I'm completely wiped from the stuff that happened under friends-lock

[conuly]

Do Scientists Ever Name Creatures After People They Dislike Out of Spite?

In pictures: Growing up in -60C

The Middle East Is Dotted With Thousands of Puzzling Kite-Shaped Structures

Armed with affection, octogenarian is an ‘octopus whisperer’

“The Linux of social media”—How LiveJournal pioneered (then lost) blogging

Meet the 22-Year-Old Breaking the Blood Bank Crisis in Cameroon

Is Ancient DNA Research Revealing New Truths — or Falling Into Old Traps?

The Surprising Popularity of Kosher Food in Prison

When the Park Ranger Was Not Your Friend

How Prohibition Paved the Way for a Ku Klux Klan Resurgence in the 1920s

How about no. Opt out. I don’t want you damn smart lock.

I Needed A Hysterectomy At Age 31. Doctors Fought Me Every Step Of The Way.

A new Supreme Court is poised to take a chunk out of MLK's legacy

Described as Defeated, Islamic State Punches Back With Guerrilla Tactics

Human Trafficking Reaches 'Horrific' New Heights, Declares U.N. Report

Comments

[maureenlycaon_dw]

Ancient population genomics is my latest fad scientific interest, so I read the NYT article -- and a lot of Twitter discussion between scientists about it.

Overall, there was a lot of negative opinion. Complaints included the fact that it seems to make Reich the dramatic villain of the story. But several people also commented that scientists *have* to be able to disagree without fear, even of "bigger" scientists with more fame. Almost everyone agreed that they need to solve the problem of four labs monopolizing the samples . . . somehow.

Paleogenomics thread

A short thread

Reich's response, including correcting some outright inaccuracies in the article

[conuly]

Thanks, I'll read that when I have the energy.