Science

Behavioural ecologist James O'Hanlon wants the world to know more about his favourite animal. After all, there are over 50,000 different species, some that can fly through the air, some play songs, solve puzzles, and even scuba dive. They're found in every continent except for Antarctica, and have been around since millions of years before dinosaurs roamed the earth.

Oh, and they're also the number one most feared animal on the planet: the spider.

O'Hanlon is on a mission to give spiders an image makeover, so that people can celebrate and appreciate them for the incredible creatures they are.

[...]

Question: What is it about spiders that you think generates that ick factor in people?

James O'Hanlon: That's actually a huge question in psychology in general. When psychologists study fears and phobias, for some strange reason, fear of spiders comes out as No. 1 of any type of fear on the planet.

More than fear of heights, fear of flying, fear of snakes, fear of dogs, spiders is the No. 1 fear that people experience. And it's a bit of a head scratcher because it doesn't really make any sense. There's no clear answers as to why we have that sort of fear.

[...]

The brainy birds carry big chips on their shoulders, scientists say. And some people who become subjects of their ire may be victims of mistaken identity.

Renowned for their intelligence, crows can mimic human speech, use tools and gather for what seem to be funeral rites when a member of their murder, as groups of crows are known, dies or is killed. They can identify and remember faces, even among large crowds.

They also tenaciously hold grudges. When a murder of crows singles out a person as dangerous, its wrath can be alarming, and can be passed along beyond an individual crow’s life span of up to a dozen or so years, creating multigenerational grudges.

Attacks by aggrieved crows can become the stuff of horror films, with lives being seemingly transformed into the Hitchcockian nightmare of “The Birds.”

. . .

How long do crows hold a grudge? Dr. Marzluff believes he has now answered the question: around 17 years.

Archive

James Robinson, along with Daron Acemoglu and Simon Johnson, has been awarded this year’s Nobel Prize in Economics for his research on the critical role institutions play in fostering national prosperity. In [this Q&A session]l with EL PAÍS, he explains that his work also seeks to highlight how the legacy of colonialism has impeded economic development in certain regions, particularly in Latin America and Africa.

James Robinson: [...] we make a simple division, focusing on the presence of inclusive institutions or extractive institutions. Inclusive institutions create broad incentives and opportunities for all people equally, while extractive institutions concentrate benefits and incentives in the hands of a few. Many economists say that development comes from entrepreneurship and innovation, but in reality it comes from people’s dreams, creativity and aspirations. To be prosperous, you have to create a series of institutions that can cultivate this talent. However, if you look at countries like Colombia or Nigeria, talent is wasted because people do not have opportunities.

[...]

Institutions can be an obstacle to competitiveness. However, one should consider the impact that European integration had on countries such as Spain, Portugal or the former Soviet countries. These are remarkable success stories. There has been an almost unprecedented transition. It is true that there may be too much regulation or inefficient rules, but broadly speaking the effects of European institutions has been largely positive over the past 50 years.

[...]

[Immigration] is one of the big questions we have to solve. [...] it can be difficult. It is not easy to quickly incorporate the millions of people who cross the Mediterranean [trying to reach Europe]. One of the possible ways is to help them develop in order to improve the terrible situation in their own countries. However, one of the biggest complications is that the policies recommended by Western institutions are not in tune with what is happening in these [developing] countries. At the World Bank, for example, you cannot talk about politics. How do we expect them to solve real problems when you cannot talk about them? Frankly, it doesn’t make sense. If we really want to change the world, we have to have honest conversations. I see that as a long way off.

[...]

The reality is that democratic countries have shown that they are better at managing public services and achieving rapid growth. You can find impressive examples like China among autocratic countries, but you cannot achieve an inclusive economy with an authoritarian regime and a model like the Chinese one.

[...]

I don’t think the Chinese model can continue. If you look at other authoritarian regimes, like Iran or Russia, they are incredibly weak economically and technologically. The economy cannot flourish in an authoritarian regime. Right now, technological dynamism is concentrated in one such country and in the Western world. However, one has to consider that, with Donald Trump, the institutions that have made the United States great are being seriously questioned. This could affect the context, and that is why the European Union and NATO are so important.

[...]

[Populism is linked to the growing disconnect between governments and citizens] and an example of this is Latin America. Democracy promised too much and did not always deliver. People’s lives did not change, and they sought new alternatives. There are various factors why democracy has not achieved transformations, such as clientelism and corruption. [...] Venezuela was governed in a deeply corrupt manner, and Hugo Chávez was clever in taking advantage of it. You also see this with Donald Trump, who has gone far because he realized there was widespread dissatisfaction with traditional politics. The failures of democratic institutions are real, and that is why we have to think about how to make them more empathetic to what people need.

[...]

Artificial intelligence can be wonderful, but like all technologies, it depends on how it is used. If artificial intelligence is used to create replacements for humans, that could be devastating. [...] It is all about how it is used, and that depends on our governments. I think that these decisions should not be left to the tech gurus. They only think about what makes them the most money, even if this is not related to the general well-being of society. In the case of artificial intelligence, it is very important, because it could have a tectonic impact on the world.

Archive link

The Nobel memorial prize in economics has been awarded to three U.S.-based academics who studied why some countries are rich and others poor and have documented that freer, open societies are more likely to prosper.

The work by Daron Acemoglu, Simon Johnson and James A. Robinson “demonstrated the importance of societal institutions for a country’s prosperity,” the Nobel committee of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences said at the announcement in Stockholm.

Why are some countries richer than others?

In countries that were already rich, or were places where European settlers did not survive well because of illnesses or the climate, “colonial institutions were extractive”, Coyle says. “In contrast, in countries that were poorer to start with or had better climates, Europeans instead built more inclusive institutions similar to their own countries.”

“The laureates demonstrated that the places that were, relatively speaking, the richest at their time of colonization are now among the poorest,” the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences said in a statement.

“When Europeans colonised large parts of the world, the existing institutions sometimes changed dramatically, but not in the same way everywhere. In some colonies, the purpose was to exploit the indigenous population and extract natural resources to benefit the colonizers. In other cases, the colonisers built inclusive political and economic systems.”

A lack of funding and academic freedom amid a political crackdown leave scientists feeling hopeless and pondering an exodus from the country.

[...]

Scientists, some of whom spoke to Nature on the condition of anonymity because they fear retribution from the government, say that Venezuelan research was already censored and underfunded before the election, but that they anticipate things will get even worse. They point to a bill passed by Maduro’s administration last month that regulates non-governmental organizations (NGOs), which some researchers rely on for funding or to help publish their research. This latest chapter in Maduro’s reign could spell the end for independent science in the country, they say.

“I am afraid to talk to you,” retired biologist Jaime Requena told Nature as he nervously prepared to leave the country, fearing that his passport would be confiscated by authorities to prevent his departure. “Science here is going down the drain quickly.”

[...]

The Nobel Prize in Physics has been awarded to two scientists, Geoffrey Hinton and John Hopfield, for their work on machine learning, the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences announced at a press conference in Stockholm, Sweden.

American Professor John Hopfield, 91, is a professor at Princeton University in the US, and Prof Hinton, 76, is a professor at University of Toronto in Canada.

[...]

The Academy listed some of the crucial applications of the two scientists’ work, including improving climate modelling, development of solar cells, and analysis of medical images.

[...]

Professor Hinton is sometimes referred to as the "Godfather of AI". [His] pioneering research on neural networks paved the way for current AI systems like ChatGPT [...] He also said he uses the AI chatbot ChatGPT4 for many things now but with the knowledge that it does not always get the answer right.

[...]

Professor John Hopfield invented a network that can save and recreate patterns.

It uses physics that describes a material’s characteristics due to atomic spin.

In a similar way to how the brain tries to recall words by using associated but incomplete words, Prof Hopfield developed a network that can use incomplete patterns to find the most similar.

[...]

The Nobel Prize committee said the two scientists' work has become part of our daily lives, including in facial recognition and language translation.

But Ellen Moons, chair of the Nobel Committee for Physics, said "its rapid development has also raised concerns about our future collectively".

Facilitated communication was created in 1977 by Australian disability advocate Rosemary Crossley, who died last year and left a complex legacy. To those who knew her, she’s remembered as champion for “people with little or no functional speech”.

But others say her communications invention - and her formidable defence of it - were misguided and harmful. It is still used worldwide, despite being widely criticised.

The first notable subject to use facilitated communication was Anne McDonald, a non-verbal Australian woman with cerebral palsy, a severe intellectual disability, and no control over her limbs.

At the time, Crossley claimed that McDonald - then 16 - could communicate by pointing at magnetic letters while Crossley supported her upper arm.

Within weeks McDonald was spelling out whole sentences and doing fractions, despite having no formal education and being institutionalised since age three.

Some of Crossley’s colleagues expressed surprise that McDonald, who’d never read, could suddenly write eloquent prose, and cite literary references, when her arm was held by the highly educated Crossley.

One who raised questions was the institution’s head paediatrician and psychiatrist Dr Dennis Maginn, who wouldn’t validate Crossley’s communication theory without independent testing.

Advocates insist it is a miracle tool, one which gives disabled people a voice.

But a growing chorus of experts, families and even former facilitators want it banned, due to research indicating that the likely author of the messages is the facilitator, not the communicator.

Appropriate levels of physical activity, sedentary behaviour and sleep (collectively termed movement behaviours) are essential for the healthy growth and development of preschool-aged children.

This was the impetus for creating the Canadian 24-Hour Movement Guidelines for the Early Years (birth to four years). Likewise, this is why the World Health Organization adopted the Canadian guidelines when creating the global guidelines on physical activity, sedentary behaviour and sleep for children under five years of age.

Considering the extensive benefits of movement behaviours, it is very alarming that a recent study found that only 14 per cent of preschoolers around the world are meeting movement behaviour guideline recommendations.

Over the past 10 years, rates of colorectal cancer among 25 to 49 year olds have increased in 24 different countries, including the UK, US, France, Australia, Canada, Norway and Argentina.

The investigation's early findings, presented by an international team at the Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) congress in Geneva in September 2024, were as eye-catching as they are concerning.

[...]

Breast cancer is one form of cancer where the trend is apparent. A new report from the ACS found that while deaths from breast cancer in women have dropped by around 10% in the past decade, incidence rates are rising by 1% per year overall – and 1.4% per year for women under the age of 50.

[...]

Cancer specialists say that patients presenting with diseases like pancreatic cancer, an illness where most people are diagnosed in their early 70s, are sometimes decades younger than would usually be expected.

[...]

In May a huge iceberg broke off from an Antarctic ice shelf, drifted, and came to a stop - right in front of “maybe the world’s unluckiest” penguins. Like a door shutting, the iceberg's huge walls sealed off the Halley Bay colony from the sea.

It seemed to spell the end for hundreds of newly-hatched fluffy chicks whose mothers, out hunting for food, may no longer have been able to reach them.

Then, a few weeks ago, the iceberg shifted and got on the move again. Scientists have now discovered that the tenacious penguins found a way to beat the colossal iceberg - satellite pictures seen exclusively by BBC News this week show life in the colony.

But scientists endured a long, anxious wait until this point - and the chicks face another potentially deadly challenge in the coming months.

[...]

A 25-year-old woman with type 1 diabetes started producing her own insulin less than three months after receiving a transplant of reprogrammed stem cells1. She is the first person with the disease to be treated using cells that were extracted from her own body.

“I can eat sugar now,” said the woman, who lives in Tianjing, on a call with Nature. It has been more than a year since the transplant, and, she says, “I enjoy eating everything — especially hotpot.” The woman asked to remain anonymous to protect her privacy.

James Shapiro, a transplant surgeon and researcher at the University of Alberta in Edmonton, Canada, says the results of the surgery are stunning. “They’ve completely reversed diabetes in the patient, who was requiring substantial amounts of insulin beforehand.”

Here is the report: We Can’t Write the Truth Anymore’: Academic Freedom in Hong Kong Under the National Security Law (pdf)

• Academic freedom in Hong Kong has severely declined since the Chinese government imposed the draconian National Security Law on the city on June 30, 2020.
• Students and faculty accustomed to academic freedom must now tread carefully to avoid retribution for what they teach, research, and publish, and even with whom they associate.
• Concerned governments and foreign universities with partnerships with Hong Kong universities should speak up for affiliated academics and students, and review these partnerships to avoid becoming complicit in human rights violations.

Academic freedom in Hong Kong has severely declined since the Chinese government imposed the draconian National Security Law on the city on June 30, 2020, Human Rights Watch and Hong Kong Democracy Council said in a report released today.

The 80-page report, “‘We Can’t Write the Truth Anymore’: Academic Freedom in Hong Kong Under the National Security Law,” documents that long-protected civil liberties, including the rights to freedom of expression, assembly, and association, have been under assault in Hong Kong’s eight publicly funded universities. As these universities have become increasingly repressive, students and faculty widely self-censor, fearful of being targeted for harassment, retribution, and even prosecution for what they say and do both in the classroom and on campus.

Abstract (added emphasis and paragraphing):

Anthropogenic methane (CH4) emissions increases from the period 1850–1900 until 2019 are responsible for around 65% as much warming as carbon dioxide (CO2) has caused to date, and large reductions in methane emissions are required to limit global warming to 1.5°C or 2°C.

However, methane emissions have been increasing rapidly since ~2006. This study shows that emissions are expected to continue to increase over the remainder of the 2020s if no greater action is taken and that increases in atmospheric methane are thus far outpacing projected growth rates.

This increase has important implications for reaching net zero CO2 targets: every 50 Mt CH4 of the sustained large cuts envisioned under low-warming scenarios that are not realized would eliminate about 150 Gt of the remaining CO2 budget. Targeted methane reductions are therefore a critical component alongside decarbonization to minimize global warming.

We describe additional linkages between methane mitigation options and CO2, especially via land use, as well as their respective climate impacts and associated metrics. We explain why a net zero target specifically for methane is neither necessary nor plausible. Analyses show where reductions are most feasible at the national and sectoral levels given limited resources, for example, to meet the Global Methane Pledge target, but they also reveal large uncertainties.

Despite these uncertainties, many mitigation costs are clearly low relative to real-world financial instruments and very low compared with methane damage estimates, but legally binding regulations and methane pricing are needed to meet climate goals.