Author: Discover Main Feed

Don’t count out the Y chromosome just yet. Far from being in a state of decay, as some studies have suggested, a new study in Nature says the male chromosome in humans is actually evolving at a furious pace.

Study leader David Page of MIT sequenced the human Y chromosome back in 2003, and in the new study his team compares it to the male chromosome of chimpanzees. The scientists expected the two sequences to look very similar. However, while human and chimp DNA generally differ by less than 2 per cent, more than 30 per cent of the Y chromosome differed between the two species [The Times].

The prevailing theories, according to the study’s introduction, have held “that Y chromosomes evolve by gene loss, the pace of which slows over time, eventually leading to a paucity of genes, and stasis.” Originally, the Y had the same set of genes as the X, biologists believe. But the two can’t trade DNA; so as the Y shed most of its X-related genes, researchers thought it lacked a way to get fresh genes and was therefore on the road to stagnation. Earlier research showed that over 300 million years of evolution, the X chromosome retained many hundreds of genes, while the Y chromosome was reduced to only about 70 or 80 genes.

However vast differences between human and chimp Y chromosomes imply not that the male chromosome is grinding to a halt in humans, but rather the opposite—it’s evolving as a furious pace compared to the rest of the genome. In fact, that study says, while the overall genome of humans and chimps are separated by a tiny relatively amount because we diverged just 6 million years ago, the Y chromosomes differ by about as much as the overall differences between humans and chickens, which last had a common ancestor more than 300 million years ago.

Why the big Y chromosome differences? Humans, the researchers say, seem to be adding and deleting genes; chimps, on the other hand, are mainly just losing them. They point to few possible explanations, including differing mating behavior. Many male apes mate with one female in the species, leading to evolutionary success only for those whose sperm out-impregnates others, a process called “sperm competition” in evolutionary biology. The human male chromosome, in contrast, shows no evidence of such competition, according to the study [USA Today].

The implications of the Y chromosome’s newfound vitality remain to be seen. This does not mean that men are evolving faster than women, given that the two belong to the same species, but it could be that the Y’s rate of change drives or influences the evolution of the rest of the human genome in ways that now need to be assessed. It would be “hard to imagine that these dramatic changes in the Y don’t have broader consequences,” Dr. Page said [The New York Times].

Related Content:
80beats: Boom Boom Krak-oo! Have Monkeys Demonstrated Syntax?
80beats: A Fossil Named Ardi Shakes Up Humanity’s Family Tree
80beats: Scientists Tickle Apes & Conclude Laughter Is At Least 10 Million Years Old
DISCOVER: Whither the Y?
DISCOVER: Y So Small?

Image: Wikimedia Commons / Frans de Waal, Emory University

If you are a single male, please answer the following questions:

Repellent body odor? No?

Superfluous and abundant body hair?

Socially awkward? No again…?

Then why are you still single? And what are the odds of you finding a girlfriend this year?

Economics grad student Peter Backus of the U.K.’s University of Warwick pondered that question, and put his mathematical skills to good use to calculate his chances of hooking up in 2010. As Backus found, the odds of him finding an appropriate love interest on any given night out are 1 in 285,000. Backus used the Drake equation to calculate these odds of finding love and wrote it up as “Why I don’t have a girlfriend: An application of the Drake Equation to love in the UK.”

As New Scientist explains:

For the uninitiated, the Drake equation was set out by Frank Drake, one of the founders of the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence. It estimates the number of alien civilisations we should expect to find in our galaxy.

New Scientist describes how Backus used a similar equation to estimate the number of university educated, age-appropriate women who he finds physically attractive that he should expect to find in his environs:

He calculates that there are 10,510 people in the UK that satisfy these basic criteria. That amounts to 0.00017% of the UK’s population, or 0.0014% of Londoners. As he says, that “doesn’t seem so bad” – especially if, as Londonist notes, he actually socialises in groups that are biased towards his own age and education level, which seems likely.

But the calculations aren’t over. Backus also estimates that only 1 in 20 women in his potential dating pool will find him attractive (a percentage he calls “depressingly low”), only half are single, and he only gets along with 1 in 1o. Once those factors are taken into account, his number of potential girlfriends shrinks to… 26 women.

Yikes. It looks like single men have only a slightly better chance of of finding a girlfriend than they do of finding an intelligent alien society in the sky.

Related Content:
Discoblog: Social Network for Beautiful People Kicks Out 5,000 “Fatties”
Discoblog: Can Pheromone Body Wash Make You More Desirable?
80beats: Are Birth Control Pills Changing the Mating Game?

Image: iStockphoto

I follow the New Horizons Pluto probe Twitter feed, and recently it linked to a graphic showing where the spacecraft is right now:

Man, is that way out in the black. The probe is now closer to the orbit of Uranus than it is to Saturn, though both planets are over a billion kilometers away from New Horizons right now.

The solar system is frakkin’ BIG (if I may mix my colorful scifi metaphors). If you’re still not sure just how roomy things are out there, even at its current speed of 16.5 km/sec (10 miles/sec) — fast enough to cross the entire United States in five minutes — New Horizons won’t pass the orbit of Uranus until March 18, 2011, more than a year from now. Neptune’s orbit isn’t until August 24, 2014.

One thing to notice: from this point of view, planets revolve around the Sun in a counterclockwise fashion. Given the position of Pluto, you can see the two are heading for a close encounter soon. Well, for a sufficiently broad definition of “soon”: July 14, 2015.

Space is big.

Identification of gases responsible for the odour of human flatus and evaluation of a device purported to reduce this odour.

“BACKGROUND/AIMS: While the social significance of flatus derives mainly from its odour, previous studies have focused on the non-odoriferous components of rectal gas. The aims of the present study were to determine the role of sulphur-containing gases in flatus odour and test the efficacy of a device purported to reduce this odour. METHODS: Flatus was quantitatively collected via rectal tube from 16 healthy subjects who ingested pinto beans and lactulose to enhance flatus output. The concentrations of sulphur-containing gases in each passage were correlated with odour intensity assessed by two judges. Odour intensity was also determined after treatment of flatus samples with zinc acetate, which binds sulphydryl compounds (hydrogen sulphide and methanethiol), or activated charcoal. Utilising gastight Mylar pantaloons, the ability of a charcoal lined cushion to adsorb sulphur-containing gases instilled at the anus of eight subjects was assessed. RESULTS: The main sulphur-containing flatus component was hydrogen sulphide (1.06 (0.2) mumol/l), followed by methanethiol (0.21 (0.04) mumol/l) and dimethyl sulphide (0.08 (0.01) mumol/l) (means (SEM)). Malodour significantly correlated with hydrogen sulphide concentration (p < or = 0.001). Zinc acetate reduced sulphur gas content but did not totally eliminate odour, while activated charcoal removed virtually all odour. The cushion absorbed more than 90% of the sulphur gases. CONCLUSION: Sulphur-containing gases are the major, but not the only, malodorous components of human flatus. The charcoal lined cushion effectively limits the escape of these sulphur-containing gases into the environment.”

We close with one more quote from To the Royal Academy of Farting:

What Comfort can the Vortices of Descartes give to a Man who has Whirlwinds in his Bowels! The Knowledge of Newton’s mutual Attraction of the Particles of Matter, can it afford Ease to him who is racked by their mutual Repulsion, and the cruel Distensions it occasions? The Pleasure arising to a few Philosophers, from seeing, a few Times in their Life, the Threads of Light untwisted, and separated by the Newtonian Prism into seven Colours, can it be compared with the Ease and Comfort every Man living might feel seven times a Day, by discharging freely the Wind from his Bowels? Especially if it be converted into a Perfume: For the Pleasures of one Sense being little inferior to those of another, instead of pleasing the Sight he might delight the Smell of those about him, & make Numbers happy, which to a benevolent Mind must afford infinite Satisfaction. The generous Soul, who now endeavours to find out whether the Friends he entertains like best Claret or Burgundy, Champagne or Madeira, would then enquire also whether they chose Musk or Lilly, Rose or Bergamot, and provide accordingly.

Thanks to Tusi for today’s ROFL!

Related content:
Discoblog: NCBI ROFL: Asparagus, urine, farts, and Benjamin Franklin (Part I)
Discoblog: NCBI ROFL: It’s like a Brita filter for your butt

It’s a really thoughtful (if not uncritical) review, and what stood out perhaps most is this great passage:

To combine my own personal view (which I have drifted into here, sorry…) with that of Unscientific America: Regular citizens and scientists are separated by a very narrow but very deep canyon, resting comfortably on either side of this canyon and vaguely aware of the others across the way. When science policy issues arise among the citizenry, the scientists don’t really play a role. When scientists lobby for their funding from the big agencies and other sources, they don’t really account for the people over on the other side of the canyon. This has been the case for years, and over this time, the social and cultural relevance of actual science has pretty much vanished among the [populace], and the ability to understand what motivates or interests the general public… or just even how to talk to them … has disappeared from the culture of science. Not that it was ever there. Looking back, it is clear that the bridges that did exist across this canyon were built by regular people inspired by the occasional super-communicator, such as Carl Sagan. Those bridges were not, in any systematic way, built by the scientists.

Thanks, Greg, for taking the time and giving the thought. Please read his full review here.

Two quick things about 2010 AL30, the small object that passed the Earth earlier today:

1) I wrote that it looks to be natural and not some booster, but now an ESA scientist says it might be a booster from Venus Express. His argument is a good one, but it’s difficult to prove.

2) Universe Today has a very cool animation of the object as it slid past us, created using 30 still images. It’s fun to watch, if a little dizzying.

Are we getting closer to our catastrophic annihilation?

The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists (based, appropriately enough, at the University of Chicago) has kept track of our impending doom for over 60 years. They use a clock to represent our current time, where midnight is complete catastrophe. Back in the good old days, this meant something prosaic like global nuclear conflagration. Nowadays, there are plenty of other things to add to the list, including global climatic collapse, avian swine ebola, and grey goo. The current time is 11:55pm. Uncomfortably late.

There’s no real metric with which to judge the “time”. The clock has an hour and minute hand, but no am/pm indicator, so in principle it can represent a total of twelve hours of unique settings. [For the sticklers, the clock in some sense lacks a unit of time; we need some other information to interpret what one of its minutes represents.] If we assume noon is “zero risk of annihilation”, and midnight is 100%, one approach would be to assume each advancing minute brings us 1/720 closer to our doom. This would mean that we presently have just under a 1% chance of ending it all. If we were to run through the last decade 200 times in a row, would we completely screw ourselves at least one time? This doesn’t sound all that unreasonable to me. Surely the odds were comparable to this during the Cuban missile crisis? (Although then the clock was at 11:53pm; it reacts to events on a relatively long timescale). The closest we’ve ever come to midnight was in the period 1953–1960, when both the US and the USSR were busy testing Hydrogen bombs. It was 11:58 pm. You might think we’re easily ten minutes earlier now, but the clock presently stands at 11:55pm. We’ve made some progress, but not nearly enough. In all likelihood, the clock was meant to be symbolic. And the main message is that we are minutes away from catastrophe, so let’s all shape it up.

Tomorrow (1/14) at 10am EST the minute hand will move. You can watch it live. The big question is: which way will it go? On the one hand, the cold war seems reasonably contained, Obama has articulated a vision of a nuclear-free world (the first time a sitting US President has done so), and the world seems relatively peaceful at present. On the other hand, Pakistan and India are relatively unfriendly neighbors, North Korea is not a paragon of stability and good governance, and all three now have nuclear weapons. Furthermore, Iran seems hell bent on joining the nuclear club, and the Middle East is the usual quagmire. Perhaps even worse, global warming continues to be debated and questioned, while we continue to dump greenhouse gases into our atmosphere and change our planet.

Over the last two years, has our catastrophic demise approached or receded? We’ll find out what our friendly Atomic Scientists think in a few hours. But I’m curious to know what our readers think.

There’s a neat paper in Nature today suggesting that astrocytes, part of the brain’s hidden majority, plays a big role in the formation of memories. The Scientist has details. For background, check out my September Discover column.

Few things bring out the hyperbole like genetically modified organisms (GMOs), and that was true again with a study making the rounds yesterday and today.

In the International Journal of Biological Studies, a team examined three genetically modified corn varieties created by Monsanto. The study’s authors say they see evidence of possible toxicity to the kidney and liver, “possibly due to the new pesticides specific to each GM corn.” However, the findings became over-hyped headlines like the Huffington Post’s “Monsanto GMO Corn Linked to Organ Failure, Study Reveals.”

That’s a pretty big leap from the not entirely convincing finding of a potentially questionable study. What actually happened is that the research team, led by Gilles-Eric Séralini, re-analyzed data from tests that Monsanto scientists themselves conducted on rats eating these three varieties of corn—data that, to be fair, the team had to scratch and claw and sue to get their hands on. In their statistical analysis, Séralini’s team says that Monsanto interpreted its own data incorrectly, and that its new analysis shows potential for toxicity.

But the scientists themselves give significant caveats that make such bold headlines a bit of a reach: “Clearly, the statistically significant effects observed here for all three GM maize varieties investigated are signs of toxicity rather than proofs of toxicity”—that is, the evidence isn’t rock solid, and not enough to warrant a bunch of alarmist headlines. The researchers argue that more research is necessary to settle the question either way: “In conclusion, our data presented here strongly recommend that additional long-term (up to 2 years) animal feeding studies be performed in at least three species, preferably also multi-generational, to provide true scientifically valid data on the acute and chronic toxic effects of GM crops, feed and foods.”

In addition, there are a couple issues that make the study itself seem a little fishy:

1. Funding. “Greenpeace contributed to the start of the investigations by funding first statistical analyses in 2006, the results were then processed further and evaluated independently by the authors,” the scientists write. Certainly one can’t oppose a huge corporation like Monsanto without funding, but drawing those funds from a political lightning rod like Greenpeace can paint conclusions in a bad light, University of California, Davis, plant genomics expert Pamela Ronald tells DISCOVER. “That does not mean that it is incorrect,” she says, “but makes me a little skeptical.”

2. The journal: The International Journal of Biological Sciences is somewhat obscure, with an “unofficial”–that is, self-assigned–impact factor of 3.24. “In other words, it has not been assessed for impact or quality,” Ronald says. Again, that doesn’t mean Séralini’s team is wrong, but it suggests that jumping to conclusions would be unwise.

The actual data analysis of the paper has started an in-depth back-and-forth on the the statistical analysis. We’ll continue following this story to see how the analysis shakes out.

Related Content:
80beats: New Biotech Corn Gives Triple Vitamin Boost; Professors Unmoved
80beats: Germany Joins the European Mutiny of Genetically Modified Crops
DISCOVER: Genetically Altered Corn tells how a corn not intended for humans got into the food supply

Image: flickr / Peter Blanchard

We have a new set of brains to add to the Hive Overmind the family of Discover Magazine blogs: NCBI ROFL. I’ll leave the description to them:

We’re two PhD students in Molecular and Cell Biology at UC Berkeley. Back in March of aught-nine, we started a little blog called “NCBI ROFL” in which we posted real scientific articles with funny subjects from the PubMed database (which is housed by the National Center for Biotechnology information, aka NCBI).

And how can you not love a blog that scientifically discusses a paper called “Accidental condom inhalation”?

Welcome to Discover Blogs!

Ah, the iPhone. What would life be without it?

You can get directions, make dinner reservations, break up via text and now, thanks to the latest app, you can get live streaming mugshots on your phone! Wait–is that mom?

Arrested! Mobile Mugshots prides itself on “Real People! Real Arrests! Real Mugshots! We collect mugshots from jails all over the USA and post them for you to view.”

The iPhone app, gratis on iTunes, serves up police pics from around the United States with full names, birth date, age, the date and time of arrest as well as the alleged crime.

Finally, a way to track Lindsay Lohan’s movements!

Check out some recent perps here.

Related Content:
Discoblog: Texting and Walking Made Easy With iPhone App
Discoblog: ZOMG! Get These iPhone Apps Right Meow!

Part animal, part plant, bright green, and totally bizarre: Meet the sea slug Elysia chlorotica.

Biologists already knew that this organism, native to the marshes of New England and Canada, was a thief that somehow pickpocketed genes from the algae it eats. At last week’s meeting of the Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology in Seattle, researcher Sidney Pierce said he has found that the slugs aren’t just kleptomaniacs—they use the pilfered genes not only to make chlorophyll, but also to execute photosynthesis and live like a plant. Said Pierce: “They can make their energy-containing molecules without having to eat anything,” Pierce said. “This is the first time that multicellular animals have been able to produce chlorophyll” [LiveScience].

The slug steals in a different way than most organisms (usually bacteria) that employ horizontal gene transfer to incorporate the DNA of others. Most of those hosts tuck in the partner cells whole in crevices or pockets among host cells. Pierce’s slug, however, takes just parts of cells, the little green photosynthetic organelles called chloroplasts, from the algae it eats. The slug’s highly branched gut network engulfs these stolen bits and holds them inside slug cells [Science News].

By using detectors to trace small amount of radioactivity, Pierce says he confirmed that the slug was actually using the stolen genes to produce the chlorophyll itself rather than snatching already-made chlorophyll from the algae. In addition, parent slugs pass on the genetic pathways for chlorophyll and photosynthesis to their offspring, showing it becomes incorporated into their genes.

Once again, nature reminds us, evolution can be wonderfully creative. “This could be a fusion of a plant and an animal — that’s just cool,” said invertebrate zoologist John Zardus [Science News].

Related Content:
80beats: Inside a Tree Leaf, It’s Always a Balmy 70 Degrees
80beats: Arsenic-Eating Bacteria May Resemble Early Life on Primordial Earth
The Loom: Going Green

Image: Nicholas E. Curtis and Ray Martinez

I am very pleased to announce that I have become a Fellow of the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry, commonly known as CSI (and formerly known as CSICOP). CSI is one of the foremost skeptical organizations in the country and the world, and it is both humbling and an honor to be a part of it.

I was chosen along with other 15 other people, many of whom will be familiar to regular readers, including Skeptic Dictionary creator Bob Carroll, Steve Novella, Massimo Pigliucci, UK Skeptic’s Christopher French, Seth Shostak, and my fellow astronomer Jay Pasachoff. You can get the full list at the CSI announcement.

I’m also very happy to note that another of the new Fellows is one James Randi! Randi helped create CSICOP, but left years ago due to personal reasons when Uri Geller (boo!) sued both him and CSICOP. Randi has maintained a cordial relationship with the group over the years, and I know he’s personally very happy to be a part of CSI once again.

I’ve received a few emails from folks asking if my leaving the JREF to do TV work would take me away from doing skeptical outreach. It will be impacted, of course, but I hope this announcement lets you know that I will continue to do what I can to make this world a more reasonable place. I could no more stop doing that than I could stop blogging, or stop breathing, or stop being amazed at how wonderful our Universe is.

My thanks to the good folks at CSI, and to all of you who support me!

The 7.0 earthquake that hit Haiti yesterday is devastating. We will continue to update this post with ways to support relief efforts and encourage our readers to add additional legitimate initiatives in comments. We ask that those with blogs repost these links on their sites.

American Red Cross International Response Fund
AmeriCares Help For Haiti
Direct Relief International
Doctors without Borders
HaitiArise
Haiti Emergency Relief Fund
Mercy Corps
Oxfam
UNICEF
Yele Haiti

@wyclef on twitter:

‘Haiti is in need of immediate AID please text Yele to 510 510 and donate $5 toward earthquake relief.’ ~Wyclef Jean, founder of Yele Haiti

@nytimes/haiti-earthquake

‘Reports from individuals, news orgs, relief agencies in Haiti.’ ~NYTimes Haiti earthquake twitter list

In the first FDA-approved trial evaluating the street drug’s therapeutic applications, it proved phenomenally successful at treating PTSD.

You might have heard the news out of last week’s American Astronomical Society meeting, that the Hubble Space Telescope had found evidence for the most distant galaxies yet discovered. Using the newly-installed Wide Field Camera 3, HST did a close-up examination of some likely candidates in the Ultra Deep Field, and found galaxies at redshifts of 7 or 8 (meaning the universe is now 8 or 9 times bigger than it was when the light was emitted). That corresponds to about 600 million years after the Big Bang, which pushes back the era of galaxy formation quite a bit.

But wait! Over at Science News, Ron Cowen points out that a team led by Rychard Bouwens and Garth Illingworth of UC Santa Cruz already has a paper on the arxiv that uses similar techniques to identify three galaxies with a redshift of 10, corresponding to only 450 million years after the Big Bang. And, as Cowen mentions in a blog post, the paper was available since last month.

Constraints on the First Galaxies: z~10 Galaxy Candidates from HST WFC3/IR
Authors: R.J. Bouwens, G.D. Illingworth, I. Labbe, P.A. Oesch, M. Carollo, M. Trenti, P.G. van Dokkum, M. Franx, M. Stiavelli, V. Gonzalez, D. Magee

Abstract: The first galaxies likely formed a few hundred million years after the Big Bang. Until recently, it has not been possible to detect galaxies earlier than ~750 million years after the Big Bang. The new HST WFC3/IR camera changed this when the deepest-ever, near-IR image of the universe was obtained with the HUDF09 program. Here we use this image to identify three redshift z~10 galaxy candidates in the heart of the reionization epoch when the universe was just 500 million years old. These would be the highest redshift galaxies yet detected, higher than the recent detection of a GRB at z~8.2. The HUDF09 data previously revealed galaxies at z~7 and z~8… [snipped]

So why are galaxies at redshift 8 considered news, if galaxies at redshift 10 have already been discovered? As Charlie Petit talks about at the Knight Science Journalism Tracker, the difference seems to be that the former were announced at a press briefing, while the latter just appeared on arxiv.

For better or for worse, conventional science journalism has been cut back to the point where most reporters have no choice but to wait for press releases to appear to write a story. They don’t have the resources to scan through arxiv postings every day — and even if they did, the precious newsworthy nuggets are rather sparsely scattered through the mass of Kuhnian normal science. And let’s not even think about the idea that journalists should spend time (and money) going to lots of conferences and talks and chatting with scientists about what’s hot in their fields these days — the resources just aren’t there.

There is some room for blogs to help out here. A blog by a respectable scientist can point to interesting stories that didn’t appear in any press releases, and journalists can follow up. (I know it’s happened here before.) But the thing about blogs is that they’re remarkably non-systematic; bloggers mention things because they personally find them interesting, not because they feel a duty to the wider public. The nature of journalism is changing rapidly, and it’s not clear how things will eventually shake out. I certainly hope that we continue to enjoy the work of people like Cowen, who make the extra effort to find good science stories and spread them widely.

This seems to be the decade of “I don’t like what you say, so instead of refuting it with evidence I’ll sue you to shut you up!” for the alt-medders.

First, it was Simon Singh being sued by the British Chiropractic Association, and now it’s Barbara Loe Fischer from the ironically named National Vaccine Information Center, who is suing writer Amy Wallace and vaccine researcher Paul Offit about an article Wallace wrote in Wired magazine. The article is one of those rare ones that actually uses facts and evidence rather than anecdotes and hearsay, so of course shines a very ill-received spotlight on the antivaxxers, showing them for what they are: a public health menace.

As usual, Orac has the details. One thing that Orac notes is that Fischer chose to file her suit in Virginia which does not have SLAPP laws, designed to prevent lawsuits intended to silence critics. So it really really looks like she is suing simply to silence critics. Others think so too.

That is enough for an interesting story all by itself, of course. But the thing about people who deny reality, though, is that eventually they find themselves having to believe seven different things before breakfast, and at some point the irony meter can get pegged as they twist and spin. In this case, Ms. Fischer blows the gauge because she is asking for a “fearless” discussion about vaccines in 2010.

Yes, you read that correctly. She wants this because open and fearless conversation is so well-supported by libel lawsuits tossed around specifically to silence your opponents.

And people wonder why I think the mouthpieces for the antivax movement are so awful.

Skeptic Rebecca Watson agrees. Here’s what she has to say about this:

You can read Ms. Fischer’s complete statements on the NVIC website, but I’d make sure you clean your computer with bleach afterwards; who knows what you might catch from going there. You might want to protect your brain, too, since she somehow manages to link vaccines with terrorism and 9/11. When it comes to terrorism, I think the antivax movement fits better than vaccines, since fear is something they use all-too-well to scare parents into not vaccinating their kids.

Of course, if they used such things as evidence and scientific research, they’d have no movement at all.

The best thing we can do is keep shining this light on the hypocrisy and distortions of the antivax movement. They will continue to push garbage like this, and we have to make sure that the public sees it. The only alternative is to wait for kids to start dying from measles, pertussis, HiB, and other preventable illnesses in greater numbers than they already are… an event which, tragically, is already underway due in part to the antivaxxers.

The best way to make a point about privacy and “invasive” body scanners at the airport–is to strip down to your underwear and then publish that video to YouTube so the whole world can see you in your nearly naked glory. Might sound strange at first, but we are covering it in Discoblog, so I guess it worked.

Warning: This video has mild nudity and so may be NSFW.

German activists from the Pirate Party thought organizing a “fleshmob” of people to strip down to their skivvies and converge on the Berlin-Tegel airport was a great idea. The activists were protesting the use of what the Germans call the Nacktscanner, or naked scanner–a body scanner that may increasingly be used for airport security, in the wake of the botched underwear bombing on Christmas Day.

As Wired reported:

The protesters marked their bodies with a number of messages such as, “Something to hide?” and “Be a good citizen — drop your pants.” One woman has the word “diaper” scrawled on her lower back with an arrow pointing to her underwear and the word “prosthetic” printed on her leg. The word “piercing” and an arrow point to one of her breasts. Another woman dressed in a beige sweater and flesh-colored tights wears a sign reading “pixelated.” (To address privacy concerns, security officials say the scanners can be programed to produce a blurred, pixelated image of passengers to protect their modesty.)

The full-body scanners work by using high frequency radio waves to produce an image of a passenger’s naked body beneath clothes. So anything strapped to the body–explosives, drugs–would be exposed. But if you chuck something in a body cavity the scanner fails to detect that. The scanners have raised concerns about passengers’ privacy, as pointed out by the semi-naked activists, but German authorities are pressing ahead with their plans to deploy them across the country’s airports over the next two years.

Related Content:
80beats: 5 Reasons Body Scanners May Not Solve Our Terrorism Problem
80beats: Are Digital Strip Searches Coming Soon To Every Airport Near You?
80beats: TSA Threatens Bloggers Who Published Security Info, Then Backs Off

As Haiti reels from yesterday’s massive earthquake and its continued aftershocks, and nations rush to put rescue efforts together, scientists analyzing the seismic event say this disaster may have been a long time coming.

The earthquake in Haiti had a preliminary magnitude of 7.0 and it appeared to have occurred along a strike-slip fault, where one side of a vertical fault slips horizontally past the other, scientists say [AP]. This fault, called the Enriquillo-Plantain Garden fault, may have been slowly building up pressure since the major 1760 earthquake that struck Haiti.

“It’s been locked solid for about the last 250 years,” said Dr Roger Musson from the British Geological Survey (BGS). “It’s been gathering stress all that time as the plates move past each other, and it was really just a matter of time before it released all that energy” [BBC News]. Chillingly, scientists led by Paul Mann warned just two years ago that such a massive quake could strike Hispaniola, the island Haiti shares with the Dominican Republic. But there wasn’t much the impoverished Caribbean nation could do with that information, Mann said: “The problem with these kinds of strikes is that they can remain quiescent — dormant — for hundreds of years,” he said Tuesday evening. “So it’s hard to predict when they’ll occur” [CNN].

The BBC reports that the fault system of which Enriquillo-Plantain is a part normally moves less than an inch per year as the North American and Caribbean tectonic plates slide by each other, but this earthquake may have caused the earth’s surface along the fault line to offset by as much as three feet.

The fact that the Enriquillo-Plantain appears to have released all its fury at once raises further worry for people living near strike-slip fault zones—California’s San Andres fault also falls under this category. However, Caribbean geology expert Grenville Draper says that the Hispaniola fault system doesn’t behave exactly like California’s. The movement along the Hispaniola fault is relatively small compared with plates moving underground in California, Draper said. The effect would be less-frequent earthquakes, but relatively large ones when they do occur [Miami Herald].

Related Content:
80beats: Science Via Twitter: Post-Earthquake Tweets Can Provide Seismic Data
80beats: Major Earthquakes Can Weaken Faults Around the Globe
80beats: A Major Quake Could Release Plutonium from Los Alamos Lab
The Intersection: Ways to Support the Relief Effort in Haiti

Image: Wikimedia Commons / The Weatherman

Are the world’s most popular search engine and the world’s most populous country headed for a breakup? That’s the word reverberating around the Internet today after Google said it would no longer put up with the Chinese government’s demands to censor the Internet and the rampant hacking attempts against it, which could result in the company ending its Chinese operations.

The announcement came as a stunning reversal for Google, which had capitulated to the government’s wishes to gain access to China’s fast-growing population of Internet users. Since arriving in 2006 under an arrangement with the government that purged its Chinese search results of banned topics, Google has come under fire for abetting a system that increasingly restricts what can be read online [The New York Times].

The standoff comes as no surprise to China watchers, however. “The idea that Google would be allowed to run an uncensored search engine would be inconsistent with everything the Chinese government has done and every single statement it has made over the past year” about the need for controls on the internet, says Rebecca MacKinnon, an expert on new media in China [Christian Science Monitor]. In fact, the news of this fight over censorship remains itself censored in China, The New York Times reports. Early reports in the Chinese news media mentioned terms like “free speech,” but those quickly disappeared.

The details of Google’s other grievance—China-based hacks against it—haven’t all come to light yet. But these sophisticated attacks against more than 30 firms, mostly Silicon Valley-based, appear to have targeted the Gmail accounts of Chinese humans right activists. Perhaps that was the last straw for Google; an anonymous source told Wired.com that the company already deals with the Chinese government harassing its own people over there. “[Google is] really concerned about their safety and feels that there is a very real possibility that they will be interrogated,” the source said. “They have been [interrogated] numerous times before, and this time they could be arrested and imprisoned” [Wired.com].

What happens if Google actually breaks with Beijing? Baidu, China’s number one search engine, will benefit, but it won’t be the only one. “With the easing of competition from Google, it’s actually going to benefit everybody. The small operators now see an opportunity to gain some market share,” said Elinor Leung, an analyst at CLSA. [Wall Street Journal]. But what’s good for the market share of Chinese search engines may not be good for Chinese Internet users. Google’s pullout could hamper the fight for Web freedom there and elsewhere, leaving governments with even more power to set the rules about how much of the Internet people within their borders can see.

That’s if Google follows through on its threat and ends its Chinese operations. As the Wall Street Journal reports, an Irish betting site is already taking wagers whether the company will do it by 2012, and the odds aren’t good—the bookies seem to think China is too tempting a market to surrender.

Related Content:
80beats: Is Google the Guardian Angel of Rainforests?
80beats: Googlefest Can’t Stop, Won’t Stop: 3 New Ways Google Will Take Over Your Life
80beats: China Bans Electroshock Therapy for “Internet Addiction”
80beats: China’s Internet Users Force Government to Back Down on Censorship

Image: Wikimedia Commons / M. Weitzel