I AM AN ATHEIST. If you are a scientist you are implicitly an atheist. Anyone that claims to be a scientist and at the same time believes in any religion is either a fraud, a criminal, or a mental retard.

Richard Dawkins on Elder with Andrew Denton






Richard Dawkins is the essence of scientific reason, an evolutionary biologist, a best-selling author, and strident atheist. He's been declared one of the most influential - and provocative - thinkers of our time. He's our guest in the last episode of this series of Elders.
RICHARD DAWKINS: I'm a scientist. I believe there is a profound contradiction between science and religious belief. There is no well demonstrated reason to believe in God and I think the idea of a divine creator belittles the elegant reality of the universe.
[Reading] Everything Darwin said is wrong and evolution has never been proven and nothing is evolving now the bible is the best book ...(deep breath!)
The time has come for people of reason to say enough is enough.
ANDREW DENTON V/O: Richard Dawkins is the essence of scientific reason. An evolutionary biologist. A best-selling author. And, strident atheist. He's been declared one of the most influential - and provocative - thinkers of our time.
ANDREW DENTON: Richard, thanks very much for inviting us to your house. You've described being moved to tears by the natural world. When has that happened? Why does it move you to tears?
RICHARD DAWKINS: I think we are social animals. We have deep emotions, we have the emotions of empathy and sympathy and sadness and love and happiness and I think it's part of being human, part of being a social animal to have these intense emotions and I don't find it that surprising to be moved by the natural world. But that includes things like looking up at the Milky Way and looking up at the sheer number of stars, being overwhelmed by the scale of the universe. And that to me gives a sort of overwhelming feeling of being, it's a feeling of exultation in that case.
ANDREW DENTON: You've described science rather beautifully actually as the poetry of reality. Where is the poetry in science?
RICHARD DAWKINS: Science is opening your eyes to the wonderfulness of what's there. It's, it's as though you've got tiny little, I've used the analogy of a burka, you know those dreadful ghastly black tents that Muslims wear, and you've got this tiny slit, rip open the burka. That's what science does, and the light floods in, and that's poetry. The poetry of the expanding universe, the poetry of geological time, the poetry of the deep complexity of life, all these things, which we're not normally equipped to understand and the science gives it to us.
ANDREW DENTON V/O: Richard was born Africa, in 1941. It was an environment that helped trigger his lifelong passion for nature.
ANDREW DENTON: You spent your early childhood in Kenya. When you go back to Africa, what response does that stir in you?
RICHARD DAWKINS: The smells, the sights of Africa, the sounds of Africa. They are immensely evocative. Whether it's just the evocativeness of childhood itself, I think perhaps everybody looks back to their childhood, especially if it was a happy childhood, with the same kind of sense of heightened awareness. I've never actually taken an hallucinogenic drug, but I've read accounts by Aldous Huxley and others of somehow everything you look at has a sort of enhanced... you're looking at with enhanced perception and my memory of childhood is that that's what it was like, that there's a sort of Garden of Eden feeling about it.
ANDREW DENTON: You talk about your childhood feeling heightened. I'm interested, you have such rigour in the way you think and such a fierce logic in the way you've approached your work. What shaped you as a child? What shaped that drive?
RICHARD DAWKINS: Gosh, I don't know. I mean heredity and environment. I suppose my parents are both interested in living things, in biology. My father read botany at Oxford and was a much better naturalist than I ever was and my mother too, was a better naturalist than I ever was. My father must have instilled in me a kind of scientific way of thinking. I had a happy, fulfilled childhood with plenty of things going on, plenty of opportunity to question and discuss and talk, seeing different parts of the world. I suppose that arouses one's curiosity.
ANDREW DENTON V/O: As a child Richard was quite devout; the idea of a 'Designer' of the natural world captured his imagination. But, in his teenage years he began to doubt the existence of God.
The complexity of life and the universe seemed better explained by Darwin's theory of evolution. In his thirties, he published his first best-seller, The Selfish Gene. He argued that we living things are mere survival machines, designed to allow genes to replicate. It was an idea that made him famous. Today, thirty years, nine books and several TV series later, he unabashedly pits logic and science, against faith and God.
ANDREW DENTON: Your friend the late Douglas Adams, laughingly quoted you once, saying your words, "I wouldn't say I was arrogant, but I find it hard to be patient with those who don't share my humility in the face of facts."
RICHARD DAWKINS: [Laughter] ... That sounds better than me. I think that's Douglas himself probably.
ANDREW DENTON: He was very good at that. When you face people who in your view are ignorant or who are superstitious, how have you dealt with your anger?
RICHARD DAWKINS: I'm virtually never angry with somebody who's honestly seeking after truth. I mean if somebody is ignorant, well that's no crime. If somebody's stupid, that's no crime. But I think, if I find somebody who is a charlatan, who is actually a fake, who is actually pretending to be something that he isn't and is particularly bamboozling young people, I think that's probably what makes me angry and when you ask how I deal with this, I probably don't very well.
ANDREW DENTON: I'm just reminded of that encounter with Ted Haggett in the "Root of all Evil"...
RICHARD DAWKINS: Oh yeah...
ANDREW DENTON: Where you were clearly angry. You could see you were flushed...
RICHARD DAWKINS: Yeah, I well I got a bit angry then, but I mean I kept control. I didn't lose it.
[FOOTAGE]
Ted Haggett: You do understand that this Issue right here of intellectual arrogance is the reason why people like you have a difficult problem with people of faith. I don't communicate an air of superiority over the people because I know so much more, and if you only read the books I know and if you only know the scientists I knew, then you would be great like me. Well. Sir, there could be many things you know well, there are other things that you don't know well but as you age you will find yourself wrong on some things, right on some other things .... But please, in the process of it, please, don't be arrogant.
ANDREW DENTON: When do you think a belief is important?
RICHARD DAWKINS: Belief in what?
ANDREW DENTON: Belief in whatever it is an individual believes in, belief as a driving force.
RICHARD DAWKINS: Well, belief I suppose is a strong conviction that something is the case based upon evidence. It better be based upon evidence or it doesn't deserve the title of belief I think.
ANDREW DENTON: Is evidence always necessary? Do we need to understand why a piece of music, for example, moves us to accept that it does?
RICHARD DAWKINS: You don't need to understand why it does but it clearly does. I mean the evidence for that is the evidence of what you. I mean you actually do feel moved by it, you actually feel moved to tears, indeed I could be moved to tears by music and that to me is evidence for the belief that I'm moved by music. I don't have to understand what's actually going on in the nervous system in order for that to happen.
ANDREW DENTON: Is it possible to explain love?
RICHARD DAWKINS: I think it in principle can be explained but I don't actually have the internal wherewithal to explain it. I just experience it.
ANDREW DENTON: Of course if somebody says to you well, I have a love of a God, I don't need to explain it, that, that is my belief. How does your logical brain respond to that?
RICHARD DAWKINS: Well, I think what you're getting at is that even if God doesn't exist the person has an experience an internal experience, which feels to them as real as my love for another human being or a dog, and I don't doubt that the experience that they feel is real to them in the same way as my experience of loving a, a person is, is real. The thing that they love doesn't exist, but that doesn't stop them loving it. I mean in, in a sense you could say it's a hallucination, but it will feel very real to them.
ANDREW DENTON: For many people, God is what gives their life meaning. What gives your life meaning?
RICHARD DAWKINS: Well when they say that God gives their life meaning, I wonder what that really means. I mean they've got an imaginary friend which I guess might be nice for them. In some cases they're just using the word God as another name for that which gives their life meaning. Most people- meaning's rather a grand name for what we're talking about- I don't mind using a grand word like meaning for science, I mean that does give my life meaning, my work.
ANDREW DENTON: What's your definition of success?
RICHARD DAWKINS: ...Oh dear, I don't really answer that kind of question...
ANDREW DENTON: Why not?
RICHARD DAWKINS: ...I'm just trying, well, because I just think of it as a dictionary word, which has a dictionary definition and you can go and look it up. I don't have a personal...
ANDREW DENTON: Well, you don't have a marker in your life for what would be achievement?
RICHARD DAWKINS: No, it's cause it's either you just give a dictionary definition or it becomes very complicated and personal. No, I don't really think I've got a got a good answer to that.
ANDREW DENTON: At Douglas's funeral, Douglas Adams' funeral you read a eulogy in which you said one of his chief charms was his ability to laugh at himself.
RICHARD DAWKINS: Yes.
ANDREW DENTON: When do you laugh at yourself?
RICHARD DAWKINS: ...Are all the questions going to be like this?
ANDREW DENTON: Not all... do you find these very difficult?
RICHARD DAWKINS: Yes.
ANDREW DENTON: Well, why is that?
RICHARD DAWKINS: Um ... because they're about me, I suppose.
ANDREW DENTON: Some of the questions are about you and some are about your observation of other people.
RICHARD DAWKINS: Yes...
ANDREW DENTON: If you like I can come back to that and we can talk more generally.
RICHARD DAWKINS: I might. I mean...I might laugh quite a lot and I'm sure I laugh at myself a lot, but I'm not sure I can think of particular examples.
ANDREW DENTON: I don't wish to make you uncomfortable, so why don't we park that and come back to it.
ANDREW DENTON V/O: Richard lives in Oxford, with his third wife Lalla Ward. An actress, beloved of Dr Who fans, Lalla now illustrates and narrates Richard's books. Richard has one daughter from a previous marriage, Juliet.
ANDREW DENTON: You wrote a letter which has been published to your daughter, Juliet, when she was ten. Can you tell me about that?
RICHARD DAWKINS: Yes, it is an attempt to encourage her to ask questions and think for herself. It begins by saying, how do we know the things that we know? And so it's a kind of hymn to evidence, it's kind of trying to encourage this ten year child to always look for the evidence for anything that you're asked to believe. And it specifically singles out for scepticism, things like tradition, authority, and revelation, which are not ways of knowing anything. Evidence is the way you know anything that you know, and I tried to put into language that a ten year old might understand- how we get evidence, and how we evaluate it.
ANDREW DENTON: It was a beautifully written but a complex letter for a ten year old. I assume you've talked it through with Juliet over the years?
RICHARD DAWKINS: Not much actually, no. I mean at that time she was living with her mother from whom I was divorced. Her mother has since died and so she then did come to live with us. We get on very well, we have a very good relationship. But we don't really talk about those things very much. I dedicated the book to her when- on her eighteenth birthday, when the book in which it was reprinted, "A Devil's Chaplain", so that was a kind of nice- in a way closure of that particular episode.
ANDREW DENTON: I'm guessing that the Tooth Fairy didn't have a very long life in your family.
RICHARD DAWKINS: Well no, I mean all that kind of thing you know, the Tooth Fairy and Father Christmas, we went along without all of that.
ANDREW DENTON: I think my son was ten when we told him there wasn't Santa and I can still see his tears squirting across the room.
RICHARD DAWKINS: Seriously?
ANDREW DENTON: Yes, well I'm not sure if it was about the presents or about Santa, but ...
RICHARD DAWKINS: ... Um yeah, um well that's rather a sad story. I think most children kind of guess don't they, before they're told. It is a puzzle to me why children virtually all accept that they've been mislead, actually lied to, by their parents about Father Christmas and about the Tooth Fairy. And yet it doesn't tumble to them that maybe the same thing applies to God. I do wonder sometimes whether magical fiction- where you have spells and princes turning into frogs and things like that- whether that actually might have a pernicious effect upon the child mind.
ANDREW DENTON: In what way?
RICHARD DAWKINS: By giving the child the idea that anything goes, that there's no discipline to reality. I'm only kind of asking the question. Is it possible that teaching children about fairies with magic wands and sleeping beauties and frogs turning into princes, that that actually does set up a kind of counter reality view of the world, which might pre-dispose them to religion, which is also magical in the same sense, but also might undermine the tendency to a sceptical take on reality, which I think is important, and actually wonderful. Because the world, the real world, the real universe is wonderful. You don't need the cheap and tawdry magic of frogs turning into princes, you've got a much better magical in a better sense- reality out there.
ANDREW DENTON: Are perhaps, fairy tales for example, speaking to that part of the human consciousness which is absolutely not rooted in reality, which is imagination and our desire to feed imagination and to play ...
RICHARD DAWKINS: ... Well that's a good point but I mean imagination is enormously important and in science as much as anything else, and scientific theory, scientific hypothesis depend upon imagination dreaming up imaginative ideas.
ANDREW DENTON: So look at someone like Salvador Dali and his vaulting imagination, isn't the flipside of fairy stories and things like that, isn't that appealing to our sense of wonder, our playfulness with the universe?
RICHARD DAWKINS: Dali isn't actually saying that there are objects that assume these surreal qualities that he paints. So he's boring into our subconscious and stimulating our minds to think in imaginative ways. He's not actually lying to children about the way reality is. Saying that frogs turn into princes is a lie. It's not just because it hasn't ever happened. It couldn't ever happen. It would violate a deep, deep scientific principle for anything like that to happen. I think there might be better ways of stimulating the imagination. I mean we've got dinosaurs, we've got the universe, we've got the whole world of nature. Don't you think a child could have its imagination stimulated by these unfamiliar and yet wonderful, magically wonderful in the good sense of magically, aspects of reality?
ANDREW DENTON: After 68 years of looking at human beings are you optimistic for the future of humanity?
RICHARD DAWKINS: At an intellectual level, I'm not entirely optimistic...
ANDREW DENTON: Why?
RICHARD DAWKINS: Well I take note of the crises that are upon us – global warming – I mean they're familiar enough, the technology to do terribly destructive things is becoming cheaper and easier and there are all sorts of reasons to be pessimistic intellectually. Emotionally, I'm not an emotional pessimist, I don't sort of fret all night about the future of the world, like some people do.
ANDREW DENTON: In your gut do you feel good about human beings?
RICHARD DAWKINS: Yeah, I'm optimistic about the goodwill, the pleasantness, the niceness, the kindness of most people. Most people don't like to see suffering; most people will feel sympathy for somebody who is suffering and try to bring it to an end.
ANDREW DENTON: What's your moral code?
RICHARD DAWKINS: I suppose it's a version of the Golden Rule, don't do unto others what you wouldn't wish them to do to you. I do feel intense vicarious sadness when I encounter sadness in others. It doesn't have to be in my own species, I mean it could be of another species as well. My moral code is definitely nothing to do with the sort of busy-bodyish religious moral code that cares about what people do in private. What they do with their sex organs and things like that, seems to me to be an utterly private matter, nothing to do with morals. I despise that kind of alleged morality, deeply despise it.
ANDREW DENTON: And how do you deal with that sense of despising something?
RICHARD DAWKINS: What can I do right about it? Speak about it, my weapons are words.
ANDREW DENTON: What would you like to live long enough to know the answer to?
RICHARD DAWKINS: I'm not a physicist but physicists talk about a theory of everything, talk about understanding those corners of physics, of the universe, of the cosmos, which we still don't yet have a grasp of. And it's not impossible that that will come in the next few decades, even in the next couple of years perhaps.
ANDREW DENTON: That concept to me is my small brain is starting to explode thinking about that...
RICHARD DAWKINS: Well me too, yes, I mean I agree with that, and I'm pretty pessimistic that I would personally understand the theory of everything. I don't know enough physics or mathematics to do that, but I think if the theory of everything said, we now understand where the laws of physics come from, where the physical constants come from, why there is a universe at all, how it started, if indeed "started" means anything. I think physicists are not far from that now and it may just need one more little push and they might they might be there.
ANDREW DENTON: That question of starting, the ultimate question. Does it not, it does me, does it not drive you mad trying to think of that, whatever the original thing was ...
RICHARD DAWKINS: ... Well yes it does ... yeah it does...
ANDREW DENTON: ...and what it formed from.
RICHARD DAWKINS: I mean physicists, many of them will say that you're not allowed to ask the question, what was there before the Big Bang. And I can't deal with that.
ANDREW DENTON: But you say you can't deal with that but you have to accept it?
RICHARD DAWKINS: I think I'm humble enough to feel well what I can't deal with doesn't necessarily mean that it's undealable with. I'm coming perilously close to a sort of faith position where I'm saying, I've got faith in, well in an immediate proximal sense, in other scientists that they understand it. I'm fully aware that I can't understand some things that other scientists can. And so there's a kind of element of faith. But it's a faith that's borne out by the experience of what works.
ANDREW DENTON: What do you believe in that you can't prove?
RICHARD DAWKINS: If there is life on other planets, (this is something I've written about quite often), then I believe that it will turn out to be Darwinian life in the sense that it's based upon some version of Darwinian natural selection. I can't prove it in the sense that I can't see life on other planets- but I can make it plausible by setting out an argument based partly upon, it's not really based upon life on this planet, but almost based upon logic actually. But it's not something I can prove.
ANDREW DENTON: Where this show started was actually that T.S. Eliot quote, "Where is the wisdom we've lost in knowledge? Where is the knowledge we've lost in information?" which to me suggested that there is an innate or core knowledge learnt from experience, which isn't necessarily something that's gained from books. it's from observation and from having lived life. How would you define wisdom?
RICHARD DAWKINS: Uh I don't do... let's not have any definitions.
ANDREW DENTON: Oh no definitions, okay.
RICHARD DAWKINS: There's a perfectly good dictionary on the shelf. You can go and look it up.
ANDREW DENTON: Well, I guess the operative word there was "you"...?
RICHARD DAWKINS: But I'm not going to get into the business of defining words that already have dictionary definitions.
ANDREW DENTON: I will not ask you for another definition.
RICHARD DAWKINS: Ok
ANDREW DENTON: I promise. You present always as, as very confident and very clear in your arguments. When you do you doubt yourself?
RICHARD DAWKINS: (laughs) When people ask me how I define words that I have no particular specialised knowledge of. I doubt myself sufficiently to decline to answer the question.
ANDREW DENTON: Was that doubt or is that dismissal?
RICHARD DAWKINS: No, it's doubt.
ANDREW DENTON: Really?
RICHARD DAWKINS: I have nothing to add to the dictionary definition of a word like wisdom...
ANDREW DENTON: It's interesting though because, and again I really am not trying to trap you here, as I said the operative word was "you". What I'm interested in is what you draw from it, but your way of responding to that is to say, no, you're after a dictionary definition.
RICHARD DAWKINS: Okay, well, I doubt myself enough to feel that that why should anybody be interested in... I mean I should expect people perhaps to be interested in what I can tell them about evolution, which I've spent a lifetime talking about, but I don't feel I've got anything very wise, I suppose, to say about wisdom.
ANDREW DENTON: What do you see when you look in the mirror?
RICHARD DAWKINS: [Pause] Ah...I don't have an interesting answer to that. I mean I see myself. No, cut that one. I guess I've probably dodged all the questions that you've been told to put to everybody.
ANDREW DENTON: No, not that I've been told, that I've chosen to. No, not all of them, but many, yes. Most of the personal ones. But that is your choice.
RICHARD DAWKINS: My choice is that I don't think people should be interested in me, but I hope I may have something interesting to say about the world.
ANDREW DENTON: Indeed you do, and I guess it's that, as I said when I first met you, that rigour, the way you have so rigorously approached the way you've examined the world, that does make you interesting.
RICHARD DAWKINS: Well that's nice, I'm glad you think that. But perhaps let it stand at that rather than ask me to say it myself and to define anything about myself.
ANDREW DENTON: I do have one final question, having read some of your work, having looked at a lot of your work, I'm curious, what star sign are you?
RICHARD DAWKINS: [Pause] ...You serious?
ANDREW DENTON: No, I just wanted to see your response! [Laughter] And it was worth it! Richard, thank you very much.

Science year in review: 2009

Climate change and it effects dominated the news in 2009 (Source: David Gray/Reuters)
The News in Science team will be taking a break during the Christmas-New Year period, but you can still enjoy the following highlights from 2009.



The highlight for Australian science in 2009 would have to be Dr Elizabeth Blackburn becoming the first Australian-born female scientist to receive a Nobel Prize. Her work in discovering telomeres and their role in ageing saw her receive the Nobel Prize in Medicine with fellow researchers Dr Carol Greider and Dr Jack Szostak.
CSIRO also scored big in 2009 when they reached a settlement with a number of companies regarding the use of its patented Wi-Fi technology. The organisation received more than $200 million in licensing fees and its creator, Dr John O'Sullivan, received the Prime Minister's Science Prize.

Heavens above
As the world celebrated the 400th anniversary of Galileo pointing a telescope to the night sky and 40 years since Neil Armstrong walked on the Moon, the most viewed story in 2009 was about our impending doom: a French study found there is a 1% chance Jupiter will kick start a game of 'planetary snooker' in the next five billion years.
This year astronomers admitted they were baffled as to why the giant red star Betelgeuse is rapidly shrinking, and NASA scientists predicted the current solar minimum to be the quietest in almost 100 years.
The number of planets outside our solar system continued to grow in 2009 and astronomers peered deeper into our universe than ever before.
The European Space Agency successfully launched two space telescopes to look deep into the universe, while NASA deliberately crashed a spacecraft into the Moon and tested its space shuttle replacement, the Ares 1 rocket.
Climate issues
The debate surrounding climate change reached a fever pitch in the lead up to the UN Copenhagen climate conference.
While some studies found the world is warming faster and sea levels are rising quicker than previously predicted, others found it is occurring as predicted and that glaciers and ice cover are actually growing.
Plans to reduce CO2 levels through ocean fertilisation and biochar were brought into question, while experts debated whether governments should implement a carbon tax or cap-and-trade scheme.
Australian researchers identified a strong link between the patterns in the Indian Ocean and reduced rainfall in southeastern Australia, which they believe contributed towards Victoria's Black Saturday bushfires.
Researchers suggested the dust storm that blanketed eastern Australia in September was caused by weather events a year earlier. The dust later caused an explosion of phytoplankton in the Tasman Sea.
Health
This year geneticists identified what might cause autism, motor neurone disease, vaccine memory, brittle bones and even curly hair.
There were a number of studies questioning the use of tests for prostate, breast and cervical cancers, as well as heart disease.
Researchers also found that thunder thighs may be good for the heart, red wine prevents tooth cavities, vitamin C wards off gout and daily sex increases the number of healthy sperm men have.
Animals
Sex in the animal kingdom continues to intrigue researchers ... and readers. This year found that females of a species of Australian lizard roll over to avoid sex, chimpanzees exchange sex for food, being a desirable fruit fly comes at a cost, and male redback spiders that provide inadequate foreplay quickly become dinner.
Scientists revealed that a lack of genetic diversity could be the undoing for three Australian icons - the koala, Tasmanian devil and grey nurse shark.
They also showed being a free-range chicken doesn't guarantee a worry-free existence, the cocker spaniel is the meanest breed of dog, serotonin causes locusts to swarm, a tiny marsupial soaks up the sun like a lizard, and the true colour of the extinct moa using its DNA.
Meanwhile, palaeontologists unearthed three new species of dinosaur in outback Queensland and found the world's earliest 'willy' in Western Australia.
Nano pros and cons
The benefits of nanotechnology featured heavily in the news throughout 2009. They included nanorods for increased data storage and nanotransistors for faster quantum computing, through to gold nanospheres that cook cancer cells and vibrating iron-nickel nanodiscs that cause cancer to self-destruct.
But there were also concerns regarding the use of nanotechnology in bandages and underwear, exposure of workers in 'nanomanufacture' and the ability of nanoparticles to affect cells remotely.
Weird science
During his stay on the International Space Station, Japanese astronaut Koichi Wakata conducted a number of unusual experiments including, flying on a carpet, using eye drops in microgravity and wearing a pair of wash-free underwear for more than a month.
Researchers investigated ways to harness the power of hamsters running in a wheel, trained bacteria to draw on an agar plate, and grew fully-functional artificial penises that allowed dismembered rabbits to once again breed … like rabbits.
From ABC Science's News in Science team have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. We'll be back publishing on 11 January 2010.
ref: http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2009/12/18/2771151.htm

Ten Science Stories That Changed Our Decade

 

There is no doubt that science has become more like science fiction in the past decade, with amazing innovations and discoveries that increased our understanding of the universe. We list ten of the biggest science stories from the past decade.



This was the decade of the first face transplant, the first extinct species brought back from the dead, and printable human tissue; a decade that brought us closer to synthetic life forms and the invisibility cloak. But we've whittled it down to ten of the decade's biggest science stories, with discoveries, advances, and topics that are sure to change our lives in the next ten years.
It's Full of Planets: This was a big decade for planets, and not just because Pluto got a downgrade. In 2005, astronomers discovered Eris, a dwarf planet larger Pluto (as well as smaller dwarf planets Haumea and Makemake). Eris' discovery prompted the International Astronomical Union to actually define the term planet, leading to Pluto's demotion to dwarf planet. But the discovery of Eris after all this time suggests there is still a lot to learn about our solar system.
We also got our first direct look at exoplanets, worlds outside our solar system, thanks to the Hubble Telescope. In 2008, astronomers at the Keck and Gemini captured the first images of planets orbiting distant stars. And the planetary discoveries just keep getting more exciting; just this week, astronomers announced that they had observed a super-Earth that might be made largely of liquid water.

Water, Water Everywhere: The world watched on as the Phoenix Lander dug through the Martian terrain for signs of water on the Red Planet. In the summer of 2008, NASA announced it had found definitive proof of water ice on Mars. More recently, scientists discovered that large deposits of water ice exist beneath the planet's surface. This fall, the moon became the center of our watery attention when astronomers found evidence of water throughout the moon's surface. Although the supervillainous plot to bomb the moon didn't seem as initially impressive as we had hoped, the probe did confirm researchers' suspicions that the moon does, in fact, contain a significant amount of frozen water. These discoveries not only reveal more about our solar system, they indicate that, should humans try to colonize Mars or the moon, there will be resources to make survival a little easier.

Shaking Up the Human Family Tree: Humanity got a new great-great-grandmother (or perhaps she's our great-great-great-aunt) in Ardi, a fossilized hominid skeleton found in Ethiopia. Granted, Ardipithecus ramidus was discovered in 1992, but it wasn't until 2009 that she was revealed as a significant addition to our family tree. Although there's technically no "missing link" because humans didn't evolve from chimpanzees, Ardi is, so far, our closest link to chimps, and brings us closer to the common human-chimp ancestor than ever before. Analysis of Ardi's skeleton and probably anatomy reveals just how unlike either chimps that common ancestor is bound to be. One of the Ardi researchers even quipped that when we find that common ancestor, it might look less like we evolved from a chimp-like creature and more like chimps evolved from creatures more like us.

The Book of Life Recorded: Our understanding of human genetics reached a new milestone with the mapping of the human genome. The Human Genome Project announced a rough draft of the human genome in 2000, followed by a more complete version in 2003; the sequence of the last chromosome was published in 2006. Though the genome hasn't been 100 percent mapped, the Human Genome Project has completed its mapping goals. We still have to interpret the sequences we have recorded, but hopefully as we translate the book of our genetic lives, we will get a better understand of how our genes interact and improve our treatment of genetic diseases. Plus, the project has paved the way for sequencing other critters and plants, and, just this week, the lung cancer and melanoma genomes were sequenced.

Changing Your Genes: The promises of genetic engineering have really begun to bear fruit in the last few years, in ways far beyond Alba, the glowing transgenic bunny that grabbed headlines in 2000. In 1999, an 18-year-old with a, inherited liver disease died during a gene therapy trial, after suffering an unanticipated immune reaction to a viral vector. But in more recent years, gene therapy and genetic engineering have shown their promise. In 2000, scientists reported the first gene therapy success, having provided a patient with severe combine immunodeficiency (commonly known as "Bubble Boy" syndrome), though SCID gene therapy treatments were halted when patients developed leukemia. This year, gene therapy successfully treated children with a congenital form of blindness, giving them the ability to see for the first time in their lives. Meanwhile, genetic engineering experiments on animals have cured color blindness in monkeys, created super-strong monkeys, created drug-producing rats, and enabled animals to pass their altered genes to their offspring.

Stem Cells Grow Up: Embryonic stem cells have been a source of contention for years, but in 2007, Shinya Yamanaka helped sidestep that issue when he found a way to reprogram adult skin cells into induced pluripotent stem cells. Stem cells themselves have continued to aid important medical advances. In 2008, researchers generated motor neurons from elderly patients with ALS, an advance that could help researchers better understand the disease. A newly released study has suggested that a mini stem cell transplant could reverse sickle cell disease, and stem cell research has lead to advances in HIV research and the treatment of heart disease.

Climate Change Takes Center Stage: One of the biggest science stories of the decade has been less about scientific advances than about how the public responds to scientific research. Reports that the glaciers are melting faster than expected, a decade of record warmth, and Al Gore's Nobel Prize have all been part of the conversation on climate change and to what extent humans are responsible.

Commercial Spacecrafts Prepare to Take Flight: Amidst NASA budget cuts, commercial spaceflight has come to the forefront. The Ansari X Prize, first offered in 1996 for the first private enterprise that could fly a three-passenger vehicle 100 kilopmeters into space twice in one week. In 2004, the prize was finally won by Mojave Aerospace Ventures' SpaceShipOne. That same year, Virgin Galactic was founded to further space tourism. The company recently unveiled SpaceShipTwo, the first commercial spacecraft. 2004 also saw the certification of the Mojave Air and Space Port, the first licensed facility for horizontal launches of reusable spacecraft in the US. In anticipation of the spaceflight business, one company claims it's readying a space hotel.
Our Cyborg Present: In the last decade, humans and machines have gotten closer than ever. We have machines that can read our memories, computers that let us type with our brains, and robotic arms controlled by monkey minds. Perhaps the most impressive cyborg advances have come in the last few months, with researchers hooking amputees up to robotic arms that not only respond to electrical signals from the human brain, but also provide tactile feedback.

The LHC Comes Online: The Large Hadron Collider has just begun colliding proton beams, but its construction represents one of the most ambitious scientific undertakings ever. The immense particle accelerator will hopefully give us first-hand observations of aspects of the universe that have been, thus far, the realm of theoretical physics. Despite fears from doomsayers that the LHC would destroy the world and a series of mishaps that led to claims that the device was being sabotaged from the future, the LHC came online this year and quickly got to smashing protons at record-breaking speeds.
最大粒子對撞機創紀錄
(明報)2009年11月30日 星期一 20:05
歐洲核子研究中心宣布,大型強子對撞機內的兩束質子流加速到1.18萬億伏特的能級,創下了新的世界紀錄。
歐洲科學家表示,這是一個重要里程碑,他們明年將做更多實驗,以解開宇宙物質來源的秘密。新紀錄打破了美國    創下的紀錄。


ref : http://io9.com/5430073/ten-science-stories-that-changed-our-decade


Bushbaby & Potto

寫完 Coquerel Sifakas (Lemurs), Tarsiers & Lorises 後, 心思思想睇吓另兩種類 Potto & Galagos 是什麼樣子的, 於是由上網找資料了.

Bushbaby (Galagos) :
bush_baby bushbaby

Hahahahhhhhhhhhh!!!!! just 攪吓笑吧了.... 哈哈哈!!!



43f0ac5db4aa8 3798_file_bushbaby_balfour[1]-730248 bushbaby1 bushbaby2
bushbaby%20with%20permission%201 bushbabyDM3011_468x458






bush baby name for several small, active nocturnal primates of the loris family, found in forested parts of Africa. Bush babies, also called galagos, form the subfamily Galaginae. The smallest are about 1 ft (30 cm) long, including the long, furry tail. All have fluffy fur, small pointed faces with large eyes, and naked, highly mobile ears. The very large eyes are adapted for nocturnal vision and their pupils contract so as to be almost invisible. The long hind legs are specialized for jumping; the fingers and toes are long and slender, with fleshy terminal pads; and the thumb and big toe are opposable. Extremely swift and agile, bush babies leap like squirrels from branch to branch and hop on their hind legs on the ground. They feed on gums, insects, fruit, and vegetable matter. Senegal bush babies ( Galago senegalensis ) are familiar as pets. They are gregarious and spend much time grooming each other with their front teeth. Bush babies are classified in the phylum Chordata , subphylum Vertebrata, class Mammalia, order Primates, family Lorisidae.

Potto :
6a010535647bf3970b010536232c03970c-800wi PottoCincyZoo



Perodicticus Potto

The potto is a mammal of the primate order and the prosimian suborder.
Physical Characteristics
The potto is 12 to 16 inches with a 1 1/2 to 6 inch tail. It weighs 1 3/4 to 3 /14 pounds. Its joints are very mobile and allow it to reach out at any angle to grasp branches. It has fur that may be gray, brown, or red. Its ears and eyes are small. Its body is slender and long.

Behavioral Characteristics
The potto is nocturnal, sleeping during the day. It is arboreal, living among the trees and is a careful but skilled climber. In order to escape the attention of predators, the potto has the ability to stay completely still for hours. If it is attacked, it tucks its head down and batters its attacker with a "shield" of horny skin that covers the spiny bones on the potto's upper back. Its slow movements, coloration, small size, use of little vocalization and the its nocturnal habits all also help protect the potto from predation.
Life Cycle
The potto's breeding season is yearlong; however, it usually occurs at such a time that the births will take place when fruit is most bountiful. Also, the breeding only occurs once per year. The gestation or pregnancy of the female potto lasts around 200 days. The one young suckles the mother's teats for 120 to 180 days or 4 to 5 months. The young potto becomes independent between 6 and 8 months. Both males and females become sexually mature at about 18 months old. The maximum lifespan of the potto is over 25 years.
Diet
The potto's diet consists of fruits, sap, gum and small animals. They eat more fruit then anything else in their diet. Species that have a fruit diet are often referred to as being frugivorous.
The potto is sometimes part of the diet of the African palm civet. However the African palm civet, like the potto is usually mostly frugivorous.
Habitat
The potto is located in western and central Africa. It lives in habitats of thick rainforest. It requires trees in order to survive.

The end.

Pygmy Slow Loris:

 

續上篇 Tarsiers……….

在 Prosimians 下 的 Coquerel Sifakas ( Lemurs), Tarsiers  同Lorises 是我暫時覺得最可愛的, 所以要來紀錄一下:

Pygmy Slow Loris:

180px-Slow_Loris_Female 0745NpX5A2_1 two pygmy infants 2928 and 2929 on branch1-1 Infant-pygmy-loris-clinging-to-branch

 

 

 

Juvenile-pygmy-loris-reaching-down Pygmy-loris- Pygmy-loris-showing-eyeshine pygmyslowloris Pygslowloris thumb_reproduction

 
 
 
Key Facts

Adult Size : 0.8 - 1.0 pounds

Natural Range : Vietnam, Laos, and parts of Cambodia

Social life : Solitary nocturnal forager

Habitat : Secondary forests, formally in primary rainforests

Diet : Fruits, other vegetation, and occasional small mammals and birds

Lifespan : 20 years, observed in captivity

Sexual maturity : females 9 months, males 17 - 20 months

Mating : Once every 12 - 18 months

Gestation : 188 days

Number of young : 1 - 2 offspring every 1 - 1 ½ years

DLC Naming theme : Insect names (Grasshopper and Skimmer.)

Interesting Facts
  • Pygmy lorises sleep rolled up in a ball with their head between their legs.
  • Pygmy lorises often hang upside-down from branches by their feet so they can use both hands to eat.
  • The native habitat of pygmy lorises was devastated during the Vietnam War. They are the most endangered of the non-lemur prosimians.
  • Pygmy lorises are often sold in the markets in Vietnam.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pygmy_Slow_Loris

The End. ……..

Tarsiers


續上篇 Coquerel sifaka
在 Prosimians 下 的 Coquerel Sifakas ( Lemurs), Tarsiers  同Lorises 是我暫時覺得最可愛的, 所以要來紀錄一下:

Tarsiers:
bohol_tarsier tarsier



tarsier1 tarsier11 tarsier_worlds_smallest_monkey tarsier-brothers
tarsius_tarsier_tandurusa_zoo





tarsier , small, nocturnal, forest-dwelling prosimian primate , genus Tarsius.
There are at least three species found in the Philippines, in Sumatra and Borneo, and in Sulawesi.
Tarsiers are about 6 in. (15 cm) long with a 10 in. (25 cm) hairless tail, and weigh about 4.5 oz (130 g).
The body is covered with dense brown fur. Enormous round eyes are set close together in a flat face.
Tarsiers' legs are specialized for climbing and jumping and end in long, thin digits bearing adhesive pads.
They feed on insects and reptiles.
They are believed to mate for life and to form family groups.
Tarsiers are classified in the phylum Chordata , subphylum Vertebrata, class Mammalia, order Primates, family Tarsiidae.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarsier

to be contiued……….

Coquerel sifaka

看完 The link : Uncovering the earliest our acestor,  使我對Lemur 發生勁大興趣,  上網看了一下資料. 
我們的 Evolution tree 原來是這樣的:

primate_tree



在 Prosimians 下 的 Coquerel Sifakas ( Lemurs), Tarsiers  同Lorises 是我暫時覺得最可愛的, 所以要來紀錄一下:
Coquerel Sifakas ( Lemurs) :
414044907_b3519c36a0_o Coquerels-Sifaka-4827
Coquerels-Sifaka-5753 dancing-sifaka-madagascar lemurs-live-in-madagascar-4



 
 
 
Key Facts
Adult Size : 7.3 - 9.9 pounds
Social life : Sociable, small family groups of 3 - 10 animals of varying ages
Habitat : northwestern dry deciduous forest
Diet : young leaves, flowers, fruit, bark and dead wood in the wet season, mature leaves and buds in the dry season
Lifespan : 25 - 30 years
Sexual maturity : 2 - 3 years
Mating : very seasonal, January - February in the wild
Gestation : approximately 162 days, infants are born between June and July in the wild
Number of young : one per year
DLC Naming theme : Roman Emperors (Julian, Marcella, Nigel, etc.)
Malagasy names : Tsibahaka, Sifaka, Ankomba Malandy
Interesting Facts
  • The Malagasy name 'sifaka' comes from the distinct call this animal makes: "shif - auk".
  • The DLC houses the only breeding colony of Coquerel's sifaka.
  • Our very own Jovian, a young male Coquerel's sifaka, is the star of the children's television show, Zoboomafoo.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coquerel's_Sifaka

to be continued………………………………

The link: Uncovering Our Earliest Ancestor? –5

Laser scanners combined with a computerized photographic model produce a digital code of her body, which once processed creates an accurately 3D model.
1 



Ida is a warm blood creature covered with thick fur, she is just under one meter long including her tail, which she used for balance as she scampered on all fours along the rain forest canopy, her opposable thumbs and toes gripped the branches.
2

Ida is probably activity at night, like us, her two large forward facing eyes gave her excellence stereoscopic vision.
3


How significant is she to our understanding of our evolution?  Does she belong on the evolutionary branch that leads to us???


The Eocene period in which she lived was a crucial time in the history life, without the developments that happened we will not exists now.

At some point during this new dawn, the primates split into two major groups.
The Prosimians (the non human branch) which still survive today, mainly as a modern lemurs.
The other branch the Antropoides has developed into monkeys, apes and ultimately us - humans.

4new

The advantage of having a skeleton that is so completed, hopefully will let us make the connection to what came later.   In the sense, studying primate evolution is all about looking at the diversity living today and tracing that back through time.  What we are interested here to see is how apes & monkeys traced back, how lemurs traced back and which of these or all of them can we find in the Eocene.
  6


The first guess of cause, because of the other specimen that were found in the Messel locality, of course is to say that this is a primitive lemur.
7


Most lemurs are of the size of monkeys, they have similar habits and life styles, but they are evolutionary side branch, they hardly changed fundamentally in 47 million years.


Prosimians species : Lemurs, Tarsiers, Loris, Galagos, & Pottos



Lemurs : Coquerels sifaka

5

6

Ring-tailed lemur
7

8

Lemurs second digit has a long grooming claw, on the hind foot.
9

Lemurs are using this for groom their fur.
10

Checking their teeth
11

Their front teeth in the lower jaw are a tooth comb.
12
 8


Ida does not have a tooth comb and no grooming claw, she only has nails like humans.  Ida does not belonging to the lemurs.
13

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKCa6u66jKc



to be continued…………………..

TML'/