Scaling the Waters

This article can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/30/science/30obshark.html?ref=science
 

            This story covers an interesting new discovery about the scales of shortfin mako sharks, a dangerous fast-swimming shark. The article is one of the newer installments of Sindya N. Bhanoo’s “Observatory” section; and as such, it is short and to the point. Like her other stories, this well-written piece has a solid lead that basically tells you all you need to know: “Amy Lang, an aerospace engineer from the University of Alabama, and colleagues found that flexible scales around the side of the shark allow it to swiftly change direction while maintaining a high speed.” Aside from a good lead, Bhanoo does well in efficiently communicating the details of the research, and she even gives a nod to its practical importance: “Dr. Lang is now trying to create models of the shark scales in her laboratory, with hopes of finding real-life applications…‘it could be used in the rotors of the helicopter blade, parts of a submarine or a torpedo.’”

            But the lead as cited above is the second paragraph, not the first. The first paragraph contains the one minor blunder in the entire article: “The shortfin mako shark is one of the fastest sharks around, perhaps because of the variation in size and flexibility of the teethlike scales embedded in its skin.” The problems with this opening paragraph are that it doesn’t make the interesting find clear enough (that the sharks actually use these flexible scales to speed through the water), and that it belittles the importance/intrigue of the discovery by not focusing on it enough. The word “perhaps” makes the whole thing seem trivial and not worth the reader’s time. Perhaps the reader will just stop reading. 

War in Bits

This article can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/28/science/28robot.html?pagewanted=1&ref=science

            As robots become more and more advanced and artificial intelligence begins to sneak up on human intelligence, the discussion of intelligent “war machines” tends to break out more frequently and more fervently. It is a controversy, for sure. Is it ethical to have robots fight our wars for us? This feature article, written by John Markoff, begins at an Army combat training facility in Georgia where military engineers are remote-controlling the newest breed of intelligent war machines. Markoff uses this as a starting point to jump into the ongoing controversy—one that is growing more relevant with every day as advances in robotics are made all the time around the globe.  

            The lead, consisting of a short one-sentence paragraph and a longer second paragraph, is very effective: “War would be a lot safer, the Army says, if only more of it were fought by robots…New robots—none of them particularly human-looking—are being designed to handle a broader range of tasks, from picking off snipers to serving as indefatigable night sentries.” Markoff is capitalizing on a subject that is incredibly relevant to us and our lives: war and our place in it. As a result, the reader is engaged immediately from the first two paragraphs. It is also gripping because of the common fear that robots may “take over the world,” and so readers want to read on and learn more about the progress of the field thus far. And Markoff, objectively and clearly, gives them that background information they seek.

The Tablets of Ancient Mathematics

This article can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/23/science/23babylon.html?ref=science

            What if our number system was not based on the number 10? (In fact, there is a common system that is based on 2: the binary system—which is often humorously described as the way dolphins would count with their two flippers). But how about a system based on the number 60? That was how the Sumerians did it in the ancient world, and this article is about the Sumerian math tablets of long ago.

            For a rather dry subject after the first few paragraphs, Nicholas Wade writes a solid, engaging story here. He starts out with a great lead that compares these ancient tablets to the technologies of the modern world: “Papyrus, parchment, paper…videotape, DVDs, Blu-ray discs—long after all these materials have crumbled to dust, the first recording medium of all, the cuneiform clay tablet of ancient Mesopotamia, may still endure.” There’s a good deal of math in the middle section of the article but it is somewhat interesting for its differences from the decimal system; and Wade does pick it up towards the end by mentioning the well-known Pythagorean theorem. He adds an element of mystery by suggesting the possibility of the Babylonians discovering the theorem before Pythagoras did. The ending, however, is a bit lacking—perhaps if he had ended with an interesting quote from a scientist/mathematician, the story would end on a stronger note and keep the reader thinking. Instead, the last paragraph simply reads, “With some tablets the answers are stated without any explanation, giving the impression that they were for show, a possession designed to make the owner seem an academic.”

Tiger Love

This article can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/22/world/asia/22tiger.html?ref=science

            Whether it’s their vibrant orange fur, their stripes, their menace, or their elusiveness, tigers attract us all. But tigers are in trouble. There are more of them in captivity than in the wild, and global forces have begun to unite and strengthen their efforts in protecting the tiger from extinction. This article, written by Leslie Kaufman, discusses the initiative of Russian Prime Minister Vlaidmir V. Putin in the battle for tiger preservation. The two-sentence lead paragraph is as follows, “Ministers from several countries gathered Sunday in St. Petersburg at the invitation of Prime Minister Vladimir V. Putin of Russia to begin a five-day meeting with the goal of protecting tigers. Only a little more than 3,000 are estimated to be living outside captivity.”

            It’s a solid lead that hooks the reader with the alarmingly low number of tigers left in the wild. From this lead, it would be safe to assume that the reader will learn more about the status of tigers in the wild and in captivity, and about the plans from Putin and others on how to solve the problem. The title of the article would have you think the same thing, that the story was about Putin’s meeting and tiger preservation: “Meeting Aims to Turn Tiger Fascination Into Conservation.” But it is not. Kaufman does not touch on these subjects until the end of the article and she does so only briefly. Most of it is about something completely different: our human attraction to large felines, such as tigers, as opposed to our general disgust with large wild canines, such as hyenas. Right after the lead, she writes, “Mr. Putin is so fond of the animals that he was given a cub for his 56^th birthday…Throughout history, prominent men have identified with the majesty, power and machismo of large cats.” It’s a very interesting topic but it catches the reader a little off-guard with a somewhat misleading lead and title.

The First Butchers

This article can be found at http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/11/21/BAE71GCDIS.DTL&type=science

            Here is another example of scientific controversy. Though not as heated and widespread as stem cell research debates, this particular dispute illustrates our fervent desire to learn about the early history of human beings and the great significance we put on the study of paleoanthropology in teaching us. A few months ago, a curator from San Francisco analyzed a few scarred animal bones and claimed they were evidence of human butchering at a time much earlier than was the general scientific consensus.

             The lead is fantastic: David Perlman writes, “A controversy is brewing over a few scarred animal bones millions of years old that a[n]…anthropologist claims could change everything we think we know about when our ancient forebears first used tools on the long road toward becoming human.” Of course, his claims end up being not so ground-breaking, but this first sentence undoubtedly grabs the reader, encouraging them to read on and find out more about their very own beginnings. Perlman also does well in establishing the conflict (other side believes the scars are not from human tools but rather from such things as animal trampling), giving each side their due with appropriately lengthened explanations and a fair number of quotations. He does well in keeping himself out of the controversy, and letting the scientists fight for themselves and explain to the reader their stance.

Primal Friendships

NOTE: This post is for Saturday, November 20

This article can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/23/science/23obmacaque.html?_r=1&ref=science

            One of the primary ways in which we understand our own behavior is by studying the behavior of our primate relatives. Recently, researchers from Germany have studied the social bonding among male macaques and they have noticed some striking similarities between these Thai monkeys and human beings. This is another “Observatory” article by Sindya N. Bhanoo and she does well in drawing the reader in by giving him/her something to connect with in the first sentence: “The human tendency to form close bonds with people other than kin may have primal roots.”

            The story is concise and clear. After briefly describing the details of the research, Bhanoo quickly moves on to one of the more important questions regarding the study: why is it an evolutionary benefit to form friends? A little more than halfway through, she provides an answer: “The bonds can lead to the forming of coalitions, where a group of males might fight another male to improve rank and social status, the researchers found.” She then quotes the lead scientist, expanding on that observation; and she finishes with questions still unanswered, including the nature of friendships among female macaques. The great thing about this article is that it makes you think.  By establishing the link between these monkeys and humans in the first sentence, Bhanoo successfully engages the reader and makes him/her think about his/her own friendships and why they may be beneficial.

Elderly Hot Jupiter

This article can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/23/science/23obplanet.html?ref=science

            In the most recent entry of Sindya N. Bhanoo’s “Observatory” column, she discusses the discovery of a hot Jupiter exoplanet orbiting an old and dying star at the edge of our galaxy. The article benefits from a great three-paragraph lead that states the finding, provides a quote from a scientist, and most importantly, explains why it is important: “The finding is important because the planet orbits a very old star that is nearing the end of its life span and may soon collapse…‘The most important thing is to understand how a planetary system evolves, and maybe our solar system will experience the same process in the next two or three billion years,’” said the lead astronomer of the study.

            The problem, though, with this article is that it makes one thing—which seems to be important since it is mentioned in the first sentence—very unclear. In the first sentence, Bhanoo writes that the discovered exoplanet has “origins outside the Milky Way galaxy.” However, in the fourth paragraph of the article, she writes, “Currently, the star and its planet are in the Milky Way.” No further information is given on the stellar system’s whereabouts. How is this possible? Perhaps the star and planet formed outside the Milky Way originally and somehow migrated to our galaxy, but if that is the case, it would have been nice if Bhanoo had made that more explicit and clear in her article.