Hey, Tim Jones here, again.
Some British scientists have done some research that appears to
solve one of the problems of a particular theory of RNA synthesis that
makes this theory more plausible as a possible explanation of the
origins of DNA and organic life on earth. That is all.
FOX News runs the headline "Scientists May Have Found How Life Began", which is positively pedestrian compared to the source article from Agence France-Presse, "Chemists See First Building Blocks to Life on Earth".
That's the problem with most science reporting…
—————
In more fun science news, they're handing out awards for optical illusions, now;
gathering last weekend of neuroscientists and psychologists at the
Naples Philharmonic Center for the Arts in Florida.
The winning entry, from a Bucknell University professor, may help explain why curve balls in baseball are so tricky to hit.
There are a couple of other cool illusions shown, as well as the design of the award trophy, which is clever.
The source paper in Nature has the catchy title Synthesis of activated pyrimidine ribonucleotides in prebiotically plausible conditions
abstract here
The abstract is not easily accessible to the layperson and I suspect that even biochemistry graduates will have to make an effort to understand it. Even journalists with science degrees are unlikely to have that specialism. Editors who write the headlines for a lay audience are more likely to be interested in a headline to hook. Add a bit of political bias to overstate or understate the issue and … .
This summary from Nature News seems more measured.
Imagine how those many steps happened to come together. It is almost impossible to believe. Why, it almost makes one believe that there must have been a guiding hand 🙂
Optical illusions! Hey, one of my colleagues won an igNobel award.
The Chicken
Hyperlink OFF?…
OFF…?
You owe me one now, TMC 🙂
But something weird is going on…
Dear Matheus,
I forgot to close the hyperlink and couldn’t even get to the combox to close it 🙁 How did you do it?
The Chicken
I wonder if the explanation for the baseball optical illusion also explains why batters generally hit better against opposite handed pitchers. A righty hitter against a lefty pitcher would be looking more directly at the ball so less peripheral vision is used or needed.
Dear TMC
I did nothing special. Firstly I tried to close the tag, to no avail. Then, I made a new opened and closed hyperlink.
But look what the link ended up becoming…Typepad has definitely been weird lately.