UT: Kissing: MyFoxAUSTIN.com

The tragic events in Japan are absolutely devastating and difficult to fathom given the magnitude of compounding disasters. Over the past week I’ve received many emails in support or in protest of nuclear energy. The nightmare unfolding halfway around the world has clearly served to polarize public opinion, but I’d like to take this moment to remind readers that now is not the time for debate or knee-jerk decisions regarding U.S. energy policy.

In the digital age, anyone with an Internet connection can post an opinion, but we must wait to learn more from informed nuclear experts–and take steps to ensure this never happens again. So instead of jumping to rash conclusions about the future of nuclear development, it is a time for compassion. We must unite as a global community to help those hit hardest by the earthquake, tsunami, and nuclear crisis. Here are some ways to contribute–and please add more in comments:

AMERICAN RED CROSS: The American Red Cross is currently supporting and advising the Japanese Red Cross, which continues to assist the government in its response.  You can help people affected by disasters, like floods, fires, tornadoes and hurricanes, as well as countless other crises at home and around the world by making a donation to support American Red Cross Disaster Relief. Donate here.

GLOBALGIVING: Established a fund to disburse donations to organizations providing relief and emergency services to victims of the earthquake and tsunami. We are working with International Medical Corps, Save the Children, and other organizations on the ground to provide support. Our partners on the ground are working hard to provide immediate relief. Donate here.

SAVE THE CHILDREN:  Save the Children, which has worked in Japan since 1986, has an immediate goal of $5 million to launch longer-term recovery for children affected by Japan’s March 11 earthquake and tsunami. Save the Children has opened the first child-friendly space in Japan, protective environments where children can gather to play and share their experiences under the supervision of trained, caring adults. Donate here.

SALVATION ARMY: The Salvation Army has been in Japan since 1895 and is currently providing emergency assistance to those in need. Donate here.

AMERICARES: AmeriCares and its relief workers in Japan are working to deliver medicines and supplies to hospitals, shelters and health responders to treat and care for survivors.  The AmeriCares team began mobilizing within hours of the first reports of the dual disasters, dispatching an emergency response manager to Tokyo to direct the efforts of our relief workers in Sendai, the largest city closest to the impact zone. Our team is in direct contact with local officials, evacuation shelters and hospitals treating the injured in Miyagi, Fukushima and Iwate to determine health needs. Donate here.

INTERNATIONAL MEDICAL CORPS: A team of doctors flew to Sendai, where they will be delivering supplies, assessing needs, and identifying communities that have not yet been reached. We continue to coordinate with local health authorities and partners on critical gaps, providing technical expertise and assisting with logistics. Donate here.

SHELTERBOX: ShelterBox responds instantly to natural and man-made disasters by delivering boxes of aid to those who are most in need. The box includes a tent for a family of 10, cooker, blankets, water purification, tool kit and other items survivors need to rebuild their lives in the days, weeks and months following a disaster. Donate here.

Over 100 million children in the developing world need–but lack access to–vision correction. Today Dow Corning and the Centre for Vision in the Developing World announced that they have teamed up to do something about it. Through the use of silicones, a new initiative called Child ViSion will provide 100 million self-adjustable eyeglasses to children by 2020, which reportedly correct nearsightedness, farsightedness, astigmatism, and age-related difficulty focusing:

The Child ViSion initiative will design, manufacture and distribute a child-specific version of self-adjustable eyeglasses to children in the developing world. The aim is to increase the effectiveness of classroom-based education by improving children’s ability to see the blackboard from which they are being taught.

Read more about this terrific program here.

Two months ago, I had the pleasure of co-hosting a session at Science Online 2011 with Kate Clancy, Anne Jefferson, and Joanne Manaster entitled “Perils of blogging as a woman under a real name.” Our conversation soon became a science web-wide phenomenon (with special thanks to Ed Yong!) and the video is now available:

I was on The Alonya Show tonight, on the RT network, discussing events in Japan and what the coverage says about the media’s scientific literacy:

Way back in 2003/2004, I wrote a kind of classic piece in Columbia Journalism Review about the problems with “he said, she said, we’re clueless” coverage of scientific topics. You can read it here.

There was much evidence back then that this was a problem, but we certainly lacked this–a new study showing that “he said, she said” coverage leaves readers less certain that they are able to discern the truth about politics. In other words, such “passive” journalism contributes to a postmodern state of affairs in which nobody thinks they can pin down what reality actually is. It is therefore damaging and detrimental to our efforts to achieve consensus in contested areas, and sound policy solutions.

I have much more to say about this at DeSmogBlog:

The study, conducted by The Ohio State University communications professor Raymond Pingree, did not focus on climate change but rather the U.S. healthcare debate—but the same lesson would seem to apply. Study subjects were asked to read fake news stories in which two disputes about the contents of a healthcare bill were either left unresolved, or factually adjudicated. In other words, sometimes the subjects were exposed to “he said, she said” coverage, and sometimes they were exposed to a breed of journalism that unflinchingly examines where the truth lies.

Then the study subjects answered survey questions about their confidence in whether it was possible to discern the truth in politics. For instance, they were asked how much they agreed that “If I wanted to, I could figure out the facts behind most political disputes.” What kind of article they’d read had a significant effect: Those who’d read the “passive” story were more, er, postmodern in outlook. They were less sure they could discern the truth (if it existed).

You can read the study here; and continue reading my DeSmogBlog analysis here.

After months of planning, Energy at the Movies happens tonight! The event begins at 6pm CT and there’s still time to register to watch online or visit Scientific American for the live feed:

Nuclear power is evil. Solar power is our savior. Or…is it the other way around? On Wednesday, March 9, at 7:00 p.m. EST, the University of Texas will present an entertaining lecture about how movies have depicted energy sources and therefore shaped public opinion and government policy, for generations. The evening will be filled with video clips and expert debates, and you can watch the whole event, live, right here at ScientificAmerican.com

We’ll be taking questions on Facebook & Twitter (tag #energymovies) and I can report that this is one of the most unique and engaging projects I’ve been involved organizing. We’ve got quite a cool and interactive show, so tune in and you won’t be disappointed!

In three days–and just in time for SXSW!–the film event I’ve been planning with colleagues at UT hits the historic ACL stage! Energy at the Movies will navigate through 70 years of energy on the big screen as we explore cultural perceptions of oil, coal, industry stereotypes, renewables, and much more. Best of all, you can watch via the livestream.

As a panelist, my role will be to discuss the portrayal of women in these films. To introduce the subject, let’s start with the Bechdel test. Heard of it? Here’s a great explanation:

There are lots of examples to discuss, from Leslie Benedict in 1956′s Giant to Kimberly Wells in 1979′s The China Syndrome. More coming soon, but for the time being, I’m interested to hear readers’ thoughts…

If true–and not a case of contamination or mistaken identity–this could be big:

Dr. Richard B. Hoover, an astrobiologist with NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center, has traveled to remote areas in Antarctica, Siberia, and Alaska, amongst others, for over ten years now, collecting and studying meteorites. He gave FoxNews.com early access to the out-of-this-world research, published late Friday evening in the March edition of the Journal of Cosmology. In it, Hoover describes the latest findings in his study of an extremely rare class of meteorites, called CI1 carbonaceous chondrites — only nine such meteorites are known to exist on Earth.

Though it may be hard to swallow, Hoover is convinced that his findings reveal fossil evidence of bacterial life within such meteorites, the remains of living organisms from their parent bodies — comets, moons and other astral bodies. By extension, the findings suggest we are not alone in the universe, he said.

For now I’ll say I’m intrigued, but also somewhat skeptical–at least until we learn more. What do readers think?

[Update: Phil's got a great post up on the possibility of fossilized microscopic life forms.]

Everyone seems to be speculating about Charlie Sheen. The media paints things any way they want, and as a blogger, admittedly, with this post I add to the hullabaloo. But I’d like to contribute something to the conversation. I’ve seen Dr. Drew describing Sheen’s unusual behavior as possibly “drug induced,” bipolar, and/or manic. Meanwhile, he has reportedly tested negative for drugs and Neil DeGrasse Tyson recently tweeted:

Now I don’t know Charlie Sheen and cannot imagine what his lifestyle is really like. The media’s portrayal is assuredly not the full story.

That said, I suspect he may have more dopamine receptors dotting the tips of his nerve cells than the average man. Dopamine is a powerful chemical associated with craving, desire, and stimulation of pleasure-pathway nerves in the brain. As I explain in my book, research suggests that a high number may predispose us to sexual promiscuity or addictive behavior.

Should this be the case, then Sheen would be–as he describes–literally on a drug called “Charlie Sheen.”