The 2000s, the “aughts”—whatever you want to call the first decade of the 21st century, you can also call it the warmest 10 years on record. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration just released its annual “State of the Climate” report, and after sampling 37 climate indicators including the biggies like sea surface temperature, glacier cover, and sea level, they came to that conclusion.
The NOAA report—published in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society—is different from other climate publications, because it’s based on observed data, not computer models, making it the “climate system’s annual scorecard,” the authors wrote… “It’s telling us what’s going on in the real world, rather than the imaginary world,” said Kevin Trenberth, a senior scientist at the Boulder, Colorado-based National Center for Atmospheric Research [National Geographic].
While one climate group trumpets its mountain of climate data, the scientists at the University of East Anglia are just climbing out from the scandal that broke out over theirs. This month another investigation cleared the Climate Research Unit of scientific misconduct or dishonesty, without condoning the emails’ tone or the unit’s handling of the controversy.
To try to improve its bruised public image, and appease climate skeptics’ calls to see the data, the university is working on way to get the unit’s data online and openly accessible.
It will not be as simple as putting the numbers online, as the data sets are frequently updated, and the steps leading to updates will also be made clear [New Scientist].
But, in a Q&A with New Scientist, former CRU director Phil Jones and East Anglia’s Trevor Davies argue that they shouldn’t have to bend over backward to all the freedom of information requests made for their data or correspondences. Says Davies:
The FOI act is clearly laudable. But we also believe there is an argument for confidentiality. The trouble is, that is interpreted by some as being somehow sinister, when it clearly is not in the vast majority of cases.
US law accepts that emails between colleagues when they’re working on a paper and around peer review should not be disclosable. That came about because of what was described as a potentially chilling effect on research if every single email exchange was released [New Scientist].
Related Content:
DISCOVER: It’s Gettin’ Hot in Here: The Big Battle Over Climate Science
80beats: Climategate Inquiry: No Scientific Misconduct from “Squeaky Clean” Researchers
80beats: 5 Ways to Fix the IPCC, Gatekeeper of Climate Science
The Intersection: How the Global Warming Story Changed, Disastrously, Due to “ClimateGate”
Image: Wikimedia Commons
Is the taboo against incest really just a psychological device to keep us from people we subconsciously find attractive? Could be, since apparently, these hotties are our parents, and even ourselves, according to research published in the journal Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin.
Studies have shown that people are more turned on by photographs of faces morphed with their own or a parent’s. More recently, when subjects were subliminally primed with a photos of a parent, they found the subsequent photos of faces more attractive than photos when they weren’t primed. Subjects also found photos morphed with their own faces more attractive than others. But if they were told that a morphed face contained their own image, they ranked that one as less attractive than others. (Wouldn’t want to look narcissistic, would they?)
Wired explains:
“All three experiments support the Freudian idea that we have subconscious mechanisms that make us attracted to features that remind us of our own, and that cultural taboos against incest exist to override that primitive drive….“People appear to be drawn to others who resemble their kin or themselves,” said [lead author] R. Chris Fraley. “It is possible, therefore, as Freud suggested, that incest taboos exist to counter this primitive tendency.”
Of course, a theory such as this one is basically impossible to prove or disprove. Still, it’s food for thought, although it might not be the best topic to bring up at your next family meal.
Related content:
Discoblog: NCBI ROFL: Freud’s take on doctors treating their own children is (surprise!) disturbing.
Discoblog: NCBI ROFL: You might want to put a condom on that symbolic penis
Image: flickr / thecameo
From the Good Blog: Where Did the Money to Rebuild Iraq Go?
From the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, July 27, 2010 (PDF):
Weaknesses in DoD's financial and management controls left it unable to properly account for $8.7 billion of the $9.1 billion in DFI funds it received for reconstruction activities in Iraq. This situation occurred because most DoD organizations receiving DFI funds did not establish the required Department of the Treasury accounts and no DoD organization was designated as the executive agent for managing the use of DFI funds. The breakdown in controls left the funds vulnerable to inappropriate uses and undetected loss.

Don't look now, but cap-and-trade is coming to the United States—and there's nothing the Senate can do about it. Earlier today, California, New Mexico, and three Canadian provinces—Ontario, Quebec, and British Columbia—unveiled a plan to set up a carbon-trading system for greenhouse gases by January 2012. This is all part of the multi-state Western Climate Initiative, a partnership that was set up in 2007, and you can read all the gory details of the new program here.
This new cap-and-trade system will be somewhat different from RGGI in the Northeast, which only covers power plants and has a fairly low price on carbon that's mainly just used to raise money for efficiency programs. This cap would be the real thing, covering most large industrial facilities as well as the transportation sector (that last is probably the biggest source of emissions in most of these states, which aren't particularly coal-heavy, and transport wouldn't get regulated until 2015). All told, the program would aim to cut overall emissions in the five participating states/provinces 15 percent by 2020—roughly in line with the U.S. Copenhagen goals.
Granted, the success of this new carbon cap will depend on the political situation in the participating states. The program is already a lot smaller than was initially envisioned: Arizona, Utah, Washington, Oregon, Montana, and Manitoba are also "partners" in the Western Climate Initiative, but their governors have all opted out of the carbon-trading system for now. And it's possible that the remaining cap-and-trade guinea pigs could balk, too. If, for instance, Meg Whitman wins California's governor's race, she's already promised to delay the implementation of the state's sweeping climate law, AB 32. (There's also a fossil-fuel-backed ballot initiative this fall to kill off AB 32 entirely.)
But assuming this system does get up-and-running, it could well help seed a larger national climate program down the road. The WCI recently commissioned an economic study of the carbon cap and found that the system would save participants some $100 billion in fuel costs by 2020. If other WCI partners see that cap-and-trade isn't actually triggering economic doom and havoc, they too could join in. And suddenly you have the makings of a pretty significant system. So this is definitely a story to watch.
Exposure to parental verbal abuse is associated with increased gray matter volume in superior temporal gyrus.
“OBJECTIVE: Exposure to parental verbal aggression (PVA) during childhood increases risk for the development of psychopathology, particularly mood and anxiety disorders. Other forms of childhood abuse have been found to be associated with alterations in brain structure. The aim of this study was to ascertain whether exposure to PVA was associated with discernible effects on brain morphology… …RESULTS: Gray matter volume (GMV) was increased by 14.1% in the left superior temporal gyrus (STG, BA 22) (P=0.004, corrected cluster level). GMV in this cluster was associated most strongly with levels of maternal (ss=0.544, P<0.0001) and paternal (ss=0.300, P<0.02) verbal aggression and inversely associated with parental education (ss=-0.577, P<0.0001). CONCLUSION: Previous studies have demonstrated an increase in STG GMV in children with abuse histories, and found a reduction in fractional anisotropy in the arcuate fasciculus connecting Wernicke’s and frontal areas in young adults exposed to PVA. These findings and the present results suggest that the development of auditory association cortex involved in language processing may be affected by exposure to early stress and/or emotionally abusive language.”
Thanks to Robert for today’s ROFL!
Related content:
Discoblog: NCBI ROFL: Head and neck injury risks in heavy metal: head bangers stuck between rock and a hard bass.
Discoblog: NCBI ROFL: Did Gollum have schizophrenia or multiple personality disorder?
Discoblog: NCBI ROFL: I wonder if this paper was cheer-reviewed.
WTF is NCBI ROFL? Read our FAQ!
Always gotta do everything myself
Picture by: Unknown
