SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY
Search headlines
Find the stories shaping the conversation.
Results for " rite " 3,529 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle
ArtBeat: Spotlight on the local arts events and entertainment
Here’s a closer look at what you can expect from the area’s events: June 4– June 10: The weekly preview of arts and culture events in the Greater Knoxville area is included in the Arts & Cultural Alliance. Summer Movie Magic: The Tennessee Theatre’s family-favorite Summer Movie Magic Series returns with three dates and six […]
Scarlet, gray and something more: The science of sports fandom at Ohio State
The November air in Columbus was bitter and cold as more than 100,000 fans packed into Ohio Stadium for the 2024 edition of The Game. At the time, The No. 2 ranked Ohio State Buckeyes were 19.5-point favorites against unranked Michigan. A Buckeye win over the Wolverines was something that many Ohio State students had […]
The Cove Continues Its Tradition of Unique Entertainment with The Slippery Chickens
By Peter Lyons Hall One of the reasons Greenwood Lake’s The Cove Restaurant has become a favorite destination for both residents and visitors is proprietor Bobby Perreira’s commitment to showcasing unique and memorable entertainment. Perreira has built a reputation for bringing distinctive performers to his lakeside venue—artists who offer something beyond the ordinary cover-band experience. […]
Rams are clear Super Bowl favorites after busy offseason. Recent history says that means very little
The week in politics (June 10, 2026)
On Wednesday's show: We discuss the latest developments in politics in our weekly roundup. And writer Lauren Hough discusses a rambling cross-country road trip she took with her dog, which she recounts in her latest book.
Mother and daughter learn to live again in "Honeyjoon"
“Laughter through tears is my favorite emotion,” Truvy Jones (Dolly Parton) said in “Steel Magnolias.” First-time feature film director Lilian T. Mehrel applies that notion to her film “Honeyjoon.” What
News - Spring Sports Highlights
With another academic year in the books, here’s a look back at the Continentals’ spring season highlights — and some of photographer Josh McKee’s favorite action shots.
Doctors Should Do More Screening for Excess Body Fat and Its Health Risks
Nearly 90% of Americans meet the criteria for CKM syndrome. New guidelines have been issued for diagnosing and treating the disorder.
Tacoma’s Grit City Books is your favorite bookseller’s favorite bookstore
Open for only two years, the "unapologetically queer-owned and queer-positive" Grit City Books in Tacoma has become a favorite among Seattle booksellers.
Best and worst national parks, from traveler who visited all 63
After visiting all 63 national parks in the US, my favorites include Yosemite and Grand Teton. I think Gateway Arch is among the worst parks, though.
Your DNA is changing all the time. Here’s why
We tend to think of the DNA strands that contain our genetic code as consistent, stable units. But in reality, the cells that make up our bodies are constantly replicating and changing. Even as you read this sentence, in fact, the genes within your cells are mutating. So, what causes these mutations and what’s the impact? Science writer Roxanne Khamsi examines the answers in her new book, Beyond Inheritance. Today on the show, she gets into how scientists examine these mutations, how they’ve shifted our understanding of disease and what the future of genetic therapy could entail.Interested in more biological and life sciences? Email us your question at shortwave@npr.org.Listen to every episode of Short Wave sponsor-free and support our work at NPR by signing up for Short Wave+ at plus.npr.org/shortwave.
Purple Row After Dark: Who’s your favorite current Rockie?
Is it the best player on the field or the personality that makes a fan favorite?
Colorado Scales Back Software and Other Business Tax Exemptions
Colorado Gov. Jared Polis (D) signed legislation repealing a series of business tax exemptions to raise revenue for an expanded working families tax credit and balance out revenue gaps resulting from President Donald Trump’s 2025 tax law.
Thunder GM Sam Presti launches spirited defense of Shai Gilgeous-Alexander: 'He's playing against 6 people. He's got 5 defenders, and the 6th defender is social media'
We can create the future of science right now
Paul Litvak is the founder and Executive Director of the Robyn Dawes Institute and a Visiting Scholar at UC Berkeley. He has a PhD in Behavioral Decision Research from Carnegie Mellon where he studied emotions and the sunk cost bias. Over 15 years in industry, he solved a wide range of challenging technical problems. At Meta he created models optimizing the ad review process. At Google he ran experiments to measure social influence. At Airbnb, he was a product manager leading machine learning teams optimizing search ranking and price suggestions. He also co-founded and led product at Rhythmic Health, a venture-backed biosensing startup, creating an accurate low cost system using a color changing strip and a smart phone to measure salivary lactate. The bottleneck At this point, it is uncontroversial to say that science needs to stop using the PDF article as the unit of knowledge and currency. The unbearable slowness of scientific publishing, the profit motive and margins: I’m not saying anything new. The PDF also sucks because it’s hard to extract structured information, which makes it hard to do evidence synthesis. As a result, we do much less evidence synthesis than is needed. And evidence synthesis ultimately undergirds most policy and medical decision-making. I can see second-by-second real-time odds for any sporting or newsworthy event, but a school board can’t see the best evidence on whether their 8th graders should be taught algebra. As a society, we don’t treat this as an important problem. Again, not controversial. Not only is the problem well understood, but the solution has already been laid out. What we need is AI-assisted living evidence synthesis - (1) an open knowledge graph of atomic claims, (2) claims linked to evidence, (3) assessment and synthesis of each piece of evidence, and (4) continuous updating with new data. What few realize (yet) is that the technical capacity to build this vision for a significant portion of science already exists. Not only that, scientists and startup teams are already building many of these components. I know this because I’ve been surveying the space and talking to many of the builders. There are some missing pieces: for example, evaluations of how well some of the components work. But at this point, most of what’s missing is a fully end-to-end working integration of all of these parts. In the rest of this essay, I’m going to lay out all the parts of a working living evidence layer for science and who is working on them, and propose concrete next steps for building this system. What’s now possible The diagram above outlines the components of a living evidence synthesis platform, including some of the teams working on each component1. Scientific PDFs are processed into claims with associated evidence. The evidence is subjected to a forensic audit, methodological evaluation and robustness and reproducibility checks. Finally it’s given a weight in a continuously updating synthesis. What follows is a description and status of each component and a few of the teams working on them. Document understanding The first thing you need to be able to do is turn an article into structured data. Mostly that means parsing PDFs. There are often multicolumn layouts that confuse non-specialized PDF to text processing libraries. For scientific papers, there is the added complexity of parsing formulas and tables and figures. This is a really hot area - there are startups offering APIs, and it seems like a new open source package gets posted to Github every few weeks. What follows isn’t exhaustive. A package called GROBID was the state of the art for a while, they didn’t update their package for nearly two years until very recently. In the meantime reducto.ai released an AI powered PDF extraction API, PaddleOCR became popular, IBM released a model called Docling, and both Mistral and Gemini created models and libraries. I also know of at least one other well-funded psychology research group working on a paper parser. By contrast, there are few open evals in this space, with no extensive evals for complex table comprehension in particular. Nonetheless, I’m confident this will be a solved problem soon, given the combination of LLM advances and developer interest. Hypothesis level extraction There has been increasing interest in comprehending the extracted text of papers and linking information to evidence for each hypothesis. A lot of work has already been done. Trialstreamer (Marshall et al. 2020) and RobotReviewer LIVE (Marshall et al. 2023) demonstrated automated extraction of trial population, intervention, and outcome at scale on clinical RCTs. PaperQA2 (Skarlinski et al. 2024) and Ai2 ScholarQA (2024) extended this to retrieval-augmented question answering with citation grounding. Elicit, Consensus, and SciSpace operationalized claim-level extraction for end users. OpenEval (Booeshaghi et al. 2026) is the most recent and most ambitious: 1.96 million atomic claims extracted from 16,087 eLife manuscripts using Claude Sonnet 4.5, grouped into ~299,000 results, with LLM evaluations showing 81% agreement with human peer review on a 2,487-paper subset. None of these solutions link claims to test-statistics, as you would need to evaluate randomized controlled trials. This is why I built the evidence.guide API - to extract hypotheses and associated test statistics from behavioral science papers. The best public eval of this kind of extraction I’m aware of comes from the recent SCORE project - they had humans code thousands of psychology papers to extract their claims by hand. It would be extremely helpful to the world if all scientific PDFs were available as structured open data. I’ve been working to make this happen, both directly at Berkeley and through coordination with large entities I can’t yet speak of; as hard as it is to do, I think it’s possible2. Forensic audit A lot of work has been done on forensic audit, but some gaps remain. Of course, for biology papers that rely on images for evidence, there are a variety of tools (notably Proofig and ImageTwin) to spot anomalies. These are still well short of what sleuths like Elizabeth Bik can do on her own, but these tools are constant companions among fraud analysts. There’s someone working on auditing Excel files for anomalies, and a number of teams are automating numerical checks like GRIM and SPRITE, including Scrutiny project, the INSPECT-SR team as well as statcheck. The regcheck team is building a way to use AI to compare preregistrations to analyses in papers, to ensure there aren’t significant deviations. Nonetheless, there are many other kinds of anomalies to screen for, both public and less publicly known. And there are no formal evals for anomaly detection that I’m aware of. Still, there’s a lot to draw from in this space and I’m pretty certain we will be able to scan papers for most kinds of obvious anomalies in the near future. Methodological review This area has been white hot, though I fear for many of the startups in this space, because this capability may become commoditized. There are at least six different AI peer review companies, including Refine.ink, Reviewer3, ReviewerZero.ai, Q.E.D. Science, Paper Wizard, and Isitcredible. Coarse (a pun on refine) was also recently created as an open source alternative. These systems provide qualitative feedback on the content of papers, spotting methodological weaknesses and mathematical errors. They seem to work pretty well, and many academics report bitterly that they exceed the average quality of typical peer reviewers. But there are few evals here either. What evals exist so far involve using LLM-as-judge (circularity problems abound) or comparing against human reviews of questionable quality. What you’d ideally want is an eval that measures capturing known errors in papers3. Reproducibility and robustness Another active area has been using AI agents to automate computational reproducibility4 and robustness5 checks in papers that report numerical results. For more recent papers where data and code are available, AI agents can see whether they can re-run the analyses and produce the numbers reported in the published paper. In addition to a handful of individual academics who have been experimenting using Claude Code for this, the Institute for Replication is a leading group working on building an end to end system. The evals related to this problem are the most mature, with CORE-Bench (Siegel, Kapoor, Narayanan 2024) and PaperBench (OpenAI 2025) available to benchmark agents on this task. There is also work on getting AI agents to test alternative ways of analyzing the data to ensure the results are robust to small analytic design choices. Synthesis This is the most underdeveloped area where significant investment is required. Although some automated evidence synthesis systems exist — for example, otto-sr is building an AI agent to write systematic reviews — none of these incorporate the full range of paper level signals to weight evidence appropriately. Nor is there anything like an eval or a gold standard for a good systematic review. Arguably Cochrane reviews are the closest we have to gold standard human systematic reviews, though I’ve heard academics in the know complain about their uneven quality. A key question for a synthesis platform is how to weight anomalies and methodological issues in assessing the quality of a piece of evidence. This is an unsolved problem and one I’m very keen to work on. Continuous updating There are many pieces of basic infrastructure available for monitoring for new research and initiating updates. OpenAlex is the current open citation graph. Retraction Watch integrated into Crossref in October 2023. Scite tracks how citations support, contrast, or mention prior claims. The Living Evidence Network demonstrated continuous-update workflows in clinical guidelines. Engineering this is a relatively straightforward task. When you look over this technical architecture and all the progress being made, it’s hard not to be optimistic that a living guide to scientific evidence will be built. The stakeholders are ready The social infrastructure for this is starting to coalesce — it’s not just a pie in the sky academic exercise to imagine this coming into existence. Institutions like the Center for Open Science, the Institute for Replication, the INSPECT-SR, the Living Evidence Network and more are all working on scaling work to improve research quality. Funders are also aligned. The Sloan Foundation has funded living evidence work through COS. Coefficient Giving supports the Institute for Replication and COS. The Astera Institute and the Institute for Progress have shown interest in this space. NIH has established an Office for Replication and Reproducibility. Although there are (very unfortunately) serious headwinds in science funding generally, there is an active group of funders interested in metascience. A brief word about what I’ve been doing at RDI. First, as a Visiting Scholar at Berkeley I’ve been actively figuring out how a non-profit and a public university can conduct and make public the results of large-scale academic article data mining. With some of the money I raised from donors, I commissioned a legal analysis of recent case law and publisher text data mining (TDM) agreements in order to understand whether a massive open data mining of academic articles is possible (with caveats, it is). I’ve also been working to bring together stakeholders in this space, and identify gaps. I’ve also been doing some software development in this space, with more to come. A pilot proposal The assumption undergirding all of this is that an AI, given all this information, would make the right judgment about a scientific claim with lots of conflicting evidence, weighing all the factors appropriately. That’s the hypothesis we need to test. Randomized control trial research is the best place to focus on first. RCTs are used to make many of the important decisions in society - from medical trials to public policy changes. And they use a relatively uniform set of inferential statistics with lots of known and available diagnostics. Behavioral science experiments, within the broader realm of RCTs, should be first used as a testbed whose results can be generalized. Because behavioral science is at the vanguard of open science practices, replications abound (there are thousands of them) to serve as ground truth training data. Key Hypothesis Therefore the pilot would test, in behavioral RCTs that have been replicated, whether the quality of evidence for a claim can be used to accurately predict whether that claim will replicate. Secondary Hypotheses Compared to claims that replicated, non-replicated claims demonstrate a greater share of forensic anomalies in their source literatures. Hypothesis level claim and statistic extraction is accurate enough to scale living evidence without onerous human review costs. Replication prediction is more accurate than prediction markets6 or journal prestige. If all the different quality signals we gather do accurately predict which studies will replicate, then we can use that model to score evidence to power the living evidence layer. Why this is informative regardless of outcome If the pilot succeeds, the architecture extends to medical RCTs (where Living Evidence already operates and integration is mostly about claim representation), then to slices of basic biology with stable replication structure. If it fails, the field learns which quality signals are load-bearing and which ones metascience has oversold. Either result is a contribution to knowing what the literature supports. Implications for funders Because this burgeoning ecosystem of builders already exists, a well-informed philanthropic or government funder could play a crucial catalyzing role in bringing this future about. They could play at least three roles: creating open structured datasets, publishing open benchmarks and incentivizing the solving of key technical challenges. First, open archives of papers that the government maintains, like PubMed, could be turned into structured data amenable to large scale metascience and claim aggregation. I know the US government already has an interest in doing this, though some key open questions remain unanswered. How do you determine the best models and systems for accurately extracting information from papers? How can you establish a robust way to allow researchers to flag errors and correct them? And finally, how do you create a legal regime in working with publishers to maximize the scope of available papers? For the latter, a university or a private philanthropy may be better positioned to make structured data publicly available under journal subscription terms or fair use. Philanthropists or government funders could also coordinate to create or commission benchmarks that evaluate whether important problems have been solved. For example, an open benchmark for claim extraction from a range of different scientific article types would be extremely helpful. Ensuring the underlying data are accurate is vital for creating these evaluations. I’ve discussed opportunistically using various human-created datasets for this purpose, but a consistent problem is that errors in human data make it difficult for them to serve as a gold standard. Finally, with structured data and benchmarks available, the government or private philanthropy could use them to incentivize groups to develop machine learning systems that meet these benchmarks. Prizes are one potentially valuable tool for this. For example, you could establish a prize for a system that accurately updates a living meta-analysis for a small set of claims. Prizes are particularly useful as signals of problem importance, and can help create vibrant ecosystems of public and private research—see, for example the role the government played in kickstarting the current work on nuclear fusion. Conclusion The drawbacks of the current scientific publishing system are known. Scientists agree, metascientists agree, philanthropists agree: the published PDF plus citation graph isn’t the right substrate for maintaining a representation of the evidence base in science. The pieces needed to build the alternative either already exist or are rapidly taking shape. The community is forming around exactly this problem, with concrete partnerships and shared infrastructure. A pilot should start on behavioral science RCTs because that’s the slice of empirical science most amenable to legibility, where replication ground truth is richest, and where the failure modes are best documented. What’s been missing is the galvanizing mission to assemble these pieces into something that works. That’s what I’m proposing to build. *** 1 I have a broader field map that I’ll release publicly soon. This is me, building in public! 2 If this is something that you are excited about, please reach out and talk to me. 3 More on this very soon too! 4 This tests whether, given the code and the data, you can get the same statistics as reported in the published paper. 5 This tests whether the results are the same as a paper’s given alternative analytical decisions in conducting the analysis (like outlier omission). Closely related is the idea of a “multiverse” where you come up with many different ways of answering the same underlying research question with the same data, and test whether the results hold in all those alternative methods. There’s been work on the latter as well. 6 Some of the replications, e.g. those from the SCORE project, had paired the experiments with forecasts from prediction markets. So we get to look at this for free.
Natalie Palamides Signs With Brillstein Entertainment Partners
Natalie Palamides, the actress, comedian, writer and director, has signed with Brillstein for management in all areas.
Opinion | Why repealing Minneapolis’ bathhouse ban could be a public health win
"History has shown multiple times how invocations of a particular concept of morality can be weaponized against queer people with ramifications on public health and civic good," two professors write.
Woman who's visited 50 countries: 3 countries I keep going back to
After visiting over 50 countries, I've got favorites. I keep planning return trips to the same three countries, including Switzerland and Italy.
Broncos' backup quarterback competition underway (is there a favorite?)
Sam Ehlinger and Jarrett Stidham are competing for the Broncos' backup quarterback job this summer.
US Offers Expedited Business, Tourist Visa Services for $750 Fee
The State Department will offer expedited interview appointments to business and tourist travelers to the US for a $750 fee beginning next month.
'Sunday Ticket' Lawsuit Could Be Heading to U.S. Supreme Court
The NFL's "Sunday Ticket" package has long been a fan favorite. The package, previously on DirecTV and now on YouTube TV, allows NFL fans to watch every game, no matter what local market they are in. For fans of teams that play in a different city, it's a godsend. It's the best way to keep up with ...
We Need to Know More About How AI is Affecting Mental Health
The public, mental health practitioners, and policymakers don’t know enough about the impacts of AI use on the human psyche, writes Chris Mills Rodrigo.
Hugh Laurie slams writer for criticizing 'House' 14 years after its finale: 'Wasn't meant for you'
Hugh Laurie channeled Dr. Gregory House himself when responding to criticism of the medical drama on which he starred for eight years: 'It wasn't meant for you.'
The Brayan Bello situation is existential
I’m officially giving up on trying to understand the 2026 version of Brayan Bello. It’s Monday Morning Brushback time, y’all, I guess? I dunno, this is another unorthodox MMBB, but this is what I feel in my heart. This is not the first time this season that I’ve gone into the weekend looking to write […]
Candidate endorsements in Maine and NH and national politics: Letters
Letter writers endorse Manzur in NH and Meyer in Maine, decry laws restricting abortion and assert congressional Republicans enable Trump corruption.
$2 million gene therapy cures require a financing model
“We do not lack cures. We lack the infrastructure to pay for and deliver them,” writes William Padula.
FOX Sports Live - Watch Live Sports, Shows, and Events Online
Stream live sporting events, news, & highlights, and all your favorite sports shows featuring former athletes and experts, on FOXsports.com.
Steelers trade among NFL favorites of 2026 offseason
The Pittsburgh Steelers landed on CBS Sports' list of favorite NFL trades made during the 2026 offseason.
Day Out With Thomas returns to Tweetsie June 12-15 and 18-21
Thomas the Tank Engine, everyone’s favorite #1 blue engine, is coming to town and bringing all his favorite musical instruments.
The health tracker backlash is here – so ditch the data and set yourself free
A rebellion is rising against the dull, highly optimised lives big tech wants for us. It’s not a second too soon, writes Emma Beddington
Universal healthcare, Highway 126, politics in this week's letters
One letter writer urges action on Highway 126 safety, another discusses a visit to Kyiv in this week's letters.
Kaleidoscopic meteorite could be a piece of a 'lost world' from the early solar system — Space photo of the week
A rare meteorite found in the Sahara Desert may be evidence of a long-lost "protoplanet" that formed in the early solar system before being destroyed in a colossal collision, a new study suggests
Burcum: This small Minnesota hospital is charting its own path to financial health
As Minnesota health care consolidates, Northfield Hospital + Clinics is a bright spot in a health care landscape characterized by strain, columnist Jill Burcum writes.
Spielberg back in alien territory with ‘Disclosure Day’
Spielberg’s latest film about aliens and UFOs, “Disclosure Day,” arrives this week and rates as an excursion into his perhaps favorite field.
Entertainment Workers Oppose Paramount-WBD Merger in Town Hall
Writers, actors, crew members and small business owners expressed their opposition to the $111 billion transaction in Beverly Hills on Saturday: “It may be the final domino that knocks everything down.”
What are your all time favorite Russell Wilson plays?
Reminisce about the good Russell Wilson days!
Myles Garrett is the betting favorite to win Defensive Player of the Year
Garrett would join Lawrence Taylor, J. J. Watt and Aaron Donald as the only three-time Defensive Players of the Year.
io9's Favorite Summer Game Fest 2026 Trailers
The Summer Game Fest showcase has come and gone for 2026, so we've put down our favorite trailers of the giant lot.
Who is your favorite individual sport Tar Heel?
We all remember the great Tar Heel teams, but what about those athletes who play individual sports?
This Is Netflix's Most-Watched Show Of All Time — See What Else Made The Top 10
Find out if your favorite show made the cut.
Wildlife ecologist says her favorite science talk this year was in her children's classroom
"The kids are alright, and they sure are ready to protect the natural world into the future."
From Masters of the Universe to Monteverdi: your complete entertainment guide to the week ahead
The cartoon favourite and Mattel toy He-Man battles Skeletor on the big screen, and Garsington continues its run of excellent early operas
Readers Write: Immigration, fraud, science funding, ‘Nuclear Family Month,’ the GOP, Target
This is home. We’re staying put.
How The 2026 World Cup Favourites Are Rated
International football has become harder to separate from the betting markets surrounding it. Predictions for the 2026 World Cup have been shifting long before the tournament itself, with qualificatio...
Myles Garrett to Rams? A.J. Brown to Patriots? CBS Sports picks favorite NFL trades of 2026 offseason
Several stars have changed teams this offseason and we're breaking them down here.
What scientists just uncovered about Neanderthals rewrites everything we thought we knew - Futura-Sciences
How did Neanderthals appear—and disappear? “How did Neanderthals appear? And how did they disappear?” To this day, these remain two of the big, unanswered mysteries in human evolution. For both questions, scientists have long suspected that a drop in genetic diversity may have played a role. Thanks to the study...
At Age 50, She Started a Business From Her Kitchen Table. Now Her Everyday Household Product Makes $31 Million a Year.
Paula Blankenship inherited her mother's eye for DIY furniture.
Caleb Williams Talks Growth, Chicago Favorites on New Heights Podcast
Our @thechicagosares breaks down Caleb Williams’ appearance on the New Heights podcast, covering his development and Chicago favorites.
Are Germany Overrated Heading In? World Cup Group E Preview
Germany always seems like a favorite at the World Cup, but does this 2026 squad have the talent to challenge for the trophy?
NBA writer predicts Draymond Green will decline his player option
Draymond Green has a player option for next season with the Warriors, but the 14-year veteran has not yet decided to exercise it.
ADHD Handwriting Similarities Go Viral
"Is that actually an ADHD thing, or did I just never learn how to write the right way?"
Opinion: UFC is cutting corners
The Ultimate Fighting Championship's releases of Ketlen Vieira and Daniel Marcos show how much the UFC is struggling with finding a balance between entertainment and competition, writes Dayne Fox.
‘The next China is still China’: McKinsey’s Joe Ngai and Nick Leung on why global business can’t write off the Chinese economy
“You can’t find another China. There’s no other China out there now," Greater China chair Joe Ngai says.
A district attorney’s job Is justice, not politics
Washoe DA Hicks writes: This summer, I will begin my 25th year as a prosecutor serving my hometown.
Kratos will return in future games, God of War developer assures fans following the Laufey reveal
Making a new God of War game that doesn't star Kratos has caused some surprise. But Sony Santa Monica reassures us that our favourite sad dad will return.
Google Employees Internally Share Memes About How Its AI Sucks
Google’s CEO says 75% of the company’s code is AI-generated. The people who write that code say the AI they’re using is overhyped.
President Trump says he will nominate Todd Blanche to serve as attorney general
Blanche sought quickly to position himself as the favorite for the permanent job after Pam Bondi's firing in April
President Trump says he will nominate Todd Blanche to serve as attorney general
Blanche sought quickly to position himself as the favorite for the permanent job after Pam Bondi's firing in April
President Trump says he will nominate Todd Blanche to serve as attorney general
Blanche sought quickly to position himself as the favorite for the permanent job after Pam Bondi's firing in April
President Trump says he will nominate Todd Blanche to serve as attorney general
Blanche sought quickly to position himself as the favorite for the permanent job after Pam Bondi's firing in April
Why Does Roast Chicken Taste So Good? Inside the Science Behind the Flavors We Love
When we cook our favorite meals, what happens to the carbo-hydrates, proteins and fats? I confess I am a less-than-average cook, but God loves a trier. I remember being about 23 years old and tryin…
Zombie Blairites still have British politics in their grip – it’s time to break free
Tony Blair’s departure as PM should have prompted a fresh start for Labour. But Starmer’s sad, backward-looking government remains in his thrall, says Guardian columnist Aditya Chakrabortty
ArtBeat: Spotlight on the local arts events and entertainment
Here’s a closer look at what you can expect from the area’s events: June 4– June 10: The weekly preview of arts and culture events in the Greater Knoxville area is included in the Arts & Cultural Alliance. Summer Movie Magic: The Tennessee Theatre’s family-favorite Summer Movie Magic Series returns with three dates and six […]
Cancer’s favorite escape trick may actually make it easier to kill
Scientists have uncovered a surprising new way the immune system fights cancer, overturning a core belief that has guided immunology for decades. The research found that when cancer cells shut down a key immune-recognition molecule called MHC I—a common trick used to hide from “killer” T cells—they can actually become more vulnerable to attack by a different group of immune cells known as CD4+ “helper” T cells.
What Saikat Chakrabarti got wrong about S.F. in his bid for Congress
Saikat Chakrabarti did not account for the fact that San Francisco has its own set of rules when it comes to running for office, Joe Garofoli writes.
Lamar Jackson lands among MVP favorites in recent season projection
As we venture under 100 days before the start of the 2026 NFL season, lamar Jackson is named as an early MVP candidate.
Readers Write: Politicians, state GOP convention, biking habits
Politicians represent us, all right. Warts and all.
Tribune’s summer 2026 arts, entertainment and food guides
Summer is here and the Tribune arts, entertainment and food writers have everything you need to know to pack your schedule with fun events.
Rewriting the Narrative: Jewish Voices in the Entertainment Industry | AJC Global Forum 2026
At AJC Global Forum 2026, writer, producer, actor, and comedian Jamie Denbo joins Grammy-nominated songwriter, music publisher, and entrepreneur Billy Mann; Deborah Marcus; and Lori York for a conversation moderated by Dov Wilker, AJC Vice President, Advocacy and Innovation; Regional Director, AJC Atlanta.
The cult of objectivity has broken consciousness science
With 22 competing theories and no consensus in sight, the science of consciousness is lost. In this exclusive IAI interview, Berkeley psychedelics researcher and bestselling author of a new book on consciousness Michael Pollan insists that even though consciousness lies beyond traditional forms of scientific investigation, we should resist becoming dualists who see it as something radically different from ordinary stuff in the world. Instead, he makes the case for reimagining science itself: it must stop reaching for objective descriptions of physical reality, and instead embrace subjectivity as the indispensable core of all inquiry. Alasdair Craig: How did your experiences with psychedelics get you interested in consciousness?Michael Pollan: One of the things that happens on psychedelics is that they foreground consciousness. What formerly seemed perfectly transparent and ever present—and yet, non-existent, as water is to fish—suddenly you see it. The metaphor I use in the book is that psychedelics sponge the windscreen. Suddenly you realize: wow, there’s a windscreen, there is this phenomenon that’s mediating my relationship to reality. This is not an unusual realization on psychedelics. I think a lot of people are called to think about consciousness after psychedelic experiences. So that was the proximate inspiration for A World Appears: A Journey Into Consciousness (2026).And then there was a more specific way in which psychedelics influence the book. That was a particular experience I had on psilocybin. I had the sensation that the plants in my garden were conscious and returning my gaze, with their own point of view and agency, and I got curious as to how to evaluate an insight like that. I mean, what’s the truth quotient of insights you have on psychedelics? And I was reading William James—who, of course, wrote beautifully about mystical experience—and he said, we can’t judge the metaphysics here, but we should pay attention to two criteria: (1) How useful is it to think this is true? He was a pragmatist, of course. And (2) can we subject it to other ways of knowing to validate it? Because maybe we should treat these insights as hypotheses. And that’s kind of how I approach psychedelics, as a great generator of hypotheses, but they need to be tested against other ways of knowing. And so that led me down this long path exploring the science of plant intelligence and plant sentience.AC: I love your phrase, “smudging the windowpane of conscious experience.” So do you now start to think, actually, even when I’m not on psychedelics, I’m just seeing a screen all the time, which is not reality, but rather is my conscious experience, behind which reality is hidden?MP: Well, you know, not when I’m brushing my teeth and making breakfast! But yes, in meditation, certainly. I mean, one of the things you realize is that my experience happens to be this way now, but it could be another way. And many things can affect it. My morning coffee changes the screen in various ways, sharpens certain things.___The only tool we have to understand consciousness is consciousness.___There’s this wonderful metaphor in Aldous Huxley’s book, The Doors of Perception, where he thinks we channel consciousness, and that what the brain does is edit it, and there’s a reducing valve. And psychedelics open the reducing valve wider. I don’t know that I’m ready to buy into the idea that consciousness exists outside brains, but I do love that metaphor because there are times when you are more conscious than others. I know I’ve switched from window pane to valve, but you know, a camera aperture can open wider or narrower. And I do have a sense of that. I have a sense of when I’m being less conscious, and when I’m being more conscious, by which I mean, you know, more present, taking in more sensory information. So when you start thinking about consciousness as a matter of degree, that changes things also.I think when we scroll on social media, obviously, we’re conscious. But minimally so, because we don’t have to generate our own thoughts. We’re basically taking these little hits from other people and thinking their thoughts.The process of writing this book made me kind of relativize everyday consciousness as just one type, which is exactly what William James said. Normal consciousness is one type, separated by the flimsiest of screens from the other types.AC: If we stick with the metaphor of the smudge on the window that you get when you take psychedelics, it seems like we’re saying that consciousness has become like an object that you’re looking at, right? You’re looking at the smudge and that just is consciousness. But sometimes we’ll talk about consciousness as a state that you’re in, rather than an object you can perceive. You’re either conscious or you’re not conscious. So it’s difficult to really know what sort of thing we’re talking about when we talk about consciousness, right?MP: Yeah. When you say that consciousness is an object, what’s the subject? Consciousness also? The only tool we have to understand consciousness is consciousness. So we’re in a closed loop and when we get a perspective on consciousness, we’re not achieving any distance from it. That’s one of the problems with studying consciousness. Science is predicated on an objective, God’s eye view of things, and you never get that. There’s no such thing. SUGGESTED VIEWING The brain filters consciousness With Àlex Gómez-Marín But, yeah, there is this sense, I think, that consciousness is something you can approach. Certainly, when you’re writing and trying to recreate a conscious experience, it’s a fiction, but you’re standing back from it, and looking at it. But there’s no real subject-object distinction.AC: That’s so interesting, because when philosophers start talking about consciousness, they often talk about what they call “qualia”, which is their word for the felt experience of, say, the color red. And I think that way of speaking often makes us think of the qualia as an object, which you can see out there: the redness of red. But, as you say, we also want to collapse the subject-object distinction when we talk about consciousness. So there’s something strange going on here…MP: Oh, yeah, there are many strange things going on! *AC: Let’s talk about the varieties of consciousness. Apart from perceptions, there are, pains, emotions, thoughts, and so on. What is it that holds all this diversity together so that they all count as instances of consciousness? What is it that they all have in common?MP: Yeah, that’s a really good question. I mean, there is sensory information, right? Which we perceive coming from the world outside ourselves. And then there’s internal information, which is what’s called interoception. And this is very important too. This is where feelings come from—what are sometimes called homeostatic feelings—that are intended to get the brain to keep us in these narrow ranges of temperature and glucose and so on. That’s a very important part of consciousness. And according to some researchers, who I think are probably right, this is where consciousness begins, with these very primal feelings, like hunger and thirst and warmth and itch, and things like that. And then there’s this third thing, which is our thinking about thinking.And what holds all this together is, I think, the sense of self. Consciousness generates a self: it is probably an organizing principle. All this stuff is happening to the self. It’s a construct, I think, but it is very useful. It can connect all these different streams of consciousness to a single being or a place, metaphorically speaking.* AC: The first half of your book is about the science of consciousness. Is consciousness just another thing, like black holes or the origin of life, which we don’t yet understand, but which we should have every hope that science will one day get to the bottom of, or is there something special about consciousness that makes this unlikely?MP: It depends how you define science. As we define science now, it’s going be very difficult. Science since Galileo has had a set of rules or assumptions, which is that the proper remit of science is to deal with the objective, quantifiable, third-person world. And the physical sciences have done amazing work under that set of limitations. Galileo—for tactical reasons, not for philosophical reasons—said science should not deal with the soul, which at the time was what consciousness was considered to be. So what is subjective, what is qualitative, what is first person, we’re going to leave to the church, he said. And this was a good agreement, and it probably kept many scientists from getting burned at the stake. But it leaves science in an awkward spot, now that it wants to venture into that territory of qualities, of first-person experience. And I don’t think it has the proper tools. I think it will have to add to its toolkit in some way, and find a way to bring in phenomenology, or lived experience and introspection, which science is usually dismissive of.The challenge—we alluded to it earlier—is that the only tool you have to study consciousness with is consciousness. And what I mean by that is, the whole scientific enterprise is a manifestation of consciousness. As much as scientists like to flatter themselves with this idea that they attain a godlike perspective on what they study, when it comes to consciousness, there’s no such thing. And it’s fine for all the things you can step outside of and study from that perspective. But two areas it won’t work are consciousness and cosmology.___It could be that we live in this anomaly of not believing nature is conscious. And maybe psychedelics are teaching us something we’ve forgotten.___With cosmology, too, you have to study the universe from inside the universe. It’s not that cosmologists haven’t made progress. We know a lot about the age of the universe and expansion and things like that. But we can’t penetrate what happened before the Big Bang. We just don’t have the tools because we can’t stand outside.The fact that there are 22 full-scale theories of consciousness tells you all you need to know: we’re kind of lost. And I was surprised to find that we are more lost than I thought we were when I started this. I thought that there’d be leading theories, or that we had experiments that we could conduct that would nail some of this down. And the fact is, we don’t.So, I don’t know if science can solve it. But, of course, we can change the rules of science. A really influential book for me was a book called The Blind Spot, by two physicists, Marcello Gleiser and Adam Frank, and a philosopher, Evan Thompson. It’s a reminder that science is a social practice. It’s organized in a certain way and it can be organized in a different way. But it has this huge blind spot at the center of it, which is its failure to recognize that it is a form of consciousness itself, and it doesn’t have a good way of taking account of lived experience.AC: On the one hand, I think you want to resist traditional dualism, which would say that consciousness is something magical, something supernatural, right? But on the other hand, you’re accepting that there is this division in reality between the stuff that you can investigate objectively and measure, and so on—the stuff that science has been good at finding out about—and consciousness, which, for some reason, you can’t objectively measure. Some would take this to suggest that the dualism is actually right. Is there a way of reconciling these two strands of your thinking?MP: To call it magical is full of value judgement. I mean, you could just say immaterial. The interesting thing is, I think, that intuitively we’re all dualists. And I don’t know whether that’s because we’re children of Descartes and other cultures are less dualist than we are. Or it may be because that’s how consciousness feels. It feels different than the body. It feels separate from the body. But I don’t think we should trust that intuition.AC: So let’s think about ways that science might be changed to get at consciousness. I suppose the starting point would be the way that you begin the second half of your book. You have this nice line from William James, where he says, “We now begin our study of the mind from within.” Could you give us some sense of the ways of studying the mind from within? What does this involve?MP: I don’t know what that science looks like. But one of the points I’m making is that it depends on the humanities. I found that I learned as much, if not more, about consciousness, from reading novels and poetry. There is a sense of the fullness and complexity of consciousness that you don’t get in any scientific account. I interviewed this stream-of-consciousness writer and I approached her as an expert on consciousness, and she is. So I think that dialogue is really important.I’m reading Ben Lerner’s new novel, Transcription. Just read the first page of this novel: it’s a man falling asleep on a train, going to conduct an interview, and there is the experience of being in the train, facing backwards, there’s the view outside, but there’s a reflection of himself through which he’s seeing outside. There’s the memory of dropping his kids off at school. All this is going on in one moment of consciousness. Scientists aren’t going anywhere near that. But I think it’s useful for them to think about. That’s where we’re trying to go: like, how does such a layered experience happen? You know, it also makes you wonder, could a computer ever do this? And it gives you some doubt.*AC: Before we get to computers, perhaps we could talk briefly about plants. How did you come to feel that they are sentient?MP: Well, it was a psychedelic experience, and it’s not unusual on psychedelics. In fact, there’ve been studies about how people become animists during psychedelic experience. Their belief in animism arises after a single psychedelic experience.You know, most scientists would say this is all a myth. But we have only 400 years of the age of enlightenment and science. Before that, we were animists, and if you go around the world, most indigenous cultures are still animists, and children are animists, by and large, until they go to school. So it could be that we live in this anomaly of not believing nature is conscious. And maybe psychedelics are teaching us something we’ve forgotten.As I said, I wanted to test this idea, and see whether there was conventional scientific evidence for it. And there’s fascinating work going on in a field that calls itself—in a rather cheeky way—plant neurobiology. These are people who fully realize there are no neurons in plants, but they’re trolling conventional botanists! And they’re doing experiments that are demonstrating that plants can learn and remember, which is kind of amazing: how do you store a memory without neurons? They’re finding plants that can solve problems, that can hear and see. In fact, they have 20 senses to our five or six. For example, a bean plant looking for something to twine, and given a pole within eight inches or so of it, knows where that pole is and will aim its spiraling reach at that pole. What is that about? Is it bouncing signals off of it?One of the spookiest things is the fact that the same anesthetics that put us out put plants out. You might think that plants are already out, but they’re not. They’re just slow. If you take a plant with a fast behavior, like a Venus flytrap, and give it an anesthetic, it will stop reacting. So you have to ask yourself, what is lost when the plant is anaesthetized? Some state of alertness, of awareness, of its environment, of reactivity. I’m not prepared to call that consciousness, but maybe it’s sentience—which is a simpler form of consciousness, and involves the ability to sense what’s going on in your environment and assess what’s good and bad for you and act appropriately. That may be a universal quality of life.AC: Let’s turn from plants to AI. You point out that LLMs are trained on the internet rather than direct interactions with reality. You put this really nicely when you say the internet is not the world so much as a shadow cast by the world. So LLMs are living in this kind of shadow world, or in Plato’s cave, as you put it. What’s the significance of this for AI consciousness and moral consideration? And, to recall the beginning of our conversation, if we’re stuck behind a veil or screen of consciousness, are we also stuck in a kind of shadow world?MP: I don’t think they’re the same shadow worlds because our world includes nature and other people. And even if it’s mediated in some ways... There is a reality out there, and we are in relation to it, through consciousness. There’s friction with it. What’s missing from the LLMs is that friction with the real world. There’s more to the world than human representation, which is what they’re dealing with. And that means that so far, AI is a cultural technology for combining thoughts we’ve already had. SUGGESTED VIEWING Cracking the code for thought With Roger Penrose, Sabrina Gonzalez Pasterski, Max Tegmark, Güneş Taylor Genuine creativity is more than collage. A lot of what AI does now is tantamount to collage, putting this with that and you know, that’s part of art, certainly. But there are also genuinely new ideas that come into the world that don’t come in through manipulating the representations we already have. So it remains to be seen whether AIs can be truly creative in that more radical sense.But my arguments against AI becoming conscious have to do with the fact that the idea of AI consciousness is based on this faulty metaphor that the brain is a computer. There are dimensions in which the brain is like a computer—it certainly does its share of computation. But computers have this sharp distinction between hardware and software, and brains don’t. In a brain, hardware and software are identical. Every memory is a physical change to the brain. Brains are not interchangeable in the way computers are. So this idea that you could take the consciousness out and somehow run it on another substrate, a silicon substrate, seems foolhardy.Anyway, it’s a more extended argument, and I may be wrong. And when we move to computers that aren’t based on silicon—neuromorphic computers and things like that—all bets may be off.AC: Regarding your point about LLMs being stuck in the world of our representations—the internet or whatever—and not being able to interact with reality, are these representations, the world of the internet, themselves part of reality? We’ve created the internet, but it’s still a real thing that exists. And so while the LLMs may be trapped within that part of reality, they’re nevertheless within reality and interacting with it and so on. So it’s not obvious that there’s a barrier there to them becoming conscious and being creative.MP: Yeah, I mean, if our consciousness is built out of human culture, which is what we’re talking about with all those representations. But I tend to think consciousness comes a bit more out of nature and friction with the natural world, but...AC: So there’s a fundamental divide between the natural world and human artefacts?MP: And we lose track of that, and especially people in this computer world. You know, the people who are creating these AI systems, my guess is they’ve been into video games since the age of three, and they didn’t go outside a lot. And their own contact with nature is somewhat limited. I could be wrong, it’d be a very interesting thing to ask, all the wizards of AI, whether they like to go fishing and hiking and do things like that. Or were they on computers from a very early age? I interviewed Blake Lemoine, the Google engineer who came to believe that LaMDA, the Google LLM out at the time, was conscious and deserved personhood. It was very clear that he didn’t see a distinction between this bubble in which he lived and the real world. And I think we’ve all been distanced from the natural world, and this is taking us even further away. But it’s still there, you know, and we still have bodies, and we’re still mortal, and we don’t live in a simulation.AC: I think that’s a great place to finish. Michael Pollan, thank you very much!
Red States’ Sound Science Laws Echo Trump Regulatory Overhaul
Republican-led states are following President Donald Trump’s lead and making it harder for their agencies to exceed federal environmental standards.
The medical-billing AI arms race between providers and insurance
“The financial side effects of care have become clinical ones,” writes Darshak Sanghavi.
International medical graduates represent nearly 25% of diagnostic radiologists in US
Recently policy changes under the Trump administration "highlight potential vulnerability in relying on this as a supply of radiologists," experts write in Academic Radiology.
A Summer Without Sunderland? Not a Chance
For anyone missing their Sunderland fix, we haven’t got too long to wait until we can watch our favourite players in action again…
Steph Ruhle: MASSIVE checks for politics are “only getting bigger”
For billionaires to "write big checks right now, it's like water. When you think about the amount of money in AI, in crypto, even in finance right now, they're writing such giant checks because they know from a Donald Trump presidency you can't just influence politics, you can control it." Stephanie Ruhle breaks down why sums of money injected into politics are only getting larger.
Los Angeles County health department asks providers to watch for infectious diseases during World Cup
As fans travel to North American cities to watch their favorite soccer teams, they might face seasonal and travel-related infectious risks.
Hunter Hawkins Signs With Jonas Group Entertainment & Red Van Records
Singer-songwriter, actor, and filmmaker Hunter Hawkins has signed with Jonas Group Entertainment [...]
The doubts and the positives
Liverpool fans have met news of an approach for Andoni Iraola in a mixed manner - with plenty of excited discussion and some concerns over his level of experience. BBC Sport asked fan writer Lola Katz-Roberts to unpick some of the key talking points. Liverpool managed to play two games a week quite successfully with a very similar style under Klopp.
Why a Neo Geo port of Doom is functionally impossible
Sprite-based graphics architecture makes first-person 3D a challenge.
The pressure is on
The Rams are heavy Super Bowl favorites after Myles Garrett trade but nothing is certain in the NFL
Elvis Costello & the Imposters will perform in Lancaster this year
Singer-songwriter Elvis Costello will return to the stage to perform songs from the course of his four-decade-long music career.
How Science Works
The 2nd Weather and Climate Livestream is now underway. It is organized by a group of early-career researchers concerned about declining funding for the field and eager to demonstrate how weather and climate research makes a difference in our lives. Last year’s event was a great success, drawing terrific press coverage including a piece in the NY Times. This year features a strong lineup of talks aimed at a general audience — I highly recommend tuning in. Share I gave a talk yesterday about How Science Works in Three Steps. You can see the short presentation here (I’ve appended a transcript below): And please tune into the livestream here. It runs through tomorrow at 6 pm ET. Thanks for reading The Climate Brink! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support our work. Subscribe Cleaned up transcript: Thank you, and thanks to everyone tuning in. I want to talk about something I think a lot of people don’t really understand: how science actually works. Arguments over any scientific topic — climate change, vaccines, you name it — revolve around competing claims. For climate change, the claims are: Is the Earth warming? Are humans to blame? What will the impacts be? Over the last 150 years, the scientific community has developed a remarkably robust method for sorting out which claims are true and which aren’t. That method is what I want to walk through. So how does science generate knowledge? If you ask a high schooler, they’ll give you the version they learned in ninth grade: an individual scientist forms a hypothesis, runs an experiment, and draws a conclusion. That’s more or less what happens at the individual level, though in practice it’s more iterative — you design, test, and refine all at once, landing on a slightly different idea each time until you reach a conclusion about whatever hypothesis you’ve ended up with. But this isn’t science. It’s only step one. Any individual scientist can make mistakes — scientists are human. Maybe there’s a bug in the code, maybe there’s an error in the experiment. Just because someone ran an experiment and reached a conclusion doesn’t mean it’s right, and scientists don’t treat a single result as settled truth. Step two is peer review, the first layer of quality control. The scientist writes up what they did and submits it to a journal, which sends the paper to other experts in the field. Those experts judge whether the methods are sound, whether it properly references prior work, and whether the conclusions actually follow from the data. Ask any scientist and they’ll tell you peer review is miserable — the comments come back brutal, often harsh, and you have to revise and resubmit, sometimes multiple times, before an editor finally accepts the paper. Peer review catches an immense amount of bad science, but it can’t catch all of it. Reviewers get sloppy or overworked, they miss obvious mistakes, and they can’t catch hidden errors — a bug in the code, a misread instrument. So a peer-reviewed paper making it into a journal doesn’t mean the paper is right. Nobody treats a single paper as the final word. That’s where step three comes in: the crucible of science. Important results get retested by the broader community. If you publish something interesting, it gets dissected. Sometimes people try to reproduce your work directly but more often they test its implications. If someone claims X is true, and that implies that Y is also true, then scientists will go check Y. If a claim survives this gauntlet long enough, it becomes accepted. That’s how we generate knowledge. Let me give an example: the ozone hole. In 1985 — and I doubt many people watching were around then, but I remember it well — Joe Farman and his colleagues published observations from Antarctica showing that a huge chunk of ozone was disappearing every year. This was shocking because most atmospheric chemists had expected ozone loss to occur at mid-latitudes and high altitudes, not over the South Pole. When scientists see something they don’t understand, they rush to explain it, and several competing hypotheses quickly appeared in the peer-reviewed literature. One pointed to chlorine chemistry from chlorofluorocarbons. A second blamed nitrogen chemistry, possibly driven by solar proton events — meaning the sun was responsible. A third argued it wasn’t chemistry at all but dynamics: winds were carrying naturally low-ozone air from the lower atmosphere up into the stratosphere. Then the community went to work testing which theory could survive the crucible. Aircraft flew into the ozone hole and found no nitrogen, ruling out the nitrogen theory. Measurements showed the air in the polar vortex was descending, not rising — which would bring high-ozone air down, eliminating the dynamics theory. Meanwhile, those same flights measured enormous amounts of chlorine, strongly correlated with exactly the regions where ozone was being destroyed. That became known as the “smoking gun” paper, and it established that chlorine chemistry was the cause. Through this process, a consensus emerged. And it’s worth being clear that this consensus is organic. There’s no vote, no poll, no meeting where it gets decided. Scientists go to conferences, talk to one another, and independently arrived at the same answer. It’s the ultimate free market of ideas. After the consensus was established, the peer-reviewed literature doesn’t even mention the rival theories — it simply takes chlorine chemistry as given. That’s what a consensus looks like. It doesn’t mean every single scientist agrees, but it does mean there’s no longer any legitimate debate. So where can you see what scientists actually think? It’s all in the peer-reviewed literature, which contains the entire historical record of the argument: the discovery, the competing theories, the debate, the testing, and finally the community coalescing around one answer. But there’s a lot of room for misrepresentation. You can dig up an old paper claiming the ozone hole was caused by dynamics and wave it around as if there still was a debate about the cause of the ozone hole — without mentioning that the idea was disproven long ago and that even its own authors no longer believe it. There’s a bigger problem, though: the peer-reviewed literature is written in a language I call “nerd.” It’s extremely hard to read — honestly, some of it is hard for me to follow. It takes graduate students years to work through the literature in a single field, so we can’t expect policymakers or ordinary people to do it. This is where scientific assessments come in. The most famous is the IPCC — the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The job of an assessment is to read and summarize the peer-reviewed literature, synthesizing what’s settled, what’s been disproven, and what remains genuinely debated. To ensure the assessments accurately summarize the peer-reviewed literature, assessments are written by large teams, which are far less prone to bias than individuals and which dilute the influence of any one scientist with an axe to grind. The teams are deliberately assembled to avoid stacking the deck, and the reports themselves go through multiple rounds of peer review. That rigorous process is exactly why you can trust them and why people consider the IPCC to be the gold standard of what we know about the climate system. An assessment produced through a different process may well not be credible. You can even watch the consensus evolve across assessments. Take the attribution of warming. The 1990 IPCC report said the observed warming was broadly consistent with model predictions but also comparable to natural variability — in other words, we don’t know whether humans are responsible. By 1995, it concluded that the balance of evidence suggested a discernible human influence — a sentence only a committee could write, and one that barely commits to anything. By 2001, most of the warming over the previous 50 years was judged “likely” due to greenhouse gases; by 2007, “very likely”; by 2013, “extremely likely.” The 2023 report says essentially the same as 2013 — there’s not much stronger language available. So, to wrap up: science is our ultimate tool for deciphering the universe — the most successful method we’ve ever developed for determining what’s true and what isn’t. Our understanding is written into the peer-reviewed literature, so if you want to know what scientists think, that’s where to look. And for those of us who don’t speak nerd, scientific assessments are the Rosetta Stone — they translate nerd into English. Let me open the floor to questions. Thank you.
DAILY Q&A: How do you consume entertainment media?
Sources of entertainment have changed over the decades, and nowadays there are so many that it’s hard to keep up. That’s why in today’s Daily Q&A, NewsChannel 7’s Mia Hernandez and Emmett Rice sit down with Producer Evan to discuss their favorite ways to consume media.
French Open: Elina Svitolina upset in quarterfinals as favorites continue to fall at Roland-Garros
Top seeds aren't faring very well at the 2026
Gail Godwin writes through political anxiety
After a near-fatal fall, author Gail Godwin explores mortality and the turbulent political landscape in her memoir.
Azzi Fudd’s pregame outfit for Dallas Wings game turns heads
Azzi Fudd started her WNBA rookie season slow but has played better in the last three games. She is also emerging as a fan favorite after being selected at No. 1 in this year’s draft. The UConn Huskies product continues…
Enzo Le Fée Is Sunderland’s Orchestrator Supreme
“He’s a supreme on-field tactician; a plotter, a schemer, one of the men that makes us tick,” writes Phil West.
Taxpayers Win Against California in Business Location Dispute
Landlords who rented out property in Alaska successfully convinced a tax tribunal in California that they had no business connection to the Golden State and, therefore, shouldn’t have to pay state taxes there.
Super Bowl 61 odds: Los Angeles Rams move to clear Super Bowl favorites after Myles Garrett trade
France rated second favourites for World Cup by Opta supercomputer
France have been identified as the second favourites to win the 2026 FIFA World Cup according to predictions generated by Opta’s supercomputer ahead of the tournament.With just over a week remaining...
Toyota Turns Up the Thrill for 2027 with New Updates to GR86
PLEASANTON, Calif. (June 1, 2026) – Making its debut at FuelFest in the Bay Area, where car culture, performance, passion and the enthusiast community come together, the 2027 Toyota GR86 returns with a series of focused enhancements designed to deepen the connection between driver, car and road. Built for enthusiasts and engineered with input shaped by motorsports, the GR86 continues to deliver the kind of lightweight, rear-wheel-drive fun that has made it a favorite among sports car purists around the world.
Rounding up Essentia media coverage from May
Each month, we share some of our favorite Essentia Health-related stories on the Newsroom.
How to Rebuild US Science and Technology Policy From the Rubble of Trump 2.0
Policymakers are going to need tools to clear the rubble and build a better foundation for policy upon which the future can be built, writes Cole Donovan.
Apple's Smart Glasses Reportedly Delayed Until Late 2027
Still, the glasses are regarded by company leadership as a top priority, Bloomberg's Mark Gurman writes.
Scientists discover inherited traits that break Mendel’s Laws of genetics
A major mouse study found that some inherited traits are passed down through epigenetic changes that break the classic rules of genetics. Researchers discovered hundreds of cases where these chemical DNA marks behaved unexpectedly, including some that seemed to emerge out of nowhere. They also identified the first known naturally occurring paramutation in a mammal, hinting that environmental influences may play a larger role in inheritance than scientists realized.
A guide to the bookstores owned by your favorite authors
Ann Patchett opened Parnassus Books in 2011 when physical bookstores seemed endangered.
From her bookstore in Nashville, Ann Patchett drives the literary conversation
Ann Patchett often finds ways to help others, whether it's promoting a fellow author's book or supporting emerging writers.
Wisconsin named favorite to flip four-star Florida State safety
The Wisconsin Badgers have been named the favorite to flip four-star safety Mekhi Williams from Florida State.
Netflix's 'The Diplomat' creator on character she couldn't kill off
In an essay for The Envelope, Debora Cahn explains why a 'baller move' she planned for 'The Diplomat' turned out to be the wrong one — and how she changed course.
Texas Business Court Is a Powerhouse for Resolving Civil Disputes
The Texas Business Court reflects a recognition that a large and complex economy with a capital-intensive, technology-driven industry needs a forum designed for those cases, writes White & Case’s Sean Gorman.