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.

A Winter Wondercomet

This article can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/19/science/space/19comet.html?ref=science

            Looks like the peanut-shaped comet named Hartley 2, which was written about by the New York Times two weeks ago, has been displaying some interesting behavior. The first sentence/paragraph reads, “A peanut-shaped comet was spewing out hundreds of tons of fluffy ice chunks a second as a NASA spacecraft swung by it two weeks ago.” Unfortunately, that one sentence is pretty much the entire article.

            Kenneth Chang, a good writer, is cursed here with a particularly uninteresting story. He attempts to make it more appealing to readers by calling it “peanut-shaped” and noting in the second paragraph that a Brown University professor called it a “snow globe that you’ve simply just shaken.” But the story falls short after that. There’s just not enough substance. The finding that supposedly “fascinated the mission scientists” was that the ice chunks seemed to be ejected off the surface of the comet by jets of carbon dioxide: “This was the first time that such carbon dioxide jets had been observed at a comet.” But the average reader won’t find that too phenomenal. Chang delves into the science behind the ice chunks and continues to include quotations from scientists who talk colorfully about the discovery, but on the whole he leaves the reader with little reason to care for such news.

Baby Lawyers

This article can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/16/science/16obchildren.html?ref=science

            In the New York Times there is a science column under the heading “Observatory” that seems to be regularly written by Sindya N. Bhanoo. The column is a series of very short science news stories published weekly—they’re each only around 200-300 words and they limit themselves to just the bare essentials, just the core of the science. The “Observatory” postings usually begin with an introductory sentence/paragraph that draws the reader in by connecting the science news at hand with everyday life; the second paragraph then states the news directly; the middle paragraphs briefly describe the science and/or experiments, often including statements from the researchers themselves; and ends with some sort of overarching summary sentence or vision for the future.

            This particular story describes new research that suggests toddlers are aware of a person’s intent and that they actually base their actions on such judgments. The organization of the story, more or less, follows the rough template described above. Bhanoo begins by comparing babies to professional adults through this ability to judge: “Understanding another’s intent is an important skill for lawyers, and perhaps politicians and businessmen as well, but according to a new study, it is an ability that even toddlers have.” This brings the reader in and makes them continue to read through the story, especially because it is so short. She also adds important quotes from scientists saying how surprising and exciting this discovery is, and also how useful it is for understanding human society. Bhanoo’s writing is engaging and concise—she draws the reader in, clearly explains the science, and makes the reader care.

Lights, Camera, CELLS!

This article can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/16/science/16animate.html?_r=1&ref=science

            In this world, humans rely on sight. There must be some ancient detail of our brain that gives such great significance to sight in our perception of the world.

            Our reliance on sight is of special importance to members of academia. In education, how many times have you heard (or perhaps said yourself) the phrase “I need to see it!” Well a recent feature article by Erik Olsen of the New York Times discusses one new way in which biology professors are capitalizing on sight’s importance: molecular animation. The title, “Where Cinema and Biology Meet,” really says it all because the accurate, colorful and incredibly detailed animation of cells is truly a testament to science, the digital age, and our American love affair with Hollywood.

            In fact, Olsen uses this love affair to draw readers in, beginning with a reference to Star Wars: his first sentence, “When Robert A. Lue[, one of the pioneers of molecular animation,] considers the “Star Wars” Death Star, his first thought is not of outer space, but inner space.” Olsen includes a nice, brief explanation of what this innovative field is all about in the beginning of the story, after introducing Dr. Lue: “molecular animation [is] a rapidly growing field that seeks to bring the power of cinema to biology. Building on decades of research and mountains of data, scientists and animators are now recreating in vivid detail the complex inner machinery of living cells.” The story is written very well—it flows smoothly in between the work/quotes of scientists and the capabilities, history and future of these technologies; and Olsen even adds bits of humor/imagery here and there to pick up the reader (“If there is a Steven Spielberg of molecular animation, it is probably Drew Berry”). Olsen also does not take sides: he smartly includes some of the concerns and criticisms other scientists (not directly involved with the animation) have about this technology, saying they “are uncertain about the value of these animations for actual scientific research.” But he does end by discussing the one benefit of this animation that no one can argue with: education.

Rocks of a Rare Earth

This article can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/09/science/09seafloor.html?_r=1&ref=science

            Rocks are not usually of major popular interest. They are dull and boring and worthless in their abundance, so it seems. This article touches on an economic market related to rocks that, though it has been active for decades, people do not know much about: it is the trade of manganese nodules found on the ocean floor that contain commercially viable elements. But recently, these nodules have been found to have rare-earth minerals, elements that may add significantly to the rocks’ commercial value.

            The writer, William J. Broad, sets up this article nicely. First he describes the manganese nodules, why there is a market for them, and that this market used to be relatively unprofitable. This leads up to the second paragraph: “Now, the frustrated visionaries [entrepreneurs] are talking excitedly about the possibility of belated success, and perhaps even profits.” With this turn, Broad gets the reader excited about the possibilities as well, engages them, and encourages to read on about the benefits of rare-earth minerals and what they can do for technology in the modern world (they’re useful for a host of 21^st century technologies, from lasers to computer chips to LCD displays). After he writes that these nodules contain valuable rare-earths and that China, “which controls some 95 percent of the world’s supply, had blocked shipments, sounding political alarms around the globe and a rush for alternatives,” he dives into the quotes from scientists with a great one-line paragraph in the form of a question: “So are seabed miners smiling at last?” He waits until the middle of the article to fully explain the nature and applications of these minerals—which serves as an interesting spike for the reader as he/she reads. In a fast-paced, exciting article brimming with scientist quotes, Broad ends with one that looks to the future: Dr. Morgan of the Underwater Mining Institute said, “It’s getting more active…Industrial people are starting to look at it again.”

A Gathering of Brains at Caltech

This article can be found at http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-science-kids-20101114,0,3971188.story

            In a Los Angeles Times article today, Bob Pool describes two competitions related to science: one was a high school research competition at Caltech; and the other was a Rubik’s Cube competition, also at Caltech. It is no surprise that these two events would take place at Caltech, a mecca of science and technology on the West Coast (along with Stanford) and undoubtedly a dream school for many of the competing high school students.

            Pool makes the article interesting by moving quickly through the specifics with short paragraphs and simplicity. Unlike the typical science news story, there is no technical explanation of the science here; instead, there is just an overview of the different experiments of the competition, involving little or no further explanation beyond statement: students “teamed up to study the effects of titanium diozide and zinc oxide nanoparticles on teeth…examined microfluidic cell trapping for cell fusion and reprogramming…ma[de] computers recognize 57 emotions in human voices…” The quick, simple pace served Pool well throughout the article and into the description of the Rubik’s Cube competition, but there was one spot that was a bit confusing and it was his first sentence: “Over here, it was a battle of brains. Over there, it looked like a contest of dexterity.” The wording here makes it seem as though the “battle of brains” and the “contest of dexterity” are the same event when they’re actually the two different competitions. Perhaps Pool could have worded that first sentence differently so that the reader does not begin in a state of confusion.

Dark Oceans

This article can be found at http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/11/13/BA1T1G47V1.DTL&type=science

            It’s shocking, frightening and oddly riveting how much we don’t know about our own earth. One of the most striking examples of this ignorance is our limited knowledge of the world’s oceans. Much of the ocean floor is unexplored and unmapped, and scientists continue to find new species of life on their voyages through the deep. This story tells of a recent voyage in Indonesia, where a group of scientists/technicians from the Bay Area studied the hydrothermal vent communities (of organisms) thriving off the energy of the undersea volcano, Kawio Barat. They got images and plant/animal samples that would add to our understanding of the deep-sea picture.

            The story, written by David Perlman of the San Francisco Chronicle, could be better written. It is clear why New York Times holds the crown for most popular newspaper—its quality of writing is unmatched. In this article, it is difficult to understand exactly what the ‘news’ is for the first few paragraphs. The lead is ineffective. It lacks a clear explanation of what actually happened, as well as reasons why it’s important and why people should care. As a whole, the story is scattered and not aligned to a central idea, making it difficult to read. Perhaps the most interesting quote from a scientist was the last sentence in the story: “This voyage has begun a new chapter in the history of ocean exploration that is certain to reveal many new discoveries that will help us to understand why, and how, the oceans are critical to life on Earth.” If that appeared in the second paragraph and if all that followed built off of that statement, this may have been a stronger story.

A Mistake of Cosmic Proportions

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

            If you think you’re having problems maintaining your budget in the aftermath of the recent financial crisis, just think about the multi-billion dollar budget NASA has to keep. It seems impossible. Maybe it is. Reports came in on Wednesday that somewhere along the line, something went wrong in the financial sphere of things for NASA and a project has run significantly over budget and behind schedule. The culprit: The James Webb Space Telescope, estimated to be “running about one-third over its $5 billion budget and more than a year behind schedule…costing $6.2 billion to $6.8 billion.”

            Kenneth Chang writes a succinct and unexpectedly interesting piece here. He does this by including a lot of great quotes from tons of scientists and administrators at NASA. Some quotes include: “The telescope, [Alan P. Boss said], ‘will leave nothing but devastation in the astrophysics division budget,’” and “’This is NASA’s Hurricane Katrina.’” Chang also includes details on the telescope itself, how this mistake happened, and what the plans for the future are. But it doesn’t seem like much can be done. The extent to which NASA will solve the problem, as Chang’s article suggests, is limited: “the project would need increases of more than $200 million in both 2011 and 2012, and that panel was not able to come up with suggestions for reducing the cost.” Be glad you only have to worry about your own budget, and not an entire division of the national treasury.

Cat-sip

This article can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/12/science/12cats.html?_r=1&ref=science

            In science, there are many experiments that are done for pure curiosity. Scientists see the world, a question sparks, and they try to answer it. Of course, these scientists operate under the belief that increasing the pool of human knowledge should always be done—knowledge for knowledge’s sake is well worth the effort—because maybe, at some point in the future, this knowledge could become useful. This story is one such case: it’s about the way cats drink. Here’s the lead: “It has taken four highly qualified engineers and a bunch of integral equations to figure it out, but we now know how cats drink. The answer is: very elegantly, and not at all the way you might suppose.” It’s a great lead because it’s unexpected and fascinating—the first half of the story is devoted to illustrating the marvel of feline sipping (and it really is quite cool); then the second half gets more into the details, the engineering, the science.

            It’s a fun story and there’s little mention of any usefulness in this research, but there doesn’t need to be any. Why not find out more about cats? Even big cats use this highly efficient, highly evolved drinking mechanism: “The cat laps four times a second—too fast for the human eye to see but a blur—and its tongue moves at a speed of one meter per second…Lions, leopards, jaguars and ocelots turned out to lap (drink) at the speeds predicted by the formula.” Indeed, many readers may be asking themselves: do we seriously spend money on this kind of research? And smartly, the writer Nicholas Wade provides an answer: “Remarkably for a scientific experiment, the project required no financing. The robot that mimicked the cat’s tongue was…just borrowed from a neighboring lab.”   

Astronomical Bubbles

This article can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/10/science/space/10galaxy.html?ref=science

            Dennis Overbye is a name that has popped up a lot in this blog for a number of reasons: 1) he mainly writes about space and the cosmos—an area that gets a lot of attention here; 2) he writes for the New York Times, probably the best and most prolific news publications out there; and 3) he’s a damn good writer. Overbye’s latest story is about the discovery of mysterious, giant energy bubbles in the center of our galaxy, and as always, he writes a great one-sentence intro paragraph to draw the reader in: “Something big is going on at the center of the galaxy, and astronomers are happy to say they don’t know what it is.” He’s also got a sense of humor later in the story: “Another option [for the source of the bubbles] is a gigantic belch from the black hole known to reside, like Jabba the Hutt, at the center of the Milky Way.”

            In the second paragraph, he gives the more specific details, including the important and fascinating fact that these bubbles “extend 25,000 light years up and down from each side of the galaxy and contain the energy equivalent to 100,000 supernova explosions.” The first half of the article emphasizes the mystery behind these bubbles (“The source of the bubbles is a mystery” is the short first sentence of the fourth paragraph), as well as the surprise and excitement felt by scientists. Then Overbye moves to the less interesting, more arcane, but still crucial and necessary-to-include science/theory concerning these bubbles. And at the end, he connects this seemingly useless discovery to a popular buzz phrase in science journalism today: dark matter. This helps remind readers why this kind of news is important and why we should care.

The Future of Science

This article can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/09/science/09predict.html?ref=science

            The New York Times has just recently released a slew of articles for their anniversary issue of the Science Times news section (the first was published on November 14^th, 1978). The common theme of these articles (there are at least 12 of them) is the future of science—predictions for what’s coming up. The section is titled “What’s Next” and the articles discuss possible upcoming discoveries and advances in a number of fields, including medicine, physics, computing, earth and planetary science, mathematics, and material science. This is a great draw for readers because it is a blend of real science and hopeful fantasy. By peering into an unknowable and unpredictable future, the science writers at the Times provide articles filled with excitement, imagination, and possibility—all things that would engage any reader.

            A wrap-up article to this “What’s Next” Science Times section is written by James Gorman and is titled “And Now, Predictions We’ll Back 100 Percent.” It’s a fun, humorous piece about what will definitely not happen in 2011, and it fits in perfectly after all the other articles about the scientific predictions in various fields. This one is kind of like comic relief and also puts everything into perspective by underlining a key point: they are just predictions! In a way, with this article the Times is saying, “Take all this with a grain of salt.” Gorman’s first sentence reads, “It’s a fool’s errand to make precise predictions about the future. Even the famously prescient often fall on their faces.” He goes on to give examples of predictions that have been hilariously off-track; and he makes his own predictions for what won’t happen in 2011—and they can’t be argued with: they include the expectation that human beings will not evolve much in 2011, Neanderthals won’t be cloned, and no humans will be conceived in space.  

The Art of Negotiation

This article can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/02/science/02obbrain.html?ref=science

            There seems to be a special talent behind effective negotiation and bargaining. This short article by Sindya N. Bhanoo describes a recent study on such abilities: “According to a new study in The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, skilled negotiators are using extra brainpower to do so.” This is the lead paragraph that comes right after her very first sentence, “Everyone knows someone who bargains extraordinarily well.” This is a good way to start off the article because readers immediately have a mental picture of a mysteriously exceptional negotiator they know (plus the cool image already in the article of a cunning man hiding everything but his eyes behind a hand of cards, who has a huge brain bulging from his cowboy hat). With this picture in mind, it becomes more personal/engaging and the reader is eager to learn more and understand what makes that person so good at what they do. Is their brain particularly special?

            The article describes the game the researchers used in the study, quotes a scientist, and then provides a one-paragraph conclusion of the study: “[scientists] found that the strategic deceivers had unique brain activity in regions connected to complex decision-making, goal maintenance and understanding another person’s belief system.” And that’s pretty much all the story offers. At just over six paragraphs in length, the article surely had room to include some more specific details on the study, on scientists’ interpretations and conclusions, on brain activity in those special regions, and on where this kind of skilled deception comes into play in the real world.

Armageddon

This article can be found at http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/11/07/MNG71G46A0.DTL&type=science

            In a very short story released today by Melissa Eddy from the Associated Press, scientists around the world say that it is time to collectively work harder at tracking and avoiding near-Earth asteroids. In a story like this, the asteroid numbers are important and a good thing to include towards the beginning: starting in second paragraph, “NASA has tracked nearly 7,000 near-Earth objects that are bigger than several feet across. Of those, 1,157 are considered ‘potentially hazardous asteroids’…risky asteroids are those that come within 4.6 million miles of Earth’s orbit.”

            The article continues to quote scientists from around the globe, but there is very little else that is substantial in this short story. It ends abruptly, without fully explaining what the game plan is for the United Nations in addressing this issue. The huge question that most readers will be asking themselves about this topic is left unanswered: how are we going to respond to a legitimate asteroid threat once we find it? The only statement that directly refers to this question is the second to last paragraph/sentence that reads, “The technology exists that would effectively allow scientists to send a craft into space to rear-end an asteroid, and slightly change its velocity.” But more details about such an operation would inform and interest the reader, and would have probably strengthened this story—a story that is relevant to not just a select group of readers, but to everyone on Earth.

Coral Reefs Destroyed by Oil

This article can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/06/science/earth/06coral.html?_r=1&ref=science

            The BP oil spill seems to be a gold mine for science news writers. Here’s another story about the impacts the spill has had on local environments; this time, scientists have uncovered damaged coral reefs in the Gulf of Mexico that are likely a result of the oil spill, they say. The writer of the story, John Collins Rudolf, writes a good lead with this crucial information, and then follows it with a second paragraph on the less interesting, but still important details: the second paragraph reads, “The coral sites lie seven miles southwest of the well, at a depth of about 4,500 feet, in an area where large plumes of dispersed oil were discovered.” There's also a nice image included that illustrates the horrible condition of the coral reefs exposed to the oil.

            After that, Rudolf takes 2-3 more paragraphs to explain unimportant details and recapitulations of what’s already been said until he finally quotes a scientist. Perhaps he could have gone into the voice of the scientist sooner. Towards the end of the article, Rudolf delves into a discussion of future study/activity surrounding the coral devastation on account of the spill: “Further study is needed to conclusively link the coral die-off to the spill, scientists said, and the survey team took a number of samples form the site to test for the presence of hydrocarbons and dispersant.” This is nice to know, but it could have been made more concise—however, the inverse pyramid structure is conserved and Rudolf is a good writer, so the article certainly works as is.

3-D Expansion

This article can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2010/11/03/science/AP-US-SCI-Video-in-3-D.html?_r=1&ref=science

            When someone says 3-D, the first thing people think about is 3-D movies. 3-D is a new technology that has seen a huge increase in popularity recently: nearly every animated movie and some live action movies are now released in theaters in 3-D form, in addition to the less expensive, traditional 2-D display. But this article talks about a new kind of 3-D in the works—hologram technology; or as the Associated Press puts it, “a technology far beyond 3-D movies and more like the “Star Wars” scene where a ghostly Princess Leia image pleads, ‘Help me, Obi-Wan Kenobi.’”

            It’s interesting that the AP includes a Star Wars reference in the lead to describe the new technology when the word ‘hologram’ would have done the trick. Though Star Wars is a famous movie, the mention of one scene that people may not remember does not explain a new technology—though it may engage the reader’s interest. The reader doesn’t get a clear view of what this technology is and what it can be used for other than entertainment until the seventh paragraph: “it might allow doctors in multiple places around the world to collaborate on live surgery, he said. If the screen were placed flat on a table, they could get a 360-degree view by walking around, just as if the patient were lying there.” Indeed, the strength of the article is that it focuses less on the technical details of this new 3-D technology that few would understand or care about, and more on the potential uses and implications.  

The Peanut Comet

This article can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/05/science/space/05comet.html?_r=1&ref=science

            Even if the news story itself is not so great, the New York Times never misses an opportunity to capitalize on the national obsession with space. There’s even a whole section within the greater Science section called ‘Space & Cosmos.’ Their latest space story is a relatively insubstantial one (it has a nice picture though) about NASA spacecraft Deep Impact passing by the peanut-shaped comet Hartley 2.

            Kenneth Chang writes the story and he keeps it brief, knowing there’s not much to be said. The only real news here is that the spacecraft came close to the comet and took some pictures; but Chang underlines how thrilling this is for astronomers, realizing it may not be so exciting for the average American. Then he goes into some nice background about the Deep Impact spacecraft and the comet Hartley 2—but there could have been more information about the actual science: Chang could have expanded on why cometary research is important, and what scientists hope for in the remaining time Deep Impact has before it is rendered useless. Answering these questions may have strengthened the piece by making it more relevant to the world down here, instead of it being primarily familiar to the cold reaches of space and in the lofty heads of arcane astronomers.

Tenacious Oil

This article can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/03/us/03spill.html?ref=science

    How long will the fiasco over the BP oil spill last? More than half a year after the oil began to flow from the drilling vessel into the Gulf of Mexico, thousands of workers are still out there, on the water and along the coastlines, cleaning up the mess. The spill has profoundly disrupted tourism and fishing industries in the Gulf, and the oil continues to impact the lives of local residents. This article is about the suspicious brown streaks in the open water near the Mississippi—locals are convinced they’re streaks of oil, but scientists say it’s algae.

    However, that’s not what the entire article is about, and rightly so. The writers use that particular story to quickly launch into a discussion of the state of the oil spill as it is now, in early November: the sixth paragraph begins, “The cleanup of the worst offshore oil spill in US history continues here on the Gulf Coast, as does some of the contentiousness of the panic-plagued summer.” The story then examines the current work being done, the progress, what’s left to do, and overall provides an engaging and concise update on the situation. Then it ventures into one of the main concerns: the possibility of “significant population declines” as a result of the spill. As many science articles do, this one ends with questions (and fears) that still need answers, leaving the reader both informed and absorbed.

Large Hadron Collider Alive and Well

This article can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/02/science/space/02cern.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&ref=science

    The Large Hadron Collider has received a lot of attention from the science news press in the past couple years, probably because scientists believe it will solve some of the greatest mysteries of the universe, such as the Higgs boson and dark matter. But since it’s been subject to repair and rigorous testing ever since the disastrous malfunction in 2008, and has been out of the press for a while, the time is right for this feature piece by Dennis Overbye in the New York Times, wherein he gives a review of the machine and discusses its recent successes, failures, and goals.

    However, none of it is all that exciting. Sure, the guys at “the Large Hadron Collider finally got five trillion high-energy particles under control, squeezed and tweaked them into tight bunches and started banging them together,” but no data has been processed yet and it appears that no interesting discoveries in the world of physics have yet been made. The piece is mostly filled with statements of excitement from many of the physicists/scientists involved with CERN and the Large Hadron Collider, and indeed, the title is “Trillions of Reasons to be Excited.” But that doesn’t necessarily make it a bad story. Overbye writes exceptionally as always, and the piece is exciting to anybody interested in physics; but it is a shame that Overbye was probably instructed to write a feature of a certain length, when a more concise story may have been more powerful and engaging to general audiences.  

Finding, Breeding, Selling Nemo

This article can be found at http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2010/11/01/breeding_nemo_maine_lab_flourishes/?page=full

    Here’s a bizarre subject for a feature piece: the breeding of saltwater tropical fish in captivity. Kelli Whitlock Burton writes about one man’s booming new business of breeding and selling saltwater tropical fish, a process that has traditionally been very difficult. His name is Soren Hansen, a graduate student from the University of Maine, and he is the subject of this feature story.

    The piece moves fairly well. This is a difficult subject to engage the reader in because it is so obscure and irrelevant, but Burton does well in keeping up the pace and making it somewhat interesting. Perhaps the best thing Burton does to answer the reader’s inevitable “so-what!-who-cares?” question is to link the tropical fish breeding with things that the general public would know/care about, like the US fish industry: “The ornamental fish industry is a billion-dollar enterprise in the United States, but the sale of saltwater aquarium fish has historically made up only a small part of that trade.” Burton also notes how the hit Disney movie “Finding Nemo” sparked a huge increase in colorful tropical fish sales—similar to what “101 Dalmatians” did for Dalmatian sales. Such details can connect the reader to the story and capture his/her attention (at least for a little bit.)

Gene Patents

This article can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/30/business/30drug.html?ref=science

    If a gene is isolated from a patient’s body and used to make significant advances in medicine, who does it belong to: the doctor who isolated it, or the original patient? So goes the controversy in medicine today surrounding gene patents. In this article, Andrew Pollack discusses the new stance of the federal government: “Reversing a longstanding policy, the federal government said on Friday that human and other genes should not be eligible for patents because they are part of nature.”

    This is an excellent first sentence, and the next paragraph, wherein he gives the relatively unimportant details of the case, is rightly kept short. Then Pollack includes two important quotes that affirm how significant this latest development in the gene patent issue is, one of them being from a patent attorney, saying “It’s major when the United States, in a filing, reverses decades of policies on an issue that everyone has been focused on for so long.” Pollack then goes into the controversy—where the proponents and opponents of gene patenting stand and why, and a brief history of gene patents in this country. It is a nice story because it not only updates the reader on this most recent big event in the gene patent debate, but it also introduces the reader to the debate itself in a clear and concise fashion. 

Extinction Talks

This article can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/30/world/30biodiversity.html?_r=1&ref=science

    The (apparent) effort to improve the world through global political action cannot be questioned: numerous international climate talks have taken place in the past few years, with varying amounts of success. But this story tells of a slightly different kind of world-saving political agenda—to reduce the extinction rate of plant and animal species worldwide. An agreement, called the Nagoya Protocol, was recently made at a United Nations talk in Japan to set specific goals for reducing the extinction rate, as well as to properly share the profits from region-based pharmaceutical products (developed from local plants or animals) between rich and poor nations.

    The writer, Neil MacFarquhar, rightly put all the above information in the lead, quickly followed by the specifics of the approved goals and their significance: “The agreement …sets a goal of cutting the current extinction rate by half or more by 2020. The Earth is losing species at 100 to 1,000 times the historical average, according to scientists who call the current period the worst since the dinosaurs were lost 65 million years ago.” This comparison to the extinction of the dinosaurs puts the current issue into perspective for the reader, and helps emphasize its importance. MacFarquhar also includes a bit on previous agreements similar to the Nagoya: “A previous and vague agreement in 2002 to substantially reverse the loss of species by 2010 failed to achieve that target.” It seems that when it comes to reducing extinction, as in the fight against global warming, global political change is hard to come by.

Sheep Defy the Forces of Natural Selection

This article can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/02/science/02obsheep.html?ref=science

    This article covers an interesting find that seems contradictory: sheep with weak immune systems may have more reproductive success. The writer, Sindya Bhanoo, writes a good first paragraph where she conveys the important information, and at the same time draws the reader in by highlighting the absurd possibility that natural selection does not always work: “A weak immune system makes an animal vulnerable to disease and parasites, but strangely natural selection does not always weed out creatures that have what appear to be severe disadvantages.” The second paragraph gives the important specifics about “reduced reproductive success” as a result of strong immune systems, and Bhanoo follows from there with details of the study.

    One thing this brief article may have included is a scientific discussion of the connection between these sheep and humans. In other words, what can this study tell us about our immune systems? There is no mention of human immune systems in the article, and that seems like it would be an interesting/important addition. The article also ends quite abruptly, probably because Bhanoo only focuses on the details of the study itself and ignores any further implications or future prospects of the research. But overall, it is an easy read, concise, and informative.

The Asian Origins of Man

This article can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/02/science/02obanthropoids.html?_r=1&ref=science

    This story has a dynamite, yet somewhat misleading, lead. The first sentence goes, “The ancestors of humans and other primates like apes and monkeys may have originated in Asia, not Africa, a new study in the journal Nature reports.” What the sentence implies and what it says appear to be two different things. At first glance, it seems to suggest that human origins took place in Asia, going against the well-known “out-of-Africa hypothesis.” It suggests that the cradle of humanity was actually located in an entirely different continent. However, that’s not exactly what it says: it says the “ancestors” of humans may have originally came from Asia, not humans themselves. This becomes clear when the writer, Sindya Bhanoo, cites a scientist as saying the fossils “indicate that there was migration from Asia.” The ancestors to modern-day primates could have originated in Asia and then migrated to Africa, where they would remain and eventually evolve into human beings.

    Aside from that misleading lead (it certainly works though—the reader can’t help but read on to find out if humans themselves actually did originate in Asia rather than Africa), the story is very well written. It is clear, to the point, and concise. Bhanoo relies heavily on the words of the scientists, which adds credibility and dynamism to her piece. 

Toxic Computers Behind Bars

This article can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/27/science/earth/27waste.html?_r=1&ref=science

    A new form of waste has developed in the last few decades. It includes the disposal of our computers, cell phones, printers, televisions, and other electronic devices, and is often referred to as “electronic waste.” This article discusses a four-year investigation by the Justice Department where it was found that prison inmates and employees have been exposed to toxic materials while “processing electronic waste for recycling.” This electronic waste had then been exported to developing nations where the toxic elements “c[ould] harm local populations by leaching into groundwater.”
   
    Leslie Kaufman writes a solid article here. All the information above—the essential information of the story—are in the first two paragraphs. Then Kaufman discusses what the investigators found, what prisons were involved, how the inquiry took place, and who was involved. There could have been more information on how the inmates/employees got sick from the electronic waste, but she does mention that there is little information known in that regard: “While the inquiry did not definitely link any long-term health effects to recycling work, it found evidence of wrongdoing, like exposing prisoners to lead and cadmium.” She also hinted, briefly at the end of the article, where the investigation might be leading (criminal charges against prisons), which was a nice conclusion to the story.

Venom

This article can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/26/science/26creatures.html?_r=1&ref=science

    The story today is a feature piece about snakes, specifically the king cobra and its venom-filled lifestyle. The writer, Sean B. Carroll, begins with a personal story to introduce the topic (common among features). His story is about the first time he saw a king cobra in a zoo and how astonished he was with its agility and size: “This sleek, agile and very alert snake was a king cobra, the largest venomous snake in the world and an icon to all snake enthusiasts, including this writer.” This personal account is advantageous for Carroll because a personal connection, in and of itself, is engaging, but it also grabs the reader’s attention because it is apparent that Carroll is fascinated by snakes—whenever a writer writes about something they love, more often than not, it will be a good read.

    And it is a good read, but only until about halfway. Rather than discussing recent news, the feature instead raises a question and seeks to answer it. The question is: “How does the king cobra maintain such an apparently high-risk lifestyle?” It is presented at the end of the third paragraph, and is an interesting question for a feature piece to focus on. However, about halfway through, Carroll veers away from that central focus question, and goes on to talk about all kinds of different animals who have evolved venom-resistance. The transitioning is not smooth/clear, and the king cobra disappears from the discussion only to return in the very last sentence: “Snakes in general, let alone cobras, will never be much loved by humans, but these animals are so extraordinary, this enthusiast cannot resist one sentimental thought: Long live the kings.” It may be cute, but on the whole, this concluding sentence doesn’t summarize or add much and, more importantly, it ends the piece without the central question ever being explicitly answered or further addressed.

Dinosaur King Ate Himself

This article can be found at http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/10/24/MNBT1FTELM.DTL&type=science

    Cannibalism is incredibly taboo in modern society, but is relatively common in the animal kingdom. This little pearl of a story reveals the possibly cannibalistic tendencies of one of the most famous animals in history—the Tyrannosaurus rex. The article starts out with a cute first paragraph that introduces the topic, but also illustrates its quite jovial nature: “Tyrannosaurus rex was certainly the king of dinosaurs, but may also have been dinosaur a la king.” The sentence highlights the fact that this is not groundbreaking science being done here—it’s just a fun fact about a popular animal.
   
    The writer does well in pacing the story. No paragraph is longer than two sentences. In fact, all but two are one sentence in length. This allows for quick and easy reading. The writer (Randolph Schmid from the Associated Press) also does well in providing important quotes from the researchers, and clearly explaining the most essential details of the study: “They found 17 fossils with deep V-shaped gouges of a type identified as being made by T. rex. Of those, four were remains of T. rex themselves. It seems likely the marks were made during scavenging from a dead dinosaur, the researchers said.” Schmid even manages to, in this short article, address the broader topic of cannibalism among other animals, and note that it is common among larger carnivores such as Komodo dragons and alligators. It then comes as no surprise that the T. rex may have feasted on itself as well.

Friday Night Lights

This article can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/24/sports/24birds.html?_r=1&ref=science

    In another showdown between environmental concerns and cultural lifestyle, this story chronicles the switch of high school football games in Hawaii from Friday nights to Saturday afternoons, on account of the local species of endangered Newell shearwater birds: “young seabirds mistake the lights of a football stadium for the moon and stars during their migration to the ocean, causing them to become disoriented, fall from the sky and die.”
   
    The story does well in providing the stance of the local residents on the issue, with multiple quotes from parents and players: “I think it’s best—Friday night lights. Not Saturday day football. It’s Friday night lights,” said one of the football players. However, there could be more information from the other side of the debate. It seems like two-thirds of the story focused on the locals and how they strongly believe that the elimination of Friday night games is an attack on their culture and their well-being. Is there more information on the birds? What else can be done to help save them? But the story is engaging, well-written, and concise; and it serves as a brilliant example of the ongoing war between humans and the rest of the world.

Aspirin on the Daily

This article can be found at http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/10/22/MNNR1G09QS.DTL&type=science

    Here’s a tremendously brief story on the positive effects of regular aspirin use. Writer Maria Cheng does well in giving the reader just the essentials of this study. One could read the first paragraph and know the substance of everything to follow: “A low dose of aspirin may reduce colon cancer cases by a quarter and deaths by a third.” That says it all. The rest of the story is just more details on the study, such as the specific data obtained and previous aspirin studies.
   
    Though its brevity is a great quality of the story, it could have included more information on the study. How was it conducted? Were there any side effects at all? What are the long-term effects of consistent aspirin use, even if it’s at a low dosage? Cheng could have also given some more input from the scientists involved. She only cites one scientist, and what he said was about the family history of colon cancer, rather than the actual study. But it is good to know that more and more is being learned in the area of medication use: we are still in the early days of medication, and hopefully we will continue to improve treatments and provide the best care possible through meticulous research and proper ethics.

The Lunar Oasis

This article can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/22/science/space/22moon.html?_r=1&ref=science

    On Earth, we take water for granted, but it is actually quite a rare occurrence in the inner terrestrial planets of our solar system. This wonderfully written story by Kenneth Chang rightly illustrates the preciousness of water and its importance for the progress of mankind. His first two paragraphs draw the reader in with a few clear, important and beautiful images: “The Moon, at least at the bottom of a deep, dark cold crater near its south pole, seems to be wetter than the Sahara…In lunar terms, that is an oasis, surprisingly wet for a place that had long been thought by many planetary scientists to be utterly dry.” The reader understands the significance of this lunar water finding from the very start, and he/she already has a feel for about how much water there is.

     Chang provides further details about the water in the lunar crater and its uses with clarity: “eight wheelbarrows of soil [would] melt [into] 10 to 13 gallons of water. The water, if purified, could be used for drinking, or broken apart into hydrogen and oxygen for rocket fuel—to get home or travel to Mars.” That’s in the third paragraph. Then he moves into the words of the scientists, explaining what they know/think about the lunar crater (named Cabeus) and the water in it. The experiments and science are explained concisely and clearly, and the inverse pyramid is conserved. As Chang moves along the article, he begins to talk about the other minerals, other than water, found in the lunar soil. While significant, these minerals are nowhere near as important to humans as water, so they are rightly placed towards the end of the article. And the story ends with a scientist’s quote of hope and new horizons, such as returning to the Moon even though Obama has urged against it: “I think the poles have just opened up a flurry of new questions...I think it is a destiny that we will go there as humans. I hope it’s not just for commercialization.”

Map of the Brain

This article can be found at http://www.boston.com/news/science/articles/2010/10/11/on_a_quest_to_map_the_brains_hidden_territory/

    It is astounding how much we still do not know about the brain. There are entire sections of the brain that can only be crudely explained and others that remain completely in the dark. As the writer of the story, Carolyn Johnson, so fantastically put it, the images we currently have of the brain are “crude and incomplete, akin to medieval maps of the world in which unexplored regions were filled in with sea monsters or dragons.” This sentence was in the first paragraph of the article, and it certainly grabs the reader’s attention and fascinates him/her right from the start.
   
    The meat of the article does not really come until the third/fourth paragraph. The big idea in this story is that researchers have developed new medical technology to image the brain in more complex ways, and have recently discovered an important structure, called the “connectome," which is an assemblage of "neural highways crucial for brain function, including thoughts, movements, and sensations…[Physicist and radiologist Dr. Van] Weeden said[,] “This is as important a structure as you’re ever going to meet, and this thing had to be designed by evolution.”” Then Johnson jumps to other scientists, discussing their research plans and thoughts on the “connectome,” as well as how important the study of this newly found cerebral region and the new medical technology will be in the future of brain research: Dr. Bruce Rosen says, “There’s excellent evidence we’ll see things we can’t see today.” Johnson really sticks to what the scientists think and say and do. She makes great use of the scientists’ thoughts to frame a story around this new imaging technology, the “connectome,” and why they are so important to our understanding of the brain. 

Oldest Thing in the Universe

This article can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2010/10/20/science/space/AP-US-SCI-Oldest-Galaxy.html?_r=1&ref=science

    About an hour and a half ago, the Associated Press released some pretty big news in the realm of astronomy. In a study published Wednesday in Nature, astronomers from the Paris Observatory say they’ve found the oldest thing in the universe known to mankind. The first paragraph of the story presents this profound discovery with humor and clarity: “It’s a galaxy far, far away from a time long, long ago.” The second paragraph continues the stream of interesting/important information and context: “hidden in a Hubble Space Telescope photo released earlier this year is a small smudge of light that European astronomers now calculate is a galaxy from 13.1 billion years ago. That’s a time when the universe was very young, just shy of 600 million years old.”
   
    The rest of the story is just as good. It is concise with short paragraphs and contains pertinent quotations from leading scientists, such as one CIT astronomy professor clarifying the extremely ancient nature of the galaxy (and in turn, the extremely youthful state we see it in): “We’re looking at the universe when it was a 20th of its current age. In human terms, we’re looking at a 4-year-old boy in the life span of an adult.” Then the story focuses on the details of the study, and ends with a scientist’s quote on how far we really are looking out into space: “We’re looking almost to the edge, almost within 100 million years of seeing the very first objects.”

Fresh Perspective on the Haiti Earthquake

This article can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/19/science/19quake.html?_r=1&ref=science

    The Haiti earthquake at the beginning of this year decimated thousands of buildings, killed hundreds of thousands of people, and left about a million others homeless. Wouldn’t it be great if we could reduce the destruction incurred from such high-magnitude earthquakes? Well, in this article, Henry Fountain explains new seismology research that could help diminish the damages done by future earthquakes.

    While the new research and its great potential are the main subjects of the article, Fountain does not arrive to them until about halfway through. It may have strengthened his story to have included the major points of the research in the first paragraph or two, so the reader knows what’s coming and what’s important. Recently, scientists had a revelation with regards to the Haiti earthquake: they found that it was intensified due to the geometry of local surface features—known as “topographic amplification.” However, in the article, this doesn’t come up until the third paragraph. He could have spent less time in the second paragraph describing the secondary intensifying effects of sedimentary rock and more time introducing the reader to these new findings. The good stuff doesn’t come until the end when he begins to quote the seismologists themselves: Dr. Hough says that with this ongoing research and computer simulations, we can eventually “say, ‘You should build over here, and not there.’” She also says, “you can build safely, even in zones [of severe shaking]. You just have to know what you’re up against…We can design for it.” This is the meat of the story, and Fountain could have included it much sooner and trimmed the fat to produce a more solid piece. 

Historic Brothels in North End

This article can be found at http://www.boston.com/news/science/articles/2010/10/18/north_end_dig_provides_rare_look_into_boston_brothels/?page=2

    This is a strange story to appear in the science section of the Boston Globe. Apparently, as said in the second paragraph, BU archeology professors have found artifacts in Boston’s North End that show a history of heavy prostitution in that area: “From toothbrushes to jewelry to cosmetics, and parts of 19 syringes used for hygiene, the treasure trove plucked from a now-buried site near Haymarket is evidence of a thriving, racy economy that the city’s prim Victorian image never acknowledges.” The rest of the story goes into more detail on the prostitution that was flourishing in these parts about a century and a half ago.

    But it doesn’t make much sense that this story would be in the science section. It seems like something that would just be under general news (or even under an ‘odd news’ section). There’s essentially no science. The archeology behind the study is barely mentioned—most of it is just about the brothel life in those days. Furthermore, the end of the story gets into an incredibly boring discussion on where the artifact collection can/should be stored; there’s very little interesting material after the first couple paragraphs. Perhaps the writer, Brian MacQuarrie, could have included more on the actual findings, or at least he could have made it a shorter article.

The Mining Dilemna

This article can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/16/science/earth/16westvirginia.html?_r=1&ref=science

    In another battle between the contemporary American’s way of life and the environmental impact of such a culture, the EPA has advised against a mountaintop removal mining project in West Virginia—a venture that would open up jobs for hundreds and stimulate a struggling economy, but would also destroy local ecosystems.
   
    This is a controversial issue, and the writer John M. Broder does a good job making the conflict clear and providing both sides of the story. He starts out with a lead that basically says it all: “A top federal regulator has recommended revoking the permit for one of the nation’s largest planned mountaintop removal mining projects, saying it would be devastating to miles of West Virginia streams and the plant and naimal life they support.” What follows are: a quick background of the mining project and its specifics, quotes from both the EPA and the mining company Arch Coal, and plans for the future. Broder mentions the possibility of a compromise but also suggests that this is only the beginning of a very long process. He ends with a statement from the executive director of the Sierra Club that sums the whole situation up, which is nice because it serves as Broder’s final summarizing statement and leaves the reader with the essence of the story: “This mother of all mountaintop removal coal mines would destroy thousands of acres of land, bury seven miles of streams and end a way of life for too many Appalachian families.”

The Death of a Deadly Virus

This article can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/16/science/16pest.html?_r=1&ref=science

    This story on the complete elimination of the deadly virus, rinderpest, is well-written and touches on a couple interesting/important topics. With the first sentence, Donald G. McNeil Jr. draws us in by acknowledging the historic and social context of this elimination: “In only the second elimination of a disease in history, rinderpest—a virus that used to kill cattle by the millions, leading to famine and death among humans—has been declared wiped off the face of the earth.” He goes on to describe the horrible consequences of the virus, the sigh of relief felt by international health and food organizations, how rinderpest was eliminated, and the future decision of whether or not to keep frozen samples of the virus stored for research purposes.

    The second half of the article goes through the history of rinderpest, from its beginnings in Asia to its “total destruction of herds” (which led to widespread famine) in Africa. In this way, the writer makes it seem like an obituary for the virus, which makes sense since it has effectively “died” and people would naturally wonder how it “lived” now that it’s gone. The writer also does well in mentioning other viruses with stories similar to rinderpest, including the infamous smallpox: “the only other disease ever eliminated.”

Worms Making Babies

This article can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/19/science/19obworm.html?_r=1&ref=science

    It’s incredible that much of what we learned about the human body has actually been through experiments done on other animals. One of the most popular experimental subjects in modern science is the worm. And according to a new study, the worm has provided some fresh insight into human fertility. In addition to regular aging, women also exhibit reproductive aging. Through the worm experiments, researchers have found why reproductive ability and egg quality decrease as women age—it appears to be due to the “increased secretion of a protein called transforming growth factor beta, or TFG-beta.”
   
    This is a nice, clear and concise story written by Sindya Bhanoo. The science is explained quite well, the lead is effective with its immediate mention of declining reproductive ability in early 30’s (and it’s humorous with the mention of Botox), and the scientist’s quotes are engaging. Towards the end, Bhanoo begins to discuss an important idea: the ability of medicine to actually extend women’s reproductive lifespans. She could have included this sentence, “this kind of research may eventually provide the knowledge to extend female fertility, Dr. Murphy said,” a little earlier in the story because it is so important; but the story is short enough that it works itself in smoothly as it is. The last sentence summarized the protein experiments with the worms. It’s a solid ending because it gives the reader a feeling that we are getting somewhere with this research but we still have a long way to go: “Although their reproductive ability increased, their life span did not, and reproducing in old age—13 days for the worms—was fatal.”

Faulty Science

This article can be found at http://www.boston.com/news/science/articles/2010/10/14/harvard_scientists_study_retracted_from_journal/

    This is the second story so far dealing with academic misconduct. And it is the third story about stem cell research. Perhaps the reason these two have crossed paths is the controversial nature of the latter. And the story is meaningful: academic morality is important to uphold in the realm of science, especially with topics as huge as stem cells. No one wants a groundbreaking discovery to be made, and then later find it to be based in faulty research.    
    The article, written by Carolyn Y. Johnson, covers the retraction of a stem cell article published in January in Nature. Johnson’s focus is primarily on the retraction, rather than the science. The whole first half provides quotes from scientists about their concerns and opinions regarding the article retraction. The substance of the article retracted and the further explanation of why it was retracted remain unknown to the reader until the last third of the story. And it’s a cursory explanation at that, with no clarification of the greater implications of the research and why it was so important to retract. Maybe it was Johnson’s orders to focus on the retraction, but a more in-depth look at the science would have put the misconduct into context and it would have made it more interesting.

Dying Languages

This article can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/12/science/12language.html?ref=science

    In America, there are really only two languages: English and not-English. Sure, other languages come into play but everyone in this country has to know how to speak English or they will not survive. And this rings true for most developed countries and their particular primary language. The number of major languages in developed countries can usually be counted on one or two hands. However, there are tons upon tons of languages in the world—a number so high that it is difficult to grasp for many English-only speakers. What other languages could there be besides the main ones? It is this extreme barrier that John Noble Wilford, the writer of the story, takes advantage of as he writes about the little-known language, Koro, in the New York Times—a publication only English-speaking people would read.  
    The story has a terrific lead that hooks you in the second paragraph with an astounding fact: “On average, every two weeks one of the world’s recorded 7,000 languages becomes extinct.” Wilbur goes on to say that language experts have traveled India and discovered a new but extremely rare language called Koro. Only 800 people are estimated to speak it. 
    What the story lacked was some context for language science. What do linguists do? What is defined as a “language”? What is a “dialect’? A “tongue”? How do these rare languages develop and what does it mean for two languages to be related? The story did well in following the inverse pyramid: it certainly became less and less interesting, but brief answers to these questions may have put the tiny language of Koro into a more meaningful perspective.

The Safety of Embryonic Stem Cell Research

This article can be found at http://www.boston.com/news/science/articles/2010/10/12/spinal_cord_patient_gets_first_embryonic_stem_cell_treatment/

    Another story here on embryonic stem cells. The story here marks a huge stepping stone in stem cell research—this is the first patient to ever undergo stem cell treatment. Right from the lead, the writer Rob Stein establishes the context of this article. It is not about the scientific details of stem cell science, but rather about the controversial nature of the research: the ethical concerns and fears going into testing stem cell treatments. As Stein puts it in the first paragraph, the treatment of this patient marks “the beginning of the first carefully designed attempt to test the promising but controversial therapy.”
    And he goes on to give equal attention to both sides. He provides quotations from scientists both in favor of pushing the research further and concerned about the “long-term safety” of stem cell treatment. The second half of the article wisely discusses what has been done already in terms of safety. He also throws in an example from a decade ago about a “death from a gene therapy experiment.” But inevitably, as is always the case in medical research, proposed treatments, even after significant study and animal testing, must be tested on humans. How else can we know whether or not it works? And that’s the dilemma that is at work right now in the field of embryonic stem cell research. Will the benefits outweigh the potential costs?

Internet Consumption At Record Levels

This article can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/10/business/10novel.html?_r=1&ref=science

    The Internet is becoming a second home for much of the developed world. Modern Internet usage is absurdly high and it continues to grow: one scientist says, “The traffic requirements on the Internet double every two years.”  Anne Eisenberg, the writer of this story, smartly relates our Internet usage to food consumption in the first paragraph: “Our taste for the Internet is insatiable…scientists are coping, finding ingenious ways to satisfy our deep bandwidth hunger.” This makes the reader understand the importance of improving Internet traffic flow—it is a necessity. Everyone needs to be able to survive on the digital nourishment of the Internet.
    The story is impressive in that it takes a fairly arcane subject—the Internet information highways made of optical fibers in the network—and brings it down to Earth, making it understandable to the common reader. Eisenberg not only explains the technological details behind the science, she also tells us of the big picture: why Internet demand is growing and what scientists have to say about it. Readers always appreciate hearing expertise; so when a professor of electrical engineering says, “We are looking at a point soon where we cannot satisfy demand,” the reader knows it’s the real deal. Her inverse pyramid also flows very nicely through the piece.

Whales Killed by Ships off the California Coast

This article can be found at http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/10/10/BALQ1FPRM7.DTL

    This story covers the most recent in a trend of whale killings due to busy shipping lanes along the California coast (and across the globe). “At least five dead whales have been sighted or have washed ashore around the [Bay Area] region since late July.” This particular story focuses on the deaths of a mother and her “17-foot-long fetus…released by her body as she decomposed.”
    This is a big problem, and the writer, Kelly Zito, proves so by describing a number of different whale strikes that have happened recently along the West Coast. Zito calls attention to the endangered status of blue, humpback and fin whales, and she says that whale protection organizations around the globe are discussing solutions, but she doesn’t spend much time on those. The purpose of this article is just to be a simple news story that doesn’t delve into the larger issues. But she does do well in starting with the specific story and then zooming out, putting the big picture into focus. She uses a lot of very short paragraphs, most of them limited to one sentence, which helps her get the facts across efficiently and quickly. Though she could have said more on the topic, such as why whales don’t seem to be able to get out of the ships’ way, Zoti stays concise and appropriately objective.

Cars with Automatic Pilot Coming Soon!

This article can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/10/science/10google.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&ref=science

    It’s a futuristic vision society has had since the dawn of the automobile: cars that drive themselves. We see it all the time in movies and books and art. Many drivers now wouldn’t even think of leaving home without a GPS system guiding the way. Some cars even beep now when they are approaching something and in danger of hitting it. This push towards autonomous automobiles is a dream we just can’t seem to get out of our heads. Fortunately (or unfortunately?), mechanical/computer engineers are beginning to make huge steps in turning this dream into a reality.
    The story, written by John Markoff, talks about the recent advances in autonomous driving made by Google. Apparently, they don’t spend all their time and money on just the internet because they’ve developed an artificial intelligence system for cars that literally drives for you, through highway traffic, stopping for stoplights, even down some of the windiest roads in San Francisco. “But of course, to be truly safer, the cars must be far more reliable than, say, today’s personal computers, which crash on occasion and are frequently infected.” A good note by Markoff—even though this autonomous automobile is already looking good, there’s still a lot of research to be done before it goes into mass production.
    Markoff writes a solid article here, keeping it interesting all the way through, and touching on the greater topics of autonomous vehicles and artificial intelligence. A discussion on the ethic of it all is rightly left out—it is a news story, even though it has a freshness and modernity in its writing that would make Google proud.  

A Whole New World, Thanks to Graphene

This article can be found at http://www.boston.com/news/world/europe/articles/2010/10/06/two_receive_nobel_physics_prize/  

    The most recent Nobel Prize in physics has been awarded to two Russian scientists for their study of the light superstrong material, graphene. Their experiments detail a major breakthrough in materials technology as they show graphene to have exceptional applications in the advancement of many industrial technologies, including satellites, aircraft, cars, televisions, and computers.
    The article does a nice job laying out the story of graphene. It begins with the big questions: what is it and so what? The one-sentence lead immediately answers both, calling graphene “the strongest and thinnest material known to mankind, a potential building block for faster computers and lighter airplanes and satellites.” Then the writer, Karl Ritter, gets more into the details, saying that graphene is “a form of carbon only one atom thick but more than 100 times stronger than steel.” This is a great description—it’s simple and easy to picture. One thing that could have been left for further down in the article was the background of the two scientists. The science behind the experiments, the scientists’ reactions of excitements, and the further implications of graphene are more important and should surely precede the more cursory information about the scientists themselves.
    Ritter also does well in emphasizing the fact that none of these advances in computers or satellites or airplanes or cars or TVs will be coming anytime soon, as he quotes one of the scientists as saying “[it will take awhile] before this sort of technology moves into mainstream application.” Though the capabilities of graphene sound promising, it’s too early to get too excited.

Miniature Dinosaurs

This article can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/07/science/07dinosaurs.html?_r=1&ref=science

    It is generally accepted that the Earth has suffered a series of mass extinctions during its 4.5 billion year existence, ending the lines of millions of species of plants and animals. Yet somehow life keeps trucking, evolving past these catastrophes; and it does so through a small number of survivors, very small species that just narrowly avoided extinction, that would eventually give rise to a greater diversity of life forms, such as dinosaurs. This article tells us about the newest scientific discovery in this area. Scientists claim they have found the earliest known relative of the dinosaurs, dating the beginning of the dinosaur era at around 250 million years ago.
    The story is well-written. The writer, Kenneth Chang, has a good lead that immediately provides the reader with an image to carry through the rest of the article: “The earliest known relatives of dinosaurs were the size of a house cat, walked on four legs and left footprints in the quarries in Poland.” And then there is a photograph of the fossilized footprints and an illustration of the “cat-size dinosaur.” Chang does well in keeping the inverse pyramid structure, getting in all the interesting stuff towards the beginning, such as the scientists’ reactions and the implications of the finding—“dinosaurs…originally arose to fill ecological niches opened by an earlier, even greater mass extinction.” It is concise and clear, and it even ventures into the greater topic of global mass extinctions in the history of the Earth.

Global Climate Action Made Bite-Sized

This article can be found at http://www.boston.com/news/science/articles/2010/10/05/find_common_ground_un_climate_chief_says/

    So far, the world has been horrendous at organizing a global effort to fight climate change. National goals have constantly been neglected and deadlines pushed back. It is widely acknowledged that the efforts of the UN to take political action against climate change have been a failure, Copenhagen being a perfect example. In fact, the failure of Copenhagen is what has inspired countries to focus on smaller initiatives: “The scaled-down ambitions are largely due to the collapse of climate talks in Copenhagen last year, when political leaders failed to produce a global and legally binding treaty on curbing the greenhouse gases that cause global warming.”
    The story seems to be a brief explanation of the global climate change fight as it stands today. The UN climate chief wants countries to “focus on smaller initiatives” rather than create far-reaching, unachievable goals. The writer makes some bold statements on an important issue that stick with the reader: “Expectations still are small because countries remain deadlocked over the same issues…Ultimately, if talks in Cancun fail to produce concrete results, the entire UN process could be in jeopardy.” However, it is unclear what the major story is here. It seems to bounce around between climate negotiations, from Mexico to China to Cancun, and it is hard to tell where things are happening and what players are involved. Perhaps the writer could have added a few more paragraphs to adequately explain the status of the political workings behind climate change. 

Humans Are Actually Not That Stupid

This article can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/05/science/05compute.html?_r=1&ref=science

    Like stem cell research, artificial intelligence is a field of study where researchers proceed with caution. There are potential consequences that could overshadow the benefits—would machines that are as intelligent as humans be the best thing to have around? It is both a practical and a moral question. The existence of intelligent robots would basically mean we created a whole new race of man, or perhaps a whole new species of being. Can we do that? Should we do that?
    Well scientists are trying to answer the former before they get to the latter. Machines are a long ways away from exhibiting human intelligence, but artificial intelligence research is in full throttle across the globe, as scientists plug away in the effort to bring the future closer. This story is about a huge stepping stone in that direction—the Never-Ending Language Learning system (NELL). This mega computer browses the Web and essentially teaches itself (with some help from scientists of course). A great example of how far computers have to go is the fact that NELL would not be able to understand the sentences, “The girl caught the butterfly with the spots,” and “The girl caught the butterfly with the net.” We immediately understand that the butterfly has the spots, not the girl, and the girl has the net, not the butterfly. This comes from our cumulative knowledge, building and evolving over years and years of experience. NELL has none of this. Scientists hope that through its ability to search the Web and acquire its own cumulative knowledge, it will someday have human-like language understanding.
    The story is very well-written. Starting with the current gap between computers and humans, then moving in to the details of NELL, all while expanding on the topics of semantic computing and artificial intelligence, the writer Steve Lohr does a brilliant job drawing the reader in and keeping him/her engaged. The examples he chooses of NELL’s abilities and inabilities, as well as the general abilities/inabilities of today’s computing, work spectacularly.