Subscribe to our weekly newsletter
Why San Francisco felt like the set of a sci-fi flick
But most city dwellers weren't seeing the science — they were seeing something out of Blade Runner.
23 October, 2020
Brittany Hosea-Small / AFP / Getty Images
On Sept. 9, many West Coast residents looked out their windows and witnessed a post-apocalyptic landscape: silhouetted cars, buildings and people bathed in an overpowering orange light that looked like a jacked-up sunset.
<p>The scientific explanation for what people were seeing was pretty straightforward. On a clear day, the sky owes its blue color to smaller atmospheric particles scattering the relatively short wavelengths of blue light waves from the sun. An atmosphere filled with larger particles, like woodsmoke, scatters even more of the color spectrum, but not as uniformly, <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/marshallshepherd/2020/09/10/the-science-behind-mysterious-orange-skies-in-california/#52bc361f6cab" target="_blank">leaving orangish-red colors for the eye to see</a>.</p><p>But most city dwellers weren't seeing the science. Instead, the burnt orange world they were witnessing was eerily reminiscent of scenes from sci-fi films like “<a href="https://twitter.com/Klee_FilmReview/status/1303748616507531264" target="_blank">Blade Runner: 2049</a>" and “<a href="https://twitter.com/Prince_Kropotkn/status/1303761059887550464" target="_blank">Dune</a>." </p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props='{"tweetId":"1303748616507531264"}'></div><p>The uncanny images evoked sci-fi movies for a reason. Over the past decade, filmmakers have increasingly adopting a palette rich with hues of two colors, orange and teal, which complement one another in ways that can have a powerful effect on viewers.</p>
<h2>Writing color into the script</h2><p>When we dissect movies in my design classes, I remind my students that everything on the screen is there for a reason. Sound, light, wardrobe, people – and, yes, the colors.</p><p>Actor, writer and director Jon Fusco <a href="https://nofilmschool.com/2016/06/watch-psychology-color-film" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">has suggested</a> "writing color as an entire character in your script," since colors can subtly change the way a scene can "resonate emotionally."</p><p>Set and costume designers can influence color palettes by sticking to certain palettes. But art directors can also imbue scenes with certain hues via "color grading," in which they use software to shift colors around in the frame.</p><p>In her short film "Color Psychology," video editor Lilly Mtz-Seara <a href="https://vimeo.com/169046276" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">assembles a montage</a> from more than 50 films to show the emotional impact intentional color grading can lend to movies. She explains how different palettes are used to emphasize different sentiments, whether it's pale pink to reflect innocence, red to capture passion or a sickly yellow to denote madness.</p>
<h2>The most powerful complement of them all</h2><p>So why orange and teal?</p><p>In the 17th century, Isaac Newton created his "<a href="http://web.mit.edu/22.51/www/Extras/color_theory/color.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">color wheel</a>." The circle of colors represents the full visible light spectrum, and people who work in color will use it to assemble palettes, or color schemes.</p><p><a href="https://www.canva.com/learn/monochromatic-colors/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">A monochromatic palette</a> involves tints from a single hue – <a href="https://www.schemecolor.com/monochromatic-blues-color-scheme.php" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">lighter and darker shades of blue</a>, for example. <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertiary_color" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">A tertiary palette</a> divides the wheel with three evenly spaced spokes: bright reds, greens and blues.</p><p>Among the most striking combinations are two hues 180 degrees apart on the color wheel. Due to a phenomenon called "<a href="https://archive.bridgesmathart.org/2006/bridges2006-517.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">simultaneous contrast</a>," the presence of a single color is intensified when paired with its complement. Green and purple complement one another, as do yellow and blue. But, according to German scientist, poet and philosopher <a href="http://www.openculture.com/2013/09/goethes-theory-of-colors-and-kandinsky.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Johann Wolfgang von Goethe</a>, the strongest of the complementary pairings exist in the ranges of – you guessed it – orange and teal.</p><p>For movie makers, this color palette can be a powerful tool. Human skin matches a relatively narrow swath of the orange section of the color wheel, <a href="https://i.pinimg.com/originals/7e/3b/2f/7e3b2fbcfa0baae19047f54d8f97dd40.jpg" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">from very light to very dark</a>. A filmmaker who wants to make a human within a scene "<a href="https://cdn.onebauer.media/one/empire-tmdb/films/76341/images/tbhdm8UJAb4ViCTsulYFL3lxMCd.jpg?quality=50&width=1800&ratio=16-9&resizeStyle=aspectfill&format=jpg" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">pop</a>" can easily do so by setting the "orange-ish" human against a teal background.</p><p>Filmmakers can also switch between the two depending on the emotional needs of the scene, with the oscillation adding drama. Orange evokes heat and creates tension while teal connotes its opposite, coolness and languid moodiness. For example, the orange and pink people in many of <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGTkgB62754" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">the chase scenes</a> in "Mad Max: Fury Road" stand out against the complementary sky-blue background.</p><p>Oranges and teals are not the sole province of sci-fi movies. David Fincher's thriller "Zodiac" <a href="https://youtu.be/tnFSymJ3Qgg" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">is tinged with blues</a>, while <a href="https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BMTlhNmVkZGUtNjdjOC00YWY3LTljZWQtMTY1YWFhNGYwNDQwXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNjc1NTYyMjg@._V1_UY1200_CR85,0,630,1200_AL_.jpg" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">countless</a> <a href="https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/horrormovies/images/c/cf/1002004000000704.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20190314174712" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">horror</a> <a href="https://dyn1.heritagestatic.com/lf?set=path%5B6%2F7%2F2%2F0%2F6720372%5D&call=url%5Bfile%3Aproduct.chain%5D" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">movies</a> deploy a reddish-orange palette. There's even been some backlash to orange and teal, with one filmmaker, Todd Miro, <a href="http://theabyssgazes.blogspot.com/2010/03/teal-and-orange-hollywood-please-stop.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">calling their overuse</a> "madness" and "a virus."</p><p>Nonetheless, given the frequency with which sci-fi films wish to subtly unsettle viewers, the palette continues to find frequent application in the genre.</p><p>As for West Coast residents unnerved by the murky air and bizarre landscapes, they're probably wishing their lives felt a lot less like a movie.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/146060/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation"></p><p><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/johndan-johnson-eilola-1155321" target="_blank">Johndan Johnson-Eilola</a>, Professor of Communication and Media, <em><a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/clarkson-university-4276" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Clarkson University</a></em></p><p>This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-san-francisco-felt-like-the-set-of-a-sci-fi-flick-146060" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">original article</a>.</p>
Keep reading
Show less
Finland “most sustainable” country, say expats
India finishes last of 60 countries in environment and sustainability, as ranked by the expats who work there
23 October, 2020
Orange is best, blue is worst on this world map for the 'sustainable expat'.
Image: Environment & Sustainability Ranking, an Expat Insider topical report published by InterNations
- How 'green' is life in your work country?
- That's the question InterNations asked its network of expats.
- The U.S. ended 30th out of 60.
<p><span></span>InterNations, the world's largest expat network, has delivered a global ranking with a twist. For the first time, it's asked its members to rate the environmental and sustainability qualities of their work countries. The best country for a sustainable life abroad: Finland. The worst: India. The U.S. lands exactly in the middle, at #30.</p><p>The ranking reflects the combined score for three categories:</p><ul class="ee-ul"><li>Products and Utilities: How available are sustainable goods and services? How 'green' is the energy supply? What about the local waste management and recycling practices?</li><li>Policies and People: How engaged is the local government in green policies? And how environmentally aware is the public?</li><li>Quality of the Environment: Specifically, of the local environment, air and water.</li></ul>The top of the list is populated by the usual suspects: eight high-income countries in Europe (four Nordics, four 'Germanics'), plus two more elsewhere (Canada, New Zealand). But not all European countries do well – Malta lands in the Bottom 10. Inversely, most Asian countries score low, except Taiwan, which finishes just outside the Top 10. <ul class="ee-ul"></ul>
<p class=""><em>Maps and data from Expat Insider 2020 by </em><a href="https://www.internations.org/" style="" target="_blank">InterNations</a><em>. Read the entire report <a href="https://www.internations.org/expat-insider/" target="_blank">here</a>.</em></p><p><strong>Strange Maps #1053</strong></p><p><em>Got a strange map? Let me know at </em><a href="mailto:strangemaps@gmail.com">strangemaps@gmail.com</a><em>.</em></p>
Nordics on top
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDU2NjgyNy9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY0NTczNzkyOX0.VgfqyjAa9avw6gFOE0qlgSgKuBN7DJmzOc5lzFGLm8g/img.jpg?width=980" id="1f0dc" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="684d625ad61deb49eed6f4e4b3260aaf" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="Evo Hiking Area, H\u00e4meenlinna is just a short drive away from the big cities of Southern Finland." />Evo Hiking Area in Hämeenlinna, Finland. Great nature, clean air, clean water? Check, check and check.
Image: public domain.
<p><br><strong>1. Finland</strong></p><p>The Nordic country scores at or near the top in all categories surveyed, including the quality of the natural environment (say 96% of expats in Finland), water and sanitation (96%) and air (95%). <br></p><p><strong>2. Sweden</strong></p><p>Swedes lead the world in environmental awareness (84%, vs. just 48% globally). Perhaps not surprising, for the homeland of Greta Thunberg. This is reflected by government policy. Sweden currently gets more than 50% of its power from renewable sources and wants to go 100% renewable before 2040. "I've been here for over 20 years and I clearly see the benefits of my taxes paid coming back to me and the rest of society," says one American expat.<br></p><p><strong>3. Norway</strong></p><p>"The beautiful nature, the clean air and tap water, and the focus on the environment," are what one Ukrainian expat enjoys most about Norway. With 76% of expats happy with the availability of green goods and services, Norway's 'weakest' category is still 13 percentage points above the global average. <br></p><p><strong>4. Austria</strong></p><p>The first non-Nordic in the global ranking, Austria places in the Top 10 for each category and comes in first for the availability of green goods and services (90%). <br></p><p><strong>5. Switzerland</strong></p><p>Swiss nature is the most appreciated in the world (98% vs. 83% on average). Switzerland also gets stellar results for air and water quality and the availability of green energy and green goods and services. </p><p><strong>6. Denmark</strong></p><p>Danes are very much into green causes, as is their government, say 83% resp. 84% of expats. "Organic food is readily available, and they are good with recycling," observes a South African expat. And they love cycling: 9 out of 10 Danes own a bike.</p><p><strong>7. New Zealand</strong></p><p>85% of expats agree that the New Zealand government takes green issues seriously. In fact, New Zealand plans to use 90% electricity from renewables by 2025. The country also scores high on the quality of its natural environment and all other categories – albeit slightly less on the quality of its water and sanitation.</p><p><strong>8. Germany</strong></p><p>"I enjoy the rising awareness about environmental issues and the alternatives the government and society are developing," says one Colombian expat. Indeed, 80% of expats agree the German government is pro-environment (vs. 55% globally). <br></p><p><strong>9. Canada</strong></p><p>The only North American destination in the Top 10, thanks especially to expat appreciation of Canada's natural environment (96%), but also the quality of its water and sanitation (90%) and the availability of green goods and services (80%). <br></p><p><strong>10. Luxembourg</strong></p><p>"Access to nature for hiking and bicycling" is a definite boon for one American expat. In fact, the country's natural environment, although ranking 13th out of 60, is its lowest-rated subcategory. Luxembourg does even better when it comes to green energy, waste management, and the quality of its air and water.</p>Taiwan, most sustainable destination in Asia
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDU2Njg1Ni9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY1NzkxMDAxNH0.Roy7h_Od1cmaqBmamk-DP4rKMpLjTM-qIajG96alZAg/img.jpg?width=980" id="00799" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="dab52370e1edb5da5ebb0f5631027b1c" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="\u200bEternal Spring Shrine in the Taroko Gorge, Hualien County, Taiwan." />Eternal Spring Shrine in the Taroko Gorge, Hualien County. Outside of Taipei, Taiwan can be surprisingly green and beautiful.
Image: Zairon, CC BY-SA 4.0
<p><strong>11. Taiwan</strong></p><p>The highest-scoring expat destination in Asia, Taiwan boasts 92% approval of its waste management and recycling, and 80% of the availability of green goods and services. But "the air pollution (in Taipei) is getting worse because it is too crowded," one expat complains.</p><p><strong>12. Netherlands</strong></p><p>Green goods and services are widely available, agree 82% of expats, as is green energy. However, 13% rate the Dutch environment negatively, 4% above the global average. <br></p><p><strong>13. Portugal</strong></p><p>Well ahead of its neighbor Spain (#20), the country scores high for air quality (91%) and natural environment (95%). "I like the opportunity for gardening and growing our own food," says one expat. <br></p><p><strong>14. Estonia</strong></p><p><strong></strong>Estonia scores in the Top 20 for every category and gets its highest marks for its natural environment. "A beautiful country with excellent air quality and open spaces," praises an Indian expat.<br></p><p><strong>15. Costa Rica</strong></p><p><strong></strong>Both the government and the people are very supportive of green policies, find 82%, resp. 67% of expats. "It's easy to live a healthy lifestyle with regard to the food, climate, clean air and water," says one. Costa Rica won the 2019 UN Champion of the Earth award and has pledged to go carbon neutral by 2050.<br></p><p><strong>16. Czechia</strong></p><p><strong></strong>"The beauty of the environment" is one of the best things about living in Czechia, says a Russian expat. No less than 97% of expats agree.<br></p><p><strong>17. France</strong></p><p><strong></strong>77% of expats are happy about the availability of green goods and services in France, which is 14 percentage points above average. The country also scores well for waste management and recycling. In short, France has a "good, green and clean environment," one Iranian expat finds. <strong><br></strong></p><p><strong>18. Australia</strong></p><p><strong></strong>While ranking high on the quality of its nature, water and air, Australia scores low when it comes to government support for green issues (51%). Fortunately, expats see more interest among the general population (68%). </p><p><strong>19. Singapore</strong></p><p><strong></strong>Expats rate the government's interest in green issues higher than globally average (77% vs. 55%), but the Singaporean public's engagement for the same less than average (40% vs. 48%). Of course, in a small, crowded place like Singapore, "(nature) spots are limited."<br></p><p><strong>20. Spain</strong></p><p>Spain's "scenery, diversity of places to visit and healthier environment" are what rate highly with one British expat. Its weak point is governmental and public support for green issues – but still slightly above the global average. <br></p>London is "polluted and noisy"
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDU2Njg4Ni9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY0NDg3NjkyOH0.3ySSD7jFBfAWA07u-EN-oL9x9cq9FZn06iz5aV0hEOw/img.jpg?width=980" id="f5630" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="80c9fa119e7ff3acc91e027b7529bfed" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="\u200bEven at 2:30pm, London gets clogged." />Afternoon traffic jam in London.
Image: Garry Knight, CC BY 2.0
<p><strong></strong><strong>21. Oman</strong></p><p><strong></strong>The highest-ranking country in the Middle East, Oman does especially well for natural environment (93%) and air quality (76%). However, only 50% are happy with the availability of green goods and services (vs. 63% globally).</p><p><strong>22. United Arab Emirates</strong></p><p><strong></strong>Despite higher-than-average scores in some categories, the UAE's 52nd place out of 60 for the appreciation of its natural environment drags down its overall score. <br></p><p><strong>23. Israel</strong></p><p><strong></strong>Two in three expats rate Israel's air quality positively, 55% think the government cares about the environment (exactly the global average) and 51% thinks the public does too (slightly above global average).<br></p><p><strong>24. Ecuador</strong></p><p><strong></strong>The highest-ranked South American country, Ecuador scores especially well for its natural environment (95%). Its overall ranking is dragged down by lower scores for air and water quality. One Dutch expat sees "a lack of care for the environment."<strong><br></strong></p><p><strong>25. Japan</strong></p><p><strong></strong>Japan boasts a "high quality of life due to clean air and water, as well as many natural recreational places," reports a Malaysian expat. Waste management and recycling is rated highly (85%), but not the government's (27%) nor the public's (33%) engagement in green issues. <br></p><p><strong>26. Ireland</strong></p><p><strong></strong>Expats are particularly satisfied with Ireland's air quality (16th) and natural environment (19th), but only 65% are content with the quality of the water and sanitation. <strong><br></strong></p><p><strong>27. Belgium</strong></p><p><strong></strong>Biggest pluses: the public is into green issues (57%), the availability of green goods and services (75%) and green energy (66%). Belgium scores below average for air quality and one Danish expat complains about "poor green infrastructure."</p><p><strong>28. United Kingdom</strong></p><p><strong></strong>"(London) is very polluted and noisy," complains a Swiss expat. In fact, the UK's natural environment ranks just 43rd. On the upside, green goods and services are slightly more available than the global average. <br></p><p><strong>29. Bahrain</strong></p><p><strong></strong>The Gulf state ranks near the bottom for its natural environment and performs best for its government's green credentials (72%). One British expat regrets "the lack of green spaces."</p><p><strong>30. United States</strong></p><p><strong></strong>When it comes to green government policies, the U.S. ranks in the Bottom 10; but the country does a lot better in terms of the availability of green goods and services. "I like that basic services for living, such as access to clean water, are guaranteed," says one Venezuelan expat.<br></p>World map for the 'sustainable expat'
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDU2Njg5MC9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYzMzAyNjQ2MH0.hjRiMDmOSnn9EvKJtx_tlzql3Gf7ph8lt8bL6dPCft4/img.png?width=980" id="def5d" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="149be2f5a19cc625cb555d8078f62ce2" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="The best & worst destiations for the sustainable expat" />Sixty expat destinations ranked for sustainability, from best (orange) to worst (light blue). In between: fairly okay (brown), middling (grey) and not that great (dark blue).
Image: Environment & Sustainability Ranking, an Expat Insider topical report published by InterNations
<p><strong></strong><strong>31. Panama</strong></p><p>While 94% of expats are happy with the quality of the natural environment, only 37% find Panama's waste management and recycling practices up to scratch (vs. 60% globally). "There is a lot of litter on the streets and in the ocean," says one expat.</p><p><strong>32. Italy</strong></p><p>Italy's "beautiful landscapes and natural areas" earn the country high praise, but that is offset by "air pollution and heavy traffic," as the same expat explains. <br></p><p><strong>33. Colombia</strong></p><p>Just like its overall score, Colombia is a mid-fielder in most categories. Its worst ranking is for air quality (47th), its best for the policy and people attitudes towards the environment (30th). </p><p><strong>34. Qatar</strong></p><p>65% of expats appreciate the Qatari government's green efforts, but just 40% think the people feel the same. "There is a lack of green options, but things are changing," observes a Canadian expat. </p><p><strong>35. Hungary</strong></p><p>Expats rate the quality of Hungary's water and sanitation higher than the global average (76% vs. 72%), but its air quality significantly lower (49% vs. 62%).<br></p><p><strong>36. Poland</strong></p><p>Poland is one of the few European countries to rank below average. No less than 60% of expats are unhappy with the air quality in Poland, compared to just 24% worldwide.<br></p><p><strong>37. Russia</strong></p><p>"St Petersburg is absolutely beautiful. There are many parks and green spaces, and the canals and the coast make it even better," gushes an American expat. But Russia is bigger than St Petersburg, and on the whole less pleasant. Water quality and waste management are just two categories rated well below the global average. <br></p><p><strong>38. Argentina</strong></p><p>88% of expats like Argentina's natural environment, and 64% are satisfied with air quality (vs. 62% globally) but the country performs average or worse on all other indicators. <br></p><p><strong>39. Chile</strong></p><p><strong></strong>Chile scores among the Bottom 10 for air quality, and not too well on many other indicators, but the quality of the country's natural environment (appreciated by 89% of expats) somewhat mitigates the result. <br></p><p><strong>40. Malaysia </strong></p><p>With 86% of expats lauding Malaysia's natural environment, the country scores above the global average in exactly one category. An Australian expat in Kuala Lumpur expresses concerns "about the air quality and waste disposal."<br></p>South Korea's "rather horrible" air
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDU2NjkxNS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY2MTY1MjIwNn0.2e6eBIc38sAZLFQGKw4UL3-SY3hA9NthX0Uj9L4ibZA/img.jpg?width=980" id="c10db" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="cba918e6e5455c2e5ff4f9d5caf54775" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="\u200bSmoggy Seoul" />Seoul's air quality is so bad you can picture it. Only India's air is perceived as worse than South Korea's, according to the expat survey.
Image: Jimmy McIntyre – editor HDR One Magazine, CC BY-SA 2.0
<p><strong>41. South Korea</strong></p><p>Coming in on 59th place, South Korea scores particularly poorly for air quality. One Filipino expat even finds the Korean air "rather horrible". The water and sanitation quality are rated a lot higher, though. </p><p><strong>42. Turkey</strong></p><p>Turkey's natural environment scores only slightly below average (78% vs. 82% globally), as does the appreciation for its air quality (59% vs. 62%). But the country scores well below global average when it comes to waste management (42% vs. 60%). One expat laments the "traffic, pollution and lack of recycling" in the country.</p><p><strong>43. Mexico</strong></p><p>Mexico is the worst performer among the North American destinations. No less than 35% of expats are dissatisfied with the quality of water and sanitation. One respondent mentioned the "lack of clean and operational public restrooms." </p><p><strong>44. Cyprus</strong></p><p>The island nation scores particularly well on air quality (68%), but worse than average on many other indicators, notably environmental awareness. "Garbage is just left anywhere," complains one British expat. </p><p><strong>45. Greece</strong></p><p><strong></strong>Greece's worst score is for waste management and recycling (53rd), but it does better for air quality (19th). Overall, 89% of expats appreciate Greece's nature, but the country is "not environmentally conscious," a Canadian expat says.</p><p><strong>46. South Africa</strong></p><p><strong></strong>Being Africa's best-ranked country at #46 is a bit of a Pyrrhic victory. In fact, South Africa scores near the bottom in many categories, including green energy options and government interest in green policies (both 59th).</p><p><strong>47. Brazil</strong></p><p><strong></strong>The worst destination in South America when it comes to environment and sustainability. Just 23% of expats say the government supports green policies, only 32% think the population is interested in them. A Canadian expat lamented the "lack of empathy for the environment."</p><p><strong>48. Morocco</strong></p><p><strong></strong>Morocco's biggest draws for expats in terms of environment and sustainability are its air quality (67%) and its nature (80%). But "I wish there was a greater awareness (with regards to) littering," complains an American expat.</p><p><strong>49. Saudi Arabia</strong></p><p><strong></strong>Best score: 50% of expats believe the Saudi government supports green policies (still 5% below the global average). "I don't like the total reliance on cars, the lack of recycling, and the lack of green spaces," an Australian expat says.</p><p><strong>50. China</strong></p><p><strong></strong>29% of expats are dissatisfied with China's natural environment, more than three times the global average (9%). "The air quality is terrible, and the people are packed tightly together," says an American expat.<br></p>Bad, worse, India
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDU2Njk0MS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY0NTcyMTczMH0.Pt2bGDrpSKSwVjimMK_iK0Jejpu8ILn77VEzHTdzQQ4/img.jpg?width=980" id="28411" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="7e0664fa6c25f63c9a9ce2344b83753c" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="\u200bIndia scores worst in all three categories, but to be fair \u2013 some of its problems were imported from more developed countries." />India scores worst in all three categories, but to be fair – some of its problems were imported from more developed countries.
Image: Jacques Holst, CC BY-NC-SA
<p><strong></strong><strong>51. Hong Kong</strong></p><p>Hong Kong's two highest-ranked qualities are its natural environment and its water and sanitation infrastructure (both 37th). It does a lot worse for air quality (55th). "They still have landfill sites. And food waste is also a huge problem," observes a Hungarian expat.</p><p><strong>52. Malta</strong></p><p><strong></strong>The only European country in the Bottom 10, Malta performs poorly in all categories, but especially in terms of green policies. Only 33% of expats thinks the government cares about those, and only 48% think the same of the people. "It's a shame," says one British expat: "Wind farms and electric buses would be a good idea."</p><p><strong>53. Kenya</strong></p><p><strong></strong>No less than 72% of expats are unsatisfied with Kenya's waste management and recycling, versus just 28% globally, and just 23% of expats believe Kenyans are interested in the environment, versus a global average of 48%.<strong><br></strong></p><p><strong>54. Philippines</strong></p><p><strong></strong>The Philippines places in the Bottom 10 for each category. There is "no environmental care," laments one British expat.</p><p><strong>55. Thailand</strong></p><p><strong></strong>53% of respondents agree that the Thai government is not supportive of green policies, more than double the global average (25%). An American expat lists "air pollution and the government's inability to enforce air pollution laws" as their least favorite aspect of expat life in Thailand.</p><p><strong>56. Vietnam</strong></p><p><strong></strong>Expats rate only India and South Korea as having worse air quality than Vietnam. A Dutch expat lists "air pollution, noise, bad waste management and rodents" as things he does not like about living in Vietnam.</p><p><strong>57. Indonesia</strong></p><p><strong></strong>50% of expats are unhappy about the state of Indonesia's water and sanitation infrastructure (vs. just 15% worldwide). "There is no waste management. All rubbish is going to the rivers and into the ocean," says a German expat. </p><p><strong>58. Egypt</strong></p><p><strong></strong>The country on the Nile scores among the worst three in all of the survey's categories. There seems to be "no care for the environment," says a Polish expat. A French expat in Cairo laments the absence of "organic or pesticide-free foods".</p><p><strong>59. Kuwait</strong></p><p><strong></strong>Only 12% of expats are pleased with Kuwait's natural environment. That the emirate's worst result, but not the only bad one. "Poor sanitation and inept waste management" are among the worst things in Kuwait, says one Australian expat. </p><p><strong>60. India</strong></p><p><strong></strong>India is the worst destination for all three categories. 87% of expats are dissatisfied with India's waste management and recycling efforts, 82% rate the air quality poorly (with 55% saying it's "very bad"), and 69% are unhappy with the quality of the water and sanitation infrastructure. </p><p>World Bank data suggests India's output of renewable energy is 15%, significantly lower than the global average of 23%. However, in terms of the ubiquitous rubbish in India, it should be noted that the country has been used by western countries as a dumping ground for plastic waste. <br></p>
Keep reading
Show less
Americans under 40 want major reforms, expanded Supreme Court
Younger Americans support expanding the Supreme Court and serious political reforms, says new poll.
22 October, 2020
Demonstrators In Louisville calling for justice for Breonna Taylor.
Credit: Jon Cherry/Getty Images
- Americans under 40 largely favor major political reforms, finds a new survey.
- The poll revealed that most would want to expand the Supreme Court, impose terms limits, and make it easier to vote.
- Millennials are more liberal and reform-centered than Generation Z.
<p>A new nonpartisan poll of Americans under 40 finds they want serious reforms in the American political system. The survey, conducted by the University of Massachusetts Lowell, showed great support for expanding the Supreme Court, terms limits, and abolishing the electoral college.</p><p>In particular, the researchers looked at opinions from 1,503 people between 18 and 39 years old, representing millennials – those born from early 1980s to mid-1990s, and the succeeding Generation Z – those born in the mid-to-late 1990s until early 2010s. Overall, most everyone agreed that the political system is quite broken, with only 24 percent having trust in the government. Interestingly, millennials appear more liberal-minded and want reforms more than the younger cohort.</p><p>The majority of the polled (52 percent) were in favor of upping the number of Supreme Court justices from nine to 13, with 66 percent of the millennials and 62 percent of the Gen Z'ers supporting. Seventy-two percent of all surveyed wanted to do away with lifetime appointments of the justices and impose term limits. Seventy-nine percent of the millennials and 62 percent of Gen Z approved this measure. Eighty-four percent of all surveyed wanted Congressional term limits.</p>
<p><span style="background-color: initial;">Political science professor John Cluverius, associate director of the </span><span style="background-color: initial;"><a href="https://www.uml.edu/research/public-opinion/" target="_blank">UMass Lowell Center for Public Opinion</a></span><span style="background-color: initial;">, which carried out the poll, sees a correlation between the views of the younger Americans and the politics in the run-up to the 2020 elections:</span></p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"It's no coincidence that as Joe Biden's lead has grown in the polls, the more comfortable Americans are with expanding the size of the Supreme Court," said Cluverius in a <a href="https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2020-10/uoml-nnp102120.php" target="_blank">press release</a>. "As the chance of Trump holding a second term and appointing more justices dwindles, the opposition to court-packing dwindles as well. Saying Americans are opposed to expanding the court used to be conventional wisdom; now it's a commonly held misconception."</p><p>Americans under 40 also want to eliminate the Electoral College and rather pick Presidents by popular vote, with 58 percent overall in favor to the idea. That includes 64 percent of millennials and 54 percent of Gen Z people polled. Sixty-nine percent of all adults also like the idea of "no excuse" absentee balloting for any voter. Additionally, 71 percent of millennials would rather see more than two political parties being competitive in the U.S., compared to 61 percent of all and 59 percent of Gen Z participants.</p>
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDU1OTE1OS9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYyNTc5NDI2NX0.GCiPQgPiUWv7qkONIvergMHcuAiMwrs3ksV2Hkmm0Gg/img.png?width=980" id="f3fb1" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="b9e0e653081a68fd9e920e0ae80641f2" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
<p>On the issues of social justice and the Black Lives Matter movement, the poll found 8 percent fewer overall saying that Black people are treated less fairly than whites, in contrast to a similar poll from August. Forty-three percent of the respondents had such opinions, with Gen Z'ers leading in this belief at 54 percent.<br></p><p> Joshua Dyck, director of the Center for Public Opinion and associate professor of political science, commented that the ideological divide didn't break down in an expected way:</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"What I find most interesting is that it is not always the youngest Americans who espouse the most liberal viewpoints," <a href="https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2020-10/uoml-nnp102120.php" target="_blank">he shared</a>." Here we see millennials, the oldest of whom are about to turn 40, as the driving force behind the vision for a more progressive future."</p>
<p>The poll also revealed that the vast majority of Gen Z (84 percent) and millennial (85 percent) responders are very likely to believe that human activity contributes to climate change. They also think the U.S. government has not done enough to combat it, with 64 percent of Gen Z'ers and 65 percent of millennials holding such views.</p><p>Americans under 40 are also largely in favor of canceling all student loan debt, with 66 percent of Generation Z and 66 percent of millennials supporting. In a telling comparison, the older generations are less on board, with Gen X'ers (those born from mid-60s to early 1980s) split, with 51 percent favoring the idea. Only 38 percent of the Baby Boomers (born 1946-1964) and 31 percent of the Silent Generation (born 1928 to 1945) back the notion.</p><p>Check out the <a href="https://www.uml.edu/Research/public-opinion/polls/default.aspx" target="_blank">detailed results of the poll.</a></p>
Keep reading
Show less
Can fake news help you remember real facts better?
A 2020 study published in the journal of Psychological Science explores the idea that fake news can actually help you remember real facts better.
22 October, 2020
Credit: Rawpixel.com on Shutterstock
Mind & Brain
- In 2019, researchers at Stanford Engineering analyzed the spread of fake news as if it were a strain of Ebola. They adapted a model for understanding diseases that can infect a person more than once to better understand how fake news spreads and gains traction.
- A new study published in 2020 explores the idea that fake news can actually help you remember real facts better.
- "These findings demonstrate one situation in which misinformation reminders can diminish the negative effects of fake-news exposure in the short term," researchers on the project explained.
<p>Fake news spreads like a virus. In 2019, <a href="https://engineering.stanford.edu/magazine/article/how-fake-news-spreads-real-virus" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">researchers at Stanford Engineering</a> analyzed the spread of fake news as if it were a strain of Ebola. The researchers adapted a model for understanding diseases that can infect a person more than once to better understand how fake news spreads and gains traction.</p><p>Researchers studied how many people are "susceptible" to the disease (or in this case, how many people are likely to believe a certain piece of fake news). The researchers also looked at how many people are exposed to fake news, how they are actually "infected" (believing the story), and how many people are likely to then spread that "infection" (misinformation) on to others. </p><p>Much like a virus, this study concluded that over time, being exposed to multiple strains of fake news can wear down a person's resistance and make them increasingly susceptible to believing it. The more times a person is exposed to the same fake news, especially if it is coming from an influential source, the more likely they are to become persuaded, no matter the likelihood of such news being true.</p><p>"The so-called 'power-law' of social media, a well-documented pattern in social networks, hold that messages replicate most rapidly if they are targeted at relatively small numbers of influential people with large followings," the <a href="https://engineering.stanford.edu/magazine/article/how-fake-news-spreads-real-virus" target="_blank">researchers explained in the Stanford study</a>.</p><ul class="ee-ul"></ul>
Previous studies on misinformation have already paved the way to a better understanding
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDU1NzQ4NC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYxNjE2Mjg1Nn0.hs_xHktN1KXUDVoWpHIVBI2sMJy6aRK6tvBVFkqmYjk/img.jpg?width=1245&coordinates=0%2C800%2C0%2C823&height=700" id="fc135" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="246bb1920c0f40ccb15e123914de1ab1" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="fake news concept of misinformation and fake news in the media" />How does misinformation spread?
Credit: Visual Generation on Shutterstock
<p><strong>What is the "continued-influence" effect?</strong></p><p>A challenge in using corrections effectively is that repeating the misinformation can have negative consequences. Research on this effect (referred to as "continued-influence") has shown that information presented as factual that is later deemed false can still contaminate memory and reasoning. The persistence of the continued-influence effect has led researchers to generally recommend avoiding repeating misinformation. </p><p>"Repetition increases familiarity and believability of misinformation," <a href="https://engineering.stanford.edu/magazine/article/how-fake-news-spreads-real-virus" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">the study explains</a>.</p><p><strong>What is the "familiarity-backfire" effect?</strong></p><p>Studies of this effect have shown that increasing misinformation familiarity through extra exposure to it leads to misattributions of fluency when the context of said information cannot be recalled. <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0956797620952797#" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">A 2017 study</a> examined this effect in myth correction. Subjects rated beliefs in facts and myths of unclear veracity. Then, the facts were affirmed and myths corrected and subjects again made belief ratings. The results suggested a role for familiarity but the myth beliefs remained below pre-manipulation levels. </p>New research into fake news has uncovered something interesting about misinformation
<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="ddeac998508e09fb9d1b4691d6c20d28"><iframe type="lazy-iframe" data-runner-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/bJ5qUx1WOsg?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span><p>A 2020 study published in the journal of <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0956797620952797" target="_blank">Psychological Science</a> explores the idea that fake news can actually help you remember real facts better.</p><p>Fake news exposure can cause misinformation to be mistakenly remembered and believed. In two experiments, the team (led by Christopher N. Wahlheim) examined whether reminders of misinformation could do the opposite: improve memory for and beliefs in corrections to that fake news. </p><p>The study had subjects reading factual statements and then separate misinformation statements taken from news websites. Then, the subjects read statements that corrected the misinformation. Some misinformation reminders appeared before some corrections but not all. Then, subjects were asked to recall facts, indicate their belief in those recalls, and indicate whether they remembered the corrections and misinformation. </p><p>The results of the study showed that reminders increased recall and belief accuracy. These benefits were greater both when misinformation was recalled and when the subjects remembered that corrections had occurred. </p><p>Researchers on the project <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0956797620952797" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">explained</a>: "These findings demonstrate one situation in which misinformation reminders can diminish the negative effects of fake-news exposure in the short term."</p><p><strong>The conclusion: fake-news misinformation that was corrected by fact-checked information can improve both memory and belief accuracy in real information.</strong></p><p>"We examined the effects of providing misinformation reminders before fake-news corrections on memory and belief accuracy. Our study included everyday fake-news misinformation that was corrected by fact-check-verified statements. Building on research using fictional, yet naturalistic, event narratives to show that reminders can counteract misinformation reliance in memory reports," <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0956797620952797" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">the researchers</a> explained.</p><p>"It suggests that there may be benefits to learning how someone was being misleading. This knowledge may inform strategies that people use to counteract high exposure to misinformation spread for political gain," <a href="https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2020-10/afps-rtf101620.php" target="_blank">Wahlheim said</a>.</p>
Keep reading
Show less
Can you solve what an MIT professor once called 'the hardest logic puzzle ever'?
Logic puzzles can teach reasoning in a fun way that doesn't feel like work.
21 October, 2020
Credit: Shutterstock
Mind & Brain
- Logician Raymond Smullyan devised tons of logic puzzles, but one was declared by another philosopher to be the hardest of all time.
- The problem, also known as the Three Gods Problem, is solvable, even if it doesn't seem to be.
- It depends on using complex questions to assure that any answer given is useful.
<p> Despite the general dislike of mathematics that most profess to have, many people enjoy logic puzzles. This is strange, as many logic puzzles are just variations of math problems. Gleefully ignorant of this fact, many mathaphobes will try to solve riddles and puzzles of tremendous difficulty using reasoning tools they fear to employ when the subject is an equation. </p><p>Today, we'll look at a puzzle, the polymath who devised it, and why you should consider picking up a book of logical puzzles next time you are at the library. </p>
<iframe width="730" height="430" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/E27v83WWiGo" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe><p> This puzzle was written by the brilliant logician <a href="https://mathshistory.st-andrews.ac.uk/Biographies/Smullyan/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Raymond Smullyan</a>. Born in New York 101 years ago, Smullyan earned his undergraduate degree at the University of Chicago and his doctorate in mathematics at Princeton, where he also taught for a few years. </p><p> An extremely prolific writer, he published several books on logic puzzles for popular consumption and an endless stream of textbooks and essays for an academic audience on logic. His puzzle books are well regarded for introducing people to complex philosophical ideas, such as <a href="https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/goedel-incompleteness/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Gödel's incompleteness theorems</a>, in a fun and non-technical way. </p><p> Skilled in close-up magic, Smullyan once worked as a professional <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/11/us/raymond-smullyan-dead-puzzle-creator.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">magician</a>. He was also an accomplished <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yamGR6XpwZw" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">pianist</a> and an amateur astronomer who built his own telescope. Besides his interest in logic, he also admired Taoist philosophy and published a book on it for a general audience. <br> </p><p>He also found the time to appear on <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E27v83WWiGo" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Johnny Carson</a>, where, as in many of his books, he argued that people who like his puzzles claim to dislike math only because they don't realize that they are one and the same.</p>
The Three Gods Problem
<iframe width="730" height="430" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/UyOGZk7WbIk" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe><p> One of the more popular wordings of the problem, which MIT logic professor George Boolos <a href="https://www.readersdigest.ca/culture/hardest-logic-puzzle-ever/" target="_blank">said</a> was the hardest ever, is:<br> <br> "Three gods A, B, and C are called, in no particular order, True, False, and Random. True always speaks truly, False always speaks falsely, but whether Random speaks truly or falsely is a completely random matter. Your task is to determine the identities of A, B, and C by asking three yes-no questions; each question must be put to exactly one god. The gods understand English, but will answer all questions in their own language, in which the words for <em>yes</em> and <em>no</em> are <em>da</em> and <em>ja</em>, in some order. You do not know which word means which."<br> <br> Boolos adds that you are allowed to ask a particular god more than one question and that Random switches between answering as if they are a truth-teller or a liar, not merely between answering "da" and "ja." <br> <br> Give yourself a minute to ponder this; we'll look at a few answers below. Ready? Okay. <strong><br> <br></strong>George Boolos' <a href="https://www.pdcnet.org/8525737F00588A37/file/31B21D0580E8B125852577CA0060ABC9/$FILE/harvardreview_1996_0006_0001_0060_0063.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">solution</a> focuses on finding either True or False through complex questions. </p><p> In logic, there is a commonly used function often written as "iff," which means "if, and only if." It would be used to say something like "The sky is blue if and only if Des Moines is in Iowa." It is a powerful tool, as it gives a true statement only when both of its components are true or both are false. If one is true and the other is false, you have a false statement. </p><p> So, if you make a statement such as "the moon is made of Gorgonzola if, and only if, Rome is in Russia," then you have made a true statement, as both parts of it are false. The statement "The moon has no air if, and only if, Rome is in Italy," is also true, as both parts of it are true. However, "The moon is made of Gorgonzola if, and only if, Albany is the capitol of New York," is false, because one of the parts of that statement is true, and the other part is not (The fact that these items don't rely on each other is immaterial for now).</p><p> In this puzzle, iff can be used here to control for the unknown value of "da" and "ja." As the answers we get can be compared with what we know they would be if the parts of our question are all true, all false, or if they differ. </p><p> Boolos would have us begin by asking god A, "Does "da" mean yes if and only if you are True if and only if B is Random?" No matter what A says, the answer you get is extremely useful. As he explains: <br> </p><p> "If A is True or False and you get the answer da, then as we have seen, B is Random, and therefore C is either True or False; but if A is True or False and you get the answer ja, then B is not Random, therefore B is either True or False… if A is Random and you get the answer da, C is not Random (neither is B, but that's irrelevant), and therefore C is either True or False; and if A is Random...and you get the answer ja, B is not random (neither is C, irrelevantly), and therefore B is either True or False."<br> <br> No matter which god A is, an answer of "da" assures that C isn't Random, and a response of "ja" means the same for B. </p><p> From here, it is a simple matter of asking whichever one you know isn't Random questions to determine if they are telling the truth, and then one on who the last god is. Boolos suggests starting with "Does da mean yes if, and only if, Rome is in Italy?" Since one part of this is accurate, we know that True will say "da," and False will say "ja," if faced with this question. </p><p> After that, you can ask the same god something like, "Does da mean yes if, and only if, A is Random?" and know exactly who is who by how they answer and the process of elimination. </p><p> If you're confused about how this works, try going over it again slowly. Remember that the essential parts are knowing what the answer will be if two positives or two negatives always come out as a positive and that two of the gods can be relied on to act consistently. </p><p> Smullyan wrote several books with other logic puzzles in them. If you liked this one and would like to learn more about the philosophical issues they investigate, or perhaps if you'd like to try a few that are a little easier to solve, you should consider reading them. A few of his puzzles can be found with explanations in this <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/02/11/obituaries/smullyan-logic-puzzles.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">interactive</a>. </p>
Keep reading
Show less
New tardigrade species withstands lethal UV radiation thanks to fluorescent 'shield'
Another amazing tardigrade survival skill is discovered.
21 October, 2020
Credit: Suma et al., Biology Letters (2020)
Surprising Science
- Apparently, some water bears can even beat extreme UV light.
- It may be an adaptation to the summer heat in India.
- Special under-skin pigments neutralize harmful rays.
<p>Many of us consider ourselves tardigrade, or "water bear" fans. These microscopic buggers — actually not bugs at all but their own distinct <a href="http://www.tardigrada.net/newsletter/tardigrades.htm" target="_blank">phylum</a> with over 1,000 members — are <a href="https://bigthink.com/brandon-weber/17-things-about-water-bears-that-explain-how-life-can-spread-to-other-planets" target="_self">unbelievably hardy</a> in spite of their diminutive stature: They range from just 0.5 to 1 millimeter in length.</p><p>Tardigrades survive in all sorts of conditions that <a href="https://bigthink.com/philip-perry/scientists-finally-figure-out-why-the-water-bear-is-nearly-unstoppable" target="_self">should</a> really spell their doom. They're basically <a href="https://serc.carleton.edu/microbelife/topics/tardigrade/index.html" target="_blank">found everywhere</a> on Earth, and last spring an Israeli lunar lander may have inadvertently <a href="https://bigthink.com/surprising-science/tardigrades-moon" target="_self">dumped a bunch of them</a> on the moon where they may well be happily going about their water bear business.</p><p>Almost nothing kills them, except for super-extreme blasts of ultraviolet (UV) light that would be deadly to most organisms. Or so it seemed, until <a href="https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/10/new-species-water-bear-uses-fluorescent-shield-survive-lethal-uv-radiation" target="_blank">researchers</a> came across some reddish-brown <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eutardigrade" target="_blank">eutardigrades</a> living in moss on a wall in Bengaluru, India. These, it turns out, don't care that much about even staggering amounts of germicide-level UV. The scientists concluded that what they were dealing with was an undocumented member of the <em>Paramacrobiotus</em> genus.</p><p>Score one more for our wee heroes.</p><p>The research is published in the Royal Society <a href="https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsbl.2020.0391" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Biological Letters</a>.</p>
Stressor testing
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDU1MzIzMS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYyMjc2MDc4Mn0.5R6DAfzsq29zvETCEH1sR9rprcnJv_L0KyUW2qedslE/img.jpg?width=980" id="c6b71" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="e7afe644fc94631ed9ea6837ed3920d3" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="water bear illustration" />3D illustration of a tardigrade
Credit: Dotted Yeti/Shutterstock
<p>It seems at times like scientists enjoy playing the "let's see if <em>this</em> kills them" game with tardigrades, a game that humans usually lose. After searching the campus of the Indian Institute of Science, researchers gathered some water bears and brought them back to the lab to see what they could handle.</p><p>The scientists found that after they exposed <a href="http://cshprotocols.cshlp.org/content/2018/11/pdb.emo102301.full" target="_blank"><em>Hypsibius exemplaris</em></a> tardigrades to very high doses — 1 kilojoule (kJ) per square meter — of UV light for about 15 minutes, they would in fact die over the next 24 hours. However, when they aimed the same blasts at the reddish-brown tardigrades…nothing. The humans even quadrupled the UV intensity and, nope, they tracked the water bears for 30 days, and a majority of them, 60 percent, were still fine.</p><p>As is often the case with tardigrades, the question is how?</p>Turning deadly light blue
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDU1MzIwMy9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYxMTM1NTE2N30.n8FiCLgp5aTqmYby2bjpeu9QJRTV7KzaB9tmTHBzWtk/img.jpg?width=980" id="5d4cc" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="7aa8735a958123bcfb269920eb4d2aed" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />Tardigrade's normal appearance (left), and under inverted fluorescence (right)
Credit: Suma et al., Biology Letters (2020)
<p>When the researchers examined the tardigrades under an inverted fluorescence microscope they found that when they were exposed to UV light, they became blue. The researchers' hypothesis is that these tardigrades carry fluorescent pigments beneath their skin that they deploy as necessary to transform UV light into simple benign, blue light. It may be that this ability has emerged as an evolutionary response to southern tropical India's often-extreme heat. The study says that typical summer-day UV levels in this region are about 4kJ per square meter.</p><p>Of the 40 percent of the reddish-brown tardigrades that had died before 30 days — mostly after about 20 days — the scientists concluded they had less pigment with which to neutralize UV light.</p><p>When the scientists extracted the pigment from the UV champions and coated some <em>Hypsibius exemplaris</em> tardigrades with the stuff, their resistance to UV exposure was also enhanced, boosting their survival rate to almost twice that of their uncoated brethren.</p><p>Autofluorescence has been found in other animals — parrots, scorpions, chameleons, and frogs, among others — so it's not completely unheard of. In parrots, for example, autofluorescence is hypothesized to be involved in tweaking coloration during mating rituals. Still, surprise, tardigrades seem to be putting it to unusual use by employing it for UV protection. </p>
Keep reading
Show less
Popular
