SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY
Search headlines
Find the stories shaping the conversation.
Results for " known " 2,046 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle
Republicans and Democrats find a unifying target: Pharmacy benefit managers
Republicans and Democrats, both patients and politicians, seem united in their disdain for the healthcare companies known as pharmacy benefit managers. Tennessee and Arkansas are regulating them now.
Ace Combat 8: Wings Of Theve Smashes Series Steam Record With Over 52,000 Concurrent Players
Ace Combat 8: Wings of Theve is off to the series' best PC launch by a wide margin. The game came out on October 2 and peaked at over 52,000 concurrent Steam players a day later, according to SteamDB. That is nearly four times the 13,758 that Ace Combat 7: Skies Unknown managed in 2019, while...
‘Fitbit Edge’ leaks as Google’s next fitness tracker with ‘Apps’ & ‘Notifications’
Following an accidental marketing leak in August and FCC listing last month, retail listings for the “Fitbit Edge” have now emerged.
Alan Alda opens up about Parkinson’s diagnosis: ‘I don’t want to wish it away’
Alan Alda says the first Parkinson’s symptom that he experienced ‘was not that well-known’ at the time, adding that he had ‘no twitch, no tremor’ and ‘no problems with [his] voice.’
Vozinha thought Yashin Trophy nomination was a ‘joke’
Vozinha (40), a relative unknown heading into this summer’s FIFA World Cup, made a name for himself in North America thanks to his exploits with Cape Verde. The 40-year-old, who has never played at ...
Manchester City faces uncertain future after 114 charges upheld
Manchester City face renewed uncertainty after reports that an independent commission upheld 114 of 115 Premier League charges. The club denies wrongdoing and has appealed, while potential sanctions remain unknown. The case could have major sporting and financial consequences for City and wider English soccer.
Scientists spot hidden magnetic state emerging inside a superconductor
YbSb₂ is the first known type-I superconductor to spontaneously break time-reversal symmetry, creating a tiny magnetic field inside itself as it enters the superconducting state.
Popular College Football Personality Doubts Success For Syracuse Football
One of the most well-known college football personalities discussed the Orange this week.
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.
ABS-CBN News
The entertainment, creative, and lifestyle industry mourn the passing of Monchet Diokno Olives or more commonly known as the “Fanman.” Full story link in the comments section.
‘Tinder Swindler’ romance fraudster promises ‘safe’ dating app – using intel from con man playbook
Shimon Hayut, the notorious 'Tinder Swindler' also known as Simon Leviev, says his new Safe Love dating app will use identity verification to prevent the fraud he once committed.
Crude oil tanker struck by unknown projectile off Oman, UKMTO says
The master of a crude oil tanker has reported being struck by an unknown projectile 4 nautical miles east of Oman, the United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) said early on Saturday.
Country star diagnosed with rare blood cancer after health scare: ‘One day at a time’
Charles Kelley, the singer and songwriter best known as a founding member of the country trio Lady A, revealed he’s been diagnosed with a rare blood cancer.
Country star diagnosed with rare blood cancer after health scare: ‘One day at a time’
Charles Kelley, the singer and songwriter best known as a founding member of the country trio Lady A, revealed he’s been diagnosed with a rare blood cancer.
Country star diagnosed with rare blood cancer after health scare: ‘One day at a time’
Charles Kelley, the singer and songwriter best known as a founding member of the country trio Lady A, revealed he’s been diagnosed with a rare blood cancer.
Country star diagnosed with rare blood cancer after health scare: ‘One day at a time’
Charles Kelley, the singer and songwriter best known as a founding member of the country trio Lady A, revealed he’s been diagnosed with a rare blood cancer.
Country star diagnosed with rare blood cancer after health scare: ‘One day at a time’
Charles Kelley, the singer and songwriter best known as a founding member of the country trio Lady A, revealed he’s been diagnosed with a rare blood cancer.
European Leaders Mostly Optimistic About Paramount-WB's Future
European industry leaders are cautiously optimistic now that Paramount is about to complete its takeover of Warner Bros., but there are many unknowns.
7 Science-Backed Ways to Channel Creativity
To boost creativity, we need to get into a “flow” state. New research reveals lesser-known ways proven to help anyone unlock their creative potential. Now that’s genius!
Studying Science in an Anti-Scientific Time
This Chronicle Review Deep Cut was first published in 2025. By Julianne Werlin Thanks for reading The Chronicle Review! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work. Subscribe The last two decades have not been kind to science studies. Already bruised and battered by the “science wars” of the 1990s, by the 2000s sociologists of science — who had long argued that science had to be understood in its human context — were encountering the funhouse-mirror version of their own views in right-wing critiques of climate scientists. It was enough to give some prominent scholars pause. “Was I wrong to participate in the invention of this field known as science studies?” asked Bruno Latour, the most famous sociologist of science in the world, in 2003. “Should we apologize for having been wrong all along? Or should we rather bring the sword of criticism to criticism itself and do a bit of soul-searching here: What were we really after when we were so intent on showing the social construction of scientific facts?” In response, Latour proposed a change of method and attitude. Science studies, now chastened and contrite, would no longer seek to strip facts of their authority, but to enrich and enhance them. What this meant in practice was never fully clear. But his diagnosis of problems resonated, even if his solutions did not. Latour’s exercise in public hand-wringing signaled a shift in mood. By 2016, with the first election of Donald Trump, the idea that skepticism of science was a right-wing position, not a left-wing one, had become a commonplace, discussed eagerly in The New York Times. For liberals, vaccine denial during the Covid era and Trump’s second-term attacks on the funding of scientific research, covered extensively in these pages, added a new urgency to the defense of science on both practical and principled grounds. There was little appetite for a sociology or philosophy of science that emphasized the messiness and missteps of the scientific process rather than its integrity and triumphs. The distinguished historian of science Peter Dear’s new book, The World as We Know It: From Natural Philosophy to Modern Science (Princeton University Press, 2025), which seeks to tell the story of 18th- and 19th-century science for a general public, may seem comfortably remote from these bitter contests. In its 16 short chapters, Dear draws swift, sure sketches of major discoveries from Newton to Einstein, ably guiding the reader through debates on stellar nebulae, animal taxonomy, atomic chemistry, evolution, and other flashpoints in the history of science. But though a work of history, Dear’s book must still negotiate our polarized present. In a blurb on its back cover, the historian of biology Lynn K. Nyhart alludes to the “present moment, when scientific knowledge is being swamped by misinformation and its institutions are under siege.” Dear himself, in his conclusion, refers to the “yard signs” and “bumper stickers” that proclaim “Science Is Real.” One antidote to both anti-science propaganda and to reductive slogans in science’s defense is a robust history and philosophy of science: exactly what Dear’s scholarship has long offered. But his new book illustrates how difficult such work has become. Dear, an emeritus professor of history at Cornell University, is best known as a creative and philosophically minded historian of the Scientific Revolution. His edited volume The Literary Structure of Scientific Argument (1991) analyzed the rhetoric of Galileo’s thought experiments to brilliant effect. Discipline and Experience: The Mathematical Way in the Scientific Revolution (1995) was a major contribution to the analysis of scientific experiments in early modern Europe and beyond, while Revolutionizing the Sciences: European Knowledge in Transition, 1500-1700 (2001), now in its third edition, remains one of the best overviews of the profound epistemological upheavals of 16th- and 17th-century science. But Dear has also ventured into later periods. Nearly two decades ago, in The Intelligibility of Nature: How Science Makes Sense of the World (2006), he turned to the 18th and 19th centuries to sketch a history and theory of scientific knowledge. Aimed at a generalist audience, Dear’s simple prose belied serious philosophical ambitions. Science, Dear argued, has two aspects: “natural philosophy,” the quest to understand the true nature of the universe, and “instrumentality,” the applied skills and technologies that allow us to manipulate the world for human advantage. Both strands are ancient, but the innovation of the phenomenon we call “science” was to yoke them together. As Francis Bacon wrote, “Human knowledge and human power meet in one; for where the cause is not known, the effect cannot be produced,” an insight typically abridged to “knowledge is power.” Or, in Bertrand Russell’s characteristically blunt phrase, science has two functions, “1. to enable us to know things, and 2., to enable us to do things.” So far, so conventional. But Dear took issue with this familiar story in one respect. Bacon’s formula implied that theory and practice could be fused in a single method. In fact, Dear argued, the quest to understand nature and the desire to manipulate it were coupled only loosely. They could come together, but they could also pull apart. Focusing on natural philosophy, the “knowing” half of the scientific circle, he used a series of case studies from cosmology, taxonomy, chemistry, electromagnetism, and quantum theory to show how theories changed over time, in dialogue with practice, but never reducible to it. Take the case of matter, the basic substrate of the physical world. In the 18th and 19th centuries, scientists not only disagreed about what it was, but also about how well it could be known. In 1789, the chemist Antoine Lavoisier dismissed speculation about the atomic composition of chemicals as “discussions entirely of a metaphysical nature,” as he sought to orient chemistry away from philosophical abstraction and toward laboratory results. But in the 19th century, atoms returned with a vengeance in the atomic chemistry of John Dalton, who wanted to explain the underlying structure of nature. It was not just that Dalton and Lavoisier had a different set of experimental results, or even a different theory, Dear showed. What counted as an explanation had changed. In arguing that scientific theories depended on their intelligibility to human beings with complex arrays of beliefs and commitments, Dear was in sympathy with science studies. Key figures such as the sociologist Steven Shapin emphasized the importance of psychological mechanisms like trust in the formation and acceptance of scientific ideas. But in focusing on the scientific pursuit of knowledge, not its politics or economics, Dear resisted the more cynical perspective of some of his colleagues. The Intelligibility of Nature strikes a very different note than Shapin’s collection of a few years later, Never Pure: Historical Studies of Science as If It Was Produced by People With Bodies, Situated in Time, Space, Culture, and Society, and Struggling for Credibility and Authority (2010), to name just one example. Walking a very fine line, Dear depicted science as driven at once by complex social dynamics and by the intellectual power of real discoveries. It was a testament not only to his own acumen but also to the vitality of the field that he was able to do so. Nearly two decades later, The World as We Know It returns to the questions broached in The Intelligibility of Nature. Like Dear’s earlier study, it begins with the Newtonian cosmos and ends with debates between Einstein and Bohr on quantum physics. Beyond its terminal figures, many of the same characters appear in both studies, including the naturalists John Ray and the Comte de Buffon; the chemists Étienne François Geoffroy, Antoine Lavoisier, and John Dalton; as well as Charles Darwin and Michael Faraday, among others. Its subject is nearly identical: As in The Intelligibility of Nature, The World as We Know It considers natural philosophy as opposed to instrumentality, here defined as the “desire to create a picture of what the world is really like — the world as God knows it — rather than simply having instrumental or operational control over it.” The two books also overlap in insights — and sometimes even in language. The reader who has learned in The Intelligibility of Nature that Buffon’s method of classifying animals “reflected his belief in the importance of the senses and empiricism in learning about nature (a doctrine associated with Newton and the philosopher John Locke)” will experience a sense of déjà vu on reading, in The World as We Know It, that the classification “reflects Buffon’s commitment to the epistemological stance of Newton and his philosophical underlaborer John Locke, who stressed the role of the senses in creating natural knowledge.” Later in the passage, we read that, “because of its stress on understanding the ways of life of animals in their environments, Buffon’s approach could almost be labeled (anachronistically) as ‘ecological.’” And again, “an anachronistic way of putting it would be to say that Buffon recommends an ecological mode of understanding.” Likewise, in The Intelligibility of Nature we read of Dalton that he was initially drawn to meteorology, and that: He did a bit of experimental work on these things, especially having to do with the water-holding capacity of gases, but his real interest lay in understanding what, at an underlying natural-philosophical level, was really going on physically.” Whereas, in The World as We Know It: He did experimental work on these things, especially concerning the water-holding capacity of gases — although not at a very refined level quantitatively — but he was continually trying to develop a theoretical conception of what was happening physically. The final full chapter of each book closes on the same resigned note. Intelligibility: These days, most serious work on the natural philosophical underpinnings and implications of quantum mechanics is performed not by physicists but by philosophers of science. Among scientific practitioners themselves, Bohr’s attempt to use instrumentality as sufficient grounds for a respectable science has met with a high degree of success. And again, in The World as We Know It: Bohr’s and Einstein’s concerns are now questions that are mostly discussed by philosophers of science rather than by physicists themselves. The marginalization of these sorts of questions amounts to the demise of natural philosophy, at least in physics, in the 20th century. Quantum mechanics “works,” and that’s good enough for most scientists who encounter it. Examples could be multiplied. When handling the same subject matter, some echoes are inevitable. Scholars should not feel that because they have written “Isaac Newton died in 1727” in one book, in the next they must describe him as perishing, expiring, or meeting his maker. But the repetitions of language and arguments (not to mention six reproduced images) threaded throughout The World as We Know It are more extensive than that. They should have been caught by Princeton University Press or its reviewers, and revised. Because the two books have so much in common, it is easy to see where they diverge. The World as We Know It is a less theoretical work than its predecessor. The sociology of knowledge that organized The Intelligibility of Nature has been reduced in scale and folded into readings and examples. The taut interplay between history and theory, which gave the earlier study so much interest, is there, but it is subtle. In the earlier book, the case studies demonstrated theoretical claims about the character and development of science. In the later work, each narrative of discovery is an end in itself. Insights emerge from the history, but they do not control the organization of the study. With the theory muted, it can be hard to understand the logic uniting Dear’s sprawling history of more than two centuries of scientific knowledge. The 16 brisk chapters cover an enormous amount of material. But the closer the volume edges to comprehensiveness, the more obvious the missing elements become. A chapter on “Institutions and Pedagogy,” describing the birth of the research university, illustrates the problem. Inserted roughly halfway through the book, the unnumbered chapter is designed as an “entr’acte,” in acknowledgement that it does not fit the study’s organization around scientific discoveries. Yet as Dear is well aware, no general history of the development of modern science can bracket its 19th-century institutionalization and professionalization. It was the 19th-century university, after all, that gave us the “scientist,” a term coined by the Cambridge philosopher William Whewell. Dear’s history of scientific discoveries implies a wider social and institutional history, but it remains largely subterranean, only occasionally extruded under the pressure of the narrative. It must be said that the balance is not all on the side of the earlier study. There are some advantages to the more historical, less theoretical organization of The World as We Know It. Dear’s accounts of paradigm shifts are remarkably lucid, no small accomplishment given that they span fields and centuries. He makes excellent use of the wealth of new scholarship on Darwin and his influences, to which he has himself contributed. It is satisfying to see puzzle pieces from Buffon’s natural history, Georges Cuvier’s animal taxonomy, Thomas Robert Malthus’s demography, and Charles Lyell’s geology recombined seamlessly in the Darwinian jigsaw. Likewise, Dear’s discussion of stellar nebulae, divided between chapters two and 15, shows vividly how Newton, Kant, Herschel, and Hubble reimagined insights and observations as they sought to discover whether the diffuse light that filtered through early telescopes was a glowing, gaseous substance or discrete but distant stars. Yet despite such pleasures, the book remains a more modest work than The Intelligibility of Nature. Dear has clearly not changed his views about the history of science. But in the two decades that have elapsed, the discipline and the world around it have changed, making it harder to write a sociologically and philosophically ambitious history of science for the general reader. That is a shame, because in the age of Silicon Valley and biotechnology, both the reciprocity and the tensions Dear identified between the epistemological and instrumental ambitions of science are more evident than ever. In recent years, some of the most exciting new books on the history of science in early modernity have focused precisely on this pressure point. Important studies such as Pamela H. Smith’s From Lived Experience to the Written Word (2022), James Poskett’s Horizons: The Global Origins of Modern Science (2022), and Vera Keller’s The Interlopers: Early Stuart Projects and the Undisciplining of Knowledge (2023) all shed new light on how early modern science negotiated the relationship between its instrumental and epistemological ambitions, or in Russell’s phrase, knowing and doing. There is every opportunity for a philosophically informed approach to draw new insights from this wealth of material. Dear, unfortunately, has not done so in The World as We Know It. But for future scholars of the history of science, his body of work over nearly four decades may provide just the model. Julianne Werlin is an associate professor of English at Duke University. Thanks for reading The Chronicle Review! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work. Subscribe
'Chronovisor' review: A researcher makes a wild discovery
Filmmakers Jack Auen and Kevin Walker, better known as the duo Cosmic Salon, mount an engagingly brainy nighttime adventure into lost technology.
NASA Campaign Explores Clouds Spawned by Wildfires
The Wildhorse grass fire in eastern Idaho erupted with a massive pulse of smoke. No one had expected it, but the wildfire had launched what’s known as a
NASA Mission Explores Clouds Spawned by Wildfires
The Wildhorse grass fire in eastern Idaho erupted with a massive pulse of smoke. No one had expected it, but the wildfire had launched what’s known as a
3.2K views · 30 reactions | New research measures the loudest birds...
New research measures the loudest birds known to science, with three South American species topping the chart. https://wapo.st/3TA5iab
11,000+ Washington residents lose healthcare, food benefits
More than 11,000 Washington state residents are losing access to healthcare and food benefits today due to changes under the federal law known as H.R. 1, also known as the One Big Beautiful Act.
Sustainable Seaweed Farming Could Boost Coastal Communities, Economies, and Marine Health
The cold, nutrient-rich waters off British Columbia and Alaska are home to some of the most spectacular and diverse marine ecosystems in the world, featuring more than 500 known seaweed species, from smaller red and green seaweeds to towering giant kelp that can grow as much as 2 feet a day.
How big is Pennsylvania's measles outbreak?
News of a fifth measles death in Pennsylvania underscores a longstanding issue about the disease. The full scope of the outbreak — in the state and in the country — isn’t known or even knowable.
What went wrong at Philly’s Academy of Natural Sciences? Former museum staffers point to years of missteps
“There was a big push to not be known as the dinosaur museum,” said one laid-off worker. That shift came with a cost, ex-staffers say.
'Money out of politics': Understanding Proposal 2 on Michigan November 2026 ballot
If voters approve Proposal 2, known as the “money out of politics” proposal, certain organizations and individuals would be limited in funding political campaigns, and regulations would apply to other types of political communications.
Shingles cases dropping among people who got chickenpox vaccine, data shows
The virus that causes chickenpox can reactivate during adulthood, causing the painful, itchy rash known as shingles.
Hot Ticket: BBQ, brews and big country hits highlight the weekend
Village Fair: Country music, barbecue and 70 years of tradition come together this weekend as the League City Music Festival & BBQ Cookoff, also known as the annual Village Fair,
UMass Memorial hires Chicago-area health executive as CFO
Biesczat spent 14 years with the organization now known as Endeavor Health, a nonprofit health system operating nine hospitals in and around Chicago.
As private equity, politics and prediction markets reshape sports, is the press box up to the task?
Sports journalism has sometimes been called the ‘toy department,’ since it was known for less serious reporting. But the sports page has an opportunity to take on a real watchdog
As private equity, politics and prediction markets reshape sports, is the press box up to the task?
Sports journalism has sometimes been called the ‘toy department,’ since it was known for less serious reporting. But the sports page has an opportunity to take on a real watchdog role.
As private equity, politics and prediction markets reshape sports, is the press box up to the task?
Sports journalism has sometimes been called the ‘toy department,’ since it was known for less serious reporting. But the sports page has an opportunity to take on a real watchdog role.
Stone Kite Is A New Studio From Halo, Destiny Creator Jason Jones And Author Margaret Stohl, And Its First Project Is About Rogue AI Robots
Stohl is perhaps best known for writing the Beautiful Creatures series of books. - Game Informer
Time lost to political haggling means lost momentum for research
While it’s not up to universities to set deadlines for EU institutions, “lost time” in the run-up to the launch of the next Horizon Europe would translate into “lost momentum” for universities, according to Dag Rune Olsen, president of the Young European Research Universities Network.“I think it's important to have [the EU budget] in place in order to be able to work on the research funding mechanisms, because we cannot afford to lose more momentum than we already have,” Olsen told Science|Business in an interview in September, just after EU research lobbies gathered in Brussels to push for a €200 billion budget for the next Horizon Europe programme.A funding gap would mean ramping down research activities, said Olsen. “You can do that quite swiftly, that’s not a problem, but ramping up again is much more difficult.”The last-minute push for an ambitious budget, and for a timely adoption of the research programme, comes at a time when the richest EU states have teamed up to call for significant cuts to European Commission’s proposal for the next multiannual budget, which allocates €175 billion for Horizon Europe. At the same gathering of research associations in September, the European Parliament’s budget rapporteur warned that the EU will need to raise its own taxes, otherwise political pressure and tighter national budgets will translate into a limited EU budget with a less ambitious envelope for research. The research sector hopes EU institutions will reach timely agreement on the budget and on Horizon Europe, but progress has been slow. Legislative progress has been delayed, partly because the European Parliament’s budget committee is still haggling over how to apply new EU-wide spending rules, known as the Performance Framework Regulation, and partly because EU governments have yet to agree on the size of the next EU budget. EU research Commissioner Ekaterina Zaharieva told Science|Business in July that she was hoping for an agreement on Horizon Europe by the end of 2026, but the timelines have been pushed back significantly, with the Parliament now aiming to announce its official position on Horizon Europe only in November. Avoid the funding gapAccording to Olsen, delayed EU funds could prompt universities and researchers to move on and do something else, potentially jeopardising years of work building consortia and collaborations. “If funding is interrupted, the networks fall apart in just a few months,” he said. Olsen also noted that an interruption would affect junior researchers first. PhD students and postdocs are on shorter term contracts and universities risk losing them if funding for EU projects is interrupted. Related articlesEU own resources ‘essential’ for future research budget, says leading MEPParliament haggle over EU-wide spending rules delays vote on Horizon EuropeZaharieva hopes for a Horizon Europe deal in 2026Universities usually have more employees, permanent and short-term staff, than they can cover with national funding, and external funding is essential to keep them all on the payroll. In case of an EU funding gap, “there will be a huge number of people that might end up without any contracts,” he said. Apart from the money issue, Olsen said EU projects forces universities to collaborate more which, in turn, increases the quality of teaching and research. In case of a funding dip, people will look around for opportunities elsewhere, in the private sector or abroad. “And then then you have to recruit again, and it's a tedious business,” said Olsen. “A gap is not a good idea, it's actually a waste of money.”According to Olsen, the difficult political context should encourage universities to make a stronger case for the EU increasing research funding, as universities can deliver on competitiveness, technological sovereignty, security and defence. “The reason why we ask for substantial investments in research is exactly what the Commission, what Europe, the Parliament have been discussing,” he said. “You really need to invest in order to thrive in the longer run.”Focus on the member statesBut EU and national R&D expenditure hasn't kept up with the times. EU governments have failed to reach a spending target set almost 25 years ago. Only six EU countries spend 3% or more of their GDP on R&D. Asked whether universities should put more effort into convincing the governments to ramp up their own spending, but also to support a strong budget for Horizon Europe in the ongoing budget negotiations, Olsen said “the answer is yes.”“We are very actively encouraging our members to talk to their ministries in order to enlighten them about the joint effort,” he said. The network is made up of 25 universities from across Europe, all established in the past 60 years or so.Who will call the shots?Budget and timing issues aside, the Parliament’s research committee has been locked in behind-the-scenes negotiations over the future structure of Horizon Europe, with MEPs disagreeing on the degree to which its collaborative research should be governed by councils of experts.The European Parliament’s lead rapporteur on Horizon Europe wants councils of independent experts to decide on the funding agenda, but the Commission, the Council, and parts of the Parliament disagree. For Olsen, it is normal for politicians to point at the big challenges, but when they start detailing how those challenges should be solved, the endeavour “fails utterly.” He does not necessarily think that “bureaucrats who don’t know the field” would be “much better at it” either. “There has to be a combination” of broad political directions and bottom-up implementation, Olsen said.
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.
These birds can match the earsplitting decibels of a chainsaw
New research measures the loudest birds known to science, with three South American species topping the chart
In Shanghai's 'Science City,' China's ascendant biotechs make their pitch to the world
A small conference with big ambitions mirrors the rapid growth of Chinese biotech, invites comparisons to U.S. biotech gathering also known for deal-making.
Liverpool's ahead-of-the-curve approach to youth recruitment
Liverpool's global talent department - led by Matt Newberry - is responsible for deciding which young talents from overseas should be targeted for a transfer move. Using their wealth of contacts across the world, including dedicated regional scouts, Liverpool are becoming increasingly aggressive in the space - and it helps that new sporting director Julian Ward is well known for his global network. After the Under-17s World Cup, Liverpool made a £1m move for Senegalese Mor Talla Ndiaye and a £2.6m move for fellow centre-back half Ifeanyi Ndukwe, who was representing Austria.
Chicago police issue alert about sting of overnight business burglaries on North, West Sides
In each incident, four unknown suspects arrived at a business, targeting cash registers, cash in gaming machines and store merchandise for theft, police said.
Windows 11 26H2 update has known issues. You might want to wait
Windows 11 26H2 has three known issues carried over from earlier versions. Here's why you might want to wait to update.
Astrology, homeopathy, vaccine rejectionism, creationism: Why pseudoscience thrives as science advances
Science has never known more, yet pseudoscience keeps gaining ground. Astrology, homeopathy, creationism and vaccine rejectionism all make
A hidden energy “treasure” under the Alps and Pyrenees? Scientists stunned - Futura-Sciences
A Secret Under Our Feet? Could hydrogen be the hidden energy of tomorrow? Recent breakthroughs are strengthening the case for this natural gas—also known as “white hydrogen”—as a key energy player in a decarbonized future. In France’s Lorraine region, for example, deep drilling has uncovered significant concentrations of natural hydrogen,...
When “DEI” research is cut, what happens to community health?
“I’m just going to run to the grocery store!” How many times have we said this without thinking about it? For most of us, it's usually an easy walk or a short drive to get the cheese we forgot. In reality, though, 13% of the U.S. population (about 39 million people) live in “food deserts,” which means living more than a mile from a grocery store in urban areas and more than 10 miles in rural areas. This was the case for people in Pittsburgh’s Hill District, where a quick run to buy food wasn’t an option. In the 1930s, federal maps marked the Hill as "hazardous" for lending, a practice known as redlining that steered investment away from Black neighborhoods. Decades of disinvestment followed, and residents went about 30 years without a nearby grocery store. This made it hard to keep healthy eating habits and contributed to chronic disease. When a grocery store finally opened in the area in 2013, researchers saw the opportunity and launched the PHRESH study, which initially compared the health of participants from the Hill district to those in the Homewood district. Over time, the study expanded to other factors such as brain health and Alzheimer's risk. Residents like Roderick Blair overcame initial hesitation to share their health data, trusting it would benefit their neighborhood. Then, in August 2026, the NIH abruptly canceled the study’s grant, citing that it was “subjective” and fell outside their scientific scope—an effect of the administration’s interpretation of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI). Research like PHRESH can help determine what changes in a neighborhood actually improve health, so cutting it has left that question unanswered. Other canceled studies have examined health issues like maternal health, preterm birth rates, or sickle cell disease. Courts have reversed some of these grant cancellations, but not all of them. If we really want America to be healthier, research into why some communities get sicker than others is absolutely critical. The law that created the federal minority health research institute passed with bipartisan support in 2000. But these days, as evidenced by grant cancellations, the political shift in attitudes toward DEI means we often lose access to the health information we need to help all communities thrive. DEI vs. health equity vs. equality and the overlap (or lack thereof) The letters “DEI” evoke very different reactions depending on who you are in the U.S. DEI programs can address gender, disability, age, and other factors, but the fiercest debate centers on race. For some people, hearing DEI brings to mind policies that may have cost them a job or a college seat because they are white. Others see DEI as a matter of justice: a way to expand representation and opportunity for groups that have been historically marginalized. Both perspectives are rooted in lived experience, and both center on the same question: whether hiring and admissions practices are fair. Hiring and admission practices, though related, are not the same as health equity. Health equity is “the attainment of the highest level of health for all people.” It’s the recognition that some groups of people consistently experience worse health outcomes than others. For instance, black mothers die from pregnancy-related complications at three times the rate of white mothers, and rural Americans are more likely to die from issues such as heart disease and cancer. Equity is also often conflated with “equality,” which leads to misunderstanding of how to actually best support communities. Equality ignores the fact that we aren’t all starting life with the same resources or circumstances, whereas equity is about helping people get what they specifically need based on their situation so they have the chance to achieve the same outcome as anyone else. For example, if every household in Pittsburgh got a $30 grocery gift card, that would be equal. But during the decades the Hill District went without a grocery store, that card wouldn’t have helped much. Equity means making sure everyone can actually access a store in the first place. DEI policies can overlap with health equity in many ways. For example, they may help expand access to quality education and stable, well-paying jobs, which in turn can provide health insurance, safer housing, and improved finances—all of which can reduce health disparities. But to make that happen, we first need data to identify disparities in communities and to develop solutions that effectively address them. What we lose when the research stops Community data is important to health equity because: You can’t fix what you don’t see: Data show which communities are most affected by health factors such as infection, heart disease, and cancer. If we don’t know what is happening and where, then we can’t develop interventions to help. Poor health costs everyone: Chronic disease is expensive—both to the individual person and to the overall economy. Understanding what groups of people are most at risk allows us to develop interventions that can save everyone money. Disparities exist for many communities: Health equity includes disparities that exist due to a whole host of factors, such as family background, race and ethnicity, rural vs. suburban residence, gender and sexual orientation, veteran status, disability, and lower income. This means many Americans can benefit from research into differences in health outcomes and how to improve them. Trust is easy to lose: Some participants in the PHRESH study were initially vocal about their concerns about participating. But that trust was earned because the researchers kept their promises and centered their work on the community. When projects are canceled mid-cycle, researchers have no choice but to leave behind communities they had promised to help. This hurts trust in the long run. It’s also a very inefficient use of resources, and it will take significant time and effort to redo the work when the government realizes this work is important again. How should we talk about health equity? This is hard because the words “equity” and “DEI” are currently very politically charged. So whether you’re a public health professional, teacher, or friend, how we talk about this topic matters. The right framing can help people who might otherwise be skeptical see why health equity research is important and deserves funding. Here are some suggestions to help your conversations: Choose your words strategically: Who are you trying to reach with your message? Are they likely to be resistant to terms like “diversity” and “equity”? If so, find alternative words to use to still get the message across. It is frustrating to be in that position, but the goal of improving health is too important not to try to make inroads. Sometimes simply reframing can help the message reach those who need to hear it. Focus on the problem: The terms “health equity” and “DEI” are abstract. Make it more specific. For example, discuss differences in maternal death or ways to improve health outcomes in rural communities. These still have equity at their core but will likely be better understood by those you’re talking with. Focus on systems: Disparities exist, but if they are communicated poorly, people can mistakenly think the issue is the individual’s fault. Disparities are largely driven by failures of the system—such as lack of access to health care and a long legacy of racism. When discussing the disparities, frame them around these systemic issues to ensure blame isn’t placed on the individuals impacted. Tell stories: Personalize these policies by using stories from those impacted that connect to the data you’re trying to convey. This helps make the policies and outcomes more concrete and meaningful. Bottom line Some communities end up sicker than others. That’s just the facts. We can argue about the best way to do that research, but canceling it simply because it may be linked to DEI doesn’t make anyone healthier. It just leaves communities like the Hill district behind. And in the end, it causes us all to move backward in our efforts to improve health in this country. Love, EM Big thanks to MacKenzie Isaac & Legairre Radden, who reviewed this piece and generously shared their expertise and lived experience to help improve it. Dr. Liz Marnik, PhD, is Executive Director of The Evidence Collective and a science communicator and immunologist working at the intersection of public trust, science, and public health. To discuss communication training on topics like health equity and storytelling, email Liz at liz@yle.health or learn more on our website. Your Local Epidemiologist (YLE) comprises a team of experts, ranging from physicians to immunologists to epidemiologists to nutritionists, working together with one goal: to “translate” ever-evolving public health science so that people are well-equipped to make evidence-based decisions. The YLE suite of newsletters reaches over 475,000 people across more than 132 countries. This newsletter is free to everyone, thanks to the generous support of fellow YLE community members. To support the effort, subscribe or upgrade below: Your Local Epidemiologist is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Subscribe
Kwak Jae-hyung Signs Exclusive Contract with Seobak Entertainment
Kwak Jae-hyung Signs Exclusive Contract with Seobak Entertainment Known for Squid Game and films like Concrete Utopia, Kwak joins Seobak Entertainment
Actor Sean Astin speaks on mental health at The Rescue Mission fundraiser
A well-known actor traveled to the Summit City to speak about breaking mental health stigma and valuing individuals.
At 40, her first mammogram changed everything: LMH Health nurse urges others to get screened
Holly Dawson expected her first mammogram to be uneventful. At 40, she had no symptoms, no known family history of breast cancer and no reason to expect the screening would find anything concerning. She might even have put it off a year or two if her LMH Health primary care physician, Dr. Caitlin Elmore, hadn’t […]
The ‘War Games’ problem: Computer science has long understood what it takes to keep AI under control
A hit 1983 movie illustrates what computer scientists have long known: If you give an AI agent a goal but don’t control what it can and can’t do, you shouldn’t be surprised by what it does.
SNAP and Americans’ Health
In 1964, when Congress passed the Food Stamp Act, the country faced a problem of inadequate nutrition among low-income Americans due to insufficient food. In response, the Food Stamp Program—today known as the Supplemental Nutrition...
Google Partners With Known Nerd Henry Cavill On A Video Game To Showcase Googlebooks
The final result will be published in November.
Slinger Francisco death: Singer known as the Mighty Sparrow was 91
"King of Calypso" Slinger Francisco, also known as the Mighty Sparrow, died in New York on Sunday at 91 following a brief illness, according to his daughter, Karen Francisco.
Stallone at 80 reflects on 'Rocky' 50 years later: 'I am a lucky dog'
Sylvester Stallone, known for his iconic role in "Rocky," reflects on his journey from underdog to Hollywood legend | WWL
Stallone at 80 reflects on 'Rocky' 50 years later: 'I am a lucky dog'
Sylvester Stallone, known for his iconic role in "Rocky," reflects on his journey from underdog to Hollywood legend | KCBS All News 106.9FM and 740AM
Dennis Haskins, who played the hapless principal on 'Saved by the Bell,' dies at 75
Dennis Haskins, best known as Principal Richard Belding on “Saved by the Bell,” has died.
A Simple iPhone Setting Can Actually Stop Spam Callers In Their Tracks
Wave goodbye to pesky unknown calls.
Dennis Haskins, 'Saved by the Bell' principal, dies at 75
The actor became a fixture of the beloved 1990s teen sitcom as Principal Richard Belding, known for his "Hey, hey, hey" catchphrase.
Radio Waves Coming From an Alien Planet May Be a Cosmic First
Beta Pictoris b appears to have an aurora caused by a powerful magnetic field. If confirmed, it would be the first such field known outside our solar system.
Nathaniel Brown: 'Keep going!'
A left-back wearing the number of a forward? It’s unusual, but it’s the perfect fit for our new No.11 Nathaniel Brown. The summer signing – known to his teammates as Nene – has spoke to member...
Dennis Haskins, 'Saved by the Bell' principal Mr. Belding, dies
Dennis Haskins, the actor best known for playing lovable principal Richard Belding on the NBC teen sitcom "Saved by the Bell," has died. He was 75.
Dennis Haskins dead: Actor known for 'Saved by the Bell' was 75
Dennis Haskins, known for playing the earnest and beloved Principal Richard Belding on 'Saved by the Bell,' has died. He was 75.
‘Saved by the Bell’ actor Dennis Haskins dies: TMZ
Dennis Haskins, the actor known for playing Principal Richard Belding in the popular sitcom “Saved by the Bell,” has died, TMZ reports. Haskins’ agent Jay Schachter reportedly confirmed the a…
Billionaire tax is dividing California healthcare system it's designed to support
California's proposal to tax billionaires more, known as Proposition 40, is dividing the healthcare system, which it is supposed to help.
Gen. George Marshall's Leesburg home designated National Park Service affiliated area
The General George C. Marshall House in Leesburg, known as Dodona Manor, has been designated an affiliated area of the National Park Service.
Raoni Barcelos’s Team Provides Latest Health Update on Fighter
UFC bantamweight Raoni Barcelos’s team has provided the latest health update for their fighter after he was stopped at UFC Vegas 121.Barcelos suffered an unknown medical emergency in the main event of UFC Vegas 121, a five-round war against Raul Rosas Jr. that Barcelos was winning up until he went unconscious in the fifth round.We […] The post Raoni Barcelos’s Team Provides Latest Health Update on Fighter appeared first on HEAVY.
Person test positive for tuberculosis in Rowan-Salisbury School System, health officials say
Not known if person was student or member of staff
Turned down MIT for a little-known college. Not everyone understood.
Hannah Mitchell turned down MIT for a the Merchant Marine Academy. Three months in, she says it was the right decision.
Two Position Battles to Watch for in Bucks Training Camp
An interesting 2026-27 season awaits the Milwaukee Bucks, likely with more lineup unknowns than knowns.
First known AI agent breach: What happens when it starts acting independently?
OpenAI agent gained unauthorized access to Australian health portal after encountering restrictions, says Prime Minister Anthony Albanese | Anadolu
New UMSOM Research Shows Promising Results for Health Care Professionals Using Ketogenic Diet Therapy to Treat Mental Illness
Specialized high-fat, low carbohydrate diets, known as ketogenic metabolic therapy, are showing promising therapeutic benefits for certain mental illnesses in emerging research. Now, a new study from researchers at the University of Maryland School of Medicine’s Maryland Psychiatric Research Center (MPRC) shows that an immersive training program can improve health care provider confidence in using a ketogenic dietary treatment plan for their patients.
3-foot claws, tons of teeth: ‘Anatomically bizarre’ giant dinosaur found by scientists
Paleontologists described Kayrasaurus changliensis, the largest known therizinosaur from the region, despite its fearsome claws and teeth.
Jess McKenna and Zach Reino are a force to be toured with
Known for their work on an improvised musical podcast and Dropout TV, this duo brings “Off Book” to the Barrymore in Madison on Oct. 17.
Officials praise Jim Ukrop, local business legend, who died Friday at 89
Perhaps best known for helping grow his family’s Ukrop’s Supermarkets grocery store chain into a beloved Richmond institution, Ukrop also made his mark in philanthropy, banking, venture capital and as a civic booster.
Xsight Group Featured in Harvard Business Review on AI Agent Orchestration Across Silos
HONG KONG, Sept. 28, 2026 /PRNewswire/ -- Xsight Group (known as Xsight), a Hong Kong–headquartered cross-border technology group founded in 2004, has been featured as a research case in "How AI Agents Orchestrate Work Across Silos," a special report published in the September–October 2026 issue of Harvard Business Review. The article examines how a new generation of AI systems can connect functions and reduce the coordination friction that slows companies down, citing Xsight's practice of decomposing complex cross-departmental decisions into modular tasks and building a layered agentic AI orchestration system as a valuable model for cross-border organizational coordination.
Calypso icon Slinger Francisco, dubbed 'The Mighty Sparrow,' dies at 91, his family says
Calypso music has lost one of its most emblematic voices with the death of Slinger Francisco, who was known on stage as the Mighty Sparrow and dubbed the “Calypso King of the World.” | Newsradio 1140 WRVA
Calypso icon Slinger Francisco, dubbed 'The Mighty Sparrow,' dies at 91, his family says
Calypso music has lost one of its most emblematic voices with the death of Slinger Francisco, who was known on stage as the Mighty Sparrow and dubbed the “Calypso King of the World.” | Talk Radio 1210 WPHT
Nations League, the 3 standout men of the night
The heroes of the night.A star, an “unknown,” and CR7’s replacement: discover the three standout men from this new Nations League night.🥉 Konstantínos Karétsas - GreeceHe may not have been ...
Newborn Planet Sets Record as Youngest Known World
Elias 2-24 b, a Jupiter-mass planet under a million years old, is the youngest world ever confirmed and is still growing in the disk around its star
Swiss voters reject bid to lock neutrality into Constitution
The country is known for neutrality, but Russia's war in Ukraine reopened questions over its non-engagement in foreign conflicts
Colts represented at Notre Dame v. Purdue game
The Indianapolis Colts are known to have representatives at a college football game on the weekend of Sept. 26.
AP Entertainment SummaryBrief at 8:30 p.m. EDT
Kennedy Center put off planned repairs despite known structural issues, former employees allege
Liverpool looking to recreate excellent Jeremy Jacquet deal
The last two years have seen a distinct change in Liverpool’s transfer policy. During the time of Jurgen Klopp, the Reds became known as a side that would sign players with upside and turn them into...
Kennedy Center put off planned repairs despite known structural issues, former employees allege
The center’s executive director and chief operating officer, Matt Floca, did not treat the roofing issues as priorities and in April halted a funded plan to address them, according to the letter Thursday signed by David Seide, a lawyer representing the anonymous whistleblowers.
Kennedy Center put off planned repairs despite known structural issues, former employees allege
Some former Kennedy Center employees are accusing officials at the performing arts venue of long knowing about structural issues they recently cited as new problems | WBBM Newsradio 780 AM & 105.9 FM
Kennedy Center put off planned repairs despite known structural issues, former employees allege
Some former Kennedy Center employees are accusing officials at the performing arts venue of long knowing about structural issues they recently cited as new problems | WBEN
Kennedy Center put off planned repairs despite known structural issues, former employees allege
Some former Kennedy Center employees are accusing officials at the performing arts venue of long knowing about structural issues they recently cited as new problems. The anonymous whistleblowers...
Anthropic says Claude found a new gene-editing enzyme but science isn't confirmed
Anthropic says Claude agents autonomously flagged a CRISPR-like enzyme system in virus DNA in a 21-hour run. A CRISPR pioneer calls it intriguing, others sceptical — it's an unreviewed preprint with function unknown.
Scientists Just Learned a Bear’s Sex From a Strand of Its Hair
Researchers matched hormone traces in grizzly hair to known bears and correctly told males from females 80% of the time, rising to 94% in adults.
NYK Expands Offshore Wind Business with SOV Newbuild
Japanese shipping major NYK is moving to strengthen its business in the offshore wind power segment. The group, best known for its operations in dry b...
Vail Health will bring medical records under one digital roof across Eagle County and beyond
On Oct. 3, Vail Health will transition to a new electronic medical record system that will be easy for many locals to remember since it coincidentally shares the same name as a well-known ski pass....
Cowboys emphasize business trip mentality as they practice in Rio ahead of their game vs Ravens
RIO DE JANEIRO (AP) — The Dallas Cowboys began their preparations in Rio de Janeiro on Friday for their game against the Baltimore Ravens with an eye on the task at hand and not the sights for which the city is known. Brian Schottenheimer, coaching in his first international game as the Cowboys’ head coach,
Cowboys emphasize business trip mentality as they practice in Rio ahead of their game vs Ravens
The Dallas Cowboys began their preparations in Rio de Janeiro on Friday for their game against the Baltimore Ravens with an eye on the task at hand and not the sights for which the city is known.
Apple Finally Shares tvOS 27 Release Notes With List of New Features
Apple today finally shared release notes for tvOS 27, nearly two weeks after releasing the software update. Many of the new features and changes listed were already known, but we are sharing the notes for the sake of completeness. tvOS 27 was released on Monday, September 14, but the Apple TV does not show release notes for software updates in the Settings app. Instead, Apple periodically updates a support document outlining what is new in tvOS updates.
Keychron Thunderbolt 5 Dock review: Unusually sensible
A company that’s best known for keyboards makes a strong entry into the high-end dock world.
Elon Musk PAC ramps up midterms spending to help Republicans
His known political giving so far this cycle falls short of the $290 million he gave to elect Trump and other Republicans in 2024
Trump’s newest rebranding project: The technology formerly known as AI
He’s trying to label the technology as “superintelligence” and says he pitched the term to Xi Jinping.
iPad Mini 8 Leaked: A20 Pro Chip, Landscape Camera, and More
Apple's next-generation iPad mini will feature the A20 Pro chip, a rearranged front-facing camera, and a new speaker system, leaked code reveals. The information originates from Apple's own code (spotted by MacRumors contributor Aaron Perris) and also shows clear product images of the new iPad mini. Although images of the device only show the front, leaving any design changes of the rear or side profile unknown, there are still visible changes.