SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY
Search headlines
Find the stories shaping the conversation.
Results for " fossil " 339 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle
Good to see you after all this time. Scientists finally put a face to Denisovans
Scientists use fossil fragments found in northern China to reconstruct the features of the ancient hominids.
Burning through Türkiye's GDP: The high cost of fossil fuel PM2.5 pollution on public health – Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air
Türkiye’s reliance on fossil fuels is generating massive air pollution health costs both within the country and throughout the region. This report finds that fossil fuels account for more than half (52%) of Türkiye’s population exposure to PM2.5 air pollution. The cumulative health impacts are estimated to cost the Turkish economy approximately USD 55 billion each year, equivalent to 4.1% of national GDP in 2024. The pollution is also responsible for roughly 26,500 deaths per year in the country, including deaths from cardiovascular and respiratory diseases, lung cancer, stroke, and diabetes.The impacts begin at the very start of life, with fossil-fuel-derived PM2.5 pollution contributing to an estimated 8,000 preterm births, 8,200 low-birthweight infants, 5,100 new cases of childhood asthma, and 6,500 emergency-room visits for asthma each year in Türkiye.Beyond the estimated deaths each year in Türkiye, air pollution from the country’s fossil fuel emissions also contributes to deaths and economic losses in neighbouring countries. In 2024, these emissions were estimated to cause: 32,000 deaths and USD 2.1 billion in economic burden in Egypt; 1,700 deaths and USD 0.2 billion in economic burden in Syria; 800 deaths and USD 0.8 billion in economic burden in Iraq; 500 deaths and USD 4.5 billion in economic burden in Israel; and 400 deaths and USD 1.5 billion in economic burden in Greece.Türkiye currently has no national ambient air-quality standard for PM2.5, despite the substantial health burden associated with exposure to the pollutant. Figure — The percentage of annual PM2.5 emissions in Türkiye’s fossil fuel emissions, using the EMEP emission inventory and EMEP MSC-W chemical transport model Key findings Türkiye’s fossil fuel emissions (from domestic sources as well as international aviation and shipping) account for 52% of population exposure to PM₂.₅ nationwide. PM2.5 pollution attributable to Türkiye’s fossil fuel use is responsible for approximately 26,500 deaths in the country every year, including deaths from cardiovascular and respiratory diseases, lung cancer, stroke, and diabetes. Children are among the most affected, with fossil fuel-derived PM2.5 pollution contributing to an estimated 8,000 preterm births, 8,200 low-birth-weight infants, 5,100 new cases of childhood asthma and 6,500 emergency room visits for asthma each year. The cumulative health impacts of fossil fuel-derived PM2.5 pollution are estimated to cost the Turkish economy approximately USD 55 billion each year, equivalent to 4.1% of national GDP in 2024. Transboundary pollution attributable to Türkiye’s land-based fossil fuel emissions also leads to thousands of deaths in five neighbouring countries, with estimated economic burden per year (as of 2024) reaching USD 2.1 billion in Egypt (3,200 deaths), USD 0.2 billion in Syria (1,700 deaths), USD 0.8 billion in Iraq (800 deaths), USD 4.5 billion in Israel (500 deaths), and USD 1.5 billion in Greece (400 deaths). Türkiye currently has no national ambient air quality standard for PM2.5, despite the substantial health burden associated with exposure to the pollutant. Reducing fossil fuel use and emissions across Türkiye’s energy, transport and industrial systems would deliver substantial air quality and public health benefits by reducing exposure to PM2.5 and preventing associated illness and deaths. Figure — Annual deaths attributable to Türkiye’s land-based fossil fuel emissions in the five most affected countries, based on 2024 emissions
Saint Louis Science Center hosts Prehistoric Life Show
The Saint Louis Science Center hosted the St. Louis Prehistoric Life Show this weekend, bringing together scientists, artists, collectors and anyone interested in fossils and pre-historic life.
Fastest Warming Congressional Districts Where Politician Is Funded By Fossil Fuel Industry
The midterm elections are less than a month away, and 35 seats in the U.S. Senate, as well as...
Prehistoric Treasures Take Over Orlando Science Center
Orlando Science Center’s resident paleontologist Mac Bodden stopped by the show with real ancient fossils to celebrate National Fossil Day—giving us an incredible up-close look at prehistoric history right here in Central Florida.
Iowa residents raise health and environmental concerns over data center expansion
Advocacy groups and residents are voicing concerns about the health and environmental impacts of Iowa's growing data center industry, citing increased fossil fuel use and air pollution.
Climate Change Is a Given in Every Extreme Weather Event, Why Do We Keep Needing to Prove It?
It's time to break through fossil fuel industry's disinformation
Coon Creek offers Community Days
The Coon Creek Science Center offers onsite tours, fossil collecting and a demonstration on how to preserve fossils.
*POSTPONED* Behind the Science with Paleontologist and Curator of Dinosauria Dr. Matthew Carrano
***Due to speaker illness, this event has been postponed. A new date will be announced in two weeks. If you registered for this program, please check your email for more information. We apologize for the inconvenience.*** Is the 21st Century the real Age of Dinosaurs? Today, more paleontologists are discovering more dinosaur fossils from more places in the world than ever before. Our understanding of these amazing creatures has leapt forward while their popularity has surged. Museums sit at the junction of these phenomena. The Smithsonian has been a center for dinosaur research for more than a century, and its collections include many iconic and scientifically important specimens. Today, Smithsonian researchers continue to discover new dinosaurs, but they are also uncovering more information about the ones we already know and love. New techniques and approaches allow them to investigate aspects of dinosaur biology, ecology, and evolution in ways that would have been inconceivable to early paleontologists. The result is an ever-improving understanding of dinosaurs as living, breathing, and thriving animals. This month, go behind the science with paleontologist Dr. Matthew Carrano, Curator of Dinosauria at the National Museum of Natural History as he discusses new discoveries at home and abroad, in the field and in the museum. Registration is encouraged. Space is filled on a first come first served basis. ---------------- About the Series: Behind the Science A monthly after-hours series featuring NMNH scientists and researchers Each month, join the National Museum of Natural History for the new series, Behind the Science, where NMNH researchers share insights into their latest discoveries and explore the fascinating questions driving their work—from the origins of life to the future of our planet. Come learn what’s happening behind the scenes and how science shapes our understanding of the natural world. Programs take place in Q?rius, the Coralyn W. Whitney Science Education Center. Topics and speakers announced on a rolling basis, but save the dates now!
Did human beings evolve from apes? Here’s what science can and can’t prove
The familiar claim about humans evolving from apes leaves out an important part of the story. Fossils and DNA reveal a much more complicated family history than the popular version suggests.
This 345-Million-Year-Old Fossil Fooled Scientists for Decades
A famous Scottish fossil is forcing scientists to rethink what claw-like feet really reveal about the move onto land. Pressed flat inside two slabs of Scottish rock, a 345-million-year-old skeleton seemed to carry some unmistakable signs of life on land. Its four limbs ended in five-digit feet, and the tips of its fingers and toes
Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History Celebrates National Earth Science Week
SANTA BARBARA, Calif. (KEYT) — Fossils, minerals and discoveries about our planet will take center stage at the Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History
Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History Celebrates National Earth Science Week
SANTA BARBARA, Calif. — Fossils, minerals and discoveries about our planet will take center stage at the Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History during
EU leads fight against fossil-fuel nations’ push to delay climate science reports
Dispute looms over next review of the latest science on the warming planet as temperatures continue to rise
Pokémon fossil exhibition coming to Denver science museum
An exhibition blending fossil specimens and Pokémon will come to Denver in 2027.
What is attribution science? The critical climate research that Big Oil would rather you didn't believe in
How an emerging field of research is fueling a major Supreme Court case that may hold fossil fuel companies liable for climate change.
This surprising mammal fossil is giving scientists something to chew on
It's likely you've already chewed and swallowed some tasty morsel today. But when did that ability emerge? New evidence points to at least the middle Jurassic, back when dinosaurs still reigned.
Transforming a fossil fuel firm into a clean energy leader
Energy companies Ørsted and Moeve offer their insights on how to transform fossil fuel-based businesses around opportunities offered by the clean economy.
Scientists discovered a crocodile they never knew existed
CT scans helped determine that the fossil unearthed in Egypt came from a distinctly different ancient species.
Pokémon Fossil Museum exhibit coming to Denver Museum of Nature and Science
Pokémon Fossil Museum exhibit coming to Denver Museum of Nature and Science
In 2026, the exhibit of life-sized fossil Pokémon models made its North American debut in Chicago, and it will make a stop in Denver next year.
Guided Fossil Collecting at Caesar Creek Highlights Ohio Earth Science Week
Earth Science Week officially runs Sunday, Oct. 11, through Saturday, Oct. 17.
Pokémon fossil exhibit coming to the Denver Museum of Nature & Science in May 2027
DENVER, Colo. (KRDO) -- The Denver Museum of Nature & Science (DMNS) announced a new exhibit featuring Pokémon opening in May 2027. The new exhibit,
South Siders get hands-on at U. of C. science festival
Martha Dehoyos watched as three of her children dug through trays of mud, sand and pebbles looking for fossils at the paleontology booth Saturday afternoon during the fifth annual South
Climate Science Under Political Attack Reaches US Supreme Court
In 2018, local officials in Colorado sued oil companies in state court, charging that pollution from fossil fuels contributed to global warming and harmed
Amy Coney Barrett calls oil companies’ arguments ‘slippery’
Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett criticized fossil fuel companies as “a little slippery” in oral arguments over a lawsuit in which oil majors claim that federal law blocks states from suing them for climate change-related damages. Her comment came in arguments Monday in the case Suncor Energy v. County Commissioners of Boulder County, which […]
St. Louis Prehistoric Life Show brings free fossil fun to the Science Center
The inaugural St. Louis Prehistoric Life Show invites families to crack open rocks, identify fossils, meet paleontologists, and more.
Business leaders deliver blow to calls for more North Sea oil and gas drilling
The campaign group Uplift said more than half of entrepreneurs backed government plans to phase out fossil fuels
Chang’e-6 lunar soil contains a surprising magnetic time capsule
Scientists studying Chang’e-6 lunar soil have discovered a previously unknown magnetic mineral in natural Moon samples: a form of metallic iron called γ-Fe. Found inside tiny impact-glass particles, the nanoscale iron can preserve a stable magnetic signal, potentially acting like a microscopic fossil of the Moon’s long-lost magnetic field.
'Giant tusks from Siberia were thought to be the horns of the mythical unicorn': What medieval people made of fossils before vertebrate paleontology
In this excerpt from "The Story of the Mammals in 25 Discoveries," author Donald R. Prothero looks at a time when the idea of extinction was blasphemous.
Earth Science Week at Museum Features Fossils, Minerals, Maps, and More
Credit: CourtesyCredit: CourtesyCredit: CourtesyCredit: Courtesy SANTA BARBARA, CA—The Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History is celebrating National
That Rare Mastodon Fossil Found in San Mateo Is Now at Stanford
The molar dates back to the Ice Age. Researchers found it submerged in a Bay Area creek at the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space Preserve.
Scientists Discover New Dinosaur Species from Remarkably Complete Fossil — and Its Feathers Are Still Preserved
The 22-inch dinosaur lived more than 100 million years ago, and its complete skeleton and preserved feathers are offering new clues about how flight evolved
Good science requires much more than evidence
Empiricists believe that scientific theories are true only if they make correct empirical predictions: if we can't verify these predictions, then there is no reason to expect that they tell us anything about reality. However, Professor of Philosophy at King's College David Kyle Johnson argues that this is mistaken. In response to Bas van Fraassen, who has written on this subject for the IAI, he argues that we have many reasons for believing a theory to be true, such as it being parsimonious and having large scope — qualities which have been used throughout the history of science as criteria for judging theories. In 2024, Princeton philosopher Bas van Fraassen wrote a short article for IAI News entitled “Science Does not Describe Reality: The Limits and Benefits of Explanation.” At the time, I was working on two projects (a science book and a Great Course) that, when completed, would (among other things) defend science’s ability to describe reality. I wanted to write a response to van Fraassen, but the projects demanded too much of my attention. But now that those projects are complete, I am in a position to explain the objections to van Fraassen’s thesis. Summarizing van Fraassen’s argumentIn a nutshell, his argument is this: What scientists do is make predictions based on theories and then invite others to test to see whether those predictions are borne out. “If theory T is right, result R should happen in experimental condition C.” Many think that running an experiment that shows that R happens in condition C is proof that theory T is true (and should be believed). But, van Fraassen argues, that R happened in condition C is only a reason to think that R happens in condition C. That’s the only observable, or empirical, result we can actually see, so that is all that we are really justified in believing. (The underlying theory that made that prediction still may or may not be true.) That is why he calls those who accept his position “empiricists.”Before I explain what is wrong with this position, let me explain what it gets right. What van Fraassen Gets RightFirst, a theory correctly predicting the results of an experiment is not, strictly speaking, “proof” that the theory is correct. The basic line of reasoning is this:If the theory T is true, result R should happen. Result R did happen. Thus, theory T is true.In other words:“If T then R. R. Thus, T.”This is a deductively invalid, fallacious mode of reasoning, called “affirming the consequent.” Those premises do not guarantee that the conclusion follows. “If I am in Pennsylvania, then I am in the USA. I am in the USA. Thus, I am in Pennsylvania.” Clearly that argument doesn’t guarantee its conclusion; neither does the above argument.However, science is not a deductive method of reasoning; it is an inductive one. And inductive arguments merely try to raise the probability of their conclusion, not “prove” them for certain. Thus, the fact that an experimental result doesn’t prove a theory is true is irrelevant; it’s not supposed to. That is not what scientific reasoning is about.___If the hypothesis that something exists clearly provides the best explanation for what we can observe, then the belief that it exists is what is rational.___Second, it’s also true that a single experimental result doesn’t provide enough justification to believe that a theory is true. Scientists do not come to a consensus about whether a theory is true by looking at a single experiment; they look at all the evidence to determine where the preponderance of evidence points. The mere fact that I am in the USA raises the probability that I am in Pennsylvania, but not nearly enough to conclude that I am in Pennsylvania. However, if I am also regularly encountering people wearing Eagles and Phillies hats and seeing advertisements for Founding Father tours, I probably am. In the same way, a theory successfully predicting the outcome of one experiment is not enough to conclude that it is true; but if a theory makes a wide variety of predictions that are all vindicated by multiple experiments, performed by many different groups and people, all actively trying to prove the theory false (which is what good scientific experiments are designed to do)—that is a good reason to conclude that the theory is true. In other words, if you repeatedly try to prove something false but can’t, that is a very good indication that it isn’t. The problem of underdeterminationIn reply, those whom van Fraassen calls “empiricists” often point to the “problem of underdetermination.” For any given theory that makes successful predictions about what happens in experimental conditions, there are countless other possible theories that make exactly the same predictions—and since they do, the experimental evidence in question is just as much reason to accept any of those theories as it is to accept our original one. Thus, the argument goes, we have no way of knowing whether our original theory is true, or one of the other “predictively equivalent” theories is true. SUGGESTED VIEWING How Occam's Razor changed the world With Johnjoe McFadden As an example of underdetermination, philosophers often offer this example. The evidence of fossils seems to provide reason to conclude that the universe is quite old; ancient fossils are what the “ancient universe” hypothesis predicts. But it’s also possible that God created an ancient-looking universe 200 years ago, complete with a “fake” fossil record for us to find, to make it look old. The existence of fossils is what that theory predicts too. So, the argument goes, the fossil record can’t be used as evidence that the universe is ancient; the fossil record supports the “200-year-old ancient-looking universe” theory just as much. The problem of underdetermination points out that, for any theory with supporting evidence, we could invent another completely different theory that predicts exactly the same evidence, and thus undermine that evidence’s ability to support the original theory.But this “argument from underdetermination” betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of what scientific reasoning is and how it works. To explain, let me use another rather strange (but very real and commonly discussed) philosophical thought experiment called “The Grue Problem.” The “Grue” ProblemSuppose I want to know what color emeralds are, so I observe a few, see that they all appear green, and form the theory that “all emeralds are green.” I thus predict that the next 100 emeralds I find will also appear to be green. And let’s say that happens, and so I thus conclude that my theory that all emeralds are green is true. Now, one might rightly point out that I don’t know for sure that all emeralds are green—I have not seen them all. Maybe some I haven’t found yet are blue. Fair enough. After all, we used to think that all swans were white, until we found some black ones. But let’s say that I go on a quest and collect every emerald in the universe—and, for the sake of the argument, let’s say I can do this, and can even know that I have every one of them. So, I collect them all, look at them all, and verify that they all appear green. Can’t I now rightly conclude that all emeralds are green?Inspired by the problem of underdetermination, a friend might argue that I cannot.Sure, they all appear green now—but there could be another kind of color called “grue.” Something is grue if it is green up to a certain point in time, but then spontaneously turns blue. And there could be an infinite number of “shades” of grue. Something that is one shade of grue will turn blue at noon today, but something that is another shade of grue will turn blue at noon tomorrow, etc. So yes, the emeralds appear green now; and since they haven’t turned blue yet, they are not some “past” shade of grue. But they might be some “future” shade of grue (e.g., they may turn blue at noon tomorrow). And since all future shades of grue are consistent with “being green up to this point in time,” the evidence you have is completely consistent with the notion that all emeralds are some future shade of grue, rather than green. Indeed, that they would appear green until now is what the “some future shade of grue” hypothesis predicts. So, we have just as much reason to conclude that all emeralds are some shade of grue as we do to conclude that they are green.You’re probably thinking “It’s not equally possible that the emeralds are grue; they are obviously green.” You are right! But explaining why your instinctive reaction to my friend’s argument is correct will help inform why van Fraassen’s “empiricist” is wrong and science actually does describe reality.The main mistake my friend makes is in thinking that the “empirical evidence” (of all the emeralds appearing green) is (or even should be) all I am using to draw the conclusion that all emeralds are green. It is not. I am also considering known facts about how colors typically work; things don’t usually change color, and when they do, they don’t do so suddenly, without cause, and all at once. So, even though the simple evidence of the emeralds all appearing green up to this point is consistent with them being some future shade of grue—that is even what the grue hypothesis “predicts”—it is still exceedingly unlikely that they are. The hypothesis that they are green is much more likely. Understanding science refutes the problem of underdetermination The misunderstanding about science that the “empiricist” pointing to “the problem of underdetermination” makes is similar to the one that my friend made. Science is not just about considering experimental evidence; in fact, it’s not even just about considering empirical evidence. As Ernan McMullin and many other philosophers of science have pointed out, the inference that makes science is “inference to the best explanation” (sometimes called “abduction” or “retroduction” by McMullin). While, depending on the circumstances, scientists use many different kinds of reasoning, science as a whole is, simply put, the process of considering multiple competing explanations and comparing them to certain criteria—explanatory criteria (the kinds of things explanations must be and do, by definition, to be a good explanation)—to see which explanation is the best.And these criteria do not deal only with empirical results. Yes, successful predictions raise the probability of a hypothesis, but it’s also the case that the more new assumptions a theory makes, the less likely it is to be true; every new assumption presents an opportunity for the theory to be false. (The fewer assumptions a theory makes, the simpler or “more parsimonious” it is said to be.) Likewise, the more existing evidence a theory contradicts, the less likely it is, because in order for a theory to be true, every piece of evidence it contradicts has to be somehow faulty. (The fewer established theories a new theory contradicts, the more “conservative” it is said to be.) And, obviously, the more something explains, the better explanation it is. (This is called having “scope.”) If a theory raises unanswerable questions, it’s not expanding our understanding, and thus is not wide-scoping. Scientists consider all these things when deciding which theory to accept, because the theory that adheres best to these explanatory criteria is most likely to be true.___the mere fact that a theory’s predictive success is why it “sticks around” or “becomes accepted” in the scientific community is not a reason to be skeptical about its truth.___The reason the grue hypothesis is no good is because it invents an entirely new kind of color—not just a new shade, but an entirely different category of color (a different way colors work)—and thus is not parsimonious. It raises unanswerable questions about how and why emeralds would just spontaneously change from green to blue (and thus does not have wide scope). And it contradicts what is already well established about how color works (and thus is unconservative).The theories that the problem of underdetermination points to do the same thing. Yes, the theory that God created an “ancient-looking universe” (complete with an ancient-looking fossil record) two hundred years ago is also consistent with the empirical evidence (of a fossil record) that presently exists; but that theory is monumentally unparsimonious (it requires many extra assumptions about infinite entities) and not wide-scoping (it raises unanswerable questions about why God would do such a thing). So, I can rationally conclude that it is false.Indeed, the history of science includes many examples of theories that were rejected because they lacked parsimony and/or scope, even before their falsity (and the truth of their competing theory) was confirmed by observation. As I point out in my book, geocentrism was rejected by the scientific community because it lacked parsimony, almost 200 years before the observation of parallax confirmed that the Earth moves around the sun. And the continuum theory of matter was completely rejected by 1860, because it couldn’t explain chemical reactions or organize matter into a periodic table, even though the experiments that eventually confirmed atomic theory weren’t even proposed until the 1870s. Solving the best of a bad lot problemIn response, the “empiricists” are likely to object, this time pointing to the “best of a bad lot” problem. “We have no reason to conclude that an explanation that has been shown to be better than others is true because we have no guarantee that the true theory was among those that we were considering.” If you have a “lot” (a collection) of poor explanations, even the best one is not true.The responses to this problem, however, are numerous. Peter Lipton argues that the set of hypotheses that scientists consider are not just randomly selected and thus unlikely to contain a theory that is true; they use existing knowledge to home in on what is most likely to be true. A doctor trying to explain abdominal pain is not going to bother wondering whether demons are causing it; they are going to stick with things like appendicitis and kidney stones, because they are most likely. Further, despite its name, inference to the best explanation is not just the process of comparing hypotheses and accepting the best one; we also want one that is a good explanation in its own right. If it’s not, we are going to keep looking until we find an explanation that is. And while that process does not guarantee that we will come across the exact truth, it’s very likely that the theory that emerges as the best will be at least approximately true, and thus we will be justified in believing it. And lastly, as I point out in my book, although many theories not based in scientific evidence (like geocentrism and continuum theory) have been completely overturned, science almost always progresses by the refinement of scientifically established theories—not their replacement. (Although our sun is not the center of the universe, heliocentrism was our first step in understanding the Earth’s true place in the universe.) So even if a theory we accept today may not be completely right, accepting it is a step on the journey toward the complete truth. The example of atomic theoryNow, it’s worth pointing out that most empiricists are not skeptical of all scientific theories; they are only skeptical of the ones that hypothesize the existence of “unobservables.” It’s not like they think that round Earth, heliocentrism, and germ theory are just useful (but untrue) “instruments” for making predictions about how to most efficiently navigate the seas, predict planetary motion, and treat diseases. They admit that the Earth actually is round, that the planets revolve around the sun, and that germs exist and cause disease. These facts and entities can be observed; the theories that suggest they exist are true. It’s only when theories start hypothesizing the existence of unobservables—like electrons, or quantum fields—that can’t be observed directly, that we should start doubting the theories’ truth. And to be fair to van Fraassen, in this published work, he doesn’t really say that we should doubt the truth of such theories. Only that scientific reasoning does not rationally force us to accept them as true. Skepticism, or agnosticism, he argues, is warranted. SUGGESTED READING Science is based in metaphor By Andrew Reynolds But the history of atomic theory throws a monkey wrench into that argument. Atoms used to be unobservable; again, scientists first accepted the theory that they exist because it had such grandiose explanatory power. But then atoms were seen with electron microscopes. They thus moved into the category of the observable. But this didn’t substantially change anything about what scientists were justified in believing; it certainly didn’t change any “atomic skeptics’” minds. It just confirmed what everyone already knew! If the hypothesis that something exists clearly provides the best explanation for what we can observe, then the belief that it exists is what is rational. The fact that the thing itself is not technically observable does not make doubting its existence rational.What’s more, the atoms were seen with an electron microscope. But electrons are themselves unobservable. How can an electron microscope reveal an atom if electrons are not real? This leads us to what is famously known as Hilary Putnam’s “miracle argument.” It’s (not) a miraclePhilosopher Hilary Putnam’s miracle argument is somewhat famous. Basically, he argued that a scientific theory being able to repeatedly make successful predictions—even about unobservables—without being at least approximately true would require a “miracle.” In other words, it would be such an improbable occurrence that it could not rationally be believed—the better explanation for why scientific theories about unobservables make the right predictions is because the unobservable entities and structures they hypothesize exist.Van Fraassen has addressed this argument. Indeed, in his original article, where he references Alison Gopnik’s point about orgasms not being “necessary for procreation” even though the desire for orgasm “drives the creation of progeny,” he is pointing to his own argument about how organisms are not naturally selected by evolution to get true beliefs; to the extent that belief-forming processes are selected for, the ones that are selected are the ones that are useful for survival—not the ones that produce true beliefs. In the same way, van Fraassen argues, scientific theories are accepted, not because they are true, but because they aren’t falsified; they make successful predictions; that’s what makes them “stick around.” So, the fact that they make successful predictions (and thus became accepted) is not a reason to think they are true.This argument is similar to C. S. Lewis’s “argument from reason,” which he used to argue against evolution: “The truth of evolution undercuts our ability to know that it is true.” Lewis’ argument famously failed; Elizabeth Anscombe, by Lewis’s own admission, demolished Lewis in a debate on the topic, and I have explained elsewhere why modified versions of the argument fail as well. In short, it’s because it fails to recognize that a belief-forming process can make an organism more likely to survive because it reliably produces true beliefs. It is therefore not the case that beliefs generated by naturally selected belief-forming processes are automatically false or unjustified.In the same way, the reason a theory “sticks around” could be because it’s not falsified, because it “makes correct predictions.” But the reason it makes correct predictions is most likely because it is true. (In pointing this out, I am echoing the arguments of Musgrave, Lipton, Psillos, and Kitcher, who refuted van Fraassen’s argument and analogy long before his 2024 article.) It would be a huge coincidence that it could do so without being true. And that is the point of Putnam’s miracle argument. Thus, contrary to van Fraassen’s suggestion, the mere fact that a theory’s predictive success is why it “sticks around” or “becomes accepted” in the scientific community is not a reason to be skeptical about its truth. ConclusionLet me close by saying something about the fact that empiricists don’t doubt the truth of all scientific theories, just the ones that hypothesize unobservables. In today’s society, this theory is dangerous to espouse publicly. The nuance between being skeptical about all of science, and just the highly technical theories about unobservables, is guaranteed to be lost to the average reader. And there is so much unjustified skepticism and doubt about the findings of science and experts that a headline like “Science Does Not Describe Reality” could easily fuel the anti-science movement, worsen climate change denial and cause the next pandemic.This is why I believe it was important to still respond to van Fraassen’s article, a full two years after he wrote it. Not only, as I have argued, does it represent a philosophically inaccurate view of how scientific reasoning works and what scientific reasoning can do, but it is a dangerous view to boot. It should thus be rejected.
Bats may have first evolved in Europe 65 million years ago
A huge genomic and fossil study suggests bats first evolved in Europe around 65 to 60 million years ago before spreading across the globe. The findings also indicate that flight and echolocation emerged near the beginning of bat evolution, potentially helping explain how bats became one of the most successful mammal groups on Earth.
Scientists Say Earth Needs to Shrink by Billions of People By 2200. But I Think We’re Already Screwed.
Fossil fuels have hidden the true cost of 8 billion people. Here’s what could happen when the illusion ends.
Something Took Wing in Paleocene Sunsets
More than 56 million years ago, something took wing. Now, combining ancient fossils with genomes from living species, researchers are rewriting the bat family tree, and tracing these creatures toward their mysterious beginnings in Paleocene Europe.
Behind the Science with Paleontologist and Curator of Dinosauria Dr. Matthew Carrano
Is the 21st Century the real Age of Dinosaurs? Today, more paleontologists are discovering more dinosaur fossils from more places in the world than ever before. Our understanding of these amazing creatures has leapt forward while their popularity has surged. Museums sit at the junction of these phenomena. The Smithsonian has been a center for dinosaur research for more than a century, and its collections include many iconic and scientifically important specimens. Today, Smithsonian researchers continue to discover new dinosaurs, but they are also uncovering more information about the ones we already know and love. New techniques and approaches allow them to investigate aspects of dinosaur biology, ecology, and evolution in ways that would have been inconceivable to early paleontologists. The result is an ever-improving understanding of dinosaurs as living, breathing, and thriving animals. This month, go behind the science with paleontologist Dr. Matthew Carrano, Curator of Dinosauria at the National Museum of Natural History as he discusses new discoveries at home and abroad, in the field and in the museum. Registration is encouraged. Space is filled on a first come first served basis. ---------------- About the Series: Behind the Science A monthly after-hours series featuring NMNH scientists and researchers Each month, join the National Museum of Natural History for the new series, Behind the Science, where NMNH researchers share insights into their latest discoveries and explore the fascinating questions driving their work—from the origins of life to the future of our planet. Come learn what’s happening behind the scenes and how science shapes our understanding of the natural world. Programs take place in Q?rius, the Coralyn W. Whitney Science Education Center. Topics and speakers announced on a rolling basis, but save the dates now!
Scientists find lunar 'magnetic fossil' in Chang'e-6 samples
The moon no longer has a global magnetic field, but lunar rocks and soils still contain records of ancient magnetism. Studying the magnetic minerals in these samples can help scientists understand how ...
A 9-Million-Year-Old Tooth Just Challenged What Scientists Thought They Knew About the Atacama Desert
Scientists were surprised to discover a fossilized tooth from a capybara that lived almost 9 million years ago in what is now northern Chile’s Atacama Desert. Chile’s Atacama Desert is an unlikely place to find traces of capybaras, the world’s largest living rodents, whose lives revolve around water and wetland plants. Yet a fossilized tooth
Scientists Discovered a New Species in a 309-Million-Year-Old Museum Fossil and Named It After Their Moms
Jeanerpeton was long labeled as another species, highlighting how much ancient amphibian diversity may have gone unnoticed.
Shelby County Health Department Seeks Permit Program Funding as Air Pollution Falls
"By emissions going down, so [is] our revenue."
Fossil-fuel firms in line for billions in benefits after answering Trump’s donation call
Senators’ report says taxpayers face higher bills after ‘bargain’ between president and major polluters
A teacher spotted two unusually large footprints. They turned out to be a first for science - WSVN 7News | Miami News, Weather, Sports
(CNN) — Kent Hups set out one morning on a research expedition in the famed Hell Creek Formation, a series of fossil-rich sedimentary rock layersRead More
Can a living fossil learn new tricks? Meet the nautilus!
With poor eyesight, the chambered nautilus hunts by smell. Explore how a blue-light experiment revealed mysteries of the cephalopod’s memory.
Earth's first bats didn't come from where we thought, landmark genetic study reveals
In the largest study of its kind to date, researchers compiled data from 103 bat genomes and 44 fossils to rewrite the bat family tree and determine where these animals first evolved.
New Study Illuminates Bats’ Murky Origins
The largest analysis of bat genomes and fossils suggests that the first bats emerged in Europe roughly 65 million years ago and that echolocation evolved early.
Scientists link fossil fuel producers to the West’s worsening water shortages » Yale Climate Connections
A new study blames 122 companies for contributing to severe drought in the region.
How Saudi oil scientists ended up working on the world’s most important climate reports
Guardian investigation reveals fossil fuel links of IPCC authors, with experts declaring the body’s conflict of interest policy ‘not fit for purpose’
High School Teacher Discovers First-Ever Adult T. Rex Trackway While Fossil Hunting In US
Hups, a teacher at Northglenn High School, also became a co-author of the study published in the Journal of Vertebrate Palaeontology.
Dinosaur fossils, the latest obsession of the ultra-rich: ‘Some enjoy knowing only they can admire it’
Paleontological pieces are fetching millions alongside works of art, a trend experts worry will hamper research
A 66-million-year-old tooth reveals T. rex was nearly as warm as a human
Chemical clues preserved inside fossilized T. rex teeth reveal that the dinosaur maintained a body temperature of about 97 degrees Fahrenheit, almost identical to humans. The finding provides direct evidence that the giant predator was warm-blooded, helping explain how it stayed active and survived in chilly environments as far north as Alaska.
London Science Museum Cuts Ties With BP After Decades Of Campaigning
The London Science Museum has cut ties with BP after decades of campaigning and pressure from activists, scientists, and schools
Environmental and Public Health Groups Sue Over the Trump EPA’s Latest Attempt to Bolster Fossil Fuels
Environmental and public health groups are suing the Trump administration over its most recent move to eliminate protections against climate-warming pollution. The Environmental Protection Agency announced a plan on Monday, finalized in the Federal Register on Thursday, to revoke most of a Biden-era rule to limit greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel power plants. The […]
What's behind 'one of paleontology's most enduring enigmas'?
New research suggests that Paleodictyon — honeycomb-shaped formations perhaps sketched by da Vinci — are not made by soft-bodied creatures.
T. rex had a body temperature similar to our own, study finds
Using fossilized teeth, scientists have finally taken the T. rex's temperature — and it wasn't too different from our own.
This week in science: T. rex footprints, solar 'superflares,' and benefits of reading
Paleontologists have discovered the tracks of a giant — the fossilized footprints of T. rex. Plus, solar "superflares" and the brain benefits of reading in this week's Short Wave science news roundup.
The T. rex had a body temperature similar to our own, study finds
Using fossilized teeth, scientists have finally taken the T. rex’s temperature — and it wasn’t too different from our own.
The T. rex had a body temperature similar to our own, study finds
Using fossilized teeth, scientists have finally taken the T. rex’s temperature — and it wasn’t too different from our own.
What Does the Science of Climate Change Really Look Like?
Editor’s Note: This is the second in a three-part series on how the Right should think about environmental and climate policy. Read Chris Barnard on Reclaiming Environmental Policy from the Left. More than a decade ago, the world’s governments negotiated and signed the Paris Climate Agreement, committing to hold global warming well below 2 degrees Celsius. In the following years, climate had immense cultural power. Greta Thunberg emerged. Fortune 500 companies established net-zero plans. The U.S. got the Inflation Reduction Act. Then the pendulum swung back. President Donald Trump returned to the Oval Office, speaking of green energy as a “scam” and carbon footprints as a “hoax” and on all matters of international policy emphasizing bilateral engagement and power over globalism and cooperation. The technology companies that had been at the forefront of net-zero pledges and green leadership discovered the importance of all-of-the-above power to their visions for artificial intelligence and began quietly postponing or removing their targets. On the left side of the political spectrum, rising concerns about inflation and cost pushed climate lower down in the stated priorities of voters and stump speeches of politicians. The moment is ripe for a reset on the politics of climate change and for conservatives especially to chart a course that acknowledges and addresses the real challenges in plausible ways. So what should we think about climate change as we enter a post-peak climate era? If it is neither an apocalypse nor a hoax, what will hold up as a durable view of climate change? And how does it project onto the concerns and priorities of the right-of-center’s emerging coalition? New to Commonplace_? Subscribe below to get the magazine in your inbox._ Subscribe A Solid Foundation As the politics and economics of climate careened over the past ten years, the physics carried on regardless. In 2015, the year the Paris Climate Agreement was adopted, the world emitted 41.2 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide. By 2025, emissions had risen only 2.4%, to 42.2 gigatonnes, because falling emissions from land use offset increasing emissions from fossil fuels. But slow growth in annual emissions is not rapid decline, let alone net-zero, so carbon dioxide kept accumulating in the atmosphere, going from 399 to 426 parts per million. Global temperature kept rising too, from about 1.1 degrees Celsius above the 1850–1900 average in 2015, to 1.4 degrees above it in 2025. None of this should surprise anyone. Even most prominent skeptics, like the authors of the 2025 report commissioned by the Trump administration’s Department of Energy, accept the basic physics. Carbon dioxide added to the atmosphere at industrial volumes accumulates and traps heat that would otherwise escape to space. That heat warms the upper ocean and increases temperatures at the surface. Increased ocean heat and melting of land ice cause sea levels to rise. Changes in the climate become noticeable to us as subtle shifts in temperature and precipitation, seasons arriving early or late, changes in the surrounding ecosystem, and weather extremes. The much more meaningful debate is not about whether these things are happening, but about what it all means for human societies. (While it is a proxy measure of overall risk, no one experiences global surface temperature.) This debate invokes at least three interesting questions: how much today’s warming is showing up in regional climate trends, how much more warming we should anticipate, and how extreme weather events can be understood in the context of climate change. Recent scientific advances give us new insights into each of these, but there is still much to learn. This is the context in which the next generation of conservative leaders will be the first to deal with significant climate change as a fact, not a forecast. It will be with them for their entire careers. Our evolving scientific picture of climate change will come from weather and climate records stretching further into the past, new kinds of observations in the present, better modeling tools for the future, and simply more time to observe the emergence of climate signals and their tangible effects on ecosystems and communities in the United States and around the world. The policy landscape will be shaped by not only the impacts of changes in the climate, but also by the ways in which societies respond and by the emergence of new technologies for both altering the trajectory of emissions and adapting to new climate realities. Global climate records now show the fingerprints of warming in different phenomena around much of the world. The IPCC, in its most recent assessment report, documents warming trends over all land regions, even as natural variability adds substantial variance to local trends. And the highest temperature extremes have become more intense and frequent, almost everywhere, since the 1950s. Scientists are highly confident that these changes are attributable to human influence. But confidence in detecting trends and attributing them to human influence degrades across heavy precipitation events; drought trends are heterogeneous and not attributable to human activity with great confidence. For hurricanes, tornadoes, and other severe storms there is even less confidence in trends or their relationship to climate change. In general, a fair summary of the evidence is that for well-observed phenomena, like surface temperature or heavy rainfall, with a clear relationship to warming, our multidecadal observations are consistent with human influence overcoming natural variability over long time periods and extremes increasing. For regions that are sampled more sparsely, or phenomena with a higher noise-to-signal ratio, we will need to observe them longer to understand the magnitude of the climate signal or improve dynamical understanding using models and observations together. But for Climate For those who can’t wait, we also have new techniques that attempt to understand the role climate change has in influencing particular extreme events. When the climate is changing and disaster strikes, it is natural to ask whether that disaster was somehow “caused” by climate change. For scientists and policymakers acting in good faith, answering that question helps develop a more accurate picture of the problem, how it may be getting worse, and what preparations we should be making to respond to it. It may, at some point, give some weight to how liability is assigned by courts or adaptation funding is distributed by society. But how we ask this question is extremely important. It is easy to get the analysis wrong by discounting the role that meteorology plays. As meteorologist Theodore Shepherd explained in a clear 2016 review of climate attribution methods, “if a weather or climate event is truly extreme in the present climate, then perforce it requires unusual meteorological conditions, which means that climate change is at most a contributing factor.” Share Scientists have two ways to probe climate as a contributing factor, both of which have entered media coverage of extreme weather events. One asks a probabilistic question: How much more likely is a particular event (e.g., a temperature record over a particular area) amid global warming? The answer involves using historical records and computer simulations to estimate the likelihood of such an event in both a changed and a preindustrial climate. The findings are less about the specific event, and more about events of that nature. The other question is: How has the changed climate affected the specific event in question? Here, scientists try to understand what a similar event would have looked like in the preindustrial climate. This is sometimes called the storyline approach, where the story is the specific meteorological details of the event. These methods offer ways to test the intuition of scientists about real weather extremes. In late June and early July of 2021, a persistent high-pressure ridge, or heat dome, set up over the Pacific Northwest and an extraordinary heat wave affected the area from Oregon to British Columbia. For six days, it shattered temperature records across the region and hundreds died from heat-related causes, in an area where such high, and persistently high, temperatures were well outside of experience and many live without air conditioning. Scientists have studied its connection to climate change using multiple approaches. This specific event was created by a rare combination of meteorological factors, a strong high-pressure ridge created the conditions for extreme heat, which occurred on top of higher average temperatures in the region from global warming. Probabilistic analyses showed that climate change increased the likelihood of such an event by at least 8-fold to more than 100-fold. One standout example found that such an event had effectively zero probability of occurring in the preindustrial climate. The enormous range in these assessments reflects how hard it is to estimate probabilities of events at the tail of the historical record. Estimates of the effect on the temperature of the event are more clustered. A recent review paper documents how multiple methodologies have found a positive influence, roughly 1-2 degrees Celsius of an anomaly that exceeded 15 degrees, of climate change on the temperature magnitude of the event. Multiple studies have investigated and found some positive influence of climate change in other extreme events. Attribution studies found climate likely increased the heavy rainfall that accompanied Hurricane Helene in North Carolina and surrounding regions in 2024. The extensive fires that struck Los Angeles in 2025 illustrate how the causal chain can become messy, though. Studies do detect a positive influence of climate on the event’s likelihood, but while climate change likely contributed to underlying aridity, it would not have played a role in the heavy winds or land practices that preceded disaster. These event attribution studies will become more common for extreme, or damaging, weather events. They can be produced quickly, and often are reported before peer review. As the Pacific Northwest heatwave example shows, when multiple methods converge on a positive attribution, the finding should probably carry some weight even if you have to be careful about accepting the results from a single study. I expect that as climate change proceeds and the climate thus departs further from a preindustrial counterfactual, the influence will become more detectable across a variety of extreme events and more easily identified. This will be used to cast blame, but can also be used to inform how communities and society adapt to ongoing change. We May Still Be Surprised One positive development, insofar as less climate change is better, has been that our central estimates for future climate change should probably be revised downward. Mostly, that is because the high-end warmings that scientists regularly analyzed about ten to 20 years ago, driven by high emissions throughout the twenty-first century, now appear to be somewhere between unlikely and impossible. At one time, the upper end of mainstream climate projections extended well into 4 to 6 degrees Celsius of warming by the end of this century, which, models suggest, would have wrought enormous real-world damage. Current energy and policy trends now point toward 2.5 or 3 degrees. Damages and risks are commonly modeled as increasing steeply with more warming, so this is already a better-than-previously-expected outcome for the climate (which is independent of the physical response to emissions). But we should maintain a wide range for plausible outcomes and prepare for the possibility of being surprised. Emissions trajectories are subject to deep uncertainty, the physical climate response is still developing, and whatever change occurs in the climate will then be mediated through unpredictable economic, social, and political institutions. Over the past decade, the pace of warming surprised some keen observers and appeared to accelerate, though not yet outside the range of expectation provided by climate models. The reasons for that apparent acceleration are being actively studied (as was the apparent pause in warming from 1998 to 2012), but no single driver has emerged. Some blame it on the El Niño, variability which would have no bearing on climate. Some think it is a result of factories in East Asia and global shipping fleets cutting aerosol emissions, which in the strongest version of the argument would indicate higher climate sensitivity to carbon-dioxide emissions. Others are more measured, not yet ready to draw solid conclusions as to whether climate projections require revision. We will have to see. Long-Term Thinking Climate change asks us to think over long time scales. But the pace of human-driven warming is compressing a large global change into a century. Changing weather patterns and extreme events are already causing adjustment costs and damages and will do more. Adaptation will help, but it is not free. For some communities, these costs will erode livelihoods and well-being, and may force migration. Are we prepared for large-scale managed retreats in the United States? Thankfully, American wealth, geographical diversity, and moderate climates may leave us better prepared than many around the world. But wealthy countries can still suffer serious disruption from narrowly concentrated costs, even if they appear entirely manageable in aggregate. Readers of Commonplace are familiar with the challenges of rapidly adapting to economic forces. The displacement that came from the China Shock is barely perceptible in aggregate GDP and employment data, but it affected millions of people and those people were far less mobile than economic models tended to assume. Deindustrialization rippled through the nation with enormous effects for not only our economic vitality, but also our national security. The forces surrounding climate change may not be so different; the world gets richer and must accept some diffuse costs. Those may be modest overall, but cause all manner of unpredictable effects with which policymakers must cope. In the case of the China Shock, our faith in a growing pie served us poorly. We’ll need to do better on climate. Leave a comment
Fossil tooth analysis confirms Tyrannosaurus rex was warm-blooded
By using fossil teeth, scientists measured T. rex’s body temperature for the first time. They found evidence of an active, warm-blooded predator.
Scientists finally know the body temperature of the Tyrannosaurus rex
Using a fossil-based thermometer on the dinosaur's teeth, researchers have revealed that the animal's body temperature was comparable to a human's.
A 240-million-year-old fossil just changed the dinosaur timeline
A newly identified 240-million-year-old animal from Tanzania is forcing scientists to rethink the early dinosaur timeline. Dinodontosaurus isiyavamanda belongs to a group previously known only from South America, linking fossil deposits on the two continents. That connection suggests Tanzania’s supposed oldest dinosaur fossils may actually be millions of years younger than previously thought.
Chinese scientists build world’s smallest CT scanner, weighing just 6kg
Compact and portable device can be used to analyse fossils and archaeological relics in the field, developer says.
UV light reveals possible camouflage on a 125-million-year-old crocodile
A 125-million-year-old crocodile fossil has revealed preserved skin, possible sensory organs, sophisticated respiratory structures, and an unexpected pattern on its tail. Ultraviolet light exposed alternating bands that may represent ancient camouflage, potentially preserving the oldest known coloration in a crocodylomorph.
First Diplodocus fossils found outside of United States
This huge guy was 83-feet long and a member of the longest land animals ever known.
Opinion | Mary Peltola’s Energy Politics Fits Alaska. Democrats Need Her.
To win in states such as Alaska, the party needs a faction that can live with fossil fuels.
EPA poised to repeal carbon standards for coal, gas power plants
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is expected to formally rescind carbon pollution standards for fossil fuel-fired power plants as soon as Monday, according to people familiar with the matter. The
Data Center Boom Brings Health Hazards, Former EPA Officials Warn
Experts warn of dangers from fossil fuel expansion and federal carveouts for the AI industry.
Data Center Boom Brings Health Hazards, Former EPA Officials Warn
Experts warn of dangers from fossil fuel expansion and federal carveouts for the AI industry.
'Oddly shaped rock' unearthed in California turns out to be 'immaculate' mastodon molar
A field survey in San Mateo County, California, has revealed the fossilized tooth of an adult Pacific mastodon, an ice-age giant that was probably native to the West Coast.
One of science’s biggest mysteries could be solved by fossilised feather in dinosaur dung
By studying this feather, researchers have found clues that help explain why birds are the only group of dinosaurs that survived the mass extinction
A fossil feather from the age of dinosaurs may explain why only some birds survived
An extremely well preserved fossil feather could reveal why some birds survived the dinosaur-killing asteroid, and others did not.
The First Denisovan Arm Bone Offers a New Clue to What These Ancient and Mysterious Humans Looked Like
New fossils, tools and butchered bones put an elusive human lineage into everyday life.
How titanosaurs hatched eggs in cooler climates
Fossil eggshells believed to be from some of the biggest dinosaurs that ever lived have been found in a surprisingly cool climate far from the equator. But those titanosaurs were too big to sit on their eggs. Microscopic evidence shows what they did instead to keep the eggs warm enough to hatch.
A 300,000-year-old jawbone from China refuses to fit neatly into the human family tree — and a reconstructed million-year-old skull is now suggesting our major ancestral branches split hundreds of thousands of years earlier than we thought
The fossil record is forcing scientists to rewrite when and where human ancestry split into separate branches, upending decades of assumptions about our evolutionary path.
Meet Lindsey Stallworth: A 16-Year-Old Who Accidentally Discovered A 34-Million-Year-Old Whale On Her Family's Alabama Farm - Futura-Sciences
The thing that identified the animal was a single tooth, and it is the same feature that corrected the same mistake in Alabama nearly two centuries ago. Lindsey Stallworth had been picking up shark teeth and fossil shells on her family’s timber property in Monroe County, Alabama, since she was...
On Clean Air Day, the EU Healthy Air Coalition is leading a call, joined by over 30 health organisations, for a fossil fuel phase-out to protect health
European and global health organisations call on EU leaders to swiftly phase out fossil fuels.
Scientists reconstructed a Wyoming forest from 56-million-year-old fossil leaves; it lost about 60% of its canopy during ancient warming and took more than 100,000 years to recover
Deep in the rock record of Wyoming, a layer of fossil leaves tells a quiet but powerful story about what happens to forests when the planet warms rapidly. About 56 million years ago, during a spike in global temperatures known as the Paleocene Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM), a lush subtropical forest that once covered the region lost roughly 60 percent of its canopy.
'Winning the lottery': Preserved fossil tissue reveals shocking cause of death for largest T. Rex ever found
It got Tyrannosaurus wrecked.
KFile: Swing-seat Democrat deleted posts envisioning ‘a world without police and prisons’
William Lawrence, the Democratic nominee in one of the country’s most competitive House races in Michigan, deleted hundreds of old social media posts in which he embraced police and prison abolition, called for nationalizing fossil-fuel companies to end their production, attacked moderate Democrats and argued for a “fundamental overhaul” of the Constitution.
Fossilized tissue reveals largest known T. rex died from broken rib
The blood vessels around the wound that killed Scotty were preserved for 66 million years.
Scientists Recreated the Long-Lost Chirps of Jurassic Insects. Listen to the Simulated Soundscape of 165 Million Years Ago
With artificial intelligence and careful modeling of fossilized wings, researchers reproduced how some extinct, katydid-like insects might have made noise
Ancient “living fossils” may reveal how complex life began
A newly discovered microbe living inside ancient stromatolite communities may offer a rare look at how complex life first emerged. Researchers captured the first direct images of an Asgard archaeon physically connected to a bacterium, with the two microbes appearing to exchange nutrients and other compounds. Scientists think similar partnerships billions of years ago may have helped produce the first complex cells.
N.Y.’s plan to charge fossil-fuel producers for climate change struck down
A federal judge ruled that the sweeping law reaches beyond a state’s responsibility and into an area of federal interest.
N.Y.’s plan to charge fossil-fuel producers for climate change struck down
A federal judge ruled that the sweeping law reaches beyond a state’s responsibility and into an area of federal interest.
Business Council applauds, State looking at appeal, after Climate Superfund Act ruling
A U.S. District Court Judge blocked New York's 2024 Climate Change Superfund Act this week, saying the State could not impose financial penalties to fossil fue
Fossil Fuel Companies Worsen Water Crisis
Half of long-term Western U.S. water issues are tied to fossil fuel producers, cement makers … Scented cleaning products can pollute interior air … and more.
Bizarre Fossil Turns Out to Be a 24-Legged Insect Science Somehow Missed
A huge evolutionary puzzle piece just landed in our laps.
Bizarre Fossil Turns Out to Be a 24-Legged Insect Science Somehow Missed
A huge evolutionary puzzle piece just landed in our laps.
'An exciting surprise': Ancient shark 'graveyard' uncovered in Egyptian desert
Fossilized teeth from at least seven shark species have been discovered in the Egyptian desert, hinting at its complex, watery past.
Hold on to your butts! This iconic ‘Jurassic Park’ fossil just sold for $400,000 at auction
An iconic ‘Jurassic Park’ fossil prop from the 1993 movie just sold for $400,000 at auction.
El Niño climate patterns supercharged by burning of fossil fuels, study finds
‘Godzilla’ event currently brewing could push 50 million people into acute hunger before the end of next year
Once upon a time, insects had 24 legs
A many-legged oddball from long ago helps fill a major gap in the fossil record — and hints at how insects ended up with just six legs.
Scientists Reconstruct Sound of Jurassic Insects
Using lasers, computer models and AI, researchers reconstructed the calls of 165-million-year-old relatives of modern crickets and katydids from fossilized wing fragments found in China.
Dinosaurs on Display at Gateway Science Museum Spark Wonder for All Ages
A new hands-on exhibit pairs replicas of prehistoric giants with real fossils being restored in Gateway's demo lab.
3 Ways Scientists Can Help Hold Major Polluters Accountable Under the Trump Administration
The impacts of climate change have been on full display this Danger Season, from record-breaking heatwaves to devastating wildfires, making evident the urgent need for accountability for the harms caused by supercharged extreme events and long-term changes. These harms have been inescapable across the western US, particularly when it comes to water. As fossil-fueled climate […]
Scientists reveal how proof of alien life could change everything tomorrow - Futura-Sciences
The approach depends on location. Within our solar system, probes sample rock, ice, and water on the ground. Farther out, astronomers have only starlight to go on. Close to home: the hunt for physical evidence NASA’s Perseverance rover has spent years scouring Mars for fossil biosignatures, chemical or geological traces...