New Scientist - always fascinating

Just a quick post on the latest issue of New Scientist that I've got to read. This one is New Scientist, no. 2507, 9 July 2005.

You can start to worry about the nuclear industry when it's revealed that "83 cubic metres of escaped liquor contain[ing] 20 tonnes of plutonium and uranium dissolved in nitric acid" was not noticed to have been lost for 8 months. The proportion of plutonium to uranium is not given here, but from what I understand about plutonium, this is potentially a species-threatening amount. (p. 6)

This month's editorial concerns itself with the latest ruse by creationists to challenge evolution. The latest approach is "Intelligent Design" which argues that "various biological structures are too complex to have been created by natural selection and so must have been designed". Associated with this is "irreduciable complexity" which "proposes that some molecular systems ... cannot be broken down into smaller functioning units, and so could not have been created by natural selection". As NS argues, "only with scientific understanding does it become clear that they are fundamentally flawed", and "crucially, they cannot be tested in any meaningful way, so they cannot qualify as science". The problem is not so much that some scientifically-ignorant people believe this stuff, but that they are promoting it in various schools, museums, and similar, in both developed and other countries. Some frightening examples follow. Kansas School Board had all mention of evolution deleted from state school standards in 2002. Thankfully, they were reinstated soon after, but the battle for control of these institutions continues. In Britain, private donors can gain some control over what is taught in a school by investing in its refubishment! NS recounts a case involving a millionaire car dealer and Christian fundamentalist. In Turkey, only creationism is presented in school texts! In Pakistan, evolution is not even taught in universities! Well, any country that goes down this path will eventually fail, given that their policies will not match testable reality, but what damage is done in the meantime? Are we entering, or are we in, the era of the new irrationality? (Editorial p.5, and p. 8-12)

How about these for a few factoids to challenge your relaxation and comfort? "13 computers that route all internet traffic are to remain under US supervision, the government said on 30 June". And "Supercomputer enigma: almost half of the 500 most powerful supercomputers in the world have an unspecified use". I'm not sure what this means; defence, perhaps? (p. 23)

Just a few snippets from another issue of this wonderful news magazine of science.