It’s possible that I shall make an ass of myself. But in that case one can always get out of it with a little dialectic. I have, of course, so worded my proposition as to be right either way (K.Marx, Letter to F.Engels on the Indian Mutiny)
Friday, August 18, 2023
New paper highlights dangerous misconceptions of AI
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is discriminatory, susceptible to racial and sexist bias and its improper use is sending education into a global crisis, a leading Charles Darwin University (CDU) expert warns in a new research paper.
The critique of AI as a foundation for judicious use in higher education' urges society to look beyond the hype of AI and analyze the risks associated with adopting the technology in education after AI ubiquitously invaded and colonized public imaginations across the world in late 2022 and early 2023.
In the paper, author and CDU AI expert Dr. Stefan Popenici discusses the two most dangerous myths about AI in education: the belief AI is objective, factual and unbiased when it is in fact directly related to specific values, beliefs and biases; and the belief AI doesn't discriminate when it is inherently discriminatory, referencing also the lack of gender diversity in the growing field.
"If we think about how technology actually operates, we realize that there is not one point in the history of humanity when technology is not directly related to specific cultures and values, beliefs and biases, religious beliefs or gender stances," Dr. Popenici said.
"There is consistent research and books that are providing examples of AI algorithms that discriminate, grotesquely amplify injustice and inequality, targeting and victimizing the most vulnerable and exposing us all to unseen mechanisms of decision where we have no transparency and possibility of recourse."
Dr. Popenici examines how the discrepancy in priorities of higher education and "Big Tech"—the most dominant companies in the information technology industry—are growing, with a striking and perilous absence of critical thinking about automation in education, especially in the case of AI. The lack of concern for AI in education is affecting the use of students' data, impacts on their privacy and ability to think critically and creatively.
"Big Tech is driven by the aims of profits and power, control and financial gain. Institutions of education and teachers have very different aims: the advancement of knowledge and to nurture educated, responsible, and active citizens that are able to live a balanced life and bring a positive contribution to their societies," Dr. Popenici said.
"It is deceiving to say, dangerous to believe, that artificial intelligence is... intelligent. There is no creativity, no critical thinking, no depth or wisdom in what generative AI gives users after a prompt."
"Intelligence, as a human trait, is a term that describes a very different set of skills and abilities, much more complex and harder to separate, label, measure and manipulate than any computing system associated with the marketing label of AI."
"If universities and educators want to remain relevant in the future and have a real chance to reach the aims of education, it is important to consider the ethical and intellectual implications of AI."
"The critique of AI as a foundation for judicious use in higher education" was published in the Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching.
More information: Stefan Popenici et al, The critique of AI as a foundation for
judicious use in higher education, Journal of Applied Learning &
When ChatGPT surged into public life in late 2022, it brought new urgency to long-running debates: Does technology help or hinder kids' learning? How can we make sure tech's influence on kids is positive?Such questions live close to the work of Jason Yip, a University of Washington associate professor in the Information School. Yip has focused on technology's role in families to support collaboration and learning.
As another school year approaches, Yip spoke with UW News about his research.
What sorts of family technology issues do you study?
I look at how technologies mediate interactions between kids and their families. That could be parents or guardians, grandparents or siblings. My doctoral degree is in science education, but I study families as opposed to schools because I think families make the biggest impact in learning.
I have three main pillars of that research. The first is about building new technologies to come up with creative ways that we can study different kinds of collaboration. The second is going into people's homes and doing field studies on things like how families search the internet, or how they interact with voice assistants or digital games. We look at how new consumer technologies influence family collaborations. The third is co-design: How do adults work with children to co-create new technologies? I'm the director of KidsTeam UW. We have kids come to the university basically to work with us as design researchers to make technologies that work for other children.
Can you explain some ways you've explored the pros and cons of learning with technology?
I study "joint media engagement," which is a fancy way of saying that kids can work and play with others when using technology. For example, digital games are a great way parents and kids can actually learn together. I'm often of the opinion that it's not the amount that people look at their screens, but it's the quality of that screen time.
I did my postdoc at Sesame Workshop, and we've known for a long time that if a child and parent watch Sesame Street together and they're talking, the kid will learn more than by watching Sesame Street alone. We found this in studies of "Pokémon Go" and "Animal Crossing." With these games, families were learning together, and in the case of Animal Crossing, processing pandemic isolation together.
Whether I'm looking at artificial intelligence or families using internet search, I'm asking: Where does the talking and sharing happen? I think that's what people don't consider enough in this debate. And that dialogue with kids matters much more than these questions of whether technology is frying kids' brains. I grew up in the '90s when there was this vast worry about video games ruining children's lives. But we all survived, I think.
When ChatGPT came out, it was presented as this huge interruption in how we've dealt with technology. But do you think it's that unprecedented in how kids and families are going to interact and learn with it?
I see the buzz around AI as a hype curve—with a surge of excitement, then a dip, then a plateau. For a long time, we've had artificial intelligence models. Then someone figured out how to make money off AI models and everything's exploding. Goodbye, jobs. Goodbye, school. Eventually we're going to hit this apex—I think we're getting close—and then this hype will fade.
The question I have for big tech companies is: Why are we releasing products like ChatGPT with these very simple interfaces? Why isn't there a tutorial, like in a video game, that teaches the mechanics and rules, what's allowed, what's not allowed?
Partly, this AI anxiety comes because we don't yet know what to do with these powerful tools. So I think it's really important to try to help kids understand that these models are trained on data with human error embedded in it. That's something that I hope generative AI makers will show kids: This is how this model works, and here are its limitations.
Have you begun studying how ChatGPT and generative AI will affect kids and families?
We've been doing co-design work with children, and when these AI models started coming out, we started playing around with them and asked the kids what they thought. Some of them were like, "I don't know if I trust it," because it couldn't answer simple questions that kids have.
A big fear is that kids and others are going to just accept the information that ChatGPT spits out. That's a very realistic perspective. But there's the other side: People, even kids, have expertise, and they can test these models. We had a kid start asking ChatGPT questions about Pokémon. And the kid is like, "This is not good," because the model was contradicting what they knew about Pokémon.
We've also been studying how public libraries can use ChatGPT to teach kids about misinformation. So we asked kids, "If ChatGPT makes a birthday card greeting for you to give to your friend Peter, is that misinformation?" Some of the kids were like, "That's not okay. The card was fine, but Peter didn't know whether it came from a human."
The third research area is going into the homes of immigrant families and trying to understand whether ChatGPT does a decent job of helping them find critical information about health or finances or economics. We've studied how the children of immigrant families are searching the internet and helping their families understand the information. Now we're trying to see how AI models affect this relationship.
What are important things for parents and kids to consider when using new technology—AI or not—for learning?
I think parents need to pay attention to the conversations they're having around it. General parenting styles range from authoritative to negotiation style to permissive. Which style is best is very contextual. But the conversations around technology still have to happen, and I think the most important thing parents can do is say to themselves, "I can be a learner, too. I can learn this with my kids." That's hard, but parenting is really hard. Technologies are developing so rapidly that it's okay for parents not to know. I think it's a better position to be in this growth mindset together.
You've taught most every grade level: elementary, junior high, high school and college. What should teachers be conscious of when integrating generative AI in their classrooms?
I feel for the teachers, I really do, because a lot of the teachers' decisions are based on district policies. So it totally depends on the context of the teaching. I think it's up to school leaders to think really deeply about what they're going to do and ask these hard questions, like: What is the point of education in the age of AI?
For example, with generative AI, is testing the best way to gauge what people know? Because if I hand out a take-home test, kids can run it through an AI model and get the answer. Are the ways we've been teaching kids still appropriate?
I taught AP chemistry for a long time. I don't encounter AP chemistry tests in my daily life, even as a former chemistry teacher. So having kids learn to adapt is more important than learning new content, because without adaptation, people don't know what to do with these new tools, and then they're stuck. Policymakers and leaders will have to help the teachers make these decisions.
A wave of technological transformation has been reshaping the landscape of HR and recruitment, with the emergence of artificial intelligence (AI) promising efficiency, accuracy, and unbiased decision-making.
Amid the rapid adoption of AI technology by HR departments, a joint study conducted by NUS Business School, the International Institute for Management Development (IMD), and The Hong Kong Polytechnic University delved into a vital question: How do jobseekers perceive AI's role in the selection and recruitment process? The study has been published in the Journal of Business Ethics.
Associate Professor Jayanth Narayanan from NUS Business School shared that the genesis of this subject emerged from a personal anecdote. "A close friend of mine who had been unwell was evaluated for a role using a video interviewing software," said Professor Jayanth. The software provided feedback that the interviewee did not seem enthusiastic during the video interview.
Professor Jayanth expressed that such an outcome would likely not have transpired had a human interviewer been present. A human evaluator, endowed with perceptiveness, could have discerned signs of illness and conceivably asked about the candidate's well-being. "A human interviewer may even conclude that if the candidate is sick and still making such a valiant effort, they deserve a positive evaluation," he added.
Distrust of AI in providing a fair hiring assessment prevalent among jobseekers
The study, which was conducted from 2017 to 2018, involved over 1,000 participants of various nationalities mostly in their mid-30s. The participants were recruited from Amazon's crowd-sourcing platform Mechanical Turk and were involved in four scenario experiments to examine how people perceive the use of computer algorithms in a recruitment context.
The first two experiments studied how the use of algorithms affects the perception of fairness among job applicants in the hiring process, while the remaining two sought to understand the reasons behind the lower fairness score.
According to the findings, jobseekers viewed the use of AI in recruitment processes as untrustworthy and perceived algorithmic decision-making to be less fair than human-assisted methods. They also perceived a higher degree of fairness when humans are involved in the resume screening and hiring decision process, as compared to an entirely algorithmic approach. This observation remains consistent even among candidates who experienced successful outcomes in algorithm-driven recruitment processes.
The disparity in perceived fairness is largely attributed to AI's limitations in recognizing the unique attributes of candidates. In contrast to human recruiters, who are more likely to pick up qualitative nuances that set each candidate apart, AI systems can overlook important qualities and potentially screen out good candidates. These findings challenge the widely-held belief that algorithms provide fairer evaluations and eliminate human biases.
Merging human and machine intelligence in hiring processes
In balancing AI technology and the human touch in the recruitment process, Professor Jayanth advocates for a collaborative approach, envisioning algorithms as decision co-pilots alongside human recruiters.
"For example, algorithms can flag that the recruiter is not shortlisting enough women or people from a minority group. Algorithms can also flag the uniqueness of a candidate compared to other applicants," said Professor Jayanth.
Considering the trajectory of AI technology, Professor Jayanth forecasts an imminent surge in its prevalence and accessibility in the recruitment space. However, he underscores the significance of human oversight, suggesting that while algorithms are set to play an essential role, the core responsibility of evaluating fellow humans for job suitability should remain within human purview.
"Why would we give up an important aspect of organizational life to an algorithm? Humanity needs to make conscious and mindful choices on how and why we automate. If we simply use the logic that we can automate anything that will result in cost savings, we are going to find that we will automate tasks that are inherently enjoyable for humans to do," he said.
More information: Maude Lavanchy et al, Applicants' Fairness Perceptions of Algorithm-Driven Hiring Procedures, Journal of Business Ethics (2023). DOI: 10.1007/s10551-022-05320-w
A new paper by researchers at Penn's School of Social Policy & Practice (SP2) and Penn's Annenberg School for Communication offers recommendations to ensure the ethical use of artificial intelligence resources such as ChatGPT by social work scientists.
Published in the Journal of the Society for Social Work and Research, the article was co-written by Dr. Desmond Upton Patton, Dr. Aviv Landau, and Dr. Siva Mathiyazhagan. Patton, a pioneer in the interdisciplinary fusion of social work, communications, and data science, holds joint appointments at Annenberg and SP2 as the Brian and Randi Schwartz University Professor.
Outlining challenges that ChatGPT and other large language models (LLMs) pose across bias, legality, ethics, data privacy, confidentiality, informed consent, and academic misconduct, the piece provides recommendations in five areas for ethical use of the technology:
Transparency: Academic writing must disclose how content is generated and by whom.
Fact-checking: Academic writing must verify information and cite sources.
Authorship: Social work scientists must retain authorship while using AI tools to support their work.
Anti-plagiarism: Idea owners and content authors should be located and cited.
Inclusion and social justice: Anti-racist frameworks and approaches should be developed to counteract potential biases of LMMs against authors who are Black, Indigenous, or people of color, and authors from the Global South.
Of particular concern to the authors are the limitations of artificial intelligence in the context of human rights and social justice. "Similar to a bureaucratic system, ChatGPT enforces thought without compassion, reason, speculation, or imagination," the authors write.
Pointing to the implications of a model trained on existing content, they state, "This could lead to bias, especially if the text used to train it does not represent diverse perspectives or scholarship by under-represented groups. . . . Further, the model generates text by predicting the next word based on the previous words. Thus, it could amplify and perpetuate existing bias based on race, gender, sexuality, ability, caste, and other identities."
Noting ChatGPT's potential for use in research assistance, theme generation, data editing, and presentation development, the authors describe the chatbot as "best suited to serve as an assistive tech tool for social work scientists."
More information: Desmond Upton Patton et al, ChatGPT for Social Work Science: Ethical Challenges and Opportunities, Journal of the Society for Social Work and Research (2023). DOI: 10.1086/726042
The artificial intelligence platform ChatGPT shows a significant and systemic left-wing bias, according to a new study led by the University of East Anglia (UEA). The team of researchers in the UK and Brazil developed a rigorous new method to check for political bias.
Published today in the journal Public Choice, the findings show that ChatGPT's responses favor the Democrats in the US; the Labour Party in the UK; and in Brazil, President Lula da Silva of the Workers' Party.
Concerns of an inbuilt political bias in ChatGPT have been raised previously, but this is the first large-scale study using a consistent, evidenced-based analysis.
Lead author Dr. Fabio Motoki, of Norwich Business School at the University of East Anglia, said, "With the growing use by the public of AI-powered systems to find out facts and create new content, it is important that the output of popular platforms such as ChatGPT is as impartial as possible. The presence of political bias can influence user views and has potential implications for political and electoral processes. Our findings reinforce concerns that AI systems could replicate, or even amplify, existing challenges posed by the Internet and social media."
The researchers developed an innovative new method to test for ChatGPT's political neutrality. The platform was asked to impersonate individuals from across the political spectrum while answering a series of more than 60 ideological questions. The responses were then compared with the platform's default answers to the same set of questions—allowing the researchers to measure the degree to which ChatGPT's responses were associated with a particular political stance.
To overcome difficulties caused by the inherent randomness of "large language models" that power AI platforms such as ChatGPT, each question was asked 100 times and the different responses collected. These multiple responses were then put through a 1,000-repetition "bootstrap" (a method of re-sampling the original data) to further increase the reliability of the inferences drawn from the generated text.
"We created this procedure because conducting a single round of testing is not enough," said co-author Victor Rodrigues. "Due to the model's randomness, even when impersonating a Democrat, sometimes ChatGPT answers would lean towards the right of the political spectrum."
A number of further tests were undertaken to ensure the method was as rigorous as possible. In a "dose-response test," ChatGPT was asked to impersonate radical political positions. In a "placebo test," it was asked politically neutral questions. And in a "profession-politics alignment test," it was asked to impersonate different types of professionals.
"We hope that our method will aid scrutiny and regulation of these rapidly developing technologies," said co-author Dr. Pinho Neto. "By enabling the detection and correction of LLM biases, we aim to promote transparency, accountability, and public trust in this technology," he added.
The unique new analysis tool created by the project would be freely available and relatively simple for members of the public to use, thereby "democratizing oversight," said Dr. Motoki. As well as checking for political bias, the tool can be used to measure other types of biases in ChatGPT's responses.
While the research project did not set out to determine the reasons for the political bias, the findings did point towards two potential sources. The first was the training dataset, which may have biases within it, or added to it by the human developers, which the developers' "cleaning" procedure had failed to remove. The second potential source was the algorithm itself, which may be amplifying existing biases in the training data.
The research was undertaken by Dr. Fabio Motoki (Norwich Business School, University of East Anglia), Dr. Valdemar Pinho Neto (EPGE Brazilian School of Economics and Finance—FGV EPGE, and Center for Empirical Studies in Economics—FGV CESE), and Victor Rodrigues (Nova Educação).
Aotearoa New Zealand's largest fault, the Hikurangi Subduction Zone (HSZ), is where the Pacific tectonic plate dives west beneath the Australian plate and underneath the east coast of the North Island.
In some parts of the subduction zone, GPS instruments are showing the plates slowly move by a few millimeters a year. This behavior is called a "slow slip" and occurs over periods of weeks or months. However, in other parts the plates are stuck, locked together, and building up pressure.
By understanding the structural factors that create the smoother slipping and stuck zones, scientists are seeking to better diagnose what areas could generate potential future earthquakes and tsunami. As Aotearoa's largest source of potential earthquakes and tsunami, its critical to be able understand the HSZ in high-resolution detail.
New 3D images reveal hidden structures in the HSZ
In 2018 a collaboration of researchers from U.S., Japan, UK, and GNS Science used the RV Marcus Langseth to record numerous overlapping race-track "seismic reflection data" lines. The data were gathered together alongside deployments of ocean bottom seismographs and onshore seismometer in a effort called the "NZ3D" survey.
In an international collaborative effort spanning three recent high-profile publications, the first ever spectacular 3D seismic images of the northern part of Hikurangi margin have now documented new insights for understanding the structural, stratigraphic and hydrogeologic characteristics of the HSZ.
Understanding these qualities, specifically how they transport fluids, are key to knowing the conditions that lead to generation of subduction earthquakes.
How the 3D images were created
Seismic reflection data are typically how geophysicists visualize the crust. To capture this data a specialist vessel, in this case the R/V Marcus Langseth, tows an array of individual sound sources that are tuned and combined to radiate a sound wave downward to the seafloor. The echoes that bounce back from layers in the earth are recorded on a streamer towed behind the vessel and on sensitive seismographs located onshore and on the seabed.
While a grid of 2D profiles is good enough to identify major plate boundary structures, this high-resolution 3D data are needed to visualize details within subduction zones to improve understanding of fault geometry and slip behavior. The 3D data are combined in a CAT scan image of the subduction zone that shows the architecture and properties of the boundary between tectonic plates can contribute to variability in the location of strong and seismogenic versus weak slipping segments.
The 3D data provides new constraints on the physical conditions and rock properties to inform computer simulations and forecasts of earthquake ground shaking and tsunami inundation that greatly help improved hazard preparedness and response.
How fluids and underwater volcanoes influence how New Zealand's largest fault moves
In June 2023 a Nature Geoscience paper reports how the NZ3D data capture a seamount (underwater volcano) caught in the act of subducting beneath the shallow part of the Hikurangi margin and forms sediment lenses in its wake that appear to enhance slow slip.
Further, in a Geology paper the NZ3D data reveal a detailed map of the deeper parts plate interface that shows that it has kilometer-high hill and valleys.
The new NZ3D data show that the plate interface may strongly govern the nature of how the margin deforms, including the localization of both slow slip and hazardous fast-slip earthquakes.
Most recently, a Science Advances paper revealed a previously hidden water reservoir within the layers of the Pacific plate being swallowed up in the subduction process.
The new finding suggests that subducting plate of volcanic rocks act as amplified source of water that influences the slip behavior of the margin. The trapped water is under pressure and results in the plate boundary being weak and prone to unlocking and sliding in slow slip. The study highlights the presence of significant water delivery to slow slip source from the incoming Pacific, that were previously unknown.
"Importantly, we are able to pinpoint the location of water rich layers, that allow smooth slipping, versus other water-poor segments that are stuck and will likely rupture in fast earthquakes," says Dr. Stuart Henrys, project lead and principal scientist, GNS Science.
Revealing the mysteries of the subduction process in ways never possible before
The hope is that these new generation 3D images will be able to identify areas of the plate boundary where water rich layers enable smooth slip and other areas that are locked and stuck.
By understanding how the slip behavior varies along the subduction zone, it allows scientists to better diagnose and pinpoint areas that are more prone to generate large earthquakes.
Our 3D data also provides new constraints on the physical conditions and rock properties to inform simulations of earthquake ground shaking and tsunami inundation that greatly help improved hazard preparedness and response.
Henrys says, "Our unique 3D seismic data, acquired offshore Gisborne along the northern Hikurangi subduction zone, is providing breakthroughs in understanding of the physical processes that control earthquakes. Globally subduction zones are where one plate dives beneath another and can rupture in devastating earthquakes and tsunami like those in Sumatra (2004) and Japan (2011)."
"These zones are also subjected to benign slow slip behavior that lasts weeks or months. Diagnosing whether slip is fast or slow along the Hikurangi subduction zone, our largest fault, will provide more reliable forecasts and assessments of the risks to vulnerable people and buildings.
"The 3D data we acquired is combined in a medical CAT scan like image providing super cool visualization of a small part of the subduction zone. For the first time we are able to map in detail the architecture and determine properties of the boundary between tectonic plates. Importantly we are able to pinpoint the location of water rich layers, that allow smooth slipping, versus other segments that are water poor, stuck and will likely rupture in fast earthquakes.
"The results represent another piece in the subduction puzzle that we can start using in large-scale earthquake cycle simulations that greatly help improved hazard preparedness and response."
More information: Andrew C. Gase et al, Subducting volcaniclastic-rich upper crust supplies fluids for shallow megathrust and slow slip, Science Advances (2023). DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.adh0150
Volcanic eruption in southwest Iceland ends: met office
The famous Eyjafjallajokull eruption paralysed air traffic in Europe in 2010.
Iceland's meteorological office on Wednesday declared that the volcanic eruption near the country's capital Reykjavik was officially over as no activity had been observed for 10 days.
"Ten days have passed since activity was last measured in the Litli-Hrutur crater. There is no longer any deformation observed in the area and seismic activity has decreased considerably," the Icelandic Meteorological Office (IMO) said in a statement.
"As a result, we can say that another chapter in the resurgence of volcanism on the Reykjanes peninsula has come to an end," it added.
Thousands of visitors have been flocking to the site to take in the hypnotic spectacle of red-hot lava spurting out of the ground.
The Reykjanes peninsula had been dormant for eight centuries but has experienced a resurgence of volcanic activity in recent years.
There have been two other recent eruptions—one in the Geldingadalir valley in March 2021, which lasted six months, and one in the Meradalir valley in August 2022, which lasted three weeks.
All of them belong to the Fagradalsfjall volcanic system.
Last week the IMO noted that this third consecutive eruption in as many years marked "a turning point in the volcanism of the Reykjanes Peninsula."
Unlike explosive eruptions that spew out thousands of tons of ash—such as the famous Eyjafjallajokull eruption that paralyzed air traffic in Europe in 2010—the three recent ones have been so-called "effusive" eruptions and have had little impact, apart from lava flows and locally toxic gas spikes.
Iceland has 33 volcanic systems currently considered active, the highest number in Europe. It has an eruption every five years on average.
The North Atlantic island straddles the Mid-Atlantic Ridge, a crack in the ocean floor separating the Eurasian and North American tectonic plates.
One night, upon returning to the cave that his tribe calls home, the monkey-humanoid Moon-Watcher finds a strange crystal object, a kind of monolith that fascinates him at first, but then quickly loses his interest when he discovers that it is not edible. Soon after, the true purpose of the monolith is revealed to be none other than penetrating the minds of our ancestors to induce new abilities that, over time, will cause the development of an intelligence capable of creating new technology.
Many readers will recognize this scene from the novel 2001, A Space Odyssey, by Arthur C. Clarke, and the film of the same name, directed by Stanley Kubrick. It almost goes without saying that the crystal monolith in question is the work of an extraterrestrial civilization that observes life on other planets and "experiments" on them to encourage the development of intelligence in as many parts of the cosmos as possible.
Seeking simple answers to complex questions
Understanding how we, as a species, came to be intelligent is one of the great enigmas of evolutionary study. Small mutations, followed by a process of natural selection to choose the most advantageous, seems too slow a process for structures as complex as the human nervous system or brain to emerge. It is this very complexity that allows millions of neurons to communicate with each other, resulting in the emergence of qualities such as the ability to respond voluntarily to environmental stimuli, or to ask questions about the very nature of humankind and the universe.
This has always been the case, in all human cultures. A classic example would be attributing atmospheric events—thunder, lightning, floods—to the wrath of God. These ideas came about before humans had ever left the ground, so it is no surprise that we turned our eyes even higher—to extraterrestrials—to explain other phenomena that we could only observe once traveling at high altitudes became part of our daily lives.
The allure of the unknown
The possibility that we might have been visited by beings from other worlds has always fascinated us. The element of mystery, of the unknown, only makes it more interesting.
Any phenomenon is made all the more enticing when it seems it is being covered up or hidden for secretive reasons. The attractiveness of conspiracies often leads people towards ideas which have no scientific basis, such as the belief that the Earth is flat, that humans never set foot on the moon, or that vaccines can control our behavior.
Even though these ideas have repeatedly been shown to be untrue, their rapid dissemination through social media, using simple, blunt language that appeals to emotion over logic, makes them very powerful weapons.
The supposed "proof" of alien visits to our planet ranges from specific Bible passages to ancient stone carvings portraying creatures or objects that may appear to be aliens or spacecraft. The latter often take the form of flying saucers.
However, we cannot forget that humans have always created imaginary creatures that resemble them and attributed them with magical powers. When imagining Gods, humans have given them a human appearance, and almost always imagined them as living in the sky.
When we look at these representations through modern eyes, we associate them with extraterrestrial beings or structures, when in fact they could be referring to a range of different things.
Image of petroglyphs in Cub Creek (Utah, United States of America). Credit: MikeGoad / Pixabay
What we can be certain of is that the more we explore our skies, the more likely it is that we will encounter phenomena that we cannot explain. However, this does not mean that they are extraterrestrial. Past experience has shown us that most of these events can be attributed to optical illusions, spy or weather balloons, space junk, or even satellites that we ourselves have made.
In Spain, UFOs were a hot topic between the 1960s and the 1980s. In this era, everyone knew someone who was convinced that they had seen a UFO. This even reached the point where an exoplanet, called Ummo, was made up. It was populated by a more advanced civilization than ours who made contact with people on Earth. In the letters these aliens supposedly sent, the 'Ummites' explained concepts such as genetics and cell structure.
The Ummo hoax was even linked to the creation of a pedophile ring, which should make us reflect on the harmful consequences that the spread of fabricated news stories can have.
Can we deny the possibility that intelligent alien civilizations exist?
The answer, of course, is no. The universe is immense, and it is more than likely that circumstances similar to those which led to the appearance of life on Earth have been repeated on other planets. But there is a huge distance (literally and figuratively) between acknowledging the existence of these creatures and considering the possibility that they might have visited us.
Exoplanets, also known as extrasolar planets, are extremely far away, and we are limited by the speed of light which, as proven by Einstein, is the maximum possible speed at which anything can travel. Therefore, the journey to even a "nearby" exoplanet would take thousands of years. Maybe a civilization more advanced than ours could find a way to do it faster, but not to the point of it being something easy or commonplace.
In any case, if the remains of alien life or spacecraft are stored away somewhere, why are they not being shown to us? Scientists would jump at the chance to analyze this organic matter to find out how it is structured, how it metabolizes energy, or what molecules it uses to store genetic information.
Until there is proof, this is not a question of science, but rather, of stories. Stories can be very entertaining, but these kinds of stories do not help us to build a more accurate or helpful view of the world.
In April, former World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE) writer Britney Abrahams sued the company for alleged discrimination following her objections at racist and discriminatory storylines. The lawsuit also contains some damning examples, citing "offensively racist and stereotypical jargon used in WWE scripts."
\In June, the defendants in the lawsuit—executive chairman Vince McMahon, chief brand officer Stephanie McMahon and other WWE executives—requested an extension to the deadline to respond.
These claims come a year after an investigation revealed a USD$3 million (£2.3 million) hush money settlement payment was made by Vince McMahon to a woman he allegedly had an affair with, resulting in his voluntary resignation as executive chairman and CEO. Within six months, he had reappointed himself as executive chairman, resulting in further board resignations in objection.
The above instances imply that the company's board is seemingly in turmoil behind the scenes, yet to many, the claims of racist pitches should not come as a shock. Stereotypes have always been, and still are, a main component of WWE.
Many of these stereotypes merely regurgitate age-old offensive characterizations, which are repackaged by the sports entertainment company and distributed to a prolific audience. Its YouTube channel has 55.5 million subscribers and has amassed almost 40 billion views.
WWE is shown in the UK on BT Sport as well as having its own global streaming platform, the WWE Network, which is currently available in 180 countries in 25 languages. These images have a global reach but receive little criticism.
Apollo Crews
One of the examples cited by Abrahams is the character development of the American wrestler Apollo Crews. In early 2021, Crews debuted a new iteration of his character, claiming he was a descendant of Nigerian royalty.
Alongside this claim, Crews now sported a stereotypical Nigerian accent, as well as entering the ring with a tribal spear. These aspects—alongside a more defiant and violent persona—evoke the stereotype of the "black buck", or "brute." This figure is seen throughout art, literature and film as a slave to his animalistic tendencies and a threat to the white man.
Crews' development reinforces the derogatory aspects of the stereotype seen throughout the 19th century, instead foregrounding the "otherness" of non-white cultures. The idea of othering—situating another culture in opposite to your own—is a main component of the WWE. Many of the Asian athletes also suffer similar stereotypical aspects.
Asuka
Asuka—a highly successful Japanese female wrestler—uses an illegal move called the "Asian mist". This is where the wrestler sprays colored liquid into the face of their opponent, causing various supposed effects from visual impairment to paralysis.
Asuka uses "Asian mist."
This move, currently only utilized by Asuka in a show of causing partial sight loss, relies on the perceived mysticism of Asia. No explanation is given to how these liquids are created, or how their various effects are achieved. Bright colors are utilized (red, green, blue) to demonstrate their exotic quality. When it was first utilized in the 1980s the wrestler made a show of rubbing their throat, as if extracting the fluid from a secret, magical gland.
Not only this, but Asuka has also drawn criticism from WWE veteran Jim Cornette for the way in which she communicated with another Japanese wrestler, IYO SKY, in their native tongue. Both women are shown shouting at each other, in an almost incoherent manner, screaming and sticking their tongues out, in a maniacal manner.
This stereotype can be seen as a manifestation of the ideas put forth by the post-colonialist author, Edward Said, most obviously in his seminal work Orientalism, in which he highlighted the way the west has misrepresented the east to situate themselves as superior and as a means to justify colonialism. The aspects of mysticism and poor communication skills demonstrate the backwardness and the perceived uncivilized behaviors that are key aspects of an Orientalist stereotype.
The WWE foregrounds the exotic, magical and mystical aspects of Asia, in opposition to the perceived norm of the west. During the pandemic, Asuka drew attention to the rise of anti-Asian racism in the US, but she is also arguably complicit in the continued perpetuation of stereotypical imagery through her WWE persona.
Sheamus
White characters also suffer from the stereotypical tendencies of the WWE. Take Sheamus, an Irish wrestler who made his debut 17 years ago. Celtic imagery has been a key component of his iconography throughout his career.
In an interview in 2006, he stated he wanted to move away from Irish stereotypes of "Guinness, leprechauns and Blarney Stones," instead attempting to portray a Fianna—fierce warriors that are a main component of Irish mythology. However this distaste for stereotype seems to have waned.
In 2020, Sheamus took part in a "bar fight" where he fought his opponent in a pub-like setting, smashing bottles over each other's heads. Links can be drawn to the US anti-immigration campaigns in the 19th century where stereotypes of Irish people were established, positing them as violent alcoholics. This is reflected in many images of the period, as well as the "no Irish need apply" campaigns.
Stereotypes of other cultures have pervaded in western media, but representation has improved in many industries, most noticeably within Hollywood. However it does not look like WWE will be changing the way it represents other cultures any time soon.
These few examples merely scratch the surface of the problem. This year the WWE also announced a merger with the Ultimate Fighting Championship creating a "live sports and entertainment powerhouse." This raises multiple questions, but one area of interest is whether these stereotypes will continue, spreading naïve representations of cultures around the globe.
A recent study has found that soil is home to 59% of all life on Earth, from an insect feeding on the soil surface to a tiny microbe nestled in a soil pore. This discovery crowns soil as the most biodiverse habitat on the planet.
The paper estimates that around 2 million species of arthropod (think insects and spiders) inhabit the soil—some 30% of all known arthropod species. There are far fewer species of soil specialists such as enchytraeidae (resembling mini earthworms) and oligochaeta (worms), with only 770 and 6,000 species respectively. That might not seem like a lot, but it still represents around 98% and 63% of these animal groups.
The variety of mammals living in soil is, by comparison, quite limited. Only 3.8% of mammal species are associated with this habitat. On the other hand, 85% of plants have their roots buried in the soil and around 43% of nematode (tiny worms) species call soil their home, or reside within the plants and animals that inhabit it.
However, the number of animal and plant species that live in soil are dwarfed by microscopic organisms. The researchers estimate that a mind-blowing 430 million species (or more than 50%) of bacteria and 5.6 million species (or 90%) of fungi have made soil their home.
But perhaps more important than the raw numbers are the functions that this biodiversity performs. The life within the soil not only helps to produce the food we eat, it also plays a crucial role in holding the soil together and even gives us potential sources for new antibiotics and medicines.
Helping plants grow
Small animals, including earthworms and springtails, break down plant material and other forms of organic matter, such as dead insects, and incorporate them into the soil. This process releases the nutrients that most plants rely on to grow. But it's not the only way that soil organisms help plants gain more nutrition.
Mycorrhizal fungi (a species of fungi that grow in association with plant roots), for instance, embed themselves in the roots of plants where they extract energy-rich compounds. In return, the fungi help plants expand their reach in the soil, allowing them to access a greater amount of nutrients.
Other species that are vital for food production include nitrogen-fixing bacteria. They are commonly associated with legumes such as beans and clover. These bacteria convert nitrogen gas from the atmosphere into compounds that the plants can use—an undertaking that can otherwise only be done synthetically, using vast amounts of energy.
How soil organisms break down plant remains and create soil pores.
Holding soil together
As organisms penetrate the soil, whether by burrowing, creating nests or as a means of anchoring themselves, they engineer pathways through the soil and contribute to its structure. Notable examples include termites rearranging the soil to create channels for air and water to filter through, as well as roots and root hairs enmeshing soil.
The incorporation of decomposed plant material into the soil serves a similarly crucial purpose. It helps to hold the soil together and creates pores that protect the soil from erosion and increase its capacity to store water.
Some of this organic material is also locked away with soil minerals, leading to the storage of carbon. In fact, soils hold three times as much carbon as vegetation and twice as much as the atmosphere.
Biodiversity increases resilience
In many cases, these functions involve a variety of species. Having multiple species perform the same function offers a safety net if conditions change, such as during a drought or a flood.
Some species are more resilient to these events than others. When conditions change, unaffected organisms within the soil can step in to fulfill the same functions as those that might have suffered—a process ecologists call "functional redundancy." This improves the ability of an ecosystem, such as soil, to withstand and recover from environmental shocks.
Soil biodiversity is also a key reservoir for new drugs. Soil bacteria have produced most of our antibiotics, including streptomycin, chloramphenicol and tetracycline. Unfortunately, the rise of antibiotic resistance has rendered many early antibiotics ineffective. However, searching through different soils is yielding promising new antibiotics with the potential to kill "superbugs" that are resistant to existing drugs.
Soil biodiversity plays an important role in producing the food we eat, sustaining soil health and helping to deliver a range of other services, from sourcing medicines to reducing the impact of floods and droughts. The importance of protecting our soils for future generations becomes ever clearer.
Yellow underwing moths were one of the species in the study. Credit: Eileen Kumpf/Shutterstock
If you've ever felt underestimated and ignored, spare a thought for your local moths. Honeybees, bumblebees and butterflies are almost synonymous with pollination. People love them for their intimate relationship with flowers—we can't grow a lot of our food or enjoy the sight of fragile springtime blossom without them. But our recent research showed moths may actually be more efficient pollinators.
Almost all scientific research on pollinators happens during the day, which means we know little about what happens at night. So we designed a study to compare the contribution of nocturnal and day-active pollinators. We focused on bramble, which is widespread across Europe.
People often look at bramble as a prickly pest that needs to be removed from our green spaces. But it is a crucial source of nectar and pollen for bees, butterflies and moths, flowering from early spring through until the autumn.
During peak summer in the UK, when we carried out our experiment, the night is only around one-third of the entire day cycle. During this time, moths are almost the only insects that visit flowers. Even though 83% of all flower visits in our study happened during the day, pollination rates were higher at night time. This suggests moths are more efficient pollinators than species that are active during the day.
We used trail cameras to record visitors to bramble flowers over three days and placed special bags over the flowers so we could compare their pollination rates. One group of flowers was covered for the whole three days. The second group was covered only during the day time and a last set was covered only at night. It wasn't possible to identify the species of every moth that visited the flowers, but among them were silver Y and large yellow underwing moths, which are both in the family Noctuidae.
While it remains unclear precisely why moths had higher pollination rates, it may be that they spend more time visiting each flower than honeybees, hoverflies and other daytime pollinators. In any case, it's certain that the importance of moths as nocturnal pollinators is undervalued. Despite the fact there are only 60 species of butterfly and over 2,500 species of moth in the UK, a far higher proportion of research and environmental policies focus on butterflies.
Our study showed that the pollination of valuable crop plants and threatened species of wildflowers may rely upon on moths. Many of the UK's macro-moths (which tend to be larger) are declining, with over 40% of species declining in abundance.
Moths are not only important pollinators—they are key links in the food chain and shape the structure and composition of habitats. Their caterpillars feed on grasses and other plants. When caterpillars are dispersed throughout a habitat, some areas are grazed and others are not, which creates a varied structure. This variety bodes well for biodiversity, by creating a greater range of habitats for different species to live in. Not to mention the importance of moths as a vital food source for bats, birds and other small mammals.
New approaches to research are being developed and tested, which will help address gaps in our understanding about the role of moths as important pollinators.
For example, automated identification and tracking of insects through machine learning can allow us to remotely monitor pollinator activity, saving time in collecting and processing data. Understanding more about moths will give us the knowledge we urgently need to protect them.
What you can do
You can help these pollinating insects by allowing some patches of bramble and other flowering, scrubby plants to grow in your garden, allotments and hedgerows. You can also encourage your council to do the same across the network of road verges and parks in the UK.
The harmful effects of artificial light can be managed by dimming or limiting the operating time of street-lighting during the night, as pioneered by Devon and some other district councils. At home, you can switch off or reduce the use of outdoor lights at night and close your curtains and blinds to prevent light from spilling outside. Tackling light spill from shop fronts and glass office blocks could also help moths stay focused on pollination.
In light of the huge declines in populations of pollinating insects across the globe, it's more important than ever to protect our pollinators. These small and simple changes will provide more homes for wildlife. Spreading the word could have a crucial impact on moth conservation—some of the most underappreciated and important animals on our planet.
