SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY
Search headlines
Find the stories shaping the conversation.
Results for " decided " 553 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle
Browns Warned Over Deshaun Watson Decision
The Cleveland Browns can insist that their quarterback competition between Deshaun Watson and Shedeur Sanders will be decided on the field, but the decision will not be made in a vacuum. The post Browns Warned Over Deshaun Watson Decision appeared first on HEAVY.
How Perizaad Zorabian Left Bollywood And Turned Her Family's Poultry Business Into A Rs 120 Crore Enterprise
Perizaad Zorabian was at the peak of her career when she decided to quit acting and turned her focus to her family's poultry business
I couldn't find a job, so I'm going to nursing school at 45
A 45-year-old couldn't find a corporate job for over a year so she decided to pursue nursing school instead. She wishes she started sooner.
Congressman: ‘Trump clearly decided that his crisis was more important than America’s crisis’
Voters should expect party politics in this nonpartisan school board race
Montgomery County residents should brace for a decidedly partisan tone ahead of November’s general election for an at large seat on the school board.
Local business raises more than $1K for residents displaced by Brockport apartment fire
SWEDEN, N.Y. (WROC) – After hearing the details of a devastating apartment complex fire in Brockport which displaced more than thirty people, the owners of a business in Sweden decided to step up and ...
Meta Thinks 'Social Learning' Can Fix Smart Glasses' Privacy Problems
Meta's CTO, Andrew Bosworth, suggests privacy expectations about smart glasses will be decided in the court of public opinion.
I found the 6 top Amazon Prime Day portable charger deals to keep your phone charged
Our tech writer always packs a portable charger, and since he knows the best from the duds, he decided to find the top ways to save on staying charged on the go.
We moved from the US to Barbados. Our 8 kids are more independent now.
Lisa Desai and her husband decided to move to Barbados from Florida because they craved freedom and adventure for their eight kids.
Our Boston Celtics 2026 NBA Draft big board
We decided to share our own big board of players we think that the Celtics should be considering with their available draft capital. Check it out!
Andrew Painter Left Phillies No Choice But To Demote Him
The Philadelphia Phillies decided to option right-handed pitcher Andrew Painter to Triple-A after another horrible start. Painter was the Phillies' top prospect last season and he was expected to make an impact this season for the big league team. However, the 23-year-old has struggled mightily as ...
Janeese Lewis George wins the Democratic primary for mayor of Washington, D.C.
In an overwhelmingly Democratic city, Lewis George is likely to take the top spot in November's general election, replacing moderate Muriel Bowser, who decided not to run again after three terms.
I had 2 job offers and chose the lower-paying option; how I decided
Rebecca Cavallo started looking for the next step in her career in 2021. She received two job offers and selected the lower-paying option for growth.
Science without borders: the lasting legacy of Marie Skłodowska-Curie
Over 30 years ago, Europe decided to back researchers, trust their curiosity, and see where it leads in honour of Marie Skłodowska-Curie
Merchants of Doubt and the attacks on Extreme Event Attribution science
Last week, I attended a meeting at Columbia University on attribution science and climate law, hosted by the Sabin Center. It was a fantastic event, bringing together scientists and legal experts working at the intersection of extreme event attribution and climate law. Subscribe For those unfamiliar with it, extreme event attribution attempts to quantify the contribution of climate change to an extreme event. For example, several groups analyzed the impact of climate change on Hurricane Harvey’s enormous rainfall totals over Houston, Texas and they found that climate change increased rainfall by 15 to 38%. One thing that came up again and again was how terrified fossil-fuel interests are of extreme event attribution science. They are acutely aware that this research could land them in court. And losing those cases would leave them legally liable for billions of dollars in climate damages. Because the legal stakes are so high, the blowback has turned ugly. I spoke with several scientists at the meeting who are facing ongoing harassment over their work. This blowback is a coordinated campaign to make the entire field look suspect. The goal is to create the impression that attribution science is too uncertain, too political, or too conflicted to be useful in court or in public policy. The strategy is not based on actual science or evidence of misconduct, but on the generation of doubt. The new Merchants of Doubt We’ve seen this before. In fact, not that long ago: We only have to go back a year to the Department of Energy (DOE) Climate Working Group (CWG) report to see an example of using doubt as the tool to push back against well-established science. This strategy is laid out in an email from a member of the CWG, Dr. Roy Spencer, that was released during litigation over the Climate Working Group process. The key quote is: About all I can hope is that what we write will provide sufficient “reasonable scientific doubt” regarding the science claims in the 2009 TSD [technical support document], based upon almost 2 decades of new science, to call into question the original reasoning for the EPA Administrator’s decision that CO2 presents a threat to human health and welfare. This statement is strong evidence that at least some members of the committee were working to support a particular policy outcome: revoking the Endangerment Finding. The email also explains how they planned to do it: by attempting to generate “reasonable doubt”. This is going to be hard, Spencer implies. Despite falsely claiming that “2 decades of new science” weakens the case, Spencer explicitly acknowledges that the actual peer-reviewed science of climate change overwhelmingly rejects his position: But if the science argument is decided upon by a vote, or by the number of published citations, we lose the science argument. We can go back even further: This CWG email shares unmistakable DNA with the infamous 1969 tobacco memo that declared: “Doubt is our product, since it is the best means of competing with the ‘body of fact’ that exists in the mind of the general public. It is also the means of establishing a controversy.” The tobacco memo also acknowledges the limit of this strategy: Like the CWG, they knew the science was not on their side. Share The new new Merchants of Doubt The people attacking the IPCC chapter on extreme event attribution are the newest iteration of the Merchants of Doubt. Their goal, like all Merchants before them, is to introduce doubt into the process. Because the report is not even out yet, they cannot attack its conclusions. So they are attacking the authors instead. Here is a press release from the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee: In the letter, the Chairmen express concerns about potential conflicts of interest involving members of the Attribution Committee, stating that “publicly available information suggests a troubling pattern” in which committee members are affiliated with nonprofits that support climate accountability lawsuits, “raising the appearance of impropriety and member bias.” To be clear, this is just innuendo. There is no actual evidence of bias. And given the robust process that these reports go through, including multiple lines of peer review, it seems very unlikely that significant bias can survive into the report. When the report comes out, critics will have the opportunity to make legitimate criticisms of the report — if any exist. If none do, however, they’ll still make criticisms, but they’ll be bogus, simply designed to generate doubt. We’ll see. A note to the press: Fix your frame To any journalists reading this: The public debate over extreme event attribution science is not going away. The science is simply too dangerous to fossil-fuel interests for them to stop fighting it. You very well might be assigned to write an article about this area of research in the future. When you do, do not automatically adopt the framing that climate misinformers want you to use. They want you to frame the story around questions like: Are climate scientists trying to put their thumb on the scale to achieve a predetermined, politically motivated result? Are climate scientists improperly letting their politics invade the science of the IPCC? That frame is a trap. Instead, you need to view this through the historical lens of the Merchants of Doubt. How does the ecosystem of doubt operate? Who funds it? What methods do they use to misrepresent science and slime researchers? What scientific results are they trying to keep people from understanding are legitimate? Ultimately, you instead need to focus your article on the generation of doubt as a way to maintain the fossil fuel industry’s social and legal license to keep burning oil, gas, and coal. If you treat the misinformers’ frame as a legitimate, good-faith scientific critique, you are helping them produce doubt. Don’t do it. Don’t be a Merchant of Doubt. Thanks for reading The Climate Brink! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support our work. Subscribe other stuff The Staying Curious Substack has an interesting post about the different flavors of climate sensitivity. This is crucial information if you want to understand how scientists think about how much warming the Earth will experience. I’d be grateful if you could hit the like button ❤️ below! It helps more people discover these ideas and lets me know what’s connecting with readers.
Science is under pressure again. Here’s what that means for young researchers
When Emma Scales decided she wanted to be a scientist, it seemed logical—simple, even. Now a Ph.D. candidate at Cornell University, Scales is studying symbiosis, specifically the way bacteria can gro...
They’re Uninsured After Obamacare Became Too Costly. And They’re Far From Alone.
After congressional Republicans let expanded subsidies for Affordable Care Act plans expire at the end of last year, some families have decided the price is too great of a financial burden and canceled their coverage.
Business roundup: Garden center closes, cookware shop opens and Ore House timeline uncertain
In this week’s business roundup: Botanical Concepts Garden Center in northeast Durango decided to call it quits this spring, a new cookware shop is set to open on Main Avenue, and a timeline for the r...
Ronald Araujo interview: ‘I needed help with my mental health. That’s why I decided to step away.’
The 27-year-old defender took a leave of absence from Barcelona last year. Now he's set for his first World Cup appearance
Rockies Hit Early, Often, and Late in Destroying Athletics
Colorado Rockies decided to have some batting practice in Las Vegas on Sunday, totally dominate Athletics.
Dybala on his future: “I haven’t decided yet.”
Paulo Dybala spoke to Algarabía Deportiva, and the central topic of the interview was his future. The Argentine striker, whose contract with Roma expires at the end of the month, preferred not to rev...
Time for California business lobby to grow a spine
The primary has only just ended, yet the California Chamber of Commerce (CalChamber) has already decided to endorse Xavier Becerra for governor.
The Researcher Who Decided Not to Know
Her decades of work on Huntington’s disease helped lead to the creation of a genetic test for the devastating condition. Why didn’t she take it herself?
The road test: Inside Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s strategy ahead of a potential 2028 campaign
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is truly undecided about what she’ll do in 2028, when she can run for president or for the seat held by Sen. Chuck Schumer. But Ocasio-Cortez is positioning herself to try to reach nationally beyond the deepest blue parts of the Democratic base — and making clear in private that whatever she decides, she has no interest in being merely a protest candidate.
Palantir's Karp says businesses are 'unhappy' with the frontier AI labs
Palantir CEO Alex Karp says AI will drive the most important political decisions in the U.S. and shouldn't be decided by party lines.
New OMB rule could break science in the United States
The drug that saved your mother. The treatment your doctor recommended. The clinical trial that bought someone you love more time. None of it was inevitable. It required a system built to operate outside politics and sustained over decades, because science doesn’t operate on the timeline of a politician. That system is now under direct threat. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has proposed a new rule to regulate all federal grants, not just science, but housing, education, defense, NASA and everything in between, that would fundamentally change how research is conducted in the United States. There have been a lot of fires in the past 16 months, and if everything is an emergency, nothing is an emergency. But this is a very big deal. These rules would strip away the independence that has kept science from becoming a political tool. The good news is there’s still something we can all do. How the grant system was designed to work When I was a new faculty member, I was full of millions of ideas, so I sat down and wrote an NIH proposal. I worked on it for months and thought it was so good. Then I sent it to my mentor. It came back covered in comments. Places where my reasoning wasn’t as airtight as I’d thought, methods that could be stronger, gaps in my thinking that I had been too close to the work to see. It stung, as honest feedback always does, but peer review almost always makes the work better. In fact, it’s the backbone of how American science has functioned for generations. At NIH, submitted proposals go to a panel of scientists who have experience in the field. These are the people who can read research methods and spot their weaknesses, who understand when an experiment is designed well and when it isn’t. Applications are scored rigorously, and often only the top 3-20% of proposals receive funding. The people making funding decisions are required to justify them based on these reviews. To be clear: this is not a perfect system, and good science still goes unfunded more often than any of us would like due to limited resources. There is also criticism that peer review may undervalue bold ideas that are risky but could have high payoffs. But the peer review system is nonetheless a meaningful part of the grant selection process. While thoughtful and careful changes could improve the system, the changes being proposed by OMB will not make things better. The rule that could change everything Through this OMB proposal, the system that helps decide what gets funded is being dismantled. There are many troubling elements buried in this proposal, but three provisions stand out in particular. Each would be damaging alone. Together, they would change what kind of science gets done in America, and who it serves. 1. Political appointees would decide which science gets funded, and peer review would be explicitly sidelined or ignored. The guidelines your doctor follows, the standards that determine what’s in your air and water, the drugs that get approved for your family: all of it starts with a funding decision. Right now, that decision is made by scientists who can evaluate whether the work is actually sound and whether it could move the needle forward. Under this proposal, funding decisions could be made by political appointees. The careful, expertise-driven review process that shapes grant funding would be effectively sidelined. That means that a poorly designed study could get funded simply because someone in a political office liked the sound of it, while rigorous, important work doesn’t get funded because it no longer aligns with the administration’s priorities. In other words, critical work that benefits all of us could now be missed just because it has become politically inconvenient. 2. Grants could be canceled at any point, without warning, in the middle of ongoing work. Say your tax dollars have been paying for a cancer study for two years. The grant was awarded for five years, so the team is mid-experiment. There are three additional years’ worth of answers that could change how the disease is treated for hundreds of thousands of people. With this new rule, the federal government could cancel the remaining funding tomorrow, walk away from the commitment it made with your money, and have no legal obligation to finish what it started. This is a huge waste of money. There are rarely other sources of funding for this work, which means the team, the graduate students, postdocs, and research staff who have dedicated years of their careers to this project could lose their jobs. Patients who have contributed their time to studies may not see it turn into useful learnings for others. Every hour of work already completed could result in nothing useful. Science can take decades to get to tangible outcomes. It needs a stable funding system to flourish. 3. Researchers would have a harder time communicating their findings without pre-approval from the federal government. There is a saying from Sir Mark Walport: “Science isn’t finished until it’s communicated.” Science is no use to anyone if it is kept locked away in the labs that produced the data. The proposed rule could make communicating research findings harder in a number of ways: Make it harder for scientists to widely share their findings in scientific journals. Publication costs, including journal fees that allow for broad public access, could not be paid for by federal funds which is often how scientists pay these costs. Restrict researchers from engaging publicly about how their findings should inform policy or public health guidelines. This would restrict scientists from doing the work that transforms years of lab work into decisions that actually affect people’s lives. Make it harder for scientists to attend conferences. Conferences would now need to be approved by the federal agency at the time of grant award. This disadvantages conferences or publications that are not politically aligned. Conferences are a key way in which scientists learn about work happening in their field so they can collaborate and build on each other’s findings. What good is science with a muzzle? The long-term impact These changes could (and hopefully would) be reversed under the next administration. But by then, damage has been done. Once projects are halted or denied funding by political appointees, people leave their science careers for other paths or even leave the country to do their amazing science elsewhere. You cannot pause a scientific study the way you pause a subscription you decided isn’t useful anymore. You cannot freeze a research team that depends on salaries to feed their families, causing a scramble for replacement funding that, in most cases, simply does not exist. When the money stops, everything stops, and all the work in progress and its potential are lost. Despite all of the language about reducing waste, fraud, and abuse, this new proposed rule increases the administrative burden tremendously. Every researcher watching this unfold will make a rational decision: don’t start anything that will take a decade to finish. This includes not building a team around funding that could vanish, or asking the big questions that need patience and stability to answer. The most consequential science, the kind that produces the treatments and the breakthroughs that reach your doctor’s office twenty years from now, is exactly the science that would be abandoned first. This is still a proposal, so we can all do something Some worry this rule is already a done deal. But by law, OMB is required to open a public comment period. Those comments matter because they inform members of Congress, they can be used in litigation, and they create a public record. So here’s what you can do: Submit a public comment. The public comment period on this proposed change is open until July 13. Anyone can submit a comment, and OMB is required to respond to substantial ones. Each comment must be different to count as distinct; identical comments will be counted only once. Comment as an individual, not on behalf of your organization. Here’s a full resource to help you, with useful examples, but in general: Share a story about how science or federal funding has benefitted you or is involved in your work. Are you or someone you loved a cancer survivor? Do you know someone with Alzheimer’s? Have you received NIH/NSF or other federal funding? All of these can be stories you use to highlight why you care. Explain why you’re worried about these proposed changes. You can use the wording found here or in other resources to help you. Ask them to withdraw this proposed rule. Contact your elected representatives. Congress allocates money to federal agencies to spend, and it has oversight of how that process works. You can let your representatives know this proposed change concerns you and ask them to intervene. There are levers they can push that can help at this moment. Let others know why federal funding matters. This isn’t just about science, but ALL federal grants, including for education systems, defense projects, and more. The process, including the importance of federal funding, is invisible to many. We can all make it more visible by sharing how science benefits us and why we value it. You can also share this article, or any of the resources linked here, to help spread awareness! Bottom line We are quickly losing ground in scientific research in the U.S. More changes, like the proposed rule by OMB, would decimate our ability to conduct research here, leaving us all worse off: fewer treatments for pancreatic cancer, less research on pollution impacts, fewer answers for patients with rare disease, and more unaddressed health needs. The impact will be very real for all of us, regardless of where we stand politically. Using our voices for science is more important than ever. Love, LM Big thanks to Dr. Megan Ranney for reading this over and providing brilliant insights, as always. Dr. Liz Marnik, PhD, is Executive Director of The Evidence Collective at YLE and a science communicator and immunologist working at the intersection of public trust, science, and public health. You can find her on Substack, LinkedIn, Instagram and Threads. Your Local Epidemiologist (YLE) comprises a team of experts, ranging from physicians to immunologists to epidemiologists to nutritionists, working together with one goal: to “Translate” ever-evolving public health science so that people are well-equipped to make evidence-based decisions. The YLE suite of newsletters reaches over 475,000 people across more than 132 countries. This newsletter is free to everyone, thanks to the generous support of fellow YLE community members. To support the effort, subscribe or upgrade below: Subscribe
Neemias Queta’s Breakout Season Should Earn Him an Extension
When the 2024-25 season ended, the Boston Celtics were faced with frontcourt issues. With Al Horford and Luke Kornet departing in free agency and Kristaps Porzingis being traded to the Golden State Warriors, Boston needed to find help in the frontcourt. Instead of targeting another big man in the market, the Celtics decided to give developing center Neemias Queta a chance. This […] The post Neemias Queta’s Breakout Season Should Earn Him an Extension appeared first on The Lead.
Stellar Blade: Blood Rain Dev Comments on Launch Platform Plans
Stellar Blade: Blood Rain developer Shift Up says nothing is decided on day one platforms, leaving the door open to Xbox Series, PC, and PS5.
Recent college grad: I moved from New York to Texas, it's cheaper
When I got a job after college, I decided to leave my home on Long Island, where I couldn't afford anything, and move to Texas, where I could save.
I bartered with an AI shopkeeper at ElevenLabs' NYC pop-up
ElevenLabs' NYC pop-up boasted that "every part of the experience is run by a voice agent." I decided to visit.
I shaved my beard to try to find a job at an AI company
A tech consultant said he often faces hiring managers half his age, so he decided to send a message by changing his appearance.
Jon Maples has big lead over Jonathan Rubin in HD 87 GOP Primary, and he’s got room to grow
Even with more than 1/3 of voters undecided, Maples already has majority support.
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.
Florentino Perez advisor made €10m commission from Barcelona deal
Real Madrid are in the heat of elections, with just three days to go before the next president of the club is decided. As such, both sides are keen to cast doubt on the leadership of the other, and it...
Why climate scientists have dropped a worst-case scenario
International scientists decided it is no longer useful to study the most extreme model of runaway global warming. So why are some people upset?
Some of the biggest U.S. sporting towns decided not to host any World Cup games, fearing a ‘major financial burden to our cities’
Chicago, Phoenix, and other big sports towns dropped their World Cup bids. History suggests it may have been a smart choice.
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.
ERC Opinions Yield Mixed Results For Essential Businesses
Two cases interpreting requirements to qualify for the ERC were decided on May 28, 2026, applying different standards to the causation standard taxpayers must meet.
OC Officials Won’t Pursue Renewing Funding For New Black Infant Health Program
OC Health Care officials decided not to pursue a grant for a program aimed at supporting Black moms and their kids.
Josh Shapiro couldn’t avoid the questions about him. He decided he doesn’t want to
For now, Josh Shapiro says his focus is on Pennsylvania – “the state that decides it all,” as he likes to say. But a politician who alludes to a famous passage from a rabbinic text in nearly every major speech has also decided to talk more about his views on Israel, whether for a future presidential campaign’s sake or just to influence a conversation that tends to land on him more than any other Jewish politician in America.
When used in the ‘wild’ conditions of the real world, large language AI stumbles
Asking medical questions of AI with language spoken “in the wild”—meaning with consumer-level LLM prompts—brings back answers with decidedly mediocre accuracy—76%—a new study shows.
Report: Cleveland Browns Starting QB Battle Seemingly Decided Already
Creighton lands commitment from local talent London Dada
London Dada, a 6-foot-7 small forward out of Omaha Westside (NE), has decided to stay home and commit to Creighton, he told Rivals. A three-star recruit, Dada is ranked as the No. 119 overall prospect in the 2027 class according to the Rivals Industry Ranking. He’s also the No. 35 ranked small forward nationally and […]
Bungie Reportedly Considered Relaunching Destiny as 'Destiny Infinity' Before Deciding to Pull the Plug on Destiny 2
Bungie's issues with its storied sci-fi shooter, Destiny 2, began around the time of the last summer's Edge of Fate expansion, which reportedly underperformed. The decision to pull the plug was allegedly made "earlier this year" after it decided not to relaunch the franchise as "Destiny Infinity."
Black Women Political Candidates Are Expected to Be 'Likable,' Qualified and Tireless. Men Aren’t.
What I had experienced during that run wasn’t entirely unfamiliar to me. The year before, in 2013, I had run for president of the Young Democrats of America (YDA), a national political party office role, against a popular opponent. The opponent was a Black man, so race wasn’t a factor in the election; however, gender was. Before my campaign, I was vice president of YDA and had heard only good things about my service: my fundraising efforts, the partnerships I had engineered with progressive organizations, and programming coordination for the membership. However, when I decided to run for president, I instantly became ‘difficult to work with’ and ‘mean.’ Research on women candidates confirms that voters are less likely to vote for a woman if they don’t like her; by comparison, voters don’t need to like men to elect them. But when I was running as the Black woman candidate in a seven-candidate primary for public office, with two other women in the race, I noticed almost nothing about my being ‘difficult’ and more about my ability and work ethic. My experience running for public office reflected the systemic bias and double standards not just for women candidates, but Black women candidates who dare to aspire to any sort of political leadership—and that needed to change. We need more progressive Black women in public office for a myriad reasons, but we also specifically need the younger generation of Instigators in office, candidates who understand the times in which we live currently. Electing more Black women will take real investment in changing the biases and attitudes (conscious and unconscious) of mostly white donors, media, campaign staff, consultants and institutional leaders to help shift the culture and systems. But this support needs to be substantively increased so that we can rebuild an inclusive, multiracial democracy with the leaders we want and need. (Excerpted from The Instigators: How Black Women Have Been Essential to American Democracy by Atima Omara.)
Polish scientists and students rally in campaign for 3% funding target
Polish scientists and students have been flooding social media with calls on the government to raise research and development spending as part of 3% for Science, 100% for Poland, a campaign born earlier this month out of frustration with chronic underfunding in the academic sector. On May 27, thousands took the slogan on to the streets.The EU has been trying to convince member states to raise their R&D expenditures to 3% of GDP for more than two decades, but the idea has never gained traction in capitals. Finance ministers were too busy plugging budget holes created in the aftermath of the 2008 crisis, then the Covid pandemic, the war in Ukraine, and now the war in Iran.Critics say that countries missed or ignored the target because it is voluntary, but also because research communities have rarely raised their voice to put pressure on national governments. The European Commission hopes to make the target legally binding in the upcoming European Research Area Act, an EU-wide regulation that should be announced by the end of the year. Academia in Poland has been faced with a funding crisis for years, often leaving its members with no other choice but to work abroad in order to access better resources, or leave the sector altogether in the hope of earning a decent living. The risk, in the long-term, is that brain drain stifles local innovation capacity and technological competitiveness.In just a few weeks, the movement rallied nationwide support, including from major academic bodies and trade unions such as the Conference of Rectors of Academic Schools in Poland and the Presidium of the Polish Academy of Sciences. Its public petition collected more than 23,000 signatures. On May 27, it formed the first large protest for science in Poland, gathering thousands of people in front of the parliament building in Warsaw.Ilona Uryga-Bugajska, representative of the Marie Curie Alumni Association Poland Chapter, was there. “The protest was peaceful, with no incidents reported, and the entire event took place in a respectful and calm atmosphere,” she said. Banners she saw in the crowd carried slogans such as “A little longer and I’ll be teaching in a supermarket,” “National culture, starvation salary,” “Stop the destruction of science,” “Passion will not pay the rent,” “Without action, don’t expect a better future,” and “Pull science out of the hole.” She also observed a strong presence of young researchers, who are on the frontline of Poland’s academic crisis.“Academics are usually people who prefer discussion, analysis, dialogue and compromise. We are not a group that protests easily,” said Katarzyna Marzec, professor at the Faculty of Pharmacy of the Jagiellonian University Medical College and AGH University of Krakow, who also took part. “But many of us feel that we have been pushed against the wall.”Aleksandra Rutkowska, translational neuroscientist and research group leader at the Medical University of Gdańsk, agreed. “Frustration in the scientific community is very high,” she said. “Science is often used politically as a symbol of innovation and modernity, but the everyday reality inside many institutions is much more difficult. There is a large gap between the public narrative and the actual condition of the sector.”Maria Wiktoria Górna, head of the structural biology group at the University of Warsaw and one of the organisers of the movement, told Science|Business that the campaign would continue without proven results. This might involve another strike in the autumn, she said. “Empty promises are not enough by now.”Campaign demandsAccording to Uryga-Bugajska, the organisers officially presented their demands and concerns to representatives of the government present at the event. These included Marek Gzik, deputy minister of science and higher education, and Karolina Zioło-Pużuk, secretary of state of that same ministry.The headline demand, for the government to increase national spending on R&D to 3% of GDP by 2030, should be within Poland’s economic capacity, Rutkowska said. “The real question is whether there is genuine long-term political commitment to treating science as a strategic priority rather than a slogan.”In 2024, R&D expenditure in Poland stood at 1.41% of GDP, which is slightly above the average for central and eastern Europe, with countries such as Czechia recording 1.82%, Hungary 1.31% and Romania 0.46%. However, it falls noticeably short of the EU average of 2.24%, which just a handful of countries exceed, including Germany, Belgium and Sweden.Campaigners are also asking for fair wages for scientific staff, including PhD stipends and junior academic salaries, which are widely considered uncompetitive. Starting doctoral scholarships amount to some €843 gross per month, when the statutory minimum wage stands at €1,135. By pushing early-career researchers out of Poland, growing precarity has caused a generational gap in the academic workforce, with just 25% of lecturers aged under 40. In this context, the movement fears that scientific careers could soon be accessible to a privileged minority only.Grzegorz Spólnik is a case in point. After 15 years working in mass spectrometry at the Polish Academy of Sciences, he decided to leave partly “to earn enough money to live a normal life,” he said. “At that time, my earnings were similar to those of people working in grocery shops, and the work-life balance is something that does not exist in science, or is very hard to achieve.”Now a senior field service engineer for Polish laboratory equipment supplier Bioanalytic, he would consider going back to research, “but never in the public sector, maybe some start-up or a big private company with ambitious R&D.”The campaigners want to see more support for basic research and have called for €236 million to be added to the budget of the National Science Centre (NCN) in 2027 so that the average grant application success rate does not fall below 25%.“At the protest, there was a banner I particularly liked: ‘NCN is not a lottery.’ Unfortunately, for many researchers, it increasingly feels exactly like one,” Marzec said. “Personally, I am one of the lucky ones. I work at two of the strongest institutions in the country, where the research standards are very high. I know that in many other institutions, the situation is much worse and obtaining funding for research at an early-career stage is becoming nearly impossible.”Rutkowska also considers herself fortunate. After studying abroad and holding a postdoctoral position, she returned to Poland, where her pay was supported through an NCN-funded project linked to the Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions. “This also made me very aware that good research conditions in Poland often depend on external competitive funding rather than on stable support from the system itself,” she said.Long-term strategyBeyond the lack of funds for both salaries and grants, scientists believe that the issue is structural. “The biggest problem at the moment is the complete lack of a clear long-term strategy for the development of science and research from the current government,” Marzec said. “Everything ends with declarations and promises that are never truly followed by concrete actions or structural reforms.”Rutkowska agreed, citing a lack of infrastructure, continuity and long-term institutional support.“Running a research group in Poland often means functioning as an entire institution at once,” she said. “I am a principal investigator, a mentor, a recruiter, a project administrator and, when needed, still someone who returns to the lab bench to help with experiments,” she went on. “This creates a large hidden workload that takes time and energy away from actual science. At times, it feels as though scientists are no longer expecting extra help; we simply hope the system will stop creating additional obstacles that make research unnecessarily difficult.”Related articlesStrategic thinking: Germany funds joint research with Poland and FrancePoland to transfer €30M of regional funds to boost Horizon Europe participationPoland is funding fewer basic research grants as high inflation hitsIn short, “academics are expected to teach, publish papers, apply for grants and conduct high-quality research, while funding and salaries remain very limited,” said Uryga-Bugajska, who returned to her home country after 13 years in the UK.According to Marzec, another issue is the way that research institutions are evaluated. Previously, this took place every four years, with a clear differentiation between stronger and weaker institutions. “The current government, perhaps to avoid political backlash, effectively concluded that everyone is doing well, so in practice no meaningful evaluation took place,” she said.But in her view, “some form of serious assessment is necessary” to ensure the excellence and international competitiveness of Polish institutions, and to determine how to best use public resources and where institutional structures need reform. “Some institutions may need to rethink hiring practices in order to attract ambitious young researchers who are capable of obtaining competitive grants and building internationally visible research groups.” Rutkowska has already had to adapt. “When hiring PhD students, I often have to combine different funding sources creatively to make positions attractive enough for talented people to stay in science,” she said. “Many young researchers do not see a stable future in academia in Poland, and that is deeply worrying.”
Polish scientists and students rally in campaign for better conditions
Polish scientists and students have been flooding social media with calls on the government to raise research and development spending as part of 3% for Science, 100% for Poland, a campaign born earlier this month out of frustration with chronic underfunding in the academic sector. On May 27, thousands took the slogan on to the streets.The EU has been trying to convince member states to raise their R&D expenditures to 3% of GDP for more than two decades, but the idea has never gained traction in capitals. Finance ministers were too busy plugging budget holes created in the aftermath of the 2008 crisis, then the Covid pandemic, the war in Ukraine, and now the war in Iran.Critics say that countries missed or ignored the target because it is voluntary, but also because research communities have rarely raised their voice to put pressure on national governments. The European Commission hopes to make the target legally binding in the upcoming European Research Area Act, an EU-wide regulation that should be announced by the end of the year. Academia in Poland has been faced with a funding crisis for years, often leaving its members with no other choice but to work abroad in order to access better resources, or leave the sector altogether in the hope of earning a decent living. The risk, in the long-term, is that brain drain stifles local innovation capacity and technological competitiveness.In just a few weeks, the movement rallied nationwide support, including from major academic bodies and trade unions such as the Conference of Rectors of Academic Schools in Poland and the Presidium of the Polish Academy of Sciences. Its public petition collected more than 23,000 signatures. On May 27, it formed the first large protest for science in Poland, gathering thousands of people in front of the parliament building in Warsaw.Ilona Uryga-Bugajska, representative of the Marie Curie Alumni Association Poland Chapter, was there. “The protest was peaceful, with no incidents reported, and the entire event took place in a respectful and calm atmosphere,” she said. Banners she saw in the crowd carried slogans such as “A little longer and I’ll be teaching in a supermarket,” “National culture, starvation salary,” “Stop the destruction of science,” “Passion will not pay the rent,” “Without action, don’t expect a better future,” and “Pull science out of the hole.” She also observed a strong presence of young researchers, who are on the frontline of Poland’s academic crisis.“Academics are usually people who prefer discussion, analysis, dialogue and compromise. We are not a group that protests easily,” said Katarzyna Marzec, professor at the Faculty of Pharmacy of the Jagiellonian University Medical College and AGH University of Krakow, who also took part. “But many of us feel that we have been pushed against the wall.”Aleksandra Rutkowska, translational neuroscientist and research group leader at the Medical University of Gdańsk, agreed. “Frustration in the scientific community is very high,” she said. “Science is often used politically as a symbol of innovation and modernity, but the everyday reality inside many institutions is much more difficult. There is a large gap between the public narrative and the actual condition of the sector.”Maria Wiktoria Górna, head of the structural biology group at the University of Warsaw and one of the organisers of the movement, told Science|Business that the campaign would continue without proven results. This might involve another strike in the autumn, she said. “Empty promises are not enough by now.”Campaign demandsAccording to Uryga-Bugajska, the organisers officially presented their demands and concerns to representatives of the government present at the event. These included Marek Gzik, deputy minister of science and higher education, and Karolina Zioło-Pużuk, secretary of state of that same ministry.The headline demand, for the government to increase national spending on R&D to 3% of GDP by 2030, should be within Poland’s economic capacity, Rutkowska said. “The real question is whether there is genuine long-term political commitment to treating science as a strategic priority rather than a slogan.”In 2024, R&D expenditure in Poland stood at 1.41% of GDP, which is slightly above the average for central and eastern Europe, with countries such as Czechia recording 1.82%, Hungary 1.31% and Romania 0.46%. However, it falls noticeably short of the EU average of 2.24%, which just a handful of countries exceed, including Germany, Belgium and Sweden.Campaigners are also asking for fair wages for scientific staff, including PhD stipends and junior academic salaries, which are widely considered uncompetitive. Starting doctoral scholarships amount to some €843 gross per month, when the statutory minimum wage stands at €1,135. By pushing early-career researchers out of Poland, growing precarity has caused a generational gap in the academic workforce, with just 25% of lecturers aged under 40. In this context, the movement fears that scientific careers could soon be accessible to a privileged minority only.Grzegorz Spólnik is a case in point. After 15 years working in mass spectrometry at the Polish Academy of Sciences, he decided to leave partly “to earn enough money to live a normal life,” he said. “At that time, my earnings were similar to those of people working in grocery shops, and the work-life balance is something that does not exist in science, or is very hard to achieve.”Now a senior field service engineer for Polish laboratory equipment supplier Bioanalytic, he would consider going back to research, “but never in the public sector, maybe some start-up or a big private company with ambitious R&D.”The campaigners want to see more support for basic research and have called for €236 million to be added to the budget of the National Science Centre (NCN) in 2027 so that the average grant application success rate does not fall below 25%.“At the protest, there was a banner I particularly liked: ‘NCN is not a lottery.’ Unfortunately, for many researchers, it increasingly feels exactly like one,” Marzec said. “Personally, I am one of the lucky ones. I work at two of the strongest institutions in the country, where the research standards are very high. I know that in many other institutions, the situation is much worse and obtaining funding for research at an early-career stage is becoming nearly impossible.”Rutkowska also considers herself fortunate. After studying abroad and holding a postdoctoral position, she returned to Poland, where her pay was supported through an NCN-funded project linked to the Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions. “This also made me very aware that good research conditions in Poland often depend on external competitive funding rather than on stable support from the system itself,” she said.Long-term strategyBeyond the lack of funds for both salaries and grants, scientists believe that the issue is structural. “The biggest problem at the moment is the complete lack of a clear long-term strategy for the development of science and research from the current government,” Marzec said. “Everything ends with declarations and promises that are never truly followed by concrete actions or structural reforms.”Rutkowska agreed, citing a lack of infrastructure, continuity and long-term institutional support.“Running a research group in Poland often means functioning as an entire institution at once,” she said. “I am a principal investigator, a mentor, a recruiter, a project administrator and, when needed, still someone who returns to the lab bench to help with experiments,” she went on. “This creates a large hidden workload that takes time and energy away from actual science. At times, it feels as though scientists are no longer expecting extra help; we simply hope the system will stop creating additional obstacles that make research unnecessarily difficult.”Related articlesStrategic thinking: Germany funds joint research with Poland and FrancePoland to transfer €30M of regional funds to boost Horizon Europe participationPoland is funding fewer basic research grants as high inflation hitsIn short, “academics are expected to teach, publish papers, apply for grants and conduct high-quality research, while funding and salaries remain very limited,” said Uryga-Bugajska, who returned to her home country after 13 years in the UK.According to Marzec, another issue is the way that research institutions are evaluated. Previously, this took place every four years, with a clear differentiation between stronger and weaker institutions. “The current government, perhaps to avoid political backlash, effectively concluded that everyone is doing well, so in practice no meaningful evaluation took place,” she said.But in her view, “some form of serious assessment is necessary” to ensure the excellence and international competitiveness of Polish institutions, and to determine how to best use public resources and where institutional structures need reform. “Some institutions may need to rethink hiring practices in order to attract ambitious young researchers who are capable of obtaining competitive grants and building internationally visible research groups.” Rutkowska has already had to adapt. “When hiring PhD students, I often have to combine different funding sources creatively to make positions attractive enough for talented people to stay in science,” she said. “Many young researchers do not see a stable future in academia in Poland, and that is deeply worrying.”
🎁The surprises keep coming: thrilling Libertadores night
Tonight, Groups C, E, and H in the CONMEBOL Libertadores were decided, and here we bring you the star, the surprise, and the disappointment of the night.Platense did its homework and takes the starWit...
WakeMed declines merger proposal from UNC Health in midst of Atrium deal
The health system received UNC’s offer to combine days after publicly announcing plans to merge with Charlotte, North Carolina-based Atrium Health. Ultimately, WakeMed decided Atrium is the best path forward.
WakeMed declined offer from UNC Health in midst of Atrium deal
The health system received UNC’s offer to combine days after publicly announcing plans to merge with Charlotte, North Carolina-based Atrium Health. Ultimately, WakeMed decided Atrium is the best path forward.
Charlotte plans to pick interim mayor before Vi Lyles leaves. Here’s the process
Public applications will open June 2, and a new mayor will be decided before Mayor Vi Lyles leaves office.
Get up to speed fast on the California election with our guide for the undecided
Californians are voting on a wide-open governor's race in a June 2 primary election. Xavier Becerra, Steve Hilton and Tom Steyer are leading in polls.
Dave Hyde: Sports lessons in a 20-minute commencement speech
Ray Lewis recently offered a window into his Hall of Fame football career. He said it turned at the University of Miami when he decided who he wanted to be. “Before I leave here, I will be the greatest Hurricane to ever walk through this university,” Lewis said to North Carolina Central University graduates. “That wasn’t arrogance. That was identity.” It’s one of my favorite seasons in sports: ...
Chris Taylor officially announces his retirement from baseball after two days of confusion about his future
The utility man announced his retirement on Friday but changed his mind on Saturday. One day later, Taylor finally decided that he is indeed retiring.
Nothing Is Decided on Arne Slot Until After Brentford
The Noise Around Slot Means Nothing Until MondayThe final weekend of Liverpool’s Premier League season has arrived and once again the narrative surrounding Arne Slot is shifting by the hour. One mom...
How a man transformed his tool shed into a man cave and cigar lounge
Tyler Graham said his old tool shed was always "a disaster." He decided to transform the space into a man cave where he can enjoy whiskey and cigars.
Newberg bear update: Cub shot, killed in Canby due to 'public health and safety concerns'
A bear cub who was previously spotted in Newberg has been killed in Canby. Authorities fatally shot the animal around 11:15 a.m. on Saturday, the Canby Police Department reported. Officials said multiple agencies "decided to stop the bear with legal force" as it moved toward the public.
A 25-year-old left her $346K job to launch makeup brand Forta
Sarah Guller, 25, said she felt like she should have been happy with her private equity job — but she decided she needed to make a change.
Denuvo added to 007 First Light 6 days before release date, canceling pre-orders
Some James Bond fans have decided to skip 007 First Light, opting to wait for the next movie. With the game’s release date on May 27th, Denuvo has surfaced on its Steam listing. Buyers concerned about performance and DRM restrictions have canceled their pre-orders.
Joe Hunter says 'Survivor 50' jury vote was decided before final Tribal Council
Joe Hunter says 'Survivor 50' jury vote was decided before final Tribal Council and addresses Cirie saying he needed to be babysat by tribemates on a 'Joetation.'
Taiwan’s president says future will not be decided by ‘external forces’
President Lai says Taiwan's future is up to its people as the island faces Chinese and US headwinds.
Pep Guardiola’s future plans after leaving Manchester City
Pep Guardiola will reportedly leave Manchester City at the end of the season.The Spaniard’s contract doesn’t expire until June 2027, but he has decided the time is right to step down from his role...
TNT Sports opts against making European finals free to watch
TNT Sports has decided not to provide a free-to-air option to watch the finals of the Champions League, Europa League or Conference League.
‘Barbie Girl’ pop group Aqua calls it quits after three decades
The 90s Danish-Norwegian pop band Aqua, known for its hit song “Barbie Girl,” is calling it quits after 30 years, the group announced Monday. “After many incredible years, we have decided to close …
Sony won't be bringing any more single-player games to PC, says PlayStation Studios boss
Following rumors earlier this year that Sony had decided to pull back from releasing PlayStation 5 exclusives on PC, Pl…
Sabres-Canadiens playoff series to be decided with Game 7 at Buffalo on Monday
Montreal and Buffalo are the two youngest teams by average age still in contention, and both relative recent playoff newcomers.
2026 PGA Championship playoff format, rules: How Wanamaker Trophy will be decided if extra holes required
With a bunched leaderboard at Aronimink Golf Club, it's possible that more than 72 holes will be required to decide a winner
Are you going to watch the college baseball tournaments?
I’ll be honest. College baseball is decidedly not my thing. The very best college prospects sometimes end up in Double-A, while the vast majority will be sent to A ball or perhaps the complex. If I wanted that I could, you know, go see actual minor leaguers in person. I know “gotta support the school” […]
Once a darling of the GOP’s ‘Never Trump’ wing, this Republican decided he’s done
Former Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan (R) is launching a leadership institute at Washington College and says he's done with seeking political office.
Voter voices from the San Gabriel Valley on California governor's race
Becerra and Hilton have emerged as the candidates to beat. But dozens of interviews across the San Gabriel Valley, a prime campaign battleground, find many voters still undecided. And discouraged.
🎥 Sensational backheel goal decides the FA Cup final!
Manchester City and Chelsea Football Club faced off in the FA Cup final at Wembley Stadium. In the end, a single goal decided the final. And what a goal it was. Antoine Semenyo sent the Citizens into ...
Stunning backheel seals the FA Cup title, watch 🎥
Manchester City won the FA Cup title this Saturday (16).The final at Wembley against Chelsea was decided thanks to a stunning backheel goal by Antoine Semenyo.In a match with few truly dangerous momen...
I can finally afford to buy a house; I've decided it's not worth it
Now that I can afford a house, I'm realizing it's not worth it. I don't want to be locked into an asset that I barely like. I have different plans.
Lewandowski confirms future at Barcelona ⚠️
Polish striker Robert Lewandowski has officially confirmed his departure from FC Barcelona.After four seasons wearing the blaugrana shirt, the center-forward decided to bring his time at the Catalan c...
Spring Sports: Another Marra excelling on the draw for Pinkerton
Melayna Marra decided that the draw was hers.
Lehigh Valley Political Pulse: Politics in an evolving news landscape
Katherine Reinhard said many voters remain undecided heading into the primary and urged audiences to rely on credible reporting as they make final decisions.
Three strangers on a rainy St. Francisville porch write a ‘Loblolly Lullaby’
Sometimes the best days are the ones where you have absolutely no business being in the room. This week's Louisiana at Large is about a St. Francisville songwriters' workshop, a word that sounds like home — and what happened when two strangers decided to help write a loblolly lullaby.
Triplet comedians say $13,000 hair transplants changed their careers
The Virzi triplets are comedians and content creators. In 2020, they decided to get hair transplants to fight hair loss.
Sony says PlayStation 6 launch timing and price are not decided
PS6 has no release date yet, Sony confirms and mentions memory prices Sony has not confirmed a launch date or price for its next PlayStation console.
PS6 Release Date and Price Not Decided Yet, Says Sony
There are "changing business models" to consider
Sony hasn't decided on PS6 release date or price yet, and may even "change business models" in response to the memory crisis
"We have not yet decided on at what timing we will launch the new console, or at what prices," says Sony CEO.
Science diplomacy lessons from a North Korean volcano
Mount Paektu, a mythic, active volcano on the border between North Korea and China, is almost the epitome of a scientific challenge that crosses political lines. In 946 CE, it erupted in one of the five biggest volcanic events of the past 10,000 years, kicking up huge quantities of ash and sending destructive mud flows down river channels for hundreds of kilometres. Should this happen again, the entire region, including easternmost Russia, South Korea and even Japan could be hit. “It’s definitely got the potential to be big,” said James Hammond, a professor of geophysics at Birkbeck, University of London. An eruption on the scale of 946 would have “huge regional impact.” For the past 15 years, Hammond has helped lead a groundbreaking collaboration with North Korean scientists to study the volcano, navigating scientific sanctions, tough export controls on scientific equipment and a long, pandemic-enforced exodus from the country. Although he seems more at home on far-flung research expeditions – before speaking to Science|Business, Hammond was camping out on a Greenland ice sheet – he has also advised the European Commission on its changing science diplomacy strategy. His long experience with North Korea has made Hammond sceptical of blanket bans on science collaboration, no matter the country.This is a live question in Europe, where in the wake of Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine, institutional ties with Russian universities were almost entirely severed, although some scientists fear this could undermine our understanding of climate change’s impact on the Arctic. Here, Hammond tells the story of the Mount Paektu mission and the policy lessons he takes from it. Ominous rumblingsThe genesis of Hammond’s collaboration came in 2002, when Mount Paektu began to rumble ominously. Earthquake activity picked up and the volcano began to emit unusual gases. North Korean scientists took notice. “People felt we need to know more about this volcano,” said Hammond. In 2011, North Korean vulcanologists put out a request for international expertise to help them learn more. At the time, Hammond and his collaborator, Clive Oppenheimer, were working on a vulcanology project in another sanctioned country, Eritrea, and so decided to answer the call. Within a month, they had flown into Pyongyang. “It was pretty incredible,” recalls Hammond (left). “We were made to feel like honoured guests, and invited to official celebrations.” The scientific opportunity was huge. Paektu is unusually positioned, a thousand kilometres from where tectonic plates rub against each other in the Pacific. “It was an incredibly interesting volcano, but not much research had been done, at least not in the international community,” he said. “There was so much we felt we could do. And we had these partners that were super keen to engage.”The mission received an unusual visitor in the form of volcano-obsessed filmmaker Werner Herzog, who accompanied Hammond and Oppenheimer while directing his 2016 film Into the Inferno about volcanos across the world. Four days into the trip, the German director delivered a long speech about reunification to his North Korean hosts, recalls Hammond. “He got to the heart of the Koreans and how they felt, and how they thought, in a way that I'm not sure I ever will,” he said. UN sanctionsHowever, Hammond realised he’d been “naïve” about how difficult it would be to collaborate with North Korea, which was sanctioned far more heavily than Eritrea. “We didn’t fully appreciate the all-encompassing nature of restrictions,” he said. In 2016, as tensions escalated over Pyongyang’s nuclear tests, a United Nations resolution banned all joint scientific work with North Korea. However, the UN sanctions did allow countries to request carve outs, and the UK successfully requested an exemption for Hammond’s work. Related articlesEU pushes for joint science diplomacy, but care needed to avoid gridlock, experts sayRussia severs its last ties with German scienceAnchor Greenlanders in Arctic climate research, experts tell EU ahead of policy updateExport controls have also delayed Hammond’s work. In one case, it took 18 months to get approval from the UK government to take seismometers, which measure earthquakes, to North Korea. “It was frustrating,” he said. “But they didn’t just say no.” However, one instrument, called an induction coil, used to measure how the earth conducts electricity, was blocked entirely because it can in theory be used to detect submarines. Karaoke bondingSince the collaboration started in 2011, Hammond has visited the country around 15 times, although the pandemic closed off North Korea for more than five years. A trip last November was Hammond’s first since the outbreak. Despite this lengthy interlude, Hammond has deep bonds in the country. The North Korean scientists Hammond works with are somewhat isolated, as they struggle to access the latest research papers and travel to international conferences. That said, they are “excellent geophysicists” and are “very well trained in the field,” he said. Over karaoke and chats about their families, “we’ve made friendships, for sure,” he said. The authorities have to sign-off things like the placement of seismometers, for example, but Hammond said these requests have been approved. “Everything that we've asked for within a scientific context has been delivered.”Scientific backchannels? These kind of personal links between scientists across political lines are one purported benefit of science diplomacy. During the Cold War, some historians argue, scientific contact between the US and Soviet Union laid a groundwork of trust for other cooperation, such as on arms control. Hammond agrees that backchannel contacts to North Korean geophysicists are hardly likely to defuse a military crisis on the Korean peninsula, but the simple fact of the scientific collaboration makes contacts between diplomats that little bit easier. “It creates opportunities to understand each other a little bit better,” he said. “When maybe you have those more difficult discussions as diplomats, it's coming from a slightly better place.” Cutting tiesDrawing lessons from the Mount Paektu mission for today’s links with Russian science isn’t simple. The analogy is far from exact, Hammond said, “because one is essentially a Cold War, versus a pretty hot war in the case of Russia.” But Hammond’s broader argument is that the challenges we face, such as climate change, pandemics, biodiversity loss, pollution and so on, have globalised in an unprecedented way, making blanket shutdowns in collaboration with any country unwise.He’s somewhat critical of the UN scientific sanctions imposed on North Korea in 2016, even though they did allow for exceptions. “I think a blanket halt to some of these things, when we face big global challenges [. . .] that’s quite a risky thing to do,” he said.Institutional endorsement?European academics are still by and large free to work individually with Russian counterparts. However, official, institutional partnerships have largely ended. Shortly following the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Russian university rectors wrote a public letter endorsing the war, meaning European universities fear official collaboration could also be seen as a kind of endorsement. Hammond acknowledges there is a risk of legitimising regimes, and state-controlled universities, through scientific cooperation. “That’s the trade off you have to make,” he said. Strategic projectsWith Russia, instead of giving a green light to restart all Arctic science, a middle ground might be firing up a few carefully selected “strategic” projects, said Hammond. After all, European countries are still collaborating with Russia on the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor, an experimental nuclear fusion plant in the south of France. However, even if Europe did try to revive Arctic science with Russia, there’s no guarantee Russian scientists would play ball. A series of high-profile arrests of physicists in Russia accused of sharing their findings with the outside world has made collaboration fraught. Even before the invasion of 2022, “the Russian regime made it increasingly difficult, and this sort of discouraged people,” Dag Rune Olsen, rector of the Arctic University of Norway, told Science|Business last year.
RUBÉN LIMARDO IS PLANNING TO COMPETE IN HIS FINAL PAN AMERICAN GAMES IN LIMA 2027 AND TO RETIRE FOR GOOD AFTER LOS ANGELES 2028
The greatest Venezuelan fencer of all time has already decided when he […]
Trump just reasserted his domination of the GOP. But that might not be good news for the party in 2026
Tuesday showed that even a politically diminished President Donald Trump still has the juice to end a Republican’s career. But while that’s great news for Trump’s political capital, it is decidedly less great news for a GOP whose midterm hopes the president is sinking.
FDA halts publication of covid, shingles vaccine studies
News of the studies being pulled comes weeks after the CDC decided it wouldn’t publish a report showing last winter’s covid vaccine cut the likelihood of hospitalizations.
🥐Mbappé, the Champions League, a lifeline... Tuesday’s 5️⃣ stories
We’re in the middle of a week of Champions League and Libertadores action, with leagues like the Premier League and the relegation battle in La Liga being decided. Atleti, this is the big nightIt’...
AJC poll finds Bottoms leading Georgia’s Democratic race for governor
Former Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms has a big advantage. But about a third of likely Democratic primary voters remain undecided.
Jayson Tatum, Celtics decided 'return to play protocol' for left knee stiffness meant missing Game 7 vs. 76ers
A California Dream? Some Democrats Fear Harris Picked the Wrong Race.
Some wish Kamala Harris had decided to run for governor in California, where Democrats are struggling to break through, rather than weigh another White House run.
A California Dream? Some Democrats Fear Harris Picked the Wrong Race.
Some wish Kamala Harris had decided to run for governor in California, where Democrats are struggling to break through, rather than weigh another White House run.
Section titles decided, matchups almost set for opening round of L-L League softball playoffs
It’s the final week of the regular season, a season that — crossed fingers — has been largely free of weather-related interruptions.
North Texas voters weigh in on transit, school bonds and more on Saturday
The results are in and North Texans have decided on city races, school bonds, transit propositions and more. NBC 5’s Meredith Yeomans has the latest on Election Night.
Heart Failure Couldn’t Stop This Couple from Saying ‘I do’ in the ICU
Daniel Phan was in heart failure and days from undergoing lifesaving surgery when he and his girlfriend, Julia, decided to get married — in the ICU.
Analysis: Howe's calls pay off
This was an afternoon when Eddie Howe's big calls paid off when he needed them most. The head coach justifiably kept faith with the bulk of players who put in an improved performance in a 1-0 defeat against Arsenal last week. Having again decided to name £124m worth of forwards on the bench, in Nick Woltemade and Yoane Wissa, Osula repaid the faith of his manager once more with the opener.
Punk Politics/Camp Costume is a fashion exhibition curated by (some of my) brilliant Parsons students!
I have the most amazing students. I teach Fashion Journalism at Parsons, as part of its MA Fashion Studies degree, though I have students of all different disciplines throughout the New School in my class — from fine-art photographers to investigative journalists to textile designers. And I learn about all sorts of fascinating things from them, like that designers are adding faux sweat stains to their garments now (part of a trend piece about “anatomy core”) and that real “French girl style” is actually about being “cunti cunta” (aka loud, rude, too much, liberated). So when I found out that some of my students were curating a fashion exhibition opening tonight(!!!), I just knew that it would be brilliant too. Wearable Art is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Subscribe It’s called Punk Politics/Camp Costuming1, and it’s up through May 10 at La Sudestada, the wonderful gallery and concept store in Greenpoint, Brooklyn. I asked the exhibit’s lead curator, Ella Birney (a talented costume and knitwear designer from Belfast who also happens to be in my class), all about it. This conversation has been edited for length and clarity. Tell me about the idea of this exhibition and how it came about. Ella Birney: For our Fashion Curation class, we had to pitch [exhibition] proposals to our professor, Jessica [Glasscock], and I really wanted to continue on the themes that I was exploring in my BA when I was studying in London a couple of years ago. My BA was very punk-inspired and very political. Everything I do, as you know from my writing, always has a slight Irish, political twist to it2. So in my BA project, it was looking at knitwear as a conveyor for exploring political identity in somewhere like Ireland, where identity is such a point of contention. And looking at the images that I generated from that project, there was something so camp about the whole thing. Like, it’s so playful and in bad taste to do a political message — like a knitted Union Jack — out of mohair. There’s something very camp about that. So that’s where it kind of became punk politics/camp costuming — looking at how from the 1970s to now there’s been protest through costume and clothing. What was your BA in? It was fashion textiles, knitwear. Very craft heavy, which — craft is never taken seriously either. That’s also a kind of spin [on the punk/camp thing]. The Union Jack knit that you made is included in the show — what is camp about knitting a Union Jack out of mohair? The whole ethos of camp is kind of bad taste, doing things that are tongue in cheek and a bit wink, wink, nudge, nudge. Like, this is a bit silly. Everything I do is like, this is a bit silly. Like, being from the North of Ireland, everything you do is political. So it’s like, everything is going to be looked at in a certain lens anyway, so we may as well lean into it. So the Union Jack was because I come from a mixed marriage — Protestant-Catholic. And in the North of Ireland, that’s still a big deal. And even though I’m a Catholic and brought up in a very like Catholic Nationalist family, there [were] Union Jacks [the symbol of the United Kingdom] on my street. So I was like, then I’m gonna make your Union Jack out of knitwear. And then that kind of all linked back to the punk movement that Vivian Westwood forefronted in the late 70s, [with her stores] Let It Rock and Seditionaries. How did you source your items? Once we decided on this exhibition idea, everyone in the class was put to [think about] what do you think can fit into punk politics/camp costuming and finding designers that fit that brief. Me and my co-curators, Dulcinea Flores and Allison Gramando, made a brief to send out — with a mood board and color stories, stuff like that — and then everyone kind of got to work emailing people. We reached out to other Parsons grads. Even through Instagram stories we’ve been able to reach so many people who were like, Yeah, of course, I’ll write something for this, or Please — let me submit stuff. It actually was quite easy sourcing things. … The Parsons thing gets you quite far. What were some great pieces you got? There’s a Brooklyn-based, nonbinary artist called Buzz Slutsky. I can’t even remember how I found them, but I came across this crazy, shoe thing — they had made all these different shoes out of papier-mâché, and the story behind them is so fantastic, so interesting. They were just so obliging, like, Of course, you can have these for a few weeks. I was really happy about that. And then we have art from a collective here called Art Comes First. And they lent loads of really amazing pieces that just tied everything together. You have your Union Jack knit in the show too. Any other pieces that you made? There’s three of my BA mohair knits. There’s the Union Jack. There’s a mohair with the word “No” — which is based on an old political campaign in Ireland that was “Ulster says no to sodomy.” And then there’s another one that is red, white and blue, like the Union Jack, but has the word “Catholic” on it and lots of holy medals. I’m so happy I got to include those. How many pieces are in the show? Between 49 and 52, something like that. A load of clothing and accessories, shoes. There’s a Brooklyn-based Irish photographer who’s given us photos. There’s also a shopping cart that is an art piece by Art Comes First that has gold knuckle dusters as the handles. There’s also lots of T-shirts, original pins from the 70s and 80s that were from people’s dads. I also brought my record player, and all of [co-curator] Allison’s dad’s original albums so everyone could play records. Oh my gosh! Yeah, it’s cool. Anything else you would like to add? If we get to do an exhibition, why would we not make it political in this day and age? I hope that people come. There’s a lot of history, because it starts back in the 70s. It’s not like chronological or anything, but there are historical objects. I hope people come out of it thinking, out of all the really horrendous decades of the 70s and 80s and 90s, all these amazing subcultures happened. There are horrible political times, but there’s art that comes out of it that lasts. Punk Politics/Camp Costume is on view May 1-10 at La Sudestada, 67 West St. Suite 513, Greenpoint, Brooklyn. RSVP for the opening Friday May 1 6pm-8pm here. There’s also a button-making and patch-making workshop and artist talk May 9. Follow the show’s Instagram page @punkxcamp.parsons. Special shout out to all the students who put on this show: Ella Birney (lead curator), Dulcinea Flores (curator), Allison Gramando (curator), Pierre Sanon (lead exhibition designer), Eliana Daneshvari (exhibition designer), Reilly Lowell (editor), Jess Gayo (researcher/writer), Joyce Gayo (researcher/writer), Maria Magdalena Ugarte Montero (researcher/writer), Cassidy Colarik (exhibition press officer), Shelby Shovein (educator), Sarah Mahnke-Baum (educator), Trinidy Coleman (graphic designer), and Leonie Soravia (project manager). Jessica Glasscock was the faculty advisor. 1 The website is definitely worth checking out. 2 This is true!
Today’s Papers: Forza Calcio, Malagò progress, Gervasoni deposition
La Gazzetta dello SportOnly Milan Modric has decidedDoesn’t want to finish on an injury, another year in Rossonero to play in the Champions League with Allegri, or it’s goodbye to footballThe Scu...
Thoughts on partisan politics, primaries and what matters
Recently, we learned that Hickman County was spending $30,000 on the primary election coming up next week, but Crystal Fitzgerald, county finance director, shared some good news as well. Tennessee lawmakers decided to reimburse counties that chose to hold primary elections. Good idea, but how about we not even run the increasingly needless exercise in
Fine chandeliers are a specialty for New Orleans business | Home/Garden
Michael Melesurgo and Ricardo “Rico” Mencia purchased Classic Chandelier from the business’s founder, Peter Sather, in 2023, when he decided to retire. The business partners rebranded the company as Vintage Chandelier and relocated it to 455 Philip St. in the Irish Channel in December 2025.The company offers a variety of services including cleaning, moving, restoration, installation, pick-up, delivery and general maintenance of light fixtures, with a specialty in fine antique chandeliers.Additional specialties include the installation and restoration of mirrors and artwork, with pick-up and delivery included. googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('fixed-breakout-mobile-1'); }); googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('fixed-breakout-tablet-1'); }); “We mainly focus on older fixtures, but we have also worked on newer ones, especially with installation,” Melesurgo said. “We aim to be able to work on almost anything within reason. But chandeliers are the meat and potatoes of the business.” googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('fixed-sticky-rail-1'); }); googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('fixed-breakout-desktop-1'); }); The team at Vintage Chandelier has worked on some of the best-known chandeliers in New Orleans, at hotels including the Ritz-Carlton and the Hyatt Regency, the Milton H. Latter Memorial branch of the New Orleans Public Library and several prominent homes.Inside Out sat down with the duo to discuss the identification and care of fine chandeliers. googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('fixed-breakout-mobile-2'); }); googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('fixed-breakout-tablet-2'); }); What are some of the hallmarks of a fine chandelier?Melesurgo: Some of the finer points of elegant chandeliers are pristine crystal, clean craftsmanship, original pieces and parts and stamped pieces to ensure authenticity. Everything should be clean and working.How should you clean a fine chandelier?Melesurgo: The material in question determines the methodology for cleaning. Crystal chandeliers should be cleaned by hand, crystal by crystal, to ensure the best outcome, and to avoid deterioration of metal wiring typically used in connecting pieces together. Spraying cleaners can, over time, sit on the metal and end up rusting connections that compromise the connections. googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('fixed-breakout-mobile-3'); }); googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('fixed-breakout-tablet-3'); }); googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('fixed-sticky-rail-2'); }); googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('fixed-breakout-desktop-2'); }); What in your backgrounds led you to this business?Melesurgo: I have an electrical background. I started as an electrical apprentice in the local union (IBEW 130) in 2005. Then Katrina hit. I ended up going back to school and getting a degree in Hotel, Restaurant and Tourism and graduating in 2011. I started working for Peter (Sather) at Classic Chandelier & Mirror in 2012, which was supposed to only be temporary, but I ended up staying for a lot longer. I have always enjoyed working with my hands and being creative. This allows me to be creative and keep a lot of beautiful history alive. googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('fixed-breakout-mobile-4'); }); googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('fixed-breakout-tablet-4'); }); Rico, you worked as a draftsman alongside an engineer at YKM Consulting. googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('fixed-sticky-rail-3'); }); googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('fixed-breakout-desktop-3'); }); Mencia: The job was interesting, especially working on the Ochsner expansion, but staring at two monitors all day became unbearable. I went to work for Peter (Sather), which opened a new world to antiques and chandeliers that I find fascinating. Vintage Chandelier, 455 Philip St., (504) 309-8983, @vintagechandelier.504 on Instagram googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('fixed-sticky-rail-4'); });
Salt shaker test: The Stetson poll is the real deal — but read the fine print
The real story is in the independent numbers — a large undecided bloc that neither party has locked up.