need to make compromises," Schmitt said.

    Feel free to weigh in on the issues raised by evolutionary biology in the comment section below. And if you want to argue over which is better, cats or dogs, I won't stop you.


    The lead researcher and first author for the study in PLoS ONE is Kristin Bishop, a former postdoctoral researcher at Duke who is now at UC-Davis. The other authors are Schmitt and Anita Pai, a former Duke student who is now a medical student at Vanderbilt University.

    To learn more about the faculties of felines, check out this article about the decoding of the cat genome, and this one explaining why cats probably can't taste sweets. You can also click your TV onto the National Geographic Channel to watch "Science of Cats" (airing Dec. 23) and "Science of Dogs" (airing Jan. 4).

    Update for 5:50 p.m. ET: My colleague on msnbc.com's multimedia team, Jim Seida, pointed me to Scott Carrier's classic audio tale on "This American Life" about his years-long effort to run down an antelope (along with his biologist brother). The quest was aimed at proving experimentally that primitive humans could do it - and proving something else that was less scientific and more spiritual. The story spawned a book titled "Running After Antelope."

Jump to December 2008 archive page: 1 2