This week in Republican science... same as every other week in Republican science, really. Since experts can't be trusted, science journals are propaganda, and evidence is not, you know, evidence. That's why we'd like to bring you segment 1323 of our ongoing series "chipped stone tools, why they will never replace traditional pointy sticks."
Fortunately, we don't live in that world... yet. In science fueled by actual people doing actual work and making actual discoveries, it's been a heckuva week.
The announcement this week of the remarkable hominid fossils found in South Africa, brought us a refined picture of our family tree.
Australopithecus sediba cranium
Photo by Brett Eloff. Courtesy Prof. Lee R. Berger and Wits University
Where most hominid remains are only a few small fragments, this collection has been rightly called a "hoard" —220 bones representing at least five individuals. Not only is the quantity of material high, but delicate structures like the small bones of the hand are better preserved in these specimens than in anything else we have that predates Neanderthals. Among my favorite features of this find is the precision to which it can be dated. Because the remains are sandwiched between layers representing periods in which the Earth's magnetic field changed, and because those layers have been precisely dated, we know that these small hominids lived 1.977 million year ago. That's over a million years after that other famous Australopithecine, Lucy. Compared to Lucy's species, Australopithecus afarensis, these new specimens show differences in the arrangement of the pelvis, leg, and foot. There also appear to be differences in the cranial morphology, though the brain capacity is still only about 1/3 that of modern humans (a value that puts it at the upper end for of that covered by chimpanzees).
One thing I particularly like about these specimens that that they don't fit the expected pattern for a creature at this point in human evolution. Ever since the Lucy find confounded expectations about the relationship between upright walking and large brains, there's been a scramble to work out how skulls, hips, legs, hands and feet developed toward the pattern we see in human ancestors like Homo erectus. So far, new finds refuse to slide neatly into preconceived niches. I love it when that happens. Since the A. sediba specimens actually seem to be younger than the oldest material assigned to the genus Homo it may be that this species isn't our direct ancestor.
Oh, and as happens every time a find of any significance is announced, a number of publications couldn't help but wonder if these finds represent the missing link. People, there is no f@*&ing missing link. It's a non-scientific term born of mystical nonsense. It may be two million years later, but every time I see that phrase it makes me want to fling poo.
Moving from bones in the ground to chemicals in the air, the first trials of reversing global warming through geoengineering are underway. This first trial, which involes hoisting a hose a kilometer into the air and spaying a mist of water, won't really cool anything (unless you chance to be standing right below the hose and get wet). This is a proof of concept to show that we really can pump materials high into the atmosphere and spray out fogs that may change the way the atmosphere interacts with light.
Just think of it as an experiment in terraforming Earth to be more like Earth, because actually addressing the cause of the problem would be expensive/job killing/unAmerican (take your pick). And really, pumping great amounts of material into the atmosphere to change the climate? What could go wrong with that?
Next time your favorite team loses, just blame it on racism. After all, a new study shows that you may well be right.
In its simplest form, when an umpire was from the same ethnic group as the pitcher, they were more likely to call a pitch a strike.
The effect goes away when the umpire knows they're being watched, which suggests this isn't really an unconscious prejudice.
John Timmer at ars Technica admits worries about the GOP hatred for knowledge.
Personally, I wouldn't vote for a candidate who rejects science and expertise, and as a voter, I'd like to have a viable choice between two qualified candidates. At the moment, it's looking like I won't.
What would the world be like if we had two parties living in reality, offering policies based on reason? Maybe another few million years of evolution will get us there.
While you're wandering the web today, don't forget to say hi to DarkSyde at Zingularity. And no, he did not get banned. He's just unavailable this morning, so don't be starting rumors.