Extraterrestrial-intelligence pioneer Jill Tarter retires

After 35 years, astronomer Jill Tarter (pictured) is retiring from the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI) — a field she helped to pioneer and popularize, most recently at the SETI Institute in Mountain View, California. Tarter, who inspired the late Carl Sagan to create Ellie Arroway, the fictional heroine of the novel and movie Contact, says that she will instead focus her efforts on what she calls “the search for intelligent funding”.

“Last year’s hibernation was a real wake-up call,” she explains, referring to the seven-month shutdown of the institute’s Allen Telescope Array in northern California, triggered when its partners at the University of California, Berkeley, withdrew from the project (see Nature 475, 442–444; 2011). The array was reopened in December after the institute put together a ‘crowdsourcing’ website, SETIStars, and raised more than US$200,000 from individual donors. But that was a best a stopgap, says Tarter: “If we don’t get funding under control,” she says, “we’ll be a SETI Institute that doesn’t do SETI.”

The institute’s research programme costs about $3 million a year, says Tarter. “So our first priority is to establish an endowment that can provide that kind of funding today, tomorrow and a century from now.” (Federal funding has been out of the question since 1993, when Congress slashed SETI from the NASA budget with extreme prejudice; politicians simply cannot resist the temptation to ridicule the search as a quest for ‘little green men.’) Using the standard 5% rule-of-thumb for interest, that means raising at least $60 million. “But what’s interesting to me,” says Tarter, “is that, at any given time, there are more than a hundred campaigns underway in the United States to raise that much for a lab building, or a concert hall. So it’s clearly not an impossible amount to raise.”

It’s not a job for amateurs, though: Tarter plans to assemble a group of experienced fund-raisers for her campaign — “people with the equivalent of large Rolodexes,” she says, “who figure that SETI is too important to fail.”

Fortunately, adds Tarter, when her hoped-for donors ask what their money is buying, she will be able to point to a substantial upgrade in the Allen Array’s search capabilities being spearheaded by Gerald Harp, her successor as head of the SETI Institute’s search programme. In the months since the restart, that programme has mostly been listening for artificial signals in the same patch of sky being scanned by NASA’s Kepler satellite, which has already found more than 60 confirmed planets there, plus thousands more candidate planets. Right now, the array can listen to only three stars at once. But this summer, Harp is planning to test a signal-analysis method that would allow it to do simultaneous, low-resolution scans of many more stars — which means that the array could efficiently carry out targeted searches and wide-field surveys at the same time.

“We always reserve the right to get smarter, and do new things,” notes Tarter, who will be feted in June at the SETI Institute’s SETIcon II festival.

Image courtesy of Seth Shostak

 

High-flying cosmic-ray detector offers hints but no results yet

When Samuel Ting, a physicist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge, got up to give his plenary talk at the opening session of the American Physical Society’s spring meeting in Atlanta on 31 March, the vast hotel ballroom was close to standing-room only. Ting is not only a Nobel laureate, but he is also the principal investigator and prime mover of the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer (AMS): the hugely controversial, US$1.5-billion cosmic-ray detector that has been riding on the International Space Station since its launch last May (see Nature 455, 854–857; 2008). If AMS works as advertised, it could detect positrons from the self-annihilation of the mysterious particles comprising dark matter, thus providing the first solid clue as to what those particles are. It might also see anti-helium nuclei that were created right after the Big Bang, thus shedding fresh light on why matter is so much more common than antimatter.

But Ting is a famously meticulous man, willing to spend enormous amounts of time on checking and cross-checking his experiments before announcing his results. He spent almost all of his 30-minute talk describing the AMS and going over the multitudinous tests his team has conducted to prove that the AMS is working as planned in the weightless, airless, sun-blasted environment of space.

Along the way, however, Ting did drop a few tantalizing hints. The AMS is working very well, he said. It has registered some 14 billion cosmic-ray events in ten months — far more than expected. And it has seen high-energy positrons: Ting showed four examples with energies ranging from 205 to 424 gigaelectronvolts.

“Hopefully within a year,” was his reply when he was asked about when results would be announced — “and as late as I can. We don’t want to announce preliminary results.”

Photo credit: NASA

Pacific Biosciences gets sued – and that’s just business as usual

Posted on behalf of Erika Check Hayden

Biotechnology lawyers seem unsurprised by a class-action lawsuit filed last month against Pacific Biosciences, the Menlo Park, California-based gene-sequencing technology company that has seen its fortunes decline dramatically over the past year.

The suit was filed on 21 December in the US District Court for Northern California on behalf of people and companies who bought stock in PacBio between 27 October 2010 — when the company made its initial public offering — and 20 September 2011.

According to the online industry newsletter GenomeWeb, the plaintiff, Thomas J. Primo, alleges that the company made “materially false and misleading statements” in the prospectus materials shown to potential investors before the company went public. For instance, the company said that it could achieve “99.99 [%] accuracy at single molecule resolution from a single DNA strand” in those materials, but then said in a press release in November 2010 that its machine was achieving “80% to 85% single molecule raw read accuracy,” according to GenomeWeb.

Biotech lawyers said that shareholder lawsuits often follow when companies’ fortunes decline, as have PacBio’s over the past year. PacBio’s stock price fell 82% in 2011, driven by lower-than-expected demand for its machines in a market that saw other products debut, and that had softened due to the dismal economic situation in the United States and Europe. The company laid off 130 people — 28% of its staff — in September. Although it is not alone among gene-sequencing companies in feeling the economic pinch, it has been among the hardest hit.

“It’s very common for plaintiffs’ class action lawyers to file a suit whenever a company’s stock tanks,” says lawyer John Conley of the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.

Deciding whether PacBio’s claims were false depends on how exactly the statements were made in its prospectuses — for instance, on whether the company was claiming its platform could reach 99.99% accuracy or whether this just applied to some sequenced molecules of DNA. However, the plaintiffs have to do a lot more than prove falsehood to win the case, says Conley: “They have to prove that the statements were intentional and misleading, and that investors reasonably relied on them. That’s tough.”

Allison Williams Dobson, who is both an attorney and a PhD toxicologist at Chapel Hill, adds, “The take-home message for the biotech world, in my mind, is just be truthful about what you’ve already achieved, and what is really just a goal.”

Collins answers the Big Questions on science and faith

Francis Collins is a geneticist who is famous not only for being the former head of the US Human Genome Project—and a widely rumoured choice to be the next director of the National Institutes of Health—but for being a devout evangelical Christian.

He sees no contradiction between those roles. In his 2006 best-seller, The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief, he argued that science is perfectly compatible with religious faith, properly understood—and that faith, in particular, need not be synonymous with absolute-literal-truth-of-every-word-in-the-Bible fundamentalism. God operates through natural law, Collins declared. Humankind is the product of Darwinian evolution. And the scriptural accounts are best read metaphorically.

Collins’ arguments earned him howls of derision from the more stridently atheistic quarters of science, but praise from many other parts of the research community (including a BioLogos.org: a Web site that, in the words of its mission statement, “addresses the core themes of science and religion, and emphasizes the compatibility of Christian faith with what science has discovered about the origins of the universe and life.”

At the heart of the site are essays that attempt to answer 33 of the most frequently asked questions about religion and science. Examples range from the basics—“”What is evolution?" href=“https://biologos.org/questions/what-is-evolution/” id="bk0l">What is evolution? "—to that freshman bull-session classic, "If God created the universe, what created God?" The BioLogos.org also provides reading lists and other resources. Future plans include curriculum materials for parents who are home-schooling their children, and looking for alternatives to the abundant materials provided by creationist and intelligent-design organizations.

No word yet on whether the founding of BioLogos.org will affect Collins’ chances for the NIH directorship. But if his book hasn’t knocked him out of contention already, it’s hard to imagine this Web site will. And besides, the choice is up to US president Barack Obama, who invited televangelist Rick Warren to give the invocation at his inauguration, and who seems to love bridging cultural divides.

New US Chief Information Officer in jeopardy

The Obama administration continues to have a hard time finding people pure enough for appointment to federal office.

New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson raised an early warning flag before the new president was even inaugurated, when he asked in early January that his name be withdrawn from consideration as Commerce Secretary—not because he, Richardson, did anything wrong (he said), but because the feds were investigating how one of his political donors got a lucrative state contract. Then came the flap over the relatively small-scale errors in Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner’s tax returns—soon followed by the uproar over the considerably larger tax errors made by former Senator Tom Daschle, who in early February was forced to withdraw his nomination as Secretary of Health and Human Services.

And so it has gone, leading an embarrassed White House to tighten and re-tighten its nominee vetting procedures to the point of paralysis. (Geithner is still battling a global financial meltdown solo, without any of his presidentially appointed deputies in place at Treasury.)

Now comes the latest embarrassment: on 12 March Vivek Kundra took a leave of absence from the White House staff just a week after being appointed to the newly created post of US Chief Information Officer (Nature 458, 136; 12 March 2009). It seems that at the office of the District of Columbia’s Chief Technology Officer—Kundra’s previous job—the FBI had caught a mid-level manager with his hand in the till. The Washington Post has the story.

There was no suggestion by the FBI or anyone else that Kundra had had anything to do with the pilfering, or that he ever had knowledge of it. But the now gun-shy White House was taking no chances: according to an administration spokesman, Kundra is ‘on leave until further details become known.’

It’s easy to understand why the administration is being ultra-careful: the press, pundits and politicians of Washington love to play ‘gotcha!’ with stuff like this, happily letting ‘unanswered questions’ consume all the the capital’s available attention. The game is much more fun that dealing with actual problems. It remains to be seen whether Kundra, like other talented individuals before him, will be forced to step aside rather than become ‘a distraction’ to the administration. And it likewise remains to be seen whether the US government—a government facing multiple world crises simultaneously—has any room for actual human beings who have lived their lives on the real, messy planet Earth.