Los Angeles Times: The restarted telescope resumes sending pictures. But there’s a new snag: A NASA repair team won’t be sent to the aging craft until at least May.
The Associated Press: Russia insisted Friday its nuclear arsenal is secure, angrily rejecting U.S. allegations that tens of thousands of aging Soviet weapons may not be fully accounted for.
MSNBC: Ancient rocks contain magnetic records about very early history of planets
BBC Newsnight: Newsnight’s Science Editor Susan Watts reports on how our online lifestyle is being driven by giant computer servers massively boosting the world’s carbon emissions.
The New York Times: A mega-tsunami rivaling the deadly one in 2004 struck southeast Asia more than 600 years ago, two teams of geologists said after finding sedimentary evidence in coastal marshes.
The Guardian: Science academy to launch a feasibility study to establish which techniques might best tackle climate change.
Nature: Physicists get CSI on the LHC.
Time: As I report on climate change, I come across a lot of scary facts, like the possibility that thawing permafrost in Siberia could release gigatons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere or the risk that Greenland could pass a tipping point and begin to melt rapidly. But one of the most frightening studies I’ve read recently had nothing to do with icebergs or mega-droughts. In a paper that came out Oct. 23 in Science, John Sterman — a professor at Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s (MIT) Sloan School of Management — wrote about asking 212 MIT grad students to give a rough idea of how much governments need to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions by to eventually stop the increase in the concentration of carbon in the atmosphere. These students had training in science, technology, mathematics and economics at one of the best schools in the world — they are probably a lot smarter than you or me. Yet 84% of Sterman’s subjects got the question wrong, greatly underestimating the degree to which greenhouse gas emissions need to fall. When the MIT kids can’t figure out climate change, what are the odds that the broader public will?
Nature: Age is no barrier to productivity.
ABC News: Scientists are intrigued by the possibility that Earth-like planets could be evolving.