« Whatever happened to... | Main | Silent mutations speak up »

2006 in review

A romp through ten of this year's big science developments.

Read it here. And let us know what we missed!

Posted by Nicola Jones on December 21, 2006 12:45 PM |

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://blogs.nature.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1662

Comments

The Year 2006 has really been an important year from the point f view of global climate and environment. Research has shown that the effects og global warming have become more pronounced than ever. And with this also comes the time for us to review our current activities in respect of the environment. On one hand, efforts to reduce emissions must be initiated at the individual level. On the other hand, suitable legislations must be passed in all the countries of the world to reduce and regulate emissions of greenhouse gases from various sources. Indeed, it is important to achieve more than the Kyoto Protocol. We must not forget that the Earth is a unique home we have in this solar system, perhaps in the whole galaxy or the universe.

Posted by: Arindam Samanta | December 21, 2006 08:57 PM

2006: parallels can be drawn with 1939, with the evils being done to our planet today resembling a scaled up version of the nazi's onslaught on europe. how much longer can we stand idly by and do nothing while entire species get exterminated? the recent news that the chinese river dolphin is extinct should be a wake-up call to us all.

our current leaders, bush and blair, have done nothing but pander to the enemy and lack the courage to take the tough decisions required. bush particularly seems happy to ignore the biggest threat the world faces, while squandering billions of dollars on comparatively mickey mouse issues such as iraq and the so-called war on terror. how he thinks a bearded old man in a cave somewhere in afghanastan is more important than global climate change is absolutely incredible.

so who is the present-day churchill who can lead us to an improbable victory? al gore should be an absolute no-brainer for the top job, but unfortunately the bizarre system of 'democracy' in america means he probably wouldnt win (or if he did he would be cheated out of it again) so schwarzenegger looks like the next best bet. the 'austrian oak' is the sort of action man america needs to stand up to the oil barons who have bush in their pocket. but will the self-serving politicians in washington ever change the law to their own disadvantage by making it possible for all american citizens (eg arnie) to become president? don't hold your breath, as 'real' democracy is not in their interests.

right thats enough ranting from me, im off to watch animal farm (the film adaptation of the book, not the porno...)

Posted by: democracy for the few, not the many | December 25, 2006 11:25 PM

It seems incredible that the leader of the most powerful nation of the world does not believe the reality of global warming. It seems ludicrous that he doesn't have any concept about what stem cell research entails. It seems insane that he is willing to send young American men and women daily to their deaths amd cause devastation to millions of innocent people in a country which he MAY only recently be able to identify in a map. And it seems pathetic for a country which prides itself on having equality for one and all (at least on paper) to harbour such wrong and hateful ideas about a religion based on a few examples about it hyped up by media. If the Muslim is faced with such discrimination today, it is simply a reflection of the grave insecurity of the west. Whether this is due to the West's own lack of awareness and its reluctance to be educated about how the other half of the world lives, or if it is simply the greed for oil, remains to be seen.
All in all, a very disappointing display of intolerance and ignorance. For shame, Mr Bush!

Posted by: Roshni Mitra Chintalapati | December 27, 2006 07:27 PM

Post a comment

Comments will be reviewed by staff before being published. You can be as critical or controversial as you like, but please don't get personal or offensive, and do keep it brief. Excessively long entries may be cropped. Remember this is for feedback and discussion - not for publishing papers or press releases.

We strongly encourage you to use your real, full name. Email addresses are required: this is just in case we need to discuss your comment with you privately. They won’t be published.


Please enter the numbers you see below - this helps us to cut down on spam. If you are having trouble with this system, you can instead e-mail a comment to 'inthefield at nature.com'.

Search