Dan Drollette writes: "When will the two Koreas unify?" is something that's been asked of this noted Asian history scholar for over four decades. His answer: Don't hold your breath. After 70 years, the North shows no sign of folding. And this is the third generation of the Kim family to run the North. In fact, modern North Korea is a 21-st century Asian monarchy based on the template of the 500-year-long reign of the Choson Dynasty and ancient Neo-Confucianism: emphasizing clearly defined hierarchies, centralized bureaucracy, obedience to the state, and social stability—elements of great use to modern despots.
Dana Nuccitelli writes: Research shows that climate scientists can engage in advocacy without losing credibility with the public. Under attack by the current administration, there are two upcoming events that provide an important opportunity to do just that.
Dan Drollette writes: A new study says that scientists should have nothing to fear from participating in things such as the upcoming March for Science in Washington, DC, writes Dana Nuccitelli. It says that scientists don't necessarily lose credibility among the public when they advocate for policies relevant to their expertise, the key word being "relevant."
Lasrick writes: The first Russian explosive device to land on US soil wasn’t delivered by a Russian missile, as Americans feared might happen throughout the Cold War. It was delivered by FedEx. This is a great story of true scientific cooperation from the great metallurgist and nuclear scientist Siegfried Hecker, who recounts the story of when an explosive magnetic flux compression generator arrived at Los Alamos National Laboratory in late 1993, shipped from the Russian Federal Nuclear Center VNIIEF. It allowed Los Alamos and VNIIEF scientists to conduct a groundbreaking joint experiment to study high-temperature superconductivity in ultra-high magnetic fields. Great stuff.
Dan Drollette writes: Of all the humanitarian issues on which Trump might have taken a passionate position, chemical weapons turned out to be what motivated him. So... why do people respond the way they do to chemical weapons? Link to Original Source
Lasrick writes: Andrew Nikiforuk, a contributing editor of The Tyee and author of Slick Water, has a smart piece outlining what the United States science community can do to combat expected attacks from the Trump administration on federal funding for research projects that examine the environmental impacts of industries such as mining and oil drilling. Nikiforuk seeks lessons from the years when the Canadian government, led by then-Prime Minister Stephen Harper, systematically reduced the capacity of publicly funded federal science to monitor the impacts of air, water, and carbon pollution from the country’s aggressive resource industries—by cutting budgets and firing staff. Great read.
Dan Drollette writes: When it comes to whistleblowers and chilled work environments, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission may have the largest refrigerator in town, says a new report from the Union of Concerned Scientists.
Lasrick writes: A postdoc research associate at Cornell University’s Cornell Laboratory for Accelerator-based ScienceS and Education (CLASSE) explores the reasons why there are so few scientists in Congress, and why (and how) that should change. 'For the sustainable advancement of science, for the preservation and promotion of liberal democracy, and for meeting the urgent challenges of today when law and policy lag behind science and technology, scientists must be active in the political discourse.' Great read.
Dan Drollette writes: A climate scientist analyzing the proposal says it's a real, honest attempt to deal with global warming. And it would give cover for Republican members of Congress to come out of the climate closet.
Lasrick writes: A heavily revised draft of President Donald Trump's executive order on cybersecurity lays out initiatives to build upon the previous administration's IT security programs rather than to radically change them.
Lasrick writes: In a guest post at Climate Brief, Zeke Hausfather goes point by point through an article from Sunday's Daily Mail, which makes the astonishing claim that 'world leaders were duped into investing billions over manipulated global warming data' and accuses the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) of manipulating the data to show more warming in a 2015 study.
Dan Drollette writes: The hands of the Doomsday Clock were re-set today, to show that we are even closer to nuclear midnight. Here's the reasoning behind it. (PS — You can also watch a replay of the live press conference this morning at clock.thebulletin.org)