Digs in space
A group of space entrepreneurs has announced a plan to mine small asteroids for minerals and water, the latter to fuel further space exploration (28 April, p 4). Reactions mostly of wonder and scepticism, if not ridicule, followed. I, too, am doubtful they can make this pay, especially as soon as the end of the decade, but I wish them well and hope that the project succeeds.
Space exploration for its own sake is wonderful for science, but expensive. The best argument for continuing to explore our solar system is the grim economic one in which operations directly benefit those undertaking them, in dollars or otherwise.
Before 1957, when the first Sputnik went into orbit, many short-sighted people questioned the expense of launching satellites. But who now doubts the utility of global weather reports, GPS locations and cheap intercontinental communications such as satellite TV? So far, interplanetary exploration has done little for the business bottom line – forecasting solar weather is one of the few exceptions – so I heartily welcome ventures that might give even the most profit-minded humans better reasons to leap out into interplanetary space.
Flight of fancy
Contrary to Alan Feduccia’s article on the evolution of birds (28 April, p 28), the meticulous, detailed anatomical evidence that they descended from theropod dinosaurs – both developing and frequently losing flight in the process – is overwhelming.
That many small dinosaurs bore early feathers is also abundantly documented. Birds evolving from small running bipeds that later became arboreal explains their unusual combination of strong legs separated from the wings, unlike pterosaurs and bats, which probably evolved from quadrupedal climbers.
That birds are flying dinosaurs is as well established as mammals being derived from therapsids, as bats evolving from mammals, as humans having descended from apes, and as evolution itself.
The current question is not whether birds evolved from dinosaurs, but how.
Peak oil?
While asking if we can avoid the spectre of oil running out (19 May, p 34), you say many predict “peak oil” – the point of global maximum production – by the end of the decade. In fact, many researchers reckon the peak has been and gone.
You are right that exploitation of the remaining oil will vary according to assumptions of demand and performance: of motor vehicles and of electrification more generally, as well as to the harnessing of renewable energy, improved energy efficiency and conservation efforts.
But caution is needed in talk of ending reliance on oil. Look at the intermittency of wind and the underperformance of wind energy against claims; the poor performance of solar photovoltaics in areas of relatively low solar irradiation; the environmental impacts of biofuel exploitation, as well as its effect on food availability and prices; the poor performance of energy efficiency measures, and over-optimistic claims made for the fuel cell.
We have scarcely begun to grasp the problems ahead – and the energy policies of most countries are a shambles.
Stick together
Your article “Engineering love” brought some very interesting scientific evidence to your readership’s notice (12 May, p 28). However, I was slightly disturbed by the assertion that we ought to “liberate ourselves from evolution” by the use of chemical stimulants, in the hope of finding happiness.
Our main happiness problem is that while we cannot avoid the effects of our own biological evolution, we have abandoned the two main constructs which have co-evolved – the social and the religious codes which meant that we could be more fulfilled by doing our duty by our family, even after the first flush of romance.
I hold scientific discovery in awe, but I am not blind to the fact that religion, together with the other moral and societal rules which are so out of favour in these times, evolved in symbiosis with the human ape – and have provided the “glue” for which your article seems to suggest chemical alternatives.
Big not better
In your look at the advance of industrial-scale solar generation across public land in the south-west US, you focused on the desert tortoise as the central obstacle to its progress (5 May, p 8).
Of course, our biologically rich deserts are home to more than tortoises. But what is slowing down the spread of “big solar” is more likely the suspension of taxpayer-funded loan guarantees and subsidies in the billions, the low price of natural gas, and the dawning awareness that these big solar projects are more technologically marginal, controversial and damaging than investors imagined.
Some green groups are building support for the saner alternative of “distributed generation” in many small-scale sites. DG encompasses many options: the use of degraded and even contaminated land; wholesale DG in the built environment, such as car parks and superstore roofs; and policy-driven DG that could take off with just a fraction of the subsidies lavished on big solar.
Escaping justice
Your article “Justice will be done” (12 May, p 44) deals effectively, but exclusively, with how to minimise wrongful convictions by making procedural changes. The avoidance of wrongful convictions is not sufficient to ensure that justice will be done.
An internet search on “miscarriages of justice” shows the phrase is, perversely, almost universally treated as synonymous with wrongful convictions, with little or no attention accorded to wrongful acquittals. This view is sustained by the long-standing criminal-law tradition that the wrongful acquittal is the preferable error. Perhaps the cognitive and behavioural precursors of failed criminal investigations and wrongful acquittals should be afforded similar attention.
Taming toxins
I read, with fascination, your article on venoms as drug candidates (5 May, p 34). Your readers might be interested in a little-known venom from a mammal. A shrew in eastern North America, Blarina brevicauda, has the peptide soricidin in its saliva. It causes paralysis and is used to immobilise prey.
The drug development company Soricimed has been developing this for its anticancer properties, with a phase I clinical study soon. There are also possible applications in treating pain.
Talking cures
In his article on the protests against the American Psychiatric Association, James Davies mentions calls for reform of the US mental health system to provide alternatives to medication (19 May, p 7). UK mental health services could also do with reform because of their overemphasis on medication.
Peer support was mentioned as an alternative. This is fashionable and can be very beneficial, but it should augment rather than substitute for professional support. Many National Health Service users I know say it is difficult, if not impossible, to get time with a psychologist.
Psychological treatment is woefully under-provisioned in the UK. Perhaps a cost-effective peer-based solution is for psychologists to provide workshops, for example teaching peer support groups the use of cognitive behavioural therapy for those with depression.
Half-man, half-phone
I was not surprised by your article “The gadget inside” (12 May, p 22) as I have thought for some time that it is inevitable that phones and other electronic devices will be implanted under the skin.
You touched on cost and reliability, that phones are fault-prone and a reliable device is likely to be rather expensive. But don’t forget obsolescence. Who would want even last month’s smartphone implanted long term? And who will do the implanting? Will gadget-implant surgery become a new speciality?
Brain growth
In your fascinating article, Evan Eichler states that duplications of the SRGAP2 gene, which helps drive development of the neocortex, would have changed early human brain development immediately and dramatically (12 May, p 10).
The possible existence of a group containing those with and without the duplications poses interesting questions. Could there have been a period in which individuals did not fully exploit their more sophisticated brains? Those raising infants blessed with the gene duplications may not have had the ability to stimulate them, to enable all the complex neural pathways to form.
What if the only individuals with the increased brainpower in a group happened to be unable to prevail in physical conflict, and therefore had less access to resources, including mates?
Changes in average intelligence may have been gradual until, for example, prolonged drought, or population growth, demanded more sophisticated problem solving, co-operation, and communication.
First transit
Marcus Chown, reviewing two books on the transit of Venus (12 May, p 48), says that in 1716 Edmond Halley was the first to realise the transit “had the potential to reveal the scale of the solar system”.
In fact British astronomer Jeremiah Horrocks – who is in my family tree – had the idea earlier. He was the first to predict and observe the transit, in 1639, and he used his precise observations to estimate the sizes and distances of the sun and the planets.
Horrocks attempted to involve others, but bewailed the lack of observation by astronomers in America, which would have allowed more precise results.