SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY
Search headlines
Find the stories shaping the conversation.
Results for " Peter " 705 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle
‘Godly leadership’: Lisa Demuth’s Pentecostal faith is a driving force behind her politics
Lisa Demuth asked God whether she should run for Minnesota House minority leader. On the morning Minnesota House Republicans were electing a new leader after a bitterly disappointing 2022 election, Demuth read the Bible verse 1 Peter 4:10: “God has given each of you a gift from his great variety of spiritual gifts. Use them […]
SKC builds new generation of Indigenous leaders with national business chapter
It's the first week of classes at Salish Kootenai College for the fall semester. As class lets out, students, new and returning, are making their way into the John Peter Paul building for the first meeting of an important club on campus. This club gives students hands-on experience by inspiring Indigenous students with leadership, networking, scholarships and business experience.
Beth Israel Lahey Health wins state OK for nearly $80m Lahey Clinic expansion
The expansion comes as BILH gains a new CEO in Peter Shorett, who will succeed Dr. Kevin Tabb in January.
Netflix is laying off 6% of its workforce, in biggest round of job cuts at streaming giant in years
Netflix plans to lay off about 6% of its workforce as part of wider organizational changes. Co-CEOs Greg Peters and Ted Sarandos announced the cuts in a memo to employees
Netflix is laying off 6% of its workforce, in biggest round of job cuts at streaming giant in years
Netflix plans to lay off about 6% of its workforce as part of wider organizational changes. Co-CEOs Greg Peters and Ted Sarandos announced the cuts in a memo to employees
Netflix is laying off 6% of its workforce, in biggest round of job cuts in years
Co-CEOs Greg Peters and Ted Sarandos said the company's product, tech, legal and human resources teams would be the most impacted
Rep. Moore says he puts policy over 'toxic' politics; Crosby calls himself a chance for change
In a debate for Utah’s newly-drawn 2nd Congressional District, Republican incumbent Rep. Blake Moore squared off with Democrat Peter Crosby.
Former councilwoman challenges Mentzer in 97th House District
Republican Steve Mentzer faces off against an East Lampeter Township woman with government experience in a bid to win his seventh reelection campaign in the 97th House District.
To get the most from science, train lab leaders
Business skills can’t just be learned on the job, say Sahar Bakr and Peter Aldiss
Wintrust Hires Atwell to Help Expand Business Development for Wintrust Specialty Finance
Wintrust Financial added Sean Atwell, vice president of business development, to Wintrust Specialty Finance.
WATCH LIVE: 2nd Congressional District Debate with Peter Crosby and Blake Moore
Democrat Peter Crosby and Republican Blake Moore are running to represent northern Utah in the U.S. House of Representatives. Watch their debate Tuesday at 6 p.m.
When 1 + 1 = 1: The Miserable Math Behind Many Media Mergers
(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.) The last few issues of this newsletter have circled two topics: September’s streaming viewership and all the Paramount/Skydance/Warner Bros./Discovery merger news. I’m happy to say on the Streaming Ratings Report front, we’ll be all caught up by early next week, then the SRR will come out on a tight weekly schedule. Then, after today, I’ll have slayed my PSWbD dragon. It’s such a big story, it demanded multiple issues. With the announcement of a name (just Skydance) and executive team, though, I think we can almost close the book on this story. In terms of topics, it becomes just another studio to cover. So today, I have one last set of takes on that merger. As I’ve sat with it, reading about who was staying and who was going, a big worry crystallized in my brain, and I gotta get that take out. Plus, I still owe you a host of “ugliness” that didn’t fit in my previous “The Good, The Bad and The Ugly” takes. Let’s dive in! Subscribe Most Important Story of the Week - As Paramount Shuffles Deck Chairs, Will They Build or Consolidate? On social media—I try to avoid most social media platforms, but sometimes I end up checking in—the best joke I saw about the announcement of the new name of Skydance was from fellow reporter Claire Atkinson who pointed out… Yeah, I laughed out loud at that one. Later, though, I saw another Twitter response (that later got deleted, so I can’t shout the person out) that did give me pause. The person noted that the Titanic film made the better analogy: a super expensive project everyone in the town doubted that went on to conquer the globe. So yeah: on one hand, the image of the Titanic recalls the actual ship and its infamous end, but that clip is from a movie which proved the doubters wrong. So for all the skepticism of the latest massive media merger, one could wonder which way this one goes. Does it crash like the Titanic or rise to glory like Titanic, the movie? Either way, this deal is “Titanic”, looking at the massive debt required to close the deal, which is not going well when it comes to borrowing costs for Paramount… …or borrowing costs for Oracle. But I’ve started to get worried about another outcome: the sum of this merger will be smaller and weaker and less profitable than its former parts. In other words, one plus one won’t equal three or two, but an even smaller number. Skydance paid to take a traditional studio off the board, but they won’t really capture the upside. Let me explain what I mean, but first, let’s look at the series of news that inspired this thought. Skydance Sets Its Leadership Team As soon as the Paramount-Skydance-Warner Bros.-Discovery merger closed, the new leadership team announced a new name—Skydance, which I’ll use going forward—and a new executive leadership team. You’ve probably read through all the executive shuffling, but if you haven’t, here’s a quick, incomplete summary, in rough order of importance: Mattel’s CEO Ynon Kreiz—who previously ran Maker Studios—joined as co-CEO with David Ellison. HBO/HBO Max’s Casey Bloys will stay and run streaming. Former head of streaming for Paramount-Skydance Cindy Holland—who was also at Netflix—will depart. The former heads of Warner Bros.—Pam Abdy and Mike De Luca—are out. The film studios will be run by Dana Goldstein and Josh Greenstein. George Cheeks of Paramount will run Skydance TV, controlling all the TV production units. In comic book news, the DC films will still be run by Peter Gunn and Peter Safran. Lastly, the head of CNN, Mark Thompson, will stay in place. Let’s quickly opine on the particulars before diving into the broad ramifications. We’re just getting started with this issue, but the rest is for paid subscribers of the Entertainment Strategy Guy, so if you’d like to find out… Who I like and dislike in their next gigs… Why I think this consolidation will likely leave Skydance worse off… The math behind which mergers succeed and which don’t… A lot more ugliness in this merger… And a whole lot more... ...please subscribe! We can only keep doing this great work with your support.
Georgetown Business Gets the History Book It Deserves
“I lived in Philadelphia and Boston before I came to Washington in 1971, two cities that are guaranteed to give you an interest in history,” says Kenneth
Microsoft’s top science exec is leaving to fulfill a childhood dream: Joining a Formula 1 team
Peter Lee, the longtime Microsoft Research leader, plans to join the Mercedes Formula 1 team in a newly created AI advisor role. He'll work on physics problems for the team's car, predictive models and how F1's regulators might govern AI.
Pope Leo in Rome hospital for lung surgery
Leo has been unusually candid for a pontiff about his health issues, disclosing the surgery to thousands of people in St. Peter's Square.
Jazz Continue Strong Preseason with Win Over Spurs
Rookie Darryn Peterson shined and Ace Bailey’s defensive versatility flashed as Utah’s dominant third-quarter surge dismantled San Antonio, signaling a dangerous new depth in the Western Conference.
Microsoft science chief Lee to advise Mercedes on AI
Departing Microsoft Science president Peter Lee plans to advise Mercedes on AI applications ranging from car physics to predictive modeling and regulation,...
Exclusive: Microsoft’s departing science president plans to join Mercedes F1 team as AI advisor
Peter Lee spent 16 years at Microsoft shaping its science and research efforts.
Health fair draws more than 1,000 in its 45th year
More than 1,000 people turned out for the 45th annual Baxter Health and KTLO Health Fair and Expo on Oct. 7 at the Mountain Home Community Center. Baxter Health CEO Ron Peterson said 75 vendors and more than 250 volunteers and staff worked the daylong event, which offered free screenings, resources and health information. He
Leicester CFO and Sporting Director Talk in Rare Interviews and Admit they Need ‘to Be More Open’
Leicester City's start to life in League One has fallen far below expectations. After a defeat to Peterborough United, they fell to 17th place, having won just two games. Plenty of the frustration over the last few years has been directed towards Chief Football Officer Jon Rudkin. He doesn't normally do interviews, but both he …
Microsoft Is Taking AI Beyond the Data Center, But Its Surface Business Is Just a Small Piece of the Pie
The tech giant's latest Nvidia-powered Surface devices add another dimension to its growth strategy as shares trade near all-time highs.
Microsoft Is Taking AI Beyond the Data Center, But Its Surface Business Is Just a Small Piece of the Pie
The tech giant's latest Nvidia-powered Surface devices add another dimension to its growth strategy as shares trade near all-time highs.
'News reports tweaked the science to speak to contemporary anxieties': How Neanderthal extinction is a projection of our own, modern fears
In this excerpt from "Neanderthals Among Us," author Peter Sahlins looks at the way Neanderthal extinction theories are often engrained with our own societal fears.
Blues Recall Dylan Peterson From Springfield
2020 third-round pick brought up with injuries to Toroipchenko, Dube; could make NHL debut Tuesday against Senators
Bruins’ JJ Peterka Hits Career Milestone In Blowout Win
The Boston Bruins were in action on Saturday afternoon against the rival Philadelphia Flyers, and it was a dominating performance by the host Bruins, who not only defeated the Flyers on the scoresheet but also had a decided advantage in shots.The Bruins earned a 5-1 win, improving their record to 4-2 overall and 3-1 at […] The post Bruins’ JJ Peterka Hits Career Milestone In Blowout Win appeared first on HEAVY.
Commanders GM Adam Peters explains release of rookie running back
Commanders GM Adam Peters explained the decision to waive rookie running back Kaytron Allen.
Three Things We Learned From PSV 2-0 SC Heerenveen
Guus Til’s clinical form rescued a vulnerable defence as Peter Bosz’s side overcame narrow escapes to secure three points ahead of their Champions League trip to Leipzig.
Did the Zionism row lose it for Zack Polanski?
Peter Walker and Lexy Topping discuss Zack Polanski’s leadership after he lost the Holborn and St Pancras byelection
In brief: 'Stick' season 2 trailer and more
Bill Murray stars in the official trailer for A Course Called Ireland. The six-part documentary series premieres on Paramount+ on Oct. 25. The show follows Murray and his friends as they travel across the island to explore Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland's best fairways ...The Die Hard films are getting a brand-new home media release. All five of the movies will be released on physical media in 4K Ultra HD on Dec. 1. Bruce Willis stars as John McClane in all of the Die Hard films. The original movie finds the New York City policeman taking on terrorists after he flies to Los Angeles to be with his estranged wife and two children on Christmas ... TNCMS.AdManager.render({region: 'fixed-big-ad-top-asset', slot: 1, fold: "above"}); The trailer for Stick season 2 is here. Owen Wilson stars as the talented golfer who strives for second chance in the sophomore season. Peter Dager, Timothy Olyphant, Rhea Seehorn, Marc Maron, John Higgins and Billy Zane also make up the cast of the new season. The Apple TV series premieres its first two episodes on Nov. 4. A new episode drops weekly every Wednesday that follows until the season finale airs on Dec. 30 ...Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved. Thank you for reading kmaland.comAt KMA, we attempt to be accurate in our reporting. If you see a typo or mistake in a story, please contact us by emailing kmaradio@kmaland.com.
Community notes: Best Bets for things to do in Brevard
Community notes: Best Bets for things to do in Brevard
ADHD and autism at risk of over-diagnosis, says report, as author warns of rise in mental ill health
Prof Peter Fonagy, who chaired the review, tells Radio 4's Today programme there has been a "very real" rise in "distress and mental ill health among young people".
Beth Israel Lahey Health Names Peter Shorett as President and Chief Executive Officer
Following a national search, the Board of Trustees of Beth Israel Lahey Health (BILH) today announced the appointment of Peter Shorett as the organization’s next President and CEO, effective January 2027. Since joining BILH in 2019, Shorett has served in a number of senior leadership roles, including most recently as Senior Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer. As COO, Shorett has led the performance, growth, and strategy of the health system, during which time he was instrumen
No ‘snowflakes’: mental health review says today’s youth have it harder and harms are real
Peter Fonagy lauds courage of young people and warns of consequences of rising prevalence of mental illness
PSV Receive Major Injury Boost Ahead of SC Heerenveen Clash
Lutsharel Geertruida’s return to training bolsters Peter Bosz’s defensive options as the Eredivisie champions navigate a congested schedule and a lengthy absentee list for Friday's home fixture.
In Peterborough, a civics quiz: Is Jonah Wheeler proving his independence? Or ignoring his voters?
In Peterborough, there’s something of a political schism playing out over two-term state Rep. Jonah Wheeler, a Democrat who has angered some in town with his votes.
Two icons, a glorious farewell and a potentially bitter ending
As Lionel Messi's international career ends in fond farewell, Cristiano Ronaldo's is at risk of petering out. BBC Sport takes a look at what could be the end of the international career's of two football greats.
ASU national security expert explains missteps since 9/11 attacks
The war against terror immediately after the 9/11 attacks had clear goals that were quickly accomplished, but has been followed by many missteps in the 25 years since, according to an Arizona State University national security expert.Peter Bergen, a professor of practice at ASU, recently released the book, “All the President’s Wars: Twenty-Five Years of America's War on Terror.”
Craig Pawson Appointed Referee for Aston Villa vs Brentford
Craig Pawson will referee Brentford's Premier League trip to Aston Villa on Saturday, with Peter Bankes on VAR duty at Villa Park.
Trump, politics and lawfare take center stage in Arizona's attorney general race
Four years ago, Democratic Attorney General Kris Mayes won the office by less than 300 votes. Now, she’s hoping her track record taking on President Trump, fake electors and predatory businesses will earn her a second term in office.
The Daily Mauling: 10/6/26
Kansas Jayhawks News The LJW has a writeup on what the return of Council means for the men’s basketball team. And it’s not paywalled! The KC Star took a close look at Darryn Peterson’s first NBA experience in this weekend’s preseason game. Should I consider DP content to be KU content? He doesn’t exactly carry […]
In current anti-fraud climate, no room for error for home health, hospice agencies
After operating hospice, home health and other companies for over a decade in Arizona, Peter prided himself on his sound reputation in the community and employees’ loyalty. He never dreamed that a technical error on a routine hospice renewal application would lead to a revocation of his hospice’s Medicare enrollment and billing privileges and leave him fighting for his livelihood.
Prince George’s County Council votes to advance billion-dollar entertainment venue project
The Sphere concert and entertainment venue planned for National Harbor is another step closer to reality after an vote Monday by the Prince George’s County Council, but unions looking to secure agreements on construction of the project have been left out.
‘Days of Our Lives,’ ‘General Hospital’ star Robert Kelker-Kelly dies at 62
Prolific soap opera actor Robert Kelker-Kelly is dead at 62. Police in Missouri said in their report that the daytime star died Saturday in his St. Peters home around 8:16
Goat to Vote: SPC students' try to get young people to the polls
St. Petersburg College students organized a voter registration event to register as many people as possible. The event, aptly named "Goat to Vote," provided treats, free yoga, and two voter-support goats.
Richie Floyd: Bernie’s 2016 Campaign Changed My Life
In 2021, Richie Floyd was elected to the St Petersburg City Council, becoming the first openly socialist elected official in Florida in over a century. Writing in Jacobin, Floyd explains how Bernie’s ...
Stephen King and Peter Straub’s Other Worlds Than These Will Break Your Heart
‘The Talisman’ finale is an emotional adventure story, resurrecting old friends, forgotten memories, and vanished worlds.
MLB playoff schedule: It’s American League Monday
The National League had the MLB playoff stage to itself on Sunday, but while those four teams switch cities, Monday belongs to the American League Division Series, with a pair of Games 2 in Cleveland and St. Petersburg. Major League Baseball in recent years has started the Division Series round with all four series playing […]
Stanford Professor One Of Three Scientists Awarded The Nobel Prize In Medicine
Stanford professor Karl Deisseroth joins Peter Hegemann and Georg Nagel as winners of the 2026 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for their work on optogenetics.
Providence Opens New Rural Health Clinic in Polson
Just over a year after breaking ground on a rural health clinic in Polson, community members, donors and hospital staff gathered Sept. 30 in front of the new building just behind Providence St. Joseph Medical Center. “Over the years we’ve heard about this need over and over again,” Chief Executive for Providence Montana Krissy Petersen […]
NYC’s office recovery becomes a competition for talent
JLL’s Peter Riguardi explains how talent, AI growth and demand for premium space are reshaping New York City’s office market.
Nobel Prize in medicine jointly awarded to Karl Deisseroth, Peter Hegemann and Georg Nagel
The Nobel Prize in medicine was awarded Monday to Karl Deisseroth, Peter Hegemann and Georg Nagel for their research into light-gated ion channels and optogenetics. The prize money this year is 12 million…
American Deisseroth and Germans Hegemann and Nagel win 2026 Nobel medicine prize
Scientists Karl Deisseroth, Peter Hegemann and Georg Nagel won the 2026 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for "discoveries concerning light-gated ion channels and optogenetics," the award-giving body said on Monday.
Nobel Prize in medicine awarded to three scientists for their work ‘concerning light-gated ion channels and optogenetics’
The 2026 Nobel Prize for physiology or medicine has been awarded to three scientists – Karl Deisseroth, Peter Hegemann and Georg Nagel – for “their discoveries concerning light-gated ion channels and optogenetics.”
Scientists win Nobel Prize in medicine for work on ‘light-gated ion channels and optogenetics’
Scientists to Karl Deisseroth, Peter Hegemann and Georg Nagel won the 2026 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine.
2026 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine awarded to Karl Deisseroth, Georg Nagel and Peter Hegemann for work on optogenetics
Karl Deisseroth, Georg Nagel and Peter Hegemann developed optogenetics, which uses light and genetics to control individual cells
'I Play Rocky' review: Can this crowd-pleaser be an Oscar contender?
"Green Book" director Peter Farrelly offers Oscar bait. But can it topple "The Odyssey"?
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
‘Biggest day of the year;’ downtown St. Petersburg businesses rejoice ahead of ALDS
Ahead of playoff baseball's return to St. Petersburg and Tropicana Field, downtown businesses are bracing for at least a weekend of packed crowds.
Recap: President Trump speaks at Peterbilt facility in Denton on Thursday
Update at 5:40 p.m.: Trump thanks the crowd for welcoming him. He concluded his speech with a short dance to “Y.M.C.A.” (1978) by Village People and walking off the stage.
Neuroscience launches seminar series with talk on brain circuitry by renowned neurobiologist Peter Strick P’98
The Bates Program in Neuroscience kicked off its new Neuroscience Seminar Series with a talk from Peter Strick P’98, Thomas Detre Professor and Chair of Neurobiology at the University of Pittsburgh.
Microsoft executives Peter Lee, president of Microsoft Science, and EVP Ryan Roslansky to depart
Two top Microsoft executives shared this week that they're leaving the Redmond, Wash., tech giant: Peter Lee, the former head of Microsoft Research, and Ryan Roslansky, Microsoft executive vice president overseeing both LinkedIn and Microsoft Office.
Ed Helms Stars In 'The Streak' For Lion Forge Entertainment
Ed Helms toplines 'The Streak,' a sports comedy from Steve Byrne that marks Oscar winner Lion Forge Entertainment's expansion into live-action.
Pilot crashed and died after mental health battle
Investigators say Peter Beeson's poor mental health make it "likely" he crashed on purpose.
Utah Jazz Remain Underrated Entering 2026-27 Season
Armed with Jaren Jackson Jr.’s elite defense and Darryn Peterson’s arrival, a revamped roster looks to defy betting lines and vault from the cellar into playoff contention.
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.
Microsoft Science president Peter Lee to retire after 16 years | ETIH EdTech News
Microsoft Science President Peter Lee is retiring after more than 16 years at Microsoft for an undisclosed “once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.” ETIH edtech news looks at his leadership of Microsoft Research and Science, academic background and continuing work across healthcare and medicine.
Microsoft Science President Peter Lee to Step Down
Microsoft veteran Peter Lee, who for years led the company’s internal research unit, will leave the company, he announced Wednesday. Lee is the latest in a string of senior executive departures from Microsoft announced this year. So far this year, Office and Windows boss Rajesh Jha, Xbox CEO Phil Spencer, chief communications officer Frank Shaw and security chief Charlie Bell have announced
Fraser Minten shines as late surge lifts the Bruins past the Rangers 3-0
Fraser Minten broke a scoreless tie with just over four minutes left, followed by goals by JJ Peterka and an empty-netter by Mark Kastelic 23 seconds apart, and the Boston Bruins beat the New York Rangers 3-0 on Tuesday night in the season opener for both teams.
What's causing health insurance costs to increase more for 170K in RI
Rhode Island Attorney General Peter Neronha calls for "bold" reform just after state announces new rate approvals.
NRL Grand Final Entertainment Reportedly Set to Be Tribute For Jai Arrow
Earlier this week, NRL head Peter V'landys teased that he'd had a change of heart about booking entertainment for this Sunday's grand final.
Gambit's Best of New Orleans 2026: Entertainment
Design by Dora Sison / Gambit Best Bounce Artist googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('ad-1492300'); }); 1. Big Freedia (Instagram: @bigfreedia)2. Ha Sizzle (Instagram: @hasizzlethevoice)3. Subtweet Shawn (Instagram: @subtweetshawn1) Trixie Minx Photo by Sophia Germer / The Times-Picayune Best Burlesque Performer1. Trixie Minx (Instagram: @trixienola)2. Bella Blue (Instagram: @bellablueforever)3. Miss Angie Z (Instagram: @missangiez) Best Casino1. Caesars New Orleans (8 Canal St., 800-427-7247; caesars.com/caesars-new-orleans)2. Treasure Chest Casino (4550 Williams Blvd., Kenner, 504-443-8000; treasurechest.com)3. Boomtown Casino (4132 Peters Road., Harvey, 504-366-7711; boomtownneworleans.com) Best Drag Performer1. Debbie with a D (Instagram: @debbiewithad)2. Katrina Waters (Instagram: @katrinawaters504)3. Laveau Contraire (Instagram: @laveaucontraire) Best Festival (that's still around)1. New Orleans Jazz & Heritage Festival (nojazzfest.com)2. French Quarter Festival (frenchquarterfest.org)3. Hogs For The Cause (hogsfest.org) Best Food Festival1. New Orleans Fried Chicken Festival (friedchickenfestival.com)2. Oak Street Po-Boy Festival (poboyfest.com)3. New Orleans Jazz & Heritage Festival (nojazzfest.com) Tipitina's Photo by Sophia Germer / The Times-Picayune Best Live Music Venue1. Tipitina’s (501 Napoleon Ave., 504-895-8477; tipitinas.com)2. The Broadside (600 N Broad St., 504-766-0871; broadsidenola.com)3. The Fillmore (6 Canal St., 504-881-1555; thefillmorenola.com) Best Live Music Club1. Maple Leaf Bar (8316 Oak St., 504-866-9359; mapleleafbar.com)2. Snug Harbor Jazz Bistro (626 Frenchmen St., 504-949-0696; snugjazz.com)3. Chickie Wah Wah (2828 Canal St., 504-541-2050; chickiewahwah.com)3. Blue Nile (532 Frenchmen St., 504-766-6193; bluenilelive.com) Best Local Blues Artist/Band1. Little Freddie King (littlefreddieking.com)2. Samantha Fish (samanthafish.com)3. Tab Benoit (tabbenoit.com) Best Local Brass Band1. Rebirth Brass Band (rebirthbrassband.com)2. Hot 8 Brass Band (hot8brassband.com)3. The Soul Rebels (thesoulrebels.com) Best Local DJ1. Paul Lakeway (Instagram: @paul_lakeway)2. DJ Soul Sister (Instagram: @djsoulsister)3. ANTWIGADEE! (Instagram: @antwigadee) Best Local Funk Band1. Dumpstaphunk (dumpstaphunk.com)2. Galactic (galacticfunk.com)3. Big Sam's Funky Nation (bigsamsfunkynation.com) Kaye the Beast Provided Photo by Catherine Debuys Best Local Hip-Hop Group/Artist1. Kaye the Beast (Instagram: @kayethebeast)2. La Reezy (Instagram: @lareezymusic)3. Pell (Instagram: @pellyeah) Best Local Movie Theater1. The Broad Theater (636 N. Broad St., 504-218-1008; thebroadtheater.com)2. The Prytania (5339 Prytania St., 504-891-2787; theprytania.com) googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('ad-1492297'); }); 3. The Prytania Theatre at Canal Place (333 Canal St., 3rd floor, 504-290-2658; theprytania.com) Best Local Music Artist/Band1. Robin Barnes & The Fiya Birds (robinbarnesmusic.com)2. Trombone Shorty (tromboneshorty.com)3. Sweet Crude (sweetcrudeband.com) Best Local Rock Band1. The Revivalists (therevivalists.com)2. Better Than Ezra (betterthanezra.com)3. Cowboy Mouth (cowboymouth.com) Best Wedding Band/ DJ1. The Mixed Nuts (themixednuts.com)2. Bucktown All-Stars (bucktownallstars.com)3. Warm Advice (warmadvice.com) Doreen Ketchens Provided photo Best Local Street Performer1. Doreen Ketchens (doreensjazz.org)2. Jourdan Blue (Instagram: @jourblue)3. Sariyah Idan (ariyahidan.com) Best Local Theater Company1. The Tennessee Williams Theatre Company of New Orleans (504-264-2580; twtheatrenola.com)2. Le Petit Theatre (616 St. Peter St., 504-522-2081; lepetittheatre.com)3. The NOLA Project (504-302-9117; nolaproject.com) Best Local Traditional Jazz Group/Artist1. Preservation Hall Jazz Band (preservationhalljazzband.com)2. Kermit Ruffins (@ruffinsbbq)3. Trombone Shorty (tromboneshorty.com) Best Marching Band1. St. Augustine High School Marching 100 (Instagram: @staugmarching100)2. Edna Karr High School Marching Band (Instagram: @theofficialkarrband)3. The Roots of Music Marching Crusaders (therootsofmusic.org) Best Mardi Gras Parade1. Muses (kreweofmuses.org)2. Iris (kreweofiris.org)3. Endymion (endymion.org) 610 Stompers Photo by Chris Granger / The Times-Picayune Best Mardi Gras Dance Krewe1. 610 Stompers (610stompers.com)2. Amelia EarHawts (aecabinkrewe.com)3. The Jamettes (Instagram: @thejametteskrewe) Best Place to See Burlesque/Drag1. The AllWays Lounge & Cabaret (2240 St. Claude Ave., 504-218-5778; theallwayslounge.net)2. The Original Nite Cap (1300 St. Bernard Ave., 2nd floor, 504-224-2854; Instagram: @originalnitecap)3. The Country Club (634 Louisa St., 504-945-0742; thecountryclubneworleans.com) Best Place to See Comedy1. Sports Drink (1042 Toledano St.; sportsdrink.org)2. The Howlin' Wolf (907 S. Peters St., 504-529-5844; thehowlinwolf.com)3. Big Couch New Orleans (1045 Desire St.; bigcouchnola.com) Best Local Comedian1. Ryan Rogers (ryanrogerscomedy.com)2. Mark Normand (marknormandcomedy.com)3. Cyrus Cooper (Instagram: @cyrusjcooper) Best Strip Club1. The Penthouse Club (727 Iberville St., 504-524-4354; penthouseclubneworleans.com)2. Rick’s Cabaret (315 Bourbon St., 504-524-4222; rickscabaretneworleans.com)3. Larry Flynt's Hustler Club (225 Bourbon St., 504-524-0010; neworleanshustlerclub.com) Best Performing Arts Center1. Jefferson Performing Arts Center (6400 Airline Dr., 504-731-4700; jeffersonpac.com)2. Saenger Theatre (1111 Canal St., 504-525-1052; saengertheatreneworleans.com)3. Mahalia Jackson Theater for the Performing Arts (1419 Basin St., 504-525-1052; mahaliajacksontheater.com) .donate-gambit-article-module-container { text-align: center; padding: 10px; /* background-color: #24da6d; */ background-color: rgb(153, 0, 0); margin-bottom: 20px; } .donate-gambit-article-module-title { font-weight: bold; color: #fff; } .donate-gambit-article-module-copy { color: #fff !important; font-size: 16px; } .donate-gambit-article-module-button { background-color: black; width: 50%; border-color: black; font-size: 16px; } .donate-gambit-article-module-button:hover { background-color: black; } @media only screen and (max-width: 600px) { .donate-gambit-article-module-button { font-size: 14px; width: 100%; } .donate-gambit-article-module-copy { font-size: 14px; } } BECOME A GAMBIT MEMBER AND JOIN OUR KREWE TODAY For more than 40 years, Gambit has covered New Orleans, for New Orleans. We’ve stood up to city hall with you, cheered the Saints with you, danced in the streets with you and cried over our collective loss with you. And we’re plannin’ on being here for 40 more. To do that, we need your help. Become a Gambit member today and help us continue our mission SUPPORT GAMBIT
Among the Academies: A Lifelong Fascination with Fish
For Peter Wainwright, the academic path was simple: he simply followed his fascination with fish."I dare say there wasn't a lot of deep thought about what direction I should go in my life," he said. "It was more, I like fish, let's see if I can do something with fish. It was all very organic."
Suicide Prevention Starts Before a Crisis
Peter Wyman, PhD, and Kimberly Van Orden, PhD, in the URochester Medicine Center for the Study and Prevention of Suicide, share how suicide prevention can start long before someone experiences a crisis.
NRL backflip as entertainment act confirmed
The pickle has been put back into the burger with Peter V’landys revealing an unnamed act will perform at Sunday night’s grand final.
‘You’ll be entertained’: NRL boss Peter V’landys teases grand final entertainment
Just days after the game was left with no pre-kick off entertainment, a mystery performer has been locked in.
Welcoming Sunday Is Planned At St. Peter’s
St. Peter’s Church-on-the-Canal will have a special service on Sunday, October 4, at 10 AM to welcome new and returning parishioners. Those who have been away from church for a
Science camp students give presentation to Fennimore School Board
The September monthly meeting of the School Board of Fennimore Community Schools kicked off with a student presentation from five high school students, Sitlalli Acatzihua-Rodriguez, Lucerito Acatzihua-Rodriguez, Riley Horsfall, Peter Volz, and Ivanna Friemoth, along with their teacher, Teresa Stewart, who spent five days at the Morgridge Institute for Research Summer Science Camp at UW–Madison this past summer.
Rob Dillingham's Hornets Future Already Looks Uncertain After Trade
Rob Dillingham will miss Hornets media day, and Jeff Peterson reportedly gave little indication that the newly acquired guard will remain in Charlotte long term.
Forest Green allow Savage to talk to another club
Forest Green give manager Robbie Savage permission to speak to another club, amid speculation linking him to Peterborough United.
Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes gave political aide no-bid government contract
Republican challenger Warren Petersen raised the no-bid contract during a Sept. 23 debate.
Peyton and Peter’s Power Hour: Professional athletes and their political opinions
What’s more important in fandom: an athlete’s play or what they say?
Peter Krause and Rachel Keller ignore trends, embrace network TV
MINNESOTA — Network TV may eventually go the way of the telegram and rotary phone. But don’t expect its extinction anytime soon. Yes, streaming services and cable TV usually offer
Chicago Cubs news
David Peterson and the pitching staff kept the Cubs in the games Friday, but the lack of offense led to Boston’s DH sweep.
I’m riding to Peloton’s rescue, says the boss who’s ‘bad’ on a bike
The exercise brand was a huge hit in lockdown but its stock has slid since. Peter Stern has got it back into shape — but board meeting spin classes are a grind
Burnham not doing enough to boost growth, says Starmer ally
Ex-Business Secretary Peter Kyle calls for more urgency on the economy, as Labour members head to the party's annual conference.
Astros at Athletics Game Discussion 9/24/2026
TONIGHT’S GAME: The Houston Astros will continue their final road trip of the regular season with the first game of a four -game series against the Athletics at Sutter Health Park in West Sacramento, CA…RHP Peter Lambert (8-10) will be on the mound for the Astros, opposite RHP Mason Barnett (1-4) and the Athletics. THE […]
Naked Eyes singer Peter Byrne dies at 74
NEW YORK — Peter Byrne from the 1980s new wave band Naked Eyes has died. He was 74. The London native who sang hit tunes “Always Something There to Remind
COURTHOUSE NEWS: Feds find Tijuana River pollution poses public health hazard in San Diego
“Polluted water becomes polluted air, and air reaches everyone who breathes it, far beyond anyone who touches the water,” one UC San Diego researcher said. By Quinn Welsch, Courthouse News Service A report on the Tijuana River pollution crisis from the U.S. Department of Health on Wednesday confirmed what many people living in San Diego County have long suspected: Air pollution from the river has reached levels capable of harming their health. The federal health assessment from the department’s Agency […]
Peter Schiff predicts economic 'downturn,' higher oil prices: 'I don't think it's over'
Peter Schiff indicated during an interview that he expects oil prices to head higher regardless of whether the Iran war ends, and thinks that there will be an economic "downturn."
Peter Byrne, Naked Eyes singer, dead at 74
Peter Byrne, half of the 1980s new wave duo Naked Eyes, has died. He was 74.
Is metascience being co-opted?
In July, the White House released a report that argued academia is deeply dysfunctional and in need of radical reform.Science: A New Golden Age sets out a litany of problems many academics will recognise: interminable waits for grants; short-term funding rather than support for longer, more ambitious projects; ballooning administrative requirements; pressure to publish, and many more. “The scientific machine is getting bogged down,” it says. At least on the face of it, Science: A New Golden Age is a triumph for the metascience movement, a loose-knit, global group of academics, philanthropists and think tankers that want far more testing and experimentation in how we fund public research and innovation. The report tells US research funders to set up internal metascience units to do just this. But it has also set alarm bells ringing that metascience is being conveniently deployed to help justify the defunding of US universities, which US vice president JD Vance has openly labelled “the enemy.” “Just because you have an issue with your plumbing in your house doesn't mean you light the entire house on fire and burn it to the ground,” said Colette Delawalla, chief executive of Stand Up for Science, a group campaigning against what it says are attacks on scientists by the Trump administration. No one is arguing that academia doesn’t need reform, but there’s debate over how far and how fast the system should be shaken up. Does public R&D need slow and steady evidence-based adjustment, or radical new experiments?One of the key arguments in Science: A New Golden Age is that there’s not enough funding for what it calls “mid-level” science: engineering-heavy projects that require tens of millions of dollars, involve ten to a hundred people, and last around five years. Such a project might develop a brain-computer interface for people with Alzheimer's disease, for example. As such, the US National Science Foundation (NSF) has already announced $1.5 billion to set up so-called X-Labs, effectively new research organisations to pursue breakthroughs in areas such as quantum sensing and new scientific instruments. Funding divertedBut there’s a catch: this money has squeezed NSF budgets for more traditional, fundamental research grants, Science reported in June, likely meaning less cash for university-based scientists. Science: A New Golden Age also makes various swipes at universities, accusing them of extracting overheads from scientists to fund administrative bloat. “We have become dependent on a narrow set of legacy institutions,” it says. The report doesn’t mention it, but the US government is simultaneously seeking greater powers over federal funding, which would allow political appointees at funding agencies to screen or cancel research grants mid-project. The White House is also seeking to slash the NSF’s budget by more than half in 2027, although similar cuts proposed for 2026 were blocked by Congress. Convenient hookThis has worried some that the metascience agenda could be misused as a kind of smokescreen to further weaken universities. James Wilsdon, executive director of the Research on Research Institute at University College London, said that the report contains lots of “interesting ideas” and agrees that in places, academia is a “pretty broken system.” But the risk is that metascience is being deployed as a “convenient hook” to support cuts and a “political land grab” to transfer grant power from scientists to political appointees in US funding agencies.So far, the metascience agenda hasn’t been seized on by radical right parties in Europe. But Wilsdon worries it will cross the Atlantic, politicising research reform efforts and making them more difficult to carry out. The report is already making some in Europe sceptical of the entire idea. “The system is not without flaws, but the metascience discussion is not likely to improve the system but rather to generate munition to undermine it,” said Claes de Vreese, a professor of AI and society at the University of Amsterdam. Peter Thiel protégéOfficially, Science: A New Golden Age has just one named author: Michael Kratsios, the director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy and a former chief of staff to Silicon Valley mogul Peter Thiel. He also served as chief financial officer of Thiel’s Clarium Capital Management. Since the 1990s, Thiel has criticised US universities for moving away from teaching what he views as the classic works of western civilisation, and drifting towards “anti-Western zealotry.” And since 2011, he has offered two-year fellowships of $250,000 to young people to skip or drop out of university, and instead start companies or pursue scientific research. “College can be good for learning about what’s been done before, but it can also discourage you from doing something new,” according to the Thiel Fellowships website. In other areas, the Trump administration has promoted academics with a longstanding interest in metascience. For example, the head of the National Institutes of Health, Jay Bhattacharya, in 2020 co-authored a study arguing the funder backs overly conservative proposals, although he achieved wider prominence as a critic of pandemic lockdowns. Careless talk costs fundingEven before the Trump administration embraced the metascience agenda, some metascientists privately wondered whether they should be careful not to overstate dysfunctions in academia, in case this gets used as ammunition against universities. But others think being cautious with criticism is pointless. After all, last year, the Trump administration sought to cut funding from US universities on an entirely different premise: supposed antisemitism on campus. “I don't think these governments need a technical metascientific excuse to attack the universities, they will want to do so anyway,” said Will Stone, a researcher at Science Works, a new think tank advocating for a “metascience revolution” in the UK. “I think researchers should report what they find, even when the findings may be used to advance policies they disagree with,” echoed Russell Funk, a researcher at the University of Minnesota, who in 2023 co-authored a highly influential paper that argued scientific papers were becoming less disruptive over time. No justificationThat said, Funk thinks that metascientific research certainly doesn’t justify a weakening of universities. Instead, scientists need “time, resources and stability to pursue unfamiliar ideas,” he said. “Taking away those conditions works against the very goal the reforms are supposed to achieve.”The Institute for Progress, a Washington DC-based innovation policy think tank that has championed X-Labs and metascience units, also says that reforms should complement, not supplant, universities. “Unpredictable, unreliable, and reduced federal funding to researchers is destabilising to the very foundations of research and development and is bad,” said Jenn Gustetic, the institute’s director of metascience and R&D policy.Evolution or revolution?This points to a much bigger divide in the metascience community: how far and how fast should public R&D be shaken up? Does it need evolution or revolution? For example, Science: A New Golden Age says the science system relies too heavily on traditional “workhorse” project grants, the type that pay out around $250,000 a year to fund “hypothesis-driven science by small teams on tractable questions.” However, in criticising project grants, the report “decisively picks one side of a debate that is far from settled,” David Hilmer Rex, a metascientist based in Denmark, has written. In June, Pierre Azoulay, a metascientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, defended project grants, saying that the alternative of X-Labs “merits scepticism.”A-B testingOne challenge in metascience is that it’s easier to generate evidence for some types of change than others. Most straightforwardly, research funders can run A-B tests on different ways of awarding money. For example, Germany’s Volkswagen Foundation recently trialled distributed peer review, where applicants rate each other’s proposals, and measured its results against traditional review panels. Distributed peer review made quicker decisions, although awarded money to largely different ideas. However, much of the focus of the metascience movement has been on founding fast-moving and free-acting new research organisations and funders, in contrast to the alleged stodginess of mainstream academia or public innovation grants. A culture of speed and freedom are the animating principles behind Germany’s Sprind or the UK’s Advanced Research and Invention Agency (Aria).Related articlesViewpoint: it's time to experiment with how Europe funds science European researchers sound the alarm that Trump rule changes will hit cooperationHowever, while it’s possible to closely study previously successful bodies, such as the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (Darpa), for historical clues to their secret sauce, it’s impossible to guarantee in advance that the likes of Sprind or Aria will actually work as hoped. But advocates of new organisations say this inherent uncertainly shouldn’t stop us trying. “If we wait for definitive proof that something will work before we try it, I don't know where your proof is coming from,” said Stone. Trade-offsUp until now, experiments in metascience haven’t generally come with hard trade-offs over money. In the US, new ideas such as focused research organisations have often been funded by billionaire philanthropists. In Europe, new innovation agencies such as Sprind and Aria, or the Netherland’s new National Agency for Disruptive Innovation, haven’t needed explicit cuts elsewhere in the research system. But with the $1.5 billion establishment of X-Labs by the NSF, the trade-offs are becoming clearer. Some metascientists privately wonder whether a smaller pilot would have been more appropriate, given that the idea is untested. The Institute for Progress counters that the $1.5 billion X-Labs budget is spread out over a decade, so will account for less than 2% of the NSF’s annual budget. “It’s important to remember that [Darpa] was once an institutional experiment as well. Now it’s one of the most cited innovative funding models in the world,” said Gustetic.As for Europe?The US isn’t the only country placing metascience at the heart of its research strategy. Science: A New Golden Age looks admiringly at the UK, which in 2024 set up a Metascience Unit to scrutinise how it funds research. In Brussels, it’s more of a mixed picture. In 2018, the EU set up the European Innovation Council to funnel grants and equity to start-ups, although it’s sometimes criticised for awarding money too slowly. Recently, the council has started experimenting with challenges, where teams of inventors compete to overcome a technological challenge. The European Commission also wants to experiment with partially randomising grant winners, to cut down on bureaucracy. However, the Commission’s own advisers have said the EU’s own research schemes are too conventional. They want the Commission to establish a new dedicated unit to scrutinise and experiment with funding. But there’s no sign of a such unit emerging in Brussels’ plans for the next Horizon Europe programme, which from 2028 is set to distribute more than €160 billion over seven years. Sam Bogerd, director of breakthrough innovation at the Brussels-based Arq Foundation, an AI-focused think tank that also looks at metascience, says that Europe might have the opposite problem to the US: universities and basic research funding are still reasonably well supported, but there’s not enough experimentation. “We're not taking a close enough look at where this money can achieve the most, and I am worried that the good ideas around metascience will be tainted politically by their association with the Trump administration,” he said. He’s still lobbying for the Commission to set up an experimental unit. But in the meantime, the Arq Foundation plans to do its own research, and is currently hiring two metascience researchers to run the rule over how Brussels spends research funding.
“9-1-1’”s Peter Krause reacts to fan theory that Bobby Nash could still be alive
Krause recently stepped into a new role on NBC’s “Line of Fire,” following the shocking death of his beloved firefighter character.
'Wirtz has not become a bad player overnight'
The LFC Poets podcast's Peter Warburton believes Florian Wirtz would look like a "world beater" if his Liverpool team-mates were on his wavelength and says he has not "become a bad player overnight". The Germany attacking midfielder has come under criticism since he signed last year in a deal worth £116m.
'The Peterson Show' review: Janine Nabers' new play goes awry
The Echo Theater Company presents the world premiere of 'The Peterson Show' by Janine Nabers, a play that reunites the cast of a beloved Black sitcom after the TV dad has gone to jail.
Harry Smith, Harlem Quartet featured in Des Moines Symphony season debut
The Des Moines Symphony will open its 89th season Saturday and Sunday with “Unity – American Mosaic & West Side Story” at the Des Moines Civic Center. The concerts will feature journalist Harry Smith narrating Peter Boyer’s multimedia work “American Mosaic,” as well as performances by the Harlem Quartet. “American Mosaic is a work of…
Political science department holds bipartisan midterms panel
The Department of Political Science last Wednesday hosted "Perspectives on the 2026 Midterm Election” as part of the Peter J. Hoagland Integrity in Public Services Lecture Series at the Sheldon Museum.
Streamer Clavicular faces rape and drugging charges
Braden Peters, better known as the "manosphere" streamer Clavicular, has been charged in Massachusetts court with rape, drugging a person for sex and providing alcohol to an underage person, court
The Green Bay Packers receive intriguing Micah Parsons return scenario
The Green Bay Packers enter Week 3 at 1-1 as the Atlanta Falcons visit Lambeau Field, while Micah Parsons continues his recovery from last season’s torn left ACL. His return date remains uncertain, and the same can be said for Jayden Reed following his frightening Week 2 injury. Peter Bukowski of Locked On Packers pointed [...]