Daily Archives: November 17, 2024

Kids dive into science creativity at SIBF

One of this year’s highlights was the “Make a Bouncy Ball” workshop, where children explored the intersection of science and creativity. Led by Hadi Bedir, a biomedical engineering and psychology student from Lebanon, the session gave young participants the chance to create their own bouncy balls while learning about polymers and chemical reactions.“This workshop is more than just fun—it’s an opportunity to understand science in action,” said Bedir. He introduced children aged nine and above to Borax, explaining its role in creating elasticity by forming polymers when combined with glue. “It’s a hands-on way to show how chemistry shapes the world around us,” he added.Children eagerly participated, mixing warm water with Borax powder and blending glue, glitter, and food colouring to personalise their creations. Bedir guided them through each step, demystifying the science behind the transformation. “The glue’s molecule chains interact with Borax to form a dense, elastic structure, turning a liquid into a solid bouncy ball,” he explained.The workshop also fostered psychological growth, encouraging children to embrace new experiences. When 10-year-old Fahad hesitated to handle the sticky mixture, Bedir patiently reassured him, inspiring confidence and active engagement.The room buzzed with excitement as children tested their creations. “My ball bounces so high—it’s amazing!” exclaimed 11-year-old Ragad Mohammed.As SIBF’s 43rd edition wraps up on November 17, its 12-day celebration of literature and learning has left a lasting impression. Organised by the Sharjah Book Authority (SBA), this year’s event featured close to 1,3500 activities for children and adults, seamlessly merging education and entertainment to ignite young imaginations.

Russian political scientist Andrei Kolesnikov: For Putin, Trump’s election is both good and bad news

Russia’s Vladimir Putin wants to show that he is not dependent on Donald Trump. That is why he denies the very existence of the phone call that allegedly took place on November 7. This is also the reason why, at a major conference in Russia on the same day, he did not mention the President-elect for the first three hours of his speech. The Kremlin leader was convinced that he had to demonstrate his independence from any American influence.
That’s what Andrei Kolesnikov, a political analyst and commentator in the Russian version of the newspaper, said. “Novaya Gazeta, one of the few media outlets in Moscow still critical of the Kremlin regime. According to Kolesnikov, “to his audience in Russia, Putin wants to present himself as king of the world:” Trump is important, but he is even more important. “Vladimir Putin doesn’t care about the rest – the state of mind he wants to demonstrate. In the United States, the message is the same: ‘If you want to make an offer for peace in Ukraine, you can send it to me; I will be happy to receive you; but I am the one who decides when and how to behave,'” the Russian political scientist explained.

“For him /Putin, ed./ the election of Donald Trump is both good and bad news. On the one hand, he feels close to the president-elect and his conservative and conspiratorial positions. But on the other, there is the problem of Donald Trump’s unpredictability, which could undermine Moscow’s discourse and policy towards Washington. The Kremlin wants to preserve the Cold War climate. Donald Trump’s outstretched hand disrupts this tactic. No one opened the champagne in the Kremlin on 5 November /the date of the US presidential election/. And I doubt very much that Vladimir Putin will agree to meet with Donald Trump soon after his inauguration, on January 20, 2025, for a big public show of reconciliation. Initially, the resumption of contacts will take place informally, behind the scenes. Donald Trump and his new administration could also quickly cut aid to Kiev, but this remains uncertain and the consequences difficult to measure,” said Andrei Kolesnikov. | BGNES

Russian political scientist Andrei Kolesnikov: For Putin, Trump’s election is both good and bad news

Russia’s Vladimir Putin wants to show that he is not dependent on Donald Trump. That is why he denies the very existence of the phone call that allegedly took place on November 7. This is also the reason why, at a major conference in Russia on the same day, he did not mention the President-elect for the first three hours of his speech. The Kremlin leader was convinced that he had to demonstrate his independence from any American influence.
That’s what Andrei Kolesnikov, a political analyst and commentator in the Russian version of the newspaper, said. “Novaya Gazeta, one of the few media outlets in Moscow still critical of the Kremlin regime. According to Kolesnikov, “to his audience in Russia, Putin wants to present himself as king of the world:” Trump is important, but he is even more important. “Vladimir Putin doesn’t care about the rest – the state of mind he wants to demonstrate. In the United States, the message is the same: ‘If you want to make an offer for peace in Ukraine, you can send it to me; I will be happy to receive you; but I am the one who decides when and how to behave,'” the Russian political scientist explained.

“For him /Putin, ed./ the election of Donald Trump is both good and bad news. On the one hand, he feels close to the president-elect and his conservative and conspiratorial positions. But on the other, there is the problem of Donald Trump’s unpredictability, which could undermine Moscow’s discourse and policy towards Washington. The Kremlin wants to preserve the Cold War climate. Donald Trump’s outstretched hand disrupts this tactic. No one opened the champagne in the Kremlin on 5 November /the date of the US presidential election/. And I doubt very much that Vladimir Putin will agree to meet with Donald Trump soon after his inauguration, on January 20, 2025, for a big public show of reconciliation. Initially, the resumption of contacts will take place informally, behind the scenes. Donald Trump and his new administration could also quickly cut aid to Kiev, but this remains uncertain and the consequences difficult to measure,” said Andrei Kolesnikov. | BGNES

The ‘science’ of polling is broken

On Nov. 4, the day before the presidential election, the polling firm Research Co. released its final survey. Unsurprisingly, it concluded that “the battleground states remain closely contested.”In typically blue New Jersey, however, the survey showed Kamala Harris with a 17-point advantage. This was in line with other recent polls. A mid-October poll by Rutgers University’s Eagleton Center found Harris leading by 20 points. And why not? Biden, after all, won the Garden State in 2020 by nearly 16 percentage points.With the final votes still being counted, Harris’s margin in New Jersey is only 6 points, a double-digit difference from most of the polling data in that state in this cycle. Bergen County — a wealthy suburb just over the Hudson River from New York City — swung 13 points in Donald Trump’s direction.Pre-election polling failed to capture other equally profound political shifts around the country. Loudon County, Va., a short commute from Washington, D.C., and home to the country club wing of the government bureaucracy, swung nearly 10 points toward Trump. Miami-Dade — one of the last blue bastions in Florida — swung 20 points. Closer to home, Fall River turned from a reliably Democratic stronghold into one of the many New England towns we can now safely regard as Trump territory.You’d expect to see this kind of sea change reflected in the polls before the election. But we didn’t.Overall, polling in battleground states may have been marginally more accurate this year than it was in past election cycles. But the fact that polling this year missed the broader shift to the right reveals a more important truth: Polling as we’ve known it over the last century is irreparably broken. And like so many of our broken things, we don’t yet know how to replace it.The notion of gauging public opinion on anything — from support for fascism to whether people prefer Fluff over peanut butter — traditionally was based on one important thing: the random sample. It became a staple of political polling in 1936, when George Gallup used the method to contradict the conventional wisdom that FDR was headed for a historic defeat.“As recently as 1983, if you wanted to know what people thought, you made a thousand calls, conducted interviews with the six hundred who answered the phone, and were literally thirty minutes away from releasing the poll,” says Michael A. Bailey, a Georgetown University public policy professor and author of “Polling at a Crossroads: Rethinking Modern Survey Research.”The size of the sample alone virtually guaranteed a representative cross-section of America. “It’s amazing,” Bailey says: Surveys back then would be accurate on many levels, “down to including the right number of people with diabetes, even if they don’t know they have diabetes.”That was then; this is now. Decades of declining trust in institutions and the proliferation of spam across all our communication networks have led to an explosive growth in what pollsters call non-response bias, which simply means that the one person out of a hundred who does respond to an unknown caller on their cellphone is unlikely to be representative of most Americans. “By definition they’re weird, right?” says Bailey. “They’re literally one out of a hundred.”One paragon of the random sampling method — the highly respected Iowa pollster Ann Selzer — shocked politicos and thrilled Harris supporters by releasing a poll the weekend before the election indicating that Harris led Trump in Iowa by three points. Iowa had not voted for a Democrat for president since Barack Obama in 2012. Last week the state went for Trump by 13 points. Selzer was off by 16 points.When it takes a hundred calls to reach a single likely voter, random samples are neither random nor samples in any meaningful sense. Most polling firms have reacted to this challenge by using ever more elaborate models to “weight” the data they get from the people who respond. They construct representations of our diverse society by relying on data collected via Doodle polls and other online questionnaires and paid surveys. Modeling uses complex mathematical formulas to estimate one district’s political leanings based on factors such as its previous voting records, the demographic breakdown within that district, and how places with similar demographics have previously voted.In a polarized country that delegates its most consequential elections to a handful of states, these models were mostly focused on pinpointing the sentiments of the residents of these battlegrounds and ignoring the rest of us. Modeling with weighted samples worked great in 2008 and 2012 (while Gallup, still relying on random sampling, underestimated Barack Obama’s support by 9 percentage points). But modeling has had diminishing returns ever since.In this cycle most pollsters — chastened by their failures to predict the true level of Trump’s support in the last two cycles — weighted their results based on how respondents remembered previously voting. This led to the seemingly accurate results in the swing states because “these models basically said, ‘This vote will be like the last vote,’ and in some places that was more or less true but with a small tilt toward Trump,” notes Bailey.But that doesn’t mean polls told us an important and true story about America. That story was playing out, largely undetected, in Bergen County and Fall River and a thousand other locations. If you looked at nearly every poll and read coverage from across the political spectrum, you still had no idea that the Obama coalition of unions, urban professionals, and racial minorities had been rent asunder, a demographic earthquake that will require the party to rethink its basic purpose.“Right now the modeling, for all its sophistication, has a hard time detecting change,” Bailey says. “Polling is in need of a new paradigm.”The problem is that detecting change is precisely what we depend on polls to do. When they can’t, the world becomes a dimmer, less comprehensible place.Jeff Howe, a former contributing editor at Wired magazine, is an associate professor of journalism at Northeastern University. Ian Dartley, a freelance reporter and recent graduate of Northeastern’s master’s in journalism program, contributed research for this article.

Nolotil under the microscope: What is the science behind the infamous Spanish painkiller linked to multiple British deaths?

THIS is what science says about infamous Spanish painkiller Nolotil after being linked to multiple British fatalities.

In Spain, Nolotil (metamizole) is a trusted choice for moderate pain, particularly post-surgery and in cancer patients, as it’s stronger than ibuprofen yet considered relatively safe. 

However, for British and Irish visitors, this seemingly harmless remedy carries a deadly risk. While approved for use in Spain and a handful of other countries, Nolotil is outright banned in the UK, US, and 40 other countries due to its link to a rare but often fatal condition: agranulocytosis, an uncommon and potentially fatal drop in white blood cells that leaves the body vulnerable to deadly infections.

Over recent years, cases have surfaced of British and Irish tourists suffering severe reactions, and even fatalities, after taking Nolotil. 

Previous Olive Press reports have spotlighted several tragic cases, spurring calls for increased regulation.

Kathy Olson reflects on her legacy as she retires from Owensboro Museum of Science and History

After more than 17 years at the helm, Kathy Olson is stepping down as the CEO of the Owensboro Museum of Science and History, leaving behind a legacy rooted in storytelling, education, and community connection.

Olson has been involved with the museum since its inception in 1966. She said her journey with the institution began when she was just 11 years old. Her father was a General Electric employee and seashell enthusiast who volunteered at the museum when it was located on Sycamore Street.

“My dad loved the natural world, and our family vacations revolved around collecting shells,” Olson said. “That passion led to connections with the Smithsonian, where he had one of his discoveries cataloged. Those early experiences shaped my lifelong love for science and history.”

Olson’s professional career at the museum began in 1990 when she joined as a registrar and later became curator of collections. She was named interim director in July 2006 before assuming the role permanently in January 2007. During her tenure, Olson oversaw numerous expansions and initiatives, including the museum’s Noon Year’s Eve Family Celebration, a family-themed New Year’s Eve celebration.

“At the end of the day, museums are about telling stories,” Olson said. “For us, it’s about preserving the natural history of Western Kentucky and sharing Owensboro’s history. But it’s also about helping families create their own stories through our programs and exhibits.”

The museum has seen significant growth under Olson’s leadership, including new galleries, structural improvements, and increased community engagement. Recent upgrades funded by a $1.1 million appropriation from the Commonwealth of Kentucky have modernized the facility, with projects such as exterior painting, facade cleaning, HVAC upgrades, and elevator repairs underway.

Looking ahead, the museum’s board will launch a search for Olson’s successor. In the interim, board member Ed Allen, who previously served as director in the late 1990s, will assume the role.

“Ed’s experience and the dedication of our board will guide the museum forward,” Olson said. “I’m confident they’ll take the time to find the right leader to continue our mission.”

Although Olson is retiring from her leadership role, she isn’t stepping away entirely. She plans to work part-time, focusing on collections and educational programs. The reduced workload will allow her to spend more time with her family, including her two grandsons.

“This change allows me to reconnect with my roots at the museum while also being present for my grandkids,” Olson said. “Family is so important, and this feels like the right time to shift my focus.”

Reflecting on her career, Olson grew emotional as she acknowledged the mentors and colleagues who shaped her journey. She highlighted the late Sam Davenport, a former board chair and steadfast supporter of the museum, as one of many who made a lasting impact.

“The museum’s success has always been about teamwork,” Olson said. “It’s the combined efforts of staff, board members, and volunteers that make everything possible. I’m so grateful for their dedication.”

As Olson prepares to enter a new chapter, she hopes the museum will continue telling the stories of Owensboro for generations to come.