SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY
Search headlines
Find the stories shaping the conversation.
Results for " question " 4,382 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle
Most Patients Want Docs To Break Cancer News Directly, Not Through Portal Messaging
By Dennis Thompson HealthDay ReporterFRIDAY, June 25, 2026 (HealthDay News) — People are becoming more comfortable communicating with their doctor through clinics’ patient portals. Folks use the portals to ask their doc questions and even to review the results of recent medical tests. But there are ...
Massachusetts marijuana legalization repeal question battle heats up
Cannabis industry leaders are urging businesses to take the initiative seriously after many previously dismissed its chances.
Making Our Own Luck
We are cross-posting a piece that former NIH official Kris Willis wrote for Macroscience. Kris is now the President and Founder of the Woodley Park Institute, for which I’m a board member. Picking winners or hedging bets? Federal science agencies have long wrestled with the question of how to ensure their billions of dollars of grants and contracts result in maximum benefits for Americans. On the surface, it might seem that a goal-oriented, interventionist style of management would be the best policy: prioritize our most pressing problems and distribute funding accordingly.This top-down strategy creates a unique hazard, though: bad choices can send resources in the wrong direction, resulting in slow progress that impedes the delivery of tangible benefits to citizens. Moreover, if decision makers pursue an applied advance when the underlying scientific principles remain poorly understood, they risk costly failures and a loss of support for the research enterprise at large. Examples include Nixon’s 1971 War on Cancer, undertaken on the premise that a cure could be achieved in less than a decade, the drive to build an operational commercial fusion plant by the mid-1990s, and the National Plan to Address Alzheimer’s Disease, which failed to produce the effective treatments and prevention strategies promised by 2025. The contrasting laissez-faire approach is to hedge your bets. If the path to an advance is impossible to predict, then the wisest choice might be to distribute funding to as widely as possible. The main risk of this strategy is that spreading funding thinly may limit the resources available to the most promising research, resulting in the same negative outcomes as the interventionist approach: limited support for the most promising topics, slow progress, and delayed returns. In reality, at science agencies like the National Science Foundation and National Institutes of Health, program managers navigate between these two extremes, setting some funds aside to target high-priority areas and using the rest to cover the widest possible range of meritorious proposals. This middle path seems like the most rational way to proceed, but it still requires making choices. How much should be set aside for high priority topics? What should those topics be? How should we define merit? Expert opinion can provide a helpful guide, but leading experts can have remarkably different opinions about what matters and what should be prioritized. Moreover, experts and administrators alike can be risk averse, giving an edge to high-profile, well-established concepts. What’s really needed is a data-driven framework to help guide decision-making, one that doesn’t simply repackage prestige or incumbency. Recognizing breakthroughs years in advance Many breakthroughs fail to attract funding or recognition at the earliest stages of development. Katalin Karikó, for example, spent years struggling to win grants for work on mRNA that would eventually win her and Drew Weissman a Nobel Prize. Similar stories can be told about Jim Allison’s groundbreaking studies leading to the development of cancer immunotherapy, Stan Pruisner’s demonstration that prions can self-replicate without DNA, or Robin Warren and Barry Marshall’s proof that Helicobacter pylori, not stress, causes ulcers. Yet at some point, the scientific community recognizes and responds to transformative breakthroughs like these. How does that change happen? And what if science funders could identify the areas that are on the cusp of a breakthrough? Those questions led my collaborators and me to study how scientists responded to past breakthroughs. Based on patterns in that data, we developed a means of predicting future breakthroughs, using biomedicine as a proof of concept. It’s worth taking a moment to describe how our approach works. Briefly, our prediction process begins by grouping the 18 million or so peer-reviewed papers in PubMed, the authoritative database of biomedical research, into roughly 50,000 unique topics. A small subset of these topics are so widely acclaimed as breakthroughs that they have been recognized with a major prize like a Nobel or a Lasker Award. We theorized that studying the development of these outliers over time, especially before they gained acclaim, was the key to identifying future instances of them. After defining topics, we chose 21 representative breakthroughs and asked what they looked like before they won prestigious prizes. To answer that question, we re-ran our topic-mapping algorithm repeatedly, winding back the clock one year each time, stringing together the years to follow the progress of each field as it grew and advanced. We found that in each case, the years leading up to a discovery followed a pattern: a burst of papers on a new, rapidly evolving topic, many of which quickly became influential. These characteristics—the percent of papers that are new, the percentage of papers that are brought in from other topics, and the influence of each individual paper—can all be measured separately for any given topic. Together, they act as a predictive signal that is detectable an average of five years before a transformative discovery is made, and up to thirty years before the discovery receives a major prize. Scanning the current research landscape for topics that display this signal allows us to predict what work will likely produce a future breakthrough. Each year we analyzed includes four or five signals, a number that appears to have remained constant across a twenty year time frame. In their classic work on the sociology of science, Bruno Latour and Steve Woolgar established that the desire to participate in a major discovery is an important motivator for scientists as they consider whether they should take up (or abandon) a research problem. Although further work is needed, the simplest explanation for our results is that this behavior is widespread enough to detect at scale. A foundational advance, or something like it, draws the attention of scientists and causes them to change the direction of their research. They vote with their feet, staking their own reputation and careers by publishing on and citing the new idea. That upswell of interest is the foundation of our breakthrough signal. What kind of research does our model identify as a breakthrough? After building a model based on the patterns in our 21 preselected breakthroughs, we tested it by identifying all early signals of discovery from 1994 through 1997. Of the 18 signals we found in that time period, 17 can be traced forward in time to a breakthrough. Examples include super-resolution fluorescence microscopy (see the image above), the directed evolution of proteins and enzymes (Chemistry Nobel, 2018), and sequencing the human genome (National Medal of Science, 2008). The discovery of the role of leptin signaling in obesity is a particularly interesting case study. Around 1950, scientists noticed the existence of a type of lab mouse that suffered from a unique inherited form of obesity. When given the freedom to choose their own diet, these mice ate more than normal and preferred food that was high in fat. Researchers had few clues as to why the animals overate; early experiments pointed to the existence of a soluble ob factor found circulating in the bloodstream that regulated appetite, but its identity was unknown. In 1994, Jeffrey Friedman and colleagues identified and sequenced the ob gene, noting that the protein it encoded appeared to fit the profile of a circulating factor. A year later, a trio of high-profile publications demonstrated that ob was a hormone that regulated body weight and fat deposition by regulating appetite. One of these was co-authored by Friedman, who christened it leptin from the ancient Greek word for thin. Using our model, the data from 1996 make it clear this advance would become a breakthrough. Scientists had flocked to study the biology of the new hormone, generating the flurry of new papers and citations required to produce a signal. One of these demonstrated that serum leptin concentrations reflected the amount of adipose tissue in the human body, providing clinical validation of the earlier mouse studies. Before the identification of leptin, scientists were unable to point to a specific molecule that controlled appetite and adiposity, so that it was impossible to rule out non-physiological causes of obesity; its characterization fundamentally changed our concept of weight gain. In 2010, Friedman and fellow pioneer Douglas Coleman were awarded a Lasker for the discovery. Our work also identifies breakthroughs in clinical practice and behavioral and social sciences, even though these areas are less likely to draw the attention of major prize committees. One example that falls into this category is the introduction of endovascular aneurysm repair, a minimally invasive surgical procedure for the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm, a leading cause of death among Americans over the age of 65. Relative to the previous standard of care, it reduces in-hospital mortality by almost four-fold. In 2017, Timothy Chuter received the American College of Surgeons’ prestigious Jacobsen Innovation award for his multiple refinements to the technique. Another under-recognized breakthrough identified by our model is the development of standardized survey instruments to assess the quality of life for HIV+ patients. The antiretroviral cocktails introduced in the mid-1990s reduced AIDS mortality, but treatment came with serious side effects. The new evaluations showed that patients whose disease progressed had worse physical functioning than Americans with other chronic diseases, while those who were asymptomatic maintained a health-related quality of life on par with the overall US population. This evidence made it possible for patients and activists to argue that even in the absence of a total cure, and in spite of the side effects, alleviation of symptoms was a worthwhile priority for clinicians. My colleagues and I have failed to identify any significant recognition for the physicians and health policy experts who pioneered this advance, although in 2016, researchers called for the World Health Organization to set targets for good health-related quality of life as part of its framework to end the AIDS pandemic. From forecasting to funding How should science funders use our predictions? Any serious discussion of what we should do with this new capability needs to begin with an understanding of its limitations. We can’t (and shouldn’t) invest all of our resources in the small number of topics predicted to produce breakthroughs. Innovative new fields are born from existing ones; they rarely arise de novo. If funders don’t maintain a diverse portfolio, the breakthroughs of tomorrow will have no antecedents. Think of this as eating the seed corn, or killing the goose that lays the golden egg. There are also multiple goals of funding beyond basic scientific discovery, including translating discoveries into clinical practice, developing new technologies, supporting economic development, and training new scientists. The investments needed to accomplish these goals are likely different from those required to support emerging breakthroughs. Finally, we must be aware that we may not capture every instance of a breakthrough. The concept is fuzzy, and not every significant discovery is recognized with a major award. Further, breakthroughs are rare, meaning that our dataset is, by necessity, small. This makes formal estimates of accuracy challenging. Although our overall success rate appears to be high, any one signal may turn out to be a false positive. We found one apparent example: the development of the third generation COX-2 inhibitors, Vioxx and Celebrex, which were much celebrated in the early 2000s as effective but non-addictive pain relievers, meets all the algorithmic criteria of a breakthrough. Five years after it received FDA approval, researchers demonstrated that Vioxx was associated with serious cardiovascular complications, and the manufacturer voluntarily pulled the drug from the market. Celebrex remains available, although like other NSAIDs, it carries an FDA warning for increased cardiovascular risk. Decision makers who were overly focused on the breakthrough potential of this research might have wasted substantial resources nurturing an area that ultimately proved to be a failure—but so would those who relied on expert opinion at the time. That said, the potential benefits of funding the next mRNA vaccine or cancer immunotherapy years earlier than we might have are large. When we can’t assume the outcome of an action, it’s worth conducting an experiment. Can targeted support for areas that are poised to produce a breakthrough increase the return on scientific investment without cannibalizing future advances? With the necessary administrative infrastructure in place, conducting this experiment would be straightforward. First, identify all the breakthrough signals between 2018 and 2023, select half at random, and commit to a decade of investment. For biomedicine, a six year window should yield about 30 topics with the potential to produce a breakthrough. Providing strong support to half of these might be accomplished for $300 million a year. That’s roughly half of the recent annual budget of the NIH Common Fund or around 20% of the fiscal year 2025 budget for ARPA-H. After five years, then again at ten, compare to see which group — the one that was actively managed, or the control — produced more breakthroughs, and on what timescale. Although we used biomedicine as an example, the same experiment could just as well be run for physics, materials science, or any other discipline. Any attempt to undertake such an experiment should keep three points top of mind. First, we can predict the topic of future breakthroughs, but the people and vision for how to move the work forward are still important. In practice, this means success requires active program managers with the expertise to develop the science and the authority to do so, including by recruiting investigators. Second, we would be wise to learn from the failures of past attempts to fund transformative research. High among these are funding modestly repackaged work, confusing the genuinely novel with the merely unfamiliar, and relying too much on incumbent investigators. All of these risks can be mitigated by thoroughly and intelligently integrating high quality data into portfolio management. Finally, we need to have patience. Even with strong funding support, producing a breakthrough takes time. If supporting breakthroughs is the best way to nurture the birth of new fields, we also need to accurately describe and properly manage the other two stages, so that we invest wisely throughout the productive lifetime of ideas and divest once they reach the point of diminishing returns. We would benefit from more study of all of these phases, especially the transition from one to another. More research could answer questions like: When does a breakthrough become an established field? How do the availability of funding, the size and characteristics of the available workforce, and the accumulation of evidence that disagrees with prevailing models affect a field’s decline? Exactly how do old ideas give birth to new ones, and can we speed up the process? The more we understand about the dynamics of scientific progress, the better we can maximize the odds that our curiosity leads to results. I’d call that finding a way to make our own luck.
Orange County Politics and Public Health Tangle in Sacramento
A debate over if supervisors should be on the board of CalOptima is opening broader questions on politics in healthcare.
Gillings-supported center helps public health teams prioritize infectious disease risks, from measles to the World Cup - UNC Gillings School of Global Public Health
June 25, 2026 When public health workers prepare for infectious disease threats, the question is rarely whether risk exists. It is where to focus first.
Texas Democrats head to convention with optimism, but questions about November remain
The Texas Democratic Convention begins Thursday in Corpus Christi. The three-day convention features several national and statewide figures in the party — this while polls show Democratic candidate James Talarico essentially even with his Republican opponent for U.S. Senate, Attorney General Ken Paxton.
David P. O'Brien
About five years ago, David P. O'Brien had a comfortable position at Marsh & McLennan Cos., where he held the top post at the financial giant's Louisville, Ky., office. Despite the lofty rank, Mr. O'Brien found himself longing to be at a smaller company that had to work a little harder to land business. That desire led him away from Kentucky five years ago and to Cleveland, where he serves as executive vice president at business insurance agency Oswald Cos. "I left Marsh before it was en vogue," he said, referring to layoffs and defections at Marsh over the course of this year that followed accusations of bid rigging at the big firm. Above all, Mr. O'Brien, 38, wanted to work at a company that relied on its inventiveness, rather than its name, for business. He said he has found that at Oswald. "It causes you to be more creative, to be more resourceful," Mr. O'Brien said. For instance, an Oswald client seeking to do business internationally might be directed to the network of offices abroad run by competitors such as Marsh and Aon Risk Services Inc. "We're going to use whatever access into the market that makes the most sense for our clients," he said. Of course, using such a strategy can be dangerous for Oswald if its client decides to further a business relationship with one of the firms Oswald recommended. "That's the obvious question and why it's nontraditional," he said. "I think if we're good, and if we're bringing value to the client, then there's no risk. I'm not threatened by it." Imaginative business solutions of that type made his career move to Oswald from Marsh worthwhile. "It's very much a challenge," he said. "It helps you keep your edge. I'm all for the competition." John Jacunski, currently vice president and corporate controller at York, Pa., paper company PH Gladfelter Co., met Mr. O'Brien four years ago when Mr. Jacunski was at WCI Steel Inc. in Warren. So impressed was he with Mr. O'Brien's work for WCI that Mr. Jacunski has retained the Oswald executive at PH Gladfelter. "He's a young guy for the position he has, but he's done a great job for us," Mr. Jacunski said. Among his roles at Oswald, Mr. O'Brien leads the firm's client retention efforts and also serves as director of its property and casualty group. "You don't have the same human resources," he said of the job jump to Oswald. "You don't have, obviously, the safety net a big company has." But sometimes, it can be difficult to ascertain individual contributions when working at a big company. "I wanted to be able to see the end results of my work and my efforts," Mr. O'Brien said.
How should European scientists respond to the US AI kill switch?
Earlier in June, Europe’s worst fears of technological dependence were confirmed when the White House ordered the AI firm Anthropic to stop non-US citizens using its leading models. This kill-switch moment crystalised anxieties in Brussels that the continent, lagging the US on the creation of leading-edge AI models, is now a technological of vassal of Washington. The shock has specific implications for European scientists and universities. Some governments are now worried that with AI being integrated into labs, Donald Trump now has his finger hovering over an off switch for European science. “Having restrictions on this tool, it can have an impact on our own research,” said France’s research minister, Philippe Baptiste, at the VivaTech conference in Paris on June 18.Baptiste, himself a former academic, said that colleagues in mathematics had recently warned him they were now cut off from leading-edge US models, risking their work. “This model is not available anymore now because of the US restriction, and for the first time this had an impact on mathematics,” a field where large language models (LLMs) are making a significant contribution, said Baptiste. So, should European scientists avoid relying on US models in the future? Or would this be a self-harming overreaction? And how is AI being used in science, anyway? What happened?On June 12, it emerged that Washington, citing cybersecurity concerns, had ordered Anthropic to stop non-US citizens using two models: Claude Mythos 5, and Claude Fable 5, a version of Mythos but with guardrails to prevent abuse. Anthropic said Washington’s concerns were overblown. But forced to follow the order, yet with no way to check who was using the models, the company suddenly shut down access for everyone, US citizens included. There’s still no agreement on how to restore broad access. But last week, Bloomberg reported that select US companies, and the US government, still had access to Mythos despite the ban, but the EU’s cybersecurity agency Enisa had been shut out. Class division of researchersIn the longer term, access outside the US should be restored, said Marcel Salathé, co-director of the AI centre at the Federal Polytechnic School of Lausanne (EPFL), because a permanent restriction would be financially ruinous to US AI firms. “Even Trump will eventually budge to economic pressure,” he said.However, US AI firms might end up operating rather like banks, doing due diligence on users of their leading-edge AI models, he went on.European scientists are unlikely to fall foul of such checks, he said. But having a Chinese postgraduate in their lab, or doing a type of research the US disapproved of, could potentially result in access being denied. “It will create a sort of class division of researchers,” he said. More than frontier modelsHowever, successfully deploying AI in science is about far more than just having access to leading LLMs such as Mythos.Instead, many science-specific tools, most famously Alphafold, which predicts protein folding structures, require “far less” computing power to train than frontier models, well within the capabilities of European supercomputers, according to a recent analysis by the Arq Foundation, a Brussel-based AI think tank. Instead, tools such as Alphafold are possible because certain fields, like protein folding, weather prediction or astronomy, have large, clean, standardised datasets that can be used to train predictive models. Rather than compute, “data is the central constraint for AI for science,” the report says. For example, a less powerful physics model trained on CERN’s data “will be more valuable than the best model without certain data,” said Bengüsu Özcan, author of the report. European advantage?Europe could therefore steal a march by using its scientific data and infrastructure to create models US digital giants cannot. “They might actually match or go even beyond what these big [US] companies are doing,” said Özcan.Indeed, some European start-ups hope to create automated testing labs to create the kind of standardised data that could speed up the discovery of new materials. Materials scientists say there’s currently too little data to train models. AI scientistsHowever, even if the bottleneck for AI in science is often data, rather than compute, being at the mercy of the US for LLM access could still become a problem for European scientists. A new class of “AI scientists” based on leading LLMs is also emerging, Özcan’s report says.Unlike domain-specific tools like Alphafold, these try to automate day-to-day scientific work, by providing an overarching tool that coordinates specific models to synthesise existing literature, generate hypotheses or run analysis of data. The problem for Europe, however, is that these tools are sometimes based on US leading models. Google Deepmind’s AI Co-Scientist, for example, is built on Google’s Gemini LLM. Systematic failureThese scientific automation tools are still in their early stages, and still exhibit “systematic failures on scientific tasks,” Özcan’s report says. One of the problems is that the messy, day-to-day process of scientific discovery is largely not documented, meaning LLMs don’t have a good source of data to learn how scientists actually work. Meanwhile, some tasks, such as literature synthesis, don’t typically require access to leading edge models.However, the performance of AI scientific assistants could improve as companies such as Google pour resources into developing them. Rely on US“Unfortunately, for scientific assistants, there is not much we can do right now except rely on US frontier AI,” said Antoine Bosselut, a natural language processing expert based at EPFL. Chinese-built open models, which can run on local computers, lessening the risk of a shutdown, are touted as one alternative to US dependence. There’s also Mistral, once seen as Europe’s main AI hope, but the Paris-based company has seen its recent models fall behind in performance. But the Chinese alternatives are generally not as capable as US frontier AI models, said Bosselut, unless paired with fiddly, custom tools that allows them to act as independent agents. “Most scientists do not have the time,” he said. Don’t jump ship yetAlthough the kill switch moment is seen a warning shot for European scientists, it doesn’t mean labs should abandon US AI tools immediately. “I do not think the right response is simply to abandon US-based models and systems under the banner of sovereignty or independence,” said Mattias Björnmalm, secretary general of the Cesaer university association. “That would be an overreaction.”Related articlesEuropean sovereignty in AI requires ‘ugly trade-offs,’ say experts Robotic lab start-up makes case for €500M EU-funded materials testing facilityAI in science: is it useful? Instead, European researchers need to ask themselves whether they’re becoming dependent on technology that could be turned off in Washington, said Özcan. “They might not see this today, but they should really start asking this question,” she said. European researchers need a plan B, said Salathé. “I would recommend to every researcher, very proactively explore alternatives.”Own toolsIn addition, Björnmalm and others want European research institutions to develop their own scientific AI tools.Instead of signing AI deals with US digital giants, European universities should be using this money to create their own models, which may end up being superior for research, said Sabine Leonelli, an expert on the use of AI in science at the Technical University of Munich. “Universities in Europe seem to be happy to sign commercial contracts with US companies on the assumption [their AI tools] are better,” she said. But US frontier LLMs are typically opaque, and have been developed without independent scientific input, she said. “This is not good enough for science.”Last year, Swiss researchers released Apertus, an LLM designed to be completely transparent, from its development methods to its training data. The idea is that this makes scientific tools built on top of the model far more reproducible than with closed, commercial alternatives.“Europe needs more of this: serious capacity-building that gives researchers, universities and companies credible options,” said Björnmalm.
NFL insider thinks Commanders have some questions about Brandon Aiyuk
Washington Commanders: Don't pencil in Brandon Aiyuk to DC yet says Adam Schefter.
Trump’s Ultimate White House Health Cover-Up Is Exposed: Author
The president’s famous “transparency” has been questioned.
Pints & Politics with WUNC's Colin Campbell in Pittsboro
To celebrate WUNC's 50th anniversary this year, we're hosting 50 events across North Carolina! Please join us on August 19 at BMC Brewing at The Plant in Pittsboro for Pints & Politics with WUNC Capitol Bureau Chief Colin Campbell! The event kicks off at 6 p.m.We'll chat about all things North Carolina politics, and your first pint will be on BMC Brewing in a special WUNC 50th anniversary pint glass! This event is free and open to the public, but an RSVP is encouraged as space is limited. Please RSVP at the link below to let us know if you are planning to join us. You can also submit a question for Colin in advance when you sign up to attend. We hope to see you soon!> RSVP Here
Rand Paul questions USPS business model as postmaster general seeks reform
Kentucky Senator Rand Paul is questioning the United States Postal Office’s (USPS) business model following the appearance of the agency’s postmaster general before lawmakers.
Online violence against women in politics: what shapes political party responses to technology-facilitated gender-based violence?
Political parties have a primary role to play in tackling online violence against women and gender diverse politicians. While the prevalence and impact of TFGBV, such as coordinated disinformation campaigns, deepfake image-based sexual abuse or trolling are well documented, many parties are still building their knowledge on how to respond effectively and have not put in place internal practices and policies that respond to the rapidly evolving, poorly regulated digital ecosystem. About the ReportIn order to promote and protect fair and democratic participation in politics, this ALIGN Report explores what political parties are doing in response to TFGBV and what factors shape their action. The findings, based on existing literature and interviews with gender and politics professionals, indicate there are three sets of factors which donors, civil society and practitioners should consider when designing action to support political parties to respond to TFGBV internally. These are: (1) gender norms; (2) socio-political environment; and (3) internal party factors.Key messagesUnequal gender norms are ubiquitous across politics, shaping expectations of leaders to be strong and assertive, and practices of political parties to uphold masculinist values and sustain cultures of silence. These often lead to weak response to TFGBV against women politicians.The socio-political context can incentivise or disincentivise action, depending on the salience of gender issues, which are increasingly weaponised. Electoral competitiveness, domestic laws (i.e. quota requirements), and even the political system or global normative frameworks influence political will to act.Internal party factors that shape responses will vary across countries and contexts, but include: structures to enforce codes of conduct, policies and reporting mechanisms on (TF)GBV, political ideology, extent of centralisation of leadership, and crucially the meaningful participation of women in decision-making positions, not least through internal women’s wings.Party responses can be seen as a spectrum, with actions falling between active discouragement to address TFGBV to commitment to transform unequal norms and practices within the party.About the ToolkitTogether with the report, this ALIGN toolkit offers gender professionals and others working on democratic strengthening a set of guiding questions and reflection prompts to identify which responses could be most effective and suitable in different contexts. These actions can complement other solutions to TFGBV, such as regulations promoting safety by design. The assessment spans a broad range of factors including: (1) different manifestations of gender norms, (2) the socio-political environment and (3) internal party structures.Key messagesPolitical parties are duty-bound to take action internally to respond to the significant threats posed to women members and candidates, including from their own party colleagues, affiliates and political peers.Existing party approaches to TFGBV can be assessed along a spectrum which ranges from active discouragement and passive acceptance to minimal response and transformative change.To generate effective and context-appropriate solutions to TFGBV, it is important to consider how gender norms shape leadership expectations and internal party practices, while also analysing the impact of the socio-political environment. While actions to support women to stay safe online are very common, codes of conduct and measures to strengthen women’s voice and power in the parties are proposed as most transformative solutions.
After New York’s Primary Elections, Democrats Face Five Big Questions
The anti-establishment left surged. How shaken are party leaders?
Microsoft's quantum computing technology called into question, again
A new critique in the scientific journal Nature is raising fresh questions about Microsoft's claimed quantum computing breakthrough last year, which underpinned the company's announcement this month that it will have a working quantum system by 2029.
Microsoft's claims over its quantum chip questioned in Nature article
The tech giant has consistently stood by its Majorana chip research despite scepticism from some experts in the field.
Google Home Speaker review: A modest update for the Gemini era
Google's new speaker is a modest update, but the question is whether Gemini is a good smart home assistant.
Scientists just found the hidden 'lid' keeping Yellowstone's supervolcano from erupting - Futura-Sciences
Few places fuel doomsday headlines like Yellowstone. America’s most famous national park sits atop a supervolcano, and the question of when it might blow has haunted the public for decades. So when scientists finally got a clear look at the top of its magma system in 2025, the discovery was...
Are AI chatbots like ChatGPT politically biased? We tested them.
The Post tested ChatGPT, Gemini and other chatbots with political questions, and the results show that the AI tools have different political leanings.
Death Row Disability Cases Are Questions of Morality, Not Science
Doctors’ input on how to weigh cognitive disability in death penalty cases can be helpful, but characterizing such judgments as science misrepresents medicine and psychology, says Dr. M. Gregg Bloche of Georgetown Law.
Do the Utah Jazz have concerns about Darryn Peterson’s health? Here’s what Austin Ainge said.
Darryn Peterson faced a lot of questions this year. The Utah Jazz are satisfied with his answers. Here's why.
KC promised a World Cup economic boost. But not for every business, leaders say
As some businesses question the World Cup’s effect on the Kansas City economy, local officials and event organizers say they still expect a boost for the city.
Roku May Help Fox Avoid Aggregeddon
(Welcome to the “Most Important Story of the Week”, my bi-weekly strategy column analyzing the most important (but often not buzziest) news story of the last two weeks. I’m the Entertainment Strategy Guy, a former streaming executive who now analyzes business strategy in the entertainment industry. Please subscribe.) Scrolling through links over the last week, I stumbled across this fun headline: Wow. Formula 1 (the sport, not the docu-series) is the perfect “dog not barking”. As a reminder, each week in my Streaming Ratings Report, I call out the shows that miss every viewership chart. I dub them “dogs not barking”—like the Sherlock Holmes mystery—because without any data, we forget they even exist. This is in contrast to something like, say, a film flop—cough The Mandalorian and Grogu cough—where even underperforming at the box office is widely discussed here, there and everywhere. In the US, Formula 1 is now in “no public viewership data, so not discussed” territory. After moving to Apple TV from its former home of ESPN, basically no one talks about it. Apple did publish an initial, unsourced, unsubstantiated, (dare I say unserious) datecdote claiming more folks are watching Formula 1 on Apple than ESPN, but we haven’t gotten any updates since. This stands in contrast to when the sport streamed on ESPN, and ESPN PR provided weekly viewership figures. Formula 1 was, at best, a niche sport in America—averaging 1.3 million viewers in the Big Data Plus era—but now it’s basically anonymous. (And yeah, after moving to Apple, I very, very, very much doubt its ratings increased.) Unfortunately, that story isn’t quite big enough to warrant a section in today’s “Most Important Story of the Week” column, but I wanted to call it out, because otherwise, no one else will! Certainly, no one will write articles about the silence/ratings decline, unlike when they wrote breathless articles connecting the rise in viewership to Netflix’s Drive to Survive, including Reuters just last month. (This is a topic I’ve tried to provide a moderate/nuanced/non-hyped take since 2022.) Anyway, on to this week’s issue. I was a bit worried I didn’t have a juicy topic, then the Murdochs went out and did their Murdoch thing: buying Roku. So that’s the story of the week, and it happens to touch on quite a few themes of the streaming wars and the disruption therein. I’ll cover that, plus why more consolidation in Hollywood media looks likely, more good news on the Hollywood labor front, whether we’ll see an uptick in production in Los Angeles, some Broadway and theme park news, cellphone prices going up in the third world (and possibly everywhere), and more. Subscribe Most Important Story of the Week - Another Big Media & Entertainment Merger The story of the week is clearly Fox is buying Roku for $22 billion. I read a lot of good strategy takes on why Fox bought this streaming TV device maker—and I’ll have mine below—but what fascinates me more is how this deal connects to quite a few themes of the streaming wars, linking to everything from the pace of M&A to “aggregeddon” to Netflix’s recent M&A actions/inactions to the shift to advertising from pure play streaming and more. The only topic I can’t really connect it to is my old theory, “never bet against Rupert Murdoch” because he isn’t the one who did this deal; his son Lachlan inked it. (Do I think he provided advice, even at his 95 years of age? Sure.) That plus I have one additional piece of strategy for all entertainment players, inspired by this deal. So let’s dive into all those topics, starting with why I like this deal. Roku is a Great M&A Buy
SoftBank CEO questions Musk's space data centers vision
Top SoftBank boss Masayoshi Son challenged the economic case for putting AI data centers in space, an idea championed by Elon Musk.
Records: Rural Michigan ‘overlooked’ in Michigan’s $6B subsidy spending spree
A Bridge analysis finds that the northeast Lower Peninsula got $71 per person in economic development spending since 2022, compared to $854 in west Michigan. Some question the disparities.
One Pitt student team will get the opportunity to send their experiment to the ISS
The University is looking for undergraduates and faculty advisors with big cosmic questions — that fit in tiny packages — as part of the national Student Spaceflight Experiments Program.
Biggest Eagles questions by position in 2026: Defense
Looking at the biggest questions for the Eagles by position on defense in 2026.
Shelby Co. Health Department questions integrity of community air monitoring report data
The Shelby County Health Department has raised questions about the integrity of data behind a May community air monitoring project report.
Approved ballot question would eliminate political party primaries for elections in Massachusetts
Massachusetts highest court approved a ballot question that would eliminate political party primaries for state elections.
Will Arnett refuses to answer Jason Bateman’s question about Amy Poehler: 'Are you looking for clicks?'
Will Arnett is gobsmacked by what his cohost Jason Bateman wanted to know about his ex-wife, Amy Poehler.
We must support 'strange' science, RNA biologist Jeff Coller writes in The New York Times
Without federal funding, American researchers can't chase scientific questions that may lead to lifesaving cures, Hopkins RNA biologist Jeff Coller writes in 'The New York Times'
Antoine Semenyo, Ghana's man on the inside and England threat
Antoine Semenyo knows better than most what to expect from England at the World Cup, as the Ghana forward seeks to lead the Black Stars to a surprise win over the country of his birth.Despite spending his entire life in England, Semenyo said there was no question about representing Ghana.
The first cracks are showing in Indiana’s Bears stadium plan
Indiana's bid to lure the Chicago Bears to Hammond is facing its first signs of political resistance as Porter County officials question taxes tied to the stadium plan.
Ranking the NFL's biggest offseason losers: Patriots, Packers facing questions
Three playoff teams crack the list of NFL clubs that had the worst offseasons
The Most Expensive Game on Steam Costs $1,000 and Lasts Just 10 Minutes
Steam users are questioning the legitimacy of a $1,000 game that basically has no gameplay, and are wondering how it made its way onto Valve’s platform in the first place.
Blazers owner Tom Dundon will address business group this week
The appearance comes as Portland’s NBA team faces big questions about its future.
Boring when people speak about my fitness
Reece James worked with Thomas Tuchel at Chelsea and is playing at his first World Cup as England's first-choice right-back. James has sustained a number of injuries in his career and has faced questions about his ability to play regularly with limited recovery time. "People always talk about injuries and availability, and to me it's so boring now," James told BC Radio 5 Live.
Where Nate Ament lands in latest mock drafts
The 2026 NBA Draft is just around the corner, and where Tennessee standout Nate Ament lands is a curious question and a storyline to follow. The 6-10 forward is a rare specimen, combining length with a variety of scoring tools, along with a capable outside shot. But so far, he hasn’t gotten the top-of-the-draft love […]
Zelda: Tears Of The Kingdom Finally Getting DLC For Zelda’s 40th Anniversar
Nintendo surprises fans with a delayed Zelda amiibo release, sparking questions about the timing of the collectible.
Eagles offensive line questions that must be answered in camp
The Eagles enter training camp with offensive line questions tied to Lane Johnson’s health, Cam Jurgens and Landon Dickerson’s rebound seasons, Tyler Steen’s growth, and Jordan Mailata’s dominance
This one question may reveal whether your body is getting the rest it needs, study finds
Research finds that feeling older than your actual age may be linked to poor sleep quality, insomnia symptoms, irregular patterns and daytime fatigue.
High-Speed Rail CEO Ian Choudri on transparency, project's path moving forward
California High-Speed Rail CEO Ian Choudri is answering questions for the first time since he was put on administrative leave.
The time has come for Arab politics in Israel to stop fearing coalition power
Opinion: Israel’s Arab public is more aware, more involved and less willing to settle for declarations; the question is no longer only who is right, but who can actually influence policy
Probe into Newsom produces a lot of smoke. Is there any fire?
Some say the investigation will boost the governor's presidential prospects. But it’s too soon to say. The action by Trump's corrupted Department of "Justice" presents more questions than answers.
Public invited to trivia with scientists gathering from around the world in Lead
Dakota Shivers Brewing in Lead will host a series of pub talks and trivia nights featuring physicists from the workshop posing science-related questions.
Congress wonders as the Iran war draws to a close: Was it worth it?
The question hangs in the halls at the Capitol: Was the war with Iran worth it
MSU researcher, Partnership Middle School students collaborate on climate science literacy podcast
STARKVILLE —Mississippi State Assistant Professor Lourdes Cardozo-Gaibisso is immersing local middle school students in climate science literacy exploration through podcasting, helping them share experiences, ask questions and engage with environmental
Should everyone be on GLP-1s? What science actually tells us (and doesn't) about the broader health benefits
The laundry list of possible health benefits from GLP-1 drugs seems to get longer by the day, from cancer prevention to combating addiction. But while there’s no question these medications show immense promise beyond their use for diabetes and weight loss, science is still catching up.
Liverpool businesses 'scared' by protest that forced them to close
Local business owners on County Road questioned why anti-immigration protesters returned to the area.
White House Creates a UAP Science Council
Below is a transcript of an interview I just had with Elizabeth Vargas on NewsNation. Her questions are labeled below by EV and my answers…
Why some Russians are breaking with Putin as Ukraine war drags on
Russian President Vladimir Putin’s iron grip on power is being challenged by the war in Ukraine and his government’s authoritarian crackdowns. He finds himself in unfamiliar political territory, questioned by some of the country’s elite and embarrassed by Ukraine’s strikes into Russian cities. Compass Points moderator Nick Schifrin discusses the state of Russian politics with Arkady Ostrovsky.
Business owner questions lack of citations written following rowdy weekend in Fells Point
Trump unveils the new Air Force One, a converted Qatari jet
The Trump administration accepted the luxury jet from Qatar despite questions about the ethics and legality
Trump unveils the new Air Force One, a converted Qatari jet
The Trump administration accepted the luxury jet from Qatar despite questions about the ethics and legality
As Juneteenth is celebrated across U.S., Obama's presidential center opens
This year's Juneteenth events, held to celebrate the end of slavery, come amid deep political divisions as the nation grapples with renewed questions about the arc of racial progress
After Local Drag Queen and Business Owner Banned From Instagram, More Questions Than Answers
Club ERA owner Naomi Dix says that her accounts were shut down this week for purportedly violating community standards.
10 biggest questions for NBA offseason: Where will Giannis land? How do Spurs rebound? What's next for LeBron?
Less than a week after the Knicks won the title, we've already moved into free agency and trade mode
AI Slipped Into Your Business Tools. Three Questions Take It Back
AI just landed inside QuickBooks, HubSpot and the tools you already pay for. Here are three questions to ask before it acts on your money and your clients.
Student research in Yellowstone could help scientists understand life on other planets
Arizona State University doctoral candidates Tanner Barnes and Vince Debes both enjoy a good hike. But when they set out on trails in places like Yellowstone National Park, they are not just taking in the sights — they are collecting samples that could answer some of science’s biggest questions: how life survives in extreme environments, how planets become habitable and what signs of life scientists should look for beyond Earth.
Your Business Should Hire an AI Receptionist. Here’s How Quickly They Can Pay for Themselves
AI receptionists can catch missed bookings, answer questions, and free up employees to focus on customers.
Whole Hog Politics: Trump proves hard to follow for GOP
[Watch “Whole Hog Politics” live: Join us today at 9 a.m. EDT at TheHill.com as Chris Stirewalt and host Bill Sammon break down this week’s political news and answer questions from a li…
Obama says U.S. may be ‘worse off’ now than before Iran war
The former president told NBC’s “TODAY” show he questioned the rationale for President Donald Trump’s war on Iran.
#PostPulpit mailbag: What will happen at tight end?
The latest edition of our Patriots mailbag answers questions about the tight end position, Gabe Jacas, and more.
Todd Bowles Admits To Bucs "Just Taking Plays Off"
After locker room leaders signaled a lack of passion, Todd Bowles confirms his defense coasted through games, sparking questions about accountability and his future leadership in Tampa.
Our biggest questions for Underwood and Illinois in 2027
No team is bulletproof, and the Illini have holes that need addressed.
How Politicized is Public Healthcare in Orange County?
There are growing questions over what politicians should be involved in healthcare for the county’s poorest residents through CalOptima.
Five questions with the Colangelo College of Business' Paul Waterman
EDITOR'S NOTE: The following article was originally published in the April issue of GCU Magazine, available in the purple bins on campus or digitally. Paul […]
Health kicks off Aspen Ideas June 22-25
Since 2014, Aspen Ideas: Health has preceded the Aspen Ideas festivals. This year, from June 22-25, it offers more than 60 sessions with seven program tracks revolving around patient care, new treatments and technology, longevity and vitality, creativity, medical enterprise, leadership and how health-related questions often lack black or white answers.
3 Burning Questions for the Rams Ahead of Training Camp
With training camp set to take place in July, here are three burning questions to be answered for the Los Angeles Rams.
What science reveals about the ‘magic’ of enlightenment
We often ask how to reach enlightenment, as if it’s a destination. A better question may be: how do we practice enlightened behavior in everyday life?
Trump Iran framework gambles on diplomacy despite warning Tehran will 'lie and cheat'
Trump administration's Iran framework offers immediate oil sanctions waivers while postponing key nuclear questions, a gamble officials say carries risks.
Nancy and the politics of deterrence: reading the French nuclear offer to Poland
A year after the Nancy Treaty, Polish-French defence cooperation is deepening and building a tangible element of European deterrence. The question is what kind of relationship Warsaw and Paris are actually building, and whether it will outlast the leaders who started it.
Rubio lets Vance take the fall as Iran deal questions mount
A split over Iran between two top presidential contenders has burst into the open.
Katie Couric (@katiecouric)
3,068 likes, 268 comments - katiecouric on June 17, 2026: "Rahm Emanuel has been a major force in Democratic politics for decades—from congressman and White House chief of staff to mayor of Chicago and U.S. ambassador to Japan. As the 2026 midterms approach, he joined me on Next Question to discuss President Trump's second term, why Democrats "lost the plot," why he believes the U.S. should end taxpayer-funded military aid to Israel, and what it will take for the party to reconnect with voters and regain lost ground. 🎧 Watch the full interview on YouTube or listen wherever you get your podcasts.".
Despite concerns, CDPAP users question Trump lawsuit
The Trump Department of Justice filed a lawsuit Wednesday alleging that the state Department of Health conducted a “sham bid process."
Despite concerns, CDPAP users question Trump lawsuit
The Trump Department of Justice filed a lawsuit Wednesday alleging that the state Department of Health conducted a “sham bid process."
Cramer's lightning round: Buy Vistra
"Mad Money" host Jim Cramer rings the lightning round bell, which means he's giving his answers to callers' stock questions at rapid speed.
Allegheny Health Network helps cancer patients know they're not alone
When you hear you're diagnosed with cancer, it can be overwhelming. It can leave questions, anger and a feeling of seclusion.
iPadOS 27 Hands-On: Everything New for iPad
Like iOS 27, iPadOS 27 gains a smarter, more capable version of Siri, the Siri app, and new Apple Intelligence features in apps, but there are a few iPad-only standouts. Subscribe to the MacRumors YouTube channel for more videos. Siri AI on iPad has all of the same features as Siri AI on the iPhone, so it can access your personal data, search the web for answers, complete tasks in apps, and answer questions about what's on your screen.
When Health Results Raise Questions but Provide Few Answers
Older people are often treated as if their judgment is less valuable, creating the risk of a future where human intelligence is seen as something that depreciates with age.
Google Releases Free Android Upgrade To Millions: Samsung Galaxy Next
Samsung's Android 17 upgrade is coming to Galaxy phones via One UI 9. But the biggest feature, Gemini Intelligence, raises serious security questions. Here's what to know
Politics: Can Divides Over War Be Bridged At The G7 Summit?
This week, on the southern shores of Lake Geneva, leaders of the Group of Seven countries gathered for their annual summit.There are several pressing issues that require attention including the U.S. and Israeli war with Iran, the resulting economic crisis, the state of the Persian Gulf, and long term questions about the future of relations with Iran.The G7 meeting also notably brought Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy face-to-face with President Donald Trump. Trump told reporters that the war Ukraine was not a priority for the United States, saying that his country had “nothing to do” with a war that was “thousands of miles away.”We discuss what this 2026 G7 meeting reveals about the state of the U.S. relationship with its most important allies, especially after months of a war of choice with Iran.Find more of our programs online. Listen to 1A sponsor-free by signing up for 1A+ at plus.npr.org/the1a.
Olivia Wilde knew her relationship with Jason Sudeikis was over when he asked her this
Filmmaker and actress Olivia Wilde said that she knew her relationship with ex-fiancé Jason Sudeikis was over when he asked her this cutting question.
Earth Might Have Been Sprinkling Europa With Life Since Before Animals Existed
Hundreds of sextillions of dust grains may have escaped Earth and reached Europa, raising intriguing questions about the possible transfer of life through space.
Will Sunshine Health see job cuts tied to parent Centene reductions?
Healthcare giant Centene is offering voluntary buyouts to staff, raising questions about its Florida subsidiary.
Panthers Reacts Survey: What should a Bryce Young extension look like?
The Panthers have more questions than time when determining Young's future
The 'Cool Demo' Era of AI Is Officially Over. Here Is the Real Question Business Leaders Should Ask Now
Sometime this spring, AI stopped being a passive tool you pick up and started becoming an active system that runs in the background.
More Details on the UAP Science Advisory Council
Below is a set of questions that I was asked today about my new leadership position regarding the UAP Science Advisory Council.
Latvia pilots citizen engagement in research grant evaluations
Latvia has introduced an element of citizen engagement to the evaluation of nationally funded research grants. The aim is to both create more connections between science and society, and to improve the quality of its evaluations. The move comes as research funders across Europe are experimenting with ways to improve evaluation processes in the face of a sharpened focus on science’s impact on society. Evaluators of grant applications submitted to Latvia’s Fundamental and Applied Research Programme (FLPP), the country’s main research funder, will this year have the option of consulting citizen feedback on challenges the public thinks science should focus on to inform their decisions. “In recent years, both public discussions and policy-level debates in Latvia have highlighted the importance of demonstrating how publicly funded research contributes to society, the economy and the resolution of real-world challenges,” said a source at the Latvian Council of Science (LCS), which manages the FLPP. “At the same time, research institutions themselves expressed interest in improving the project evaluation framework while continuing to ensure that funding is awarded to the highest-quality projects,” the source added. The citizen input comes from a survey that was conducted between 25 February and 16 March 2025, to which 1,737 people responded. It gathered information on what the public views as problem areas for Latvia, and the role of science and technology in providing solutions to these problems. A summary of these responses has been included as an annex to the FLPP 2026 call for proposals that evaluators can refer to, purely in an advisory manner, when judging proposals. Results from the survey show that the main problem areas identified by the public were in healthcare and public health, followed by the development of new treatment methods and medicines, and then digital technology, data security and cyber security. At the bottom of the list was research aimed at acquiring new knowledge about the universe, matter and the laws of nature. Further analysis looked at the public view of the possible role of science in solving these problems. The survey charted 4,167 individual responses based on open-ended questions that were derived from the participants’ answers. The analysis again found that medical and health sciences topped the scoring, with 788 responses referring to the field. Humanities and the arts were bottom of the list, with 625. Digging further into the details, the survey suggests citizens are aware of and concerned about a number of research areas. This includes technologies and innovation to improve the environment or reduce pollution, the development of modern military technologies and cybersecurity tools, and the development and application of artificial intelligence, among others. “We hope this initiative will help strengthen public trust in science and create a more meaningful dialogue between researchers and society,” the LCS source said, adding that it offers benefits to researchers, evaluators and to the general public. More space for citizen engagement in evaluationsThere is a gradual but increasing use of citizen engagement in research evaluation processes around Europe, especially in healthcare, but it remains relatively rare, said Henry Sauermann, a professor at the European School of Management and Technology in Berlin and an expert in citizen science.“Given that we are at a point where citizen involvement is extremely limited, there is presumably space for more, but it's not that we should do it just because we want to do it,” he told Science|Business. He said some research lends itself better to having citizen input, and this usually tends to be on the applied end of the science spectrum where the public can offer useful feedback based on their experiences. He added that advising scientists on certain topics to study is also a useful approach, in the way that Latvia is doing. “The public does fund a lot of science, there's a lot of tax money going into this. We of course do want to preserve academic freedom, but it's also not unreasonable to incorporate more feedback or input from citizens where possible,” he said. Related articlesCitizen science: where, when, and how to let the public contribute to researchHow can Europe cope with a flood of AI-assisted research grant proposals?Data Corner: Horizon Europe’s AI, digital and data call success rate is 5.2%There are several ways of involving citizens in science funding. The most minimal way is having a few representatives on a panel, such as members of a patient group or union. The most direct way is crowdsourcing funding for specific projects. There is an increasing number of online platforms that allow the public to chip in to support scientific proposals.Sauermann studied this in a recent paper and found that it can have its uses, but it still is not clear if there are benefits to it. There are various assumptions linked to citizen engagement, for example that it increases public trust in science, or that it provides a representative view of what the public thinks about science. These are not necessarily true, Sauermann found. People who participate in engagement activities tend to already be very trusting of science, and, on the whole, it is generally the well-off and well educated who contribute, giving a narrow view of public opinion. On whether citizen input can help manage the increasing number of proposals that are being submitted due to assistance from AI, Sauermann is more sceptical. “The obvious answer to the flood of AI-written proposals is AI-driven evaluation,” he said, adding that it doesn’t mean citizen engagement shouldn’t be a part of evaluations in a well thought-out manner. Southern Denmark’s successful approachOne successful example of citizen engagement in science evaluations was implemented in southern Denmark. Between 2019 and 2025, citizens in the region were invited to vote to fund one of five pre-selected projects in the field of healthcare. The project, called A Healthier Southern Denmark, was a collaboration between regional authorities, the University of Southern Denmark, and two media partners. Over the seven years, there were 75,000 votes and significant public engagement online and on social media. “It was a bit of a wild project, we’d never done something like that before and we were a bit nervous about what would be said in the media about it. But actually, people were very positive,” said Anne Kathrine Overgaard, one of the main organisers of the project from the University of Southern Denmark. The university and its researchers have learned a lot from the experience, particularly about engaging with society and shaping their research to match real-world needs. This is important with Europe’s increasing focus on competitiveness and bringing innovations to market faster, Overgaard said. She hopes to see more citizen engagement in evaluation processes and in science more broadly. “For many years, citizen engagement has been a bit of an add-on to proposals, just to check a box. But I think things are changing,” she said. It’s less about citizens just gathering data and more “about the dialogue between the public and the scientists,” she said. The initiative ended last year as the team wanted to regroup to find fresh momentum. The development of AI and AI-written proposals has made Overgaard reflect on how the project could be reworked to help evaluators. She hopes to bring it back in the future. “It could be a good idea to try this initiative again in a slightly re-worked format,” she said.
Merchants of Doubt and the attacks on Extreme Event Attribution science
Last week, I attended a meeting at Columbia University on attribution science and climate law, hosted by the Sabin Center. It was a fantastic event, bringing together scientists and legal experts working at the intersection of extreme event attribution and climate law. Subscribe For those unfamiliar with it, extreme event attribution attempts to quantify the contribution of climate change to an extreme event. For example, several groups analyzed the impact of climate change on Hurricane Harvey’s enormous rainfall totals over Houston, Texas and they found that climate change increased rainfall by 15 to 38%. One thing that came up again and again was how terrified fossil-fuel interests are of extreme event attribution science. They are acutely aware that this research could land them in court. And losing those cases would leave them legally liable for billions of dollars in climate damages. Because the legal stakes are so high, the blowback has turned ugly. I spoke with several scientists at the meeting who are facing ongoing harassment over their work. This blowback is a coordinated campaign to make the entire field look suspect. The goal is to create the impression that attribution science is too uncertain, too political, or too conflicted to be useful in court or in public policy. The strategy is not based on actual science or evidence of misconduct, but on the generation of doubt. The new Merchants of Doubt We’ve seen this before. In fact, not that long ago: We only have to go back a year to the Department of Energy (DOE) Climate Working Group (CWG) report to see an example of using doubt as the tool to push back against well-established science. This strategy is laid out in an email from a member of the CWG, Dr. Roy Spencer, that was released during litigation over the Climate Working Group process. The key quote is: About all I can hope is that what we write will provide sufficient “reasonable scientific doubt” regarding the science claims in the 2009 TSD [technical support document], based upon almost 2 decades of new science, to call into question the original reasoning for the EPA Administrator’s decision that CO2 presents a threat to human health and welfare. This statement is strong evidence that at least some members of the committee were working to support a particular policy outcome: revoking the Endangerment Finding. The email also explains how they planned to do it: by attempting to generate “reasonable doubt”. This is going to be hard, Spencer implies. Despite falsely claiming that “2 decades of new science” weakens the case, Spencer explicitly acknowledges that the actual peer-reviewed science of climate change overwhelmingly rejects his position: But if the science argument is decided upon by a vote, or by the number of published citations, we lose the science argument. We can go back even further: This CWG email shares unmistakable DNA with the infamous 1969 tobacco memo that declared: “Doubt is our product, since it is the best means of competing with the ‘body of fact’ that exists in the mind of the general public. It is also the means of establishing a controversy.” The tobacco memo also acknowledges the limit of this strategy: Like the CWG, they knew the science was not on their side. Share The new new Merchants of Doubt The people attacking the IPCC chapter on extreme event attribution are the newest iteration of the Merchants of Doubt. Their goal, like all Merchants before them, is to introduce doubt into the process. Because the report is not even out yet, they cannot attack its conclusions. So they are attacking the authors instead. Here is a press release from the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee: In the letter, the Chairmen express concerns about potential conflicts of interest involving members of the Attribution Committee, stating that “publicly available information suggests a troubling pattern” in which committee members are affiliated with nonprofits that support climate accountability lawsuits, “raising the appearance of impropriety and member bias.” To be clear, this is just innuendo. There is no actual evidence of bias. And given the robust process that these reports go through, including multiple lines of peer review, it seems very unlikely that significant bias can survive into the report. When the report comes out, critics will have the opportunity to make legitimate criticisms of the report — if any exist. If none do, however, they’ll still make criticisms, but they’ll be bogus, simply designed to generate doubt. We’ll see. A note to the press: Fix your frame To any journalists reading this: The public debate over extreme event attribution science is not going away. The science is simply too dangerous to fossil-fuel interests for them to stop fighting it. You very well might be assigned to write an article about this area of research in the future. When you do, do not automatically adopt the framing that climate misinformers want you to use. They want you to frame the story around questions like: Are climate scientists trying to put their thumb on the scale to achieve a predetermined, politically motivated result? Are climate scientists improperly letting their politics invade the science of the IPCC? That frame is a trap. Instead, you need to view this through the historical lens of the Merchants of Doubt. How does the ecosystem of doubt operate? Who funds it? What methods do they use to misrepresent science and slime researchers? What scientific results are they trying to keep people from understanding are legitimate? Ultimately, you instead need to focus your article on the generation of doubt as a way to maintain the fossil fuel industry’s social and legal license to keep burning oil, gas, and coal. If you treat the misinformers’ frame as a legitimate, good-faith scientific critique, you are helping them produce doubt. Don’t do it. Don’t be a Merchant of Doubt. Thanks for reading The Climate Brink! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support our work. Subscribe other stuff The Staying Curious Substack has an interesting post about the different flavors of climate sensitivity. This is crucial information if you want to understand how scientists think about how much warming the Earth will experience. I’d be grateful if you could hit the like button ❤️ below! It helps more people discover these ideas and lets me know what’s connecting with readers.
Oklahoma independents show up to vote on minimum wage question, denounce closed primaries
Oklahoma’s nearly 500,000 registered independent voters were eligible to vote on State Question 832 in Tuesday’s election, which would raise the statewide minimum wage to $15 per hour.
Arman Tsarukyan urges UFC to cut former title challenger
Arman Tsarukyan is urging the UFC not to allow one of its former title challengers to step into the octagon again. As the dust settles on a historic night at the White House, several key talking points have surfaced. Most are directed toward fighters at the top of the bill, with questions being ...
Mamdani's affordability problem worsens as NYC business leaders blast his housing plan
‘The Big Money Show’ discusses Manhattan's median rent, which climbed to a record $5,125 in May, up 7% from a year ago, raising new questions about affordability as demand continues to outpace housing supply across New York City.
People are betting on elections. Congress is watching
As prediction markets stir debate over betting on politics, the Los Angeles mayoral race raised a new question: What happens when people wager on elections?
Questions surround Bo Nix's health as Broncos Minicamp begins on Tuesday
Opinion: Being Alaska Native is not a political label
Voters must look beyond identity and question those who exploit it.
Judge who had sex in courthouse and attended political event agrees to exit Georgia election case
A federal judge who was disciplined after an investigation found that she had sex with a police officer in her chambers and attended a partisan event, then lied when confronted with the allegations, has recused herself in a fight over Georgia election records after the U.S. Department of Justice raised questions about her ability to be impartial.
Judge who had sex in courthouse and attended political event agrees to exit Georgia election case
A federal judge has recused herself in a fight over Georgia election records after the U.S. Department of Justice raised questions about her ability to be impartial
Vance’s Book Tour Begins With a Visit to ‘The View’
The vice president is promoting his book about faith and facing questions about his political ambitions and the war with Iran.