×

We use cookies to help make LingQ better. By visiting the site, you agree to our cookie policy.


image

PBS NewsHour (Nov to Dec 2017), Dec 20, 2017 - In 2017, politics overshadowed science and scientists fought back

Dec 20, 2017 - In 2017, politics overshadowed science and scientists fought back

Judy Woodruff:

It has been quite a year in the world of science. The headlines and images were powerful, among them, the rupture of enormous icebergs, scientists taking to the streets, the solar eclipse that captured the attention of the country, and new insights into the workings of the universe.

William Brangham sat down with Miles O'Brien to get some perspective on it all. It's part of our weekly segment, the Leading Edge. William Brangham:

So, what would you say is the most important science story of the year? Miles O'Brien: I think there's little doubt, William, that the big science of the year is a political story, sort of political science. Scientists concerned about the Trump administration and its climate denial or climate skepticism took to the streets April 22, Earth Day. Thousands of them marched, concerned about the climate policy, but also environmental policies of the administration, also, frankly, concerned about their funding.

And not long after the new administrator of the EPA came in, Scott Pruitt, a lot of evidence that they had reason to be concerned. There was a purge of scientists that received EPA funding, many of them associated with academic institutions, which made more room for corporate-sponsored science advising the Environmental Protection Agency.

One of those purged scientists, Deborah Swackhamer from the University of Minnesota, told me she's really concerned about the precedent. Deborah Swackhamer:

It almost feels like this is the first of a wave of potential actions that are going to further marginalize science advice, and therefore marginalize the science being done at EPA, marginalize the science being done in other government agencies, and then ultimately just there is going to be this very slow-motion snowball effect. Miles O'Brien: And then the big worry, in June, President Trump into the Rose Garden announcing that the U.S. — it is his decision for the U.S. to remove itself from the Paris climate accords.

This is a big deal, 170 nations committing to limit greenhouse gas production to about two degrees of warming above industrial levels. The United States is the only nation that is not a party to Paris right now. William Brangham:

And this pushback and rejection of the climate science comes at a time when we seem to be getting more and more evidence of the severity of what climate change and global warming will do. Miles O'Brien: The evidence is stacking up.

Climate change is not something in the future. It's happening now. We could talk about the wildfires in California right now, certainly the hurricane season, epic, tragic, catastrophic in so many ways. In Puerto Rico, they're still trying to come back from that. Not only is there a lot of science linking the severity of these storms to climate change. They are, after all, fueled by warm water. But there is a lot of studies that indicate that there is increased precipitation that comes along with these storms.

Look what we saw in Houston.

I spoke with a climate scientist at Columbia University, Radley Horton, about this. Radley Horton:

Even if the hurricane strengths stay the same, we will probably see more rainfall in those hurricanes in the future,because the upper oceans are going to be warmer, because that warmer atmosphere can hold more moisture. That means that, even if the storm strength is the same, you will probably see a little more rainfall occurring during those powerful hurricanes. Miles O'Brien: There was other evidence as well.

In April, there was a very significant coral bleaching event in the Great Barrier Reef in Australia that scientists said had clear-cut signs that climate change was a factor. Warm water affects the coral in very significant ways.

And then, in July, one of the biggest icebergs ever seen was created. The Larsen Ice Sea Shelf fell off of Antarctica into the sea.

Glaciologist Kelly Brunt gave us some perspective on that. Kelly Brunt:

Losing ice that represents roughly the state of Rhode Island in a month-and-a-half just far exceeded anybody's expectations of what could happen and the time scale that it could happen in. Miles O'Brien: It was kind of like, we have to rethink things here a little bit. I mean, this was a wakeup call. Kelly Brunt:

This was absolutely a wakeup call. William Brangham:

Another concern that scientists have been raising is repeatedly is the threat of superbugs.

These are bacteria that have not only developed some ability to fight back against our best antibiotics, but some of them are wholly resistant to those antibiotics. Miles O'Brien: It's really a big problem; 23,000 Americans now die each year because there are no antibiotics to help them, and very simple infections can kill you without antibiotics. The World Health Organization came out with a landmark study this year indicating this is of grave concern and there have to be some incentives put in place to find new antibiotics. William Brangham:

Financial incentives. Miles O'Brien: But it's difficult because of the way antibiotics are prescribed. There's not a lot of money in it for the big pharma companies. And scientists, frankly, are running out of the low-hanging fruit, the microbes that are there that make it possible to make antibiotics.

But this is a big concern which we need to be watching. William Brangham:

And one of the biggest science events of the year certainly was the eclipse. We loved watching your coverage of that wonderful event. Miles O'Brien: Wish you could have been there, pal.

(LAUGHTER) William Brangham:

That was big news. And then there was other — other news of the heavens. Tell us about that. Miles O'Brien: Well, the eclipse was — it was great.

I have been covering science for a long time. I once saw an annular eclipse, which allows a little ring of the sun to still exist. But this was a full eclipse.

This — I happened to be in the path of the totality. I was prepared to be blase. And I have got to tell you, William, next time they come around, make sure you find yourself to one of these spots.

It's really a great experience, in the sense that it gives us understanding of how much we know about our — the space and astronomy, and yet how insignificant we are in some ways. There's a certain dichotomy there. And maybe we're not so alone. In February, the European Southern Observatory announced it had found a very Earth-like-looking system. The so-called TRAPPIST system seven planets around it, has a lot of indications that they might be Earth-like.

Let's listen to one of the scientists, Thomas Zurbuchen. Thomas Zurbuchen:

You can see in this illustration is that three of these planets marked in green are in the habitable zone, where liquid water can pool on the surface. In fact, with the right atmospheric conditions, there could be water on any of these planets. Miles O'Brien: And, as you know, William, on this planet, where you find liquid water, you always find life. So, that is a tantalizing clue. Scientists haven't figured that one out yet. Now for the big scientific, purely scientific event of the year, you have to look at the collision of two neutron stars that was recorded in two novel ways, capturing their gravitational waves, as well as traditional astronomy.

Scientists had not witnessed one of those collisions of these very dense neutron stars. Why is that significant? Well, understanding it using both gravitational waves and traditional light astronomy gave them a way of further calibrating a lot of what Einstein first told us about the expansion of the universe.

They also theorize that these collisions are what created a lot of the heavy elements, including gold and platinum, for example. Scientists estimated that this collision generated more than an octillion dollars worth of gold. That's one with 27 zeros. The problem is, it's about 130 million light years away. (LAUGHTER) Miles O'Brien: So, the prospecting prospects, if you will, are not so great.

The scientists, however, that are responsible for this are the odds-on favorite down the road to win a Nobel Prize, William. William Brangham:

Miles O'Brien, such fascinating stuff. Thank you very much. Miles O'Brien: You're welcome.

Dec 20, 2017 - In 2017, politics overshadowed science and scientists fought back 20. Dezember 2017 - 2017 überschattete die Politik die Wissenschaft und die Wissenschaftler schlugen zurück Dec 20, 2017 - En 2017, la política eclipsó a la ciencia y los científicos contraatacaron 20 décembre 2017 - En 2017, la politique a éclipsé la science et les scientifiques ont riposté 2017年12月20日 - 2017年、政治は科学を覆い、科学者たちは反撃した 20 grudnia 2017 r. - W 2017 r. polityka przyćmiła naukę, a naukowcy walczyli z nią 20 dez 2017 - Em 2017, a política ofuscou a ciência e os cientistas ripostaram Dec 20, 2017 - В 2017 году политика затмила науку, а ученые дали отпор 20 Aralık 2017 - 2017'de siyaset bilimi gölgede bıraktı, bilim insanları mücadele etti 20 грудня 2017 р. - У 2017 році політика затьмарила науку, і вчені дали відсіч 2017年12月20日 - 2017年,政治掩盖了科学,科学家反击 2017年12月20日 - 2017年,政治掩蓋了科學,科學家反擊

Judy Woodruff:

It has been quite a year in the world of science. Cela a été toute une année dans le monde de la science. The headlines and images were powerful, among them, the rupture of enormous icebergs, scientists taking to the streets, the solar eclipse that captured the attention of the country, and new insights into the workings of the universe. Les titres et les images étaient puissants, parmi lesquels la rupture d'énormes icebergs, les scientifiques descendant dans la rue, l'éclipse solaire qui a attiré l'attention du pays et de nouvelles perspectives sur le fonctionnement de l'univers.

William Brangham sat down with Miles O'Brien to get some perspective on it all. William Brangham s'est assis avec Miles O'Brien pour avoir une idée de tout cela. It's part of our weekly segment, the Leading Edge. Cela fait partie de notre segment hebdomadaire, le Leading Edge. William Brangham:

So, what would you say is the most important science story of the year? Miles O'Brien: I think there's little doubt, William, that the big science of the year is a political story, sort of political science. Scientists concerned about the Trump administration and its climate denial or climate skepticism took to the streets April 22, Earth Day. Thousands of them marched, concerned about the climate policy, but also environmental policies of the administration, also, frankly, concerned about their funding. Des milliers d'entre eux ont défilé, soucieux de la politique climatique, mais aussi des politiques environnementales de l'administration, aussi, franchement, soucieuses de leur financement.

And not long after the new administrator of the EPA came in, Scott Pruitt, a lot of evidence that they had reason to be concerned. There was a purge of scientists that received EPA funding, many of them associated with academic institutions, which made more room for corporate-sponsored science advising the Environmental Protection Agency. Il y a eu une purge des scientifiques qui ont reçu un financement de l'EPA, dont beaucoup étaient associés à des institutions universitaires, ce qui a fait plus de place à la science parrainée par les entreprises conseillant l'Agence de protection de l'environnement.

One of those purged scientists, Deborah Swackhamer from the University of Minnesota, told me she's really concerned about the precedent. L'une de ces scientifiques purgées, Deborah Swackhamer de l'Université du Minnesota, m'a dit qu'elle était vraiment préoccupée par le précédent. Deborah Swackhamer:

It almost feels like this is the first of a wave of potential actions that are going to further marginalize science advice, and therefore marginalize the science being done at EPA, marginalize the science being done in other government agencies, and then ultimately just there is going to be this very slow-motion snowball effect. On a presque l'impression que c'est la première d'une vague d'actions potentielles qui vont marginaliser davantage les conseils scientifiques, et donc marginaliser la science en cours à l'EPA, marginaliser la science en cours dans d'autres agences gouvernementales, et puis finalement juste il va être cet effet boule de neige au ralenti. Miles O'Brien: And then the big worry, in June, President Trump into the Rose Garden announcing that the U.S. — it is his decision for the U.S. to remove itself from the Paris climate accords.

This is a big deal, 170 nations committing to limit greenhouse gas production to about two degrees of warming above industrial levels. C'est un gros problème, 170 nations s'engageant à limiter la production de gaz à effet de serre à environ deux degrés de réchauffement au-dessus des niveaux industriels. The United States is the only nation that is not a party to Paris right now. William Brangham:

And this pushback and rejection of the climate science comes at a time when we seem to be getting more and more evidence of the severity of what climate change and global warming will do. Et ce recul et ce rejet de la science du climat surviennent à un moment où nous semblons obtenir de plus en plus de preuves de la gravité de ce que le changement climatique et le réchauffement climatique feront. Miles O'Brien: The evidence is stacking up. Les preuves s'accumulent.

Climate change is not something in the future. It's happening now. We could talk about the wildfires in California right now, certainly the hurricane season, epic, tragic, catastrophic in so many ways. In Puerto Rico, they're still trying to come back from that. À Porto Rico, ils essaient toujours de s'en remettre. Not only is there a lot of science linking the severity of these storms to climate change. Non seulement de nombreuses données scientifiques établissent un lien entre la gravité de ces tempêtes et le changement climatique. They are, after all, fueled by warm water. But there is a lot of studies that indicate that there is increased precipitation that comes along with these storms. Mais il y a beaucoup d'études qui indiquent qu'il y a une augmentation des précipitations qui accompagne ces tempêtes.

Look what we saw in Houston.

I spoke with a climate scientist at Columbia University, Radley Horton, about this. Radley Horton:

Even if the hurricane strengths stay the same, we will probably see more rainfall in those hurricanes in the future,because the upper oceans are going to be warmer, because that warmer atmosphere can hold more moisture. Même si la force des ouragans reste la même, nous verrons probablement plus de précipitations dans ces ouragans à l'avenir, car les océans supérieurs seront plus chauds, car cette atmosphère plus chaude peut contenir plus d'humidité. That means that, even if the storm strength is the same, you will probably see a little more rainfall occurring during those powerful hurricanes. Miles O'Brien: There was other evidence as well.

In April, there was a very significant coral bleaching event in the Great Barrier Reef in Australia that scientists said had clear-cut signs that climate change was a factor. En avril, il y a eu un événement très important de blanchissement des coraux dans la Grande Barrière de Corail en Australie qui, selon les scientifiques, avait des signes évidents que le changement climatique était un facteur. Warm water affects the coral in very significant ways.

And then, in July, one of the biggest icebergs ever seen was created. Et puis, en juillet, l'un des plus grands icebergs jamais vus a été créé. The Larsen Ice Sea Shelf fell off of Antarctica into the sea. Le plateau de la mer de glace de Larsen est tombé de l'Antarctique dans la mer.

Glaciologist Kelly Brunt gave us some perspective on that. La glaciologue Kelly Brunt nous a donné une certaine perspective à ce sujet. Kelly Brunt:

Losing ice that represents roughly the state of Rhode Island in a month-and-a-half just far exceeded anybody's expectations of what could happen and the time scale that it could happen in. La perte de glace qui représente à peu près l'état du Rhode Island en un mois et demi a dépassé de loin les attentes de quiconque quant à ce qui pourrait arriver et à l'échelle de temps dans laquelle cela pourrait se produire. Miles O'Brien: It was kind of like, we have to rethink things here a little bit. I mean, this was a wakeup call. Kelly Brunt:

This was absolutely a wakeup call. William Brangham:

Another concern that scientists have been raising is repeatedly is the threat of superbugs. Une autre préoccupation que les scientifiques ont soulevée à plusieurs reprises est la menace des superbactéries.

These are bacteria that have not only developed some ability to fight back against our best antibiotics, but some of them are wholly resistant to those antibiotics. Miles O'Brien: It's really a big problem; 23,000 Americans now die each year because there are no antibiotics to help them, and very simple infections can kill you without antibiotics. The World Health Organization came out with a landmark study this year indicating this is of grave concern and there have to be some incentives put in place to find new antibiotics. L'Organisation mondiale de la santé a publié cette année une étude historique indiquant que cela est très préoccupant et qu'il doit y avoir des incitations mises en place pour trouver de nouveaux antibiotiques. William Brangham:

Financial incentives. Miles O'Brien: But it's difficult because of the way antibiotics are prescribed. There's not a lot of money in it for the big pharma companies. Il n'y a pas beaucoup d'argent pour les grandes sociétés pharmaceutiques. And scientists, frankly, are running out of the low-hanging fruit, the microbes that are there that make it possible to make antibiotics. Et les scientifiques, franchement, sont à court de fruits à portée de main, les microbes qui sont là et qui permettent de fabriquer des antibiotiques.

But this is a big concern which we need to be watching. William Brangham:

And one of the biggest science events of the year certainly was the eclipse. We loved watching your coverage of that wonderful event. Nous avons adoré regarder votre couverture de ce merveilleux événement. Miles O'Brien: Wish you could have been there, pal. J'aurais aimé que tu sois là, mon pote.

(LAUGHTER) William Brangham:

That was big news. C'était une grande nouvelle. And then there was other — other news of the heavens. Et puis il y avait d'autres — d'autres nouvelles du ciel. Tell us about that. Miles O'Brien: Well, the eclipse was — it was great.

I have been covering science for a long time. I once saw an annular eclipse, which allows a little ring of the sun to still exist. J'ai vu une fois une éclipse annulaire, qui permet à un petit anneau du soleil d'exister encore. But this was a full eclipse.

This — I happened to be in the path of the totality. Cela — il se trouve que j'étais sur le chemin de la totalité. I was prepared to be blase. J'étais prêt à être blasé. And I have got to tell you, William, next time they come around, make sure you find yourself to one of these spots. Et je dois vous dire, William, la prochaine fois qu'ils viennent, assurez-vous de vous retrouver à l'un de ces endroits.

It's really a great experience, in the sense that it gives us understanding of how much we know about our — the space and astronomy, and yet how insignificant we are in some ways. C'est vraiment une expérience formidable, dans le sens où cela nous permet de comprendre tout ce que nous savons sur notre — l'espace et l'astronomie, et pourtant à quel point nous sommes insignifiants à certains égards. There's a certain dichotomy there. And maybe we're not so alone. In February, the European Southern Observatory announced it had found a very Earth-like-looking system. En février, l'Observatoire européen austral a annoncé qu'il avait trouvé un système très semblable à la Terre. The so-called TRAPPIST system seven planets around it, has a lot of indications that they might be Earth-like. Le soi-disant système TRAPPIST sept planètes autour de lui, a beaucoup d'indications qu'elles pourraient ressembler à la Terre.

Let's listen to one of the scientists, Thomas Zurbuchen. Thomas Zurbuchen:

You can see in this illustration is that three of these planets marked in green are in the habitable zone, where liquid water can pool on the surface. Vous pouvez voir sur cette illustration que trois de ces planètes marquées en vert se trouvent dans la zone habitable, où l'eau liquide peut s'accumuler à la surface. In fact, with the right atmospheric conditions, there could be water on any of these planets. Miles O'Brien: And, as you know, William, on this planet, where you find liquid water, you always find life. So, that is a tantalizing clue. Donc, c'est un indice alléchant. Scientists haven't figured that one out yet. Les scientifiques n'ont pas encore compris celui-là. Now for the big scientific, purely scientific event of the year, you have to look at the collision of two neutron stars that was recorded in two novel ways, capturing their gravitational waves, as well as traditional astronomy. Maintenant, pour le grand événement scientifique, purement scientifique de l'année, vous devez regarder la collision de deux étoiles à neutrons qui a été enregistrée de deux manières nouvelles, capturant leurs ondes gravitationnelles, ainsi que l'astronomie traditionnelle.

Scientists had not witnessed one of those collisions of these very dense neutron stars. Les scientifiques n'avaient pas été témoins d'une de ces collisions de ces étoiles à neutrons très denses. Why is that significant? Well, understanding it using both gravitational waves and traditional light astronomy gave them a way of further calibrating a lot of what Einstein first told us about the expansion of the universe. Eh bien, le comprendre en utilisant à la fois les ondes gravitationnelles et l'astronomie lumineuse traditionnelle leur a permis de calibrer davantage une grande partie de ce qu'Einstein nous a d'abord dit sur l'expansion de l'univers.

They also theorize that these collisions are what created a lot of the heavy elements, including gold and platinum, for example. Ils théorisent également que ces collisions sont à l'origine de la création de nombreux éléments lourds, notamment l'or et le platine, par exemple. Scientists estimated that this collision generated more than an octillion dollars worth of gold. That's one with 27 zeros. The problem is, it's about 130 million light years away. (LAUGHTER) Miles O'Brien: So, the prospecting prospects, if you will, are not so great. Ainsi, les perspectives de prospection, si vous voulez, ne sont pas si grandes.

The scientists, however, that are responsible for this are the odds-on favorite down the road to win a Nobel Prize, William. Les scientifiques, cependant, qui en sont responsables sont le favori sur la route pour remporter un prix Nobel, William. William Brangham:

Miles O'Brien, such fascinating stuff. Thank you very much. Miles O'Brien: You're welcome.