Top 10 Scientific Advances of 2004

TarrVetus writes "Science Magazine's The Top Ten Science Breakthroughs of 2004 have been announced. The winner: The NASA Rovers and their evidence of water on Mars. The runner up was the Hobbit species found in Indonesia. Other breakthroughs include cloned human embryos and the first discovered pulsar pair."

Comments

what about SpaceshipOne?

[hsmith]

I consider that a pretty awesome feat as i assume many others do

Re:what about SpaceshipOne?

[arkanes]

An impressive engineering, technical, and economic feat, but not one that really impacts science. It's not about the coolest applications of science, but rather about the coolest discoveries in science.

No Exoplanet Picture?

[LithiumX]

We have the first actual picture of a planet orbiting another star... not inferential data, not radio info, but optical (not sure about wavelength, but that's irrelevant).

And it's not even on the list? The still questionable "discovery" of a wet Martian past makes the top of the list, but a deffinitive leap of scientific discovery (ie a fuzzy and blurred but very real picture of an extrasolar planet) doesn't even receive mention on the list (even if the article was kind enough to mention it)?

Scientific errors

[The_Mystic_For_Real]

The fact it can be done begins to move us away from some of the mysteries surrounding human beings; things like the existence of a soul, which frankly is pure imagination

I don't happen to believe in the soul as it appears in most religions, but I fail to see how a successful cloning experiment completely disproves the idea that helps countless millions cope with their lives. Statements like these hurt the image of the scientific community in the eyes of the public, i.e. the people the science is supposedly trying to improve the lives of.

If he had really disproven the soul or God (which is impossible to to the vague nature of their descriptions) then he should by all means spread this proof, but since he hasn't, then he should just STFU.

He is making scientific conclusions based on his faith that the soul is not real. That's just stupid.

Discrediting mention of junk DNA

[lukesl]

As a biologist, I have to say that I'm incredibly disappointed by the inclusion of "junk" DNA in the list. I don't know what specific research results they're referring to when they say there's a breakthrough there, but the entire concept of "junk" DNA is absurd. I've never met a single molecular biologist who believed that non-coding regions were unimportant, and in fact it's been known for at least forty years that non-coding regions are important in regulation of gene expression. Maybe what bothers me most is the term "junk" DNA, which I've never actually heard another scientist use. It's a fictitious concept perpetuated by science writers so that they can feign surprise every time someone can attribute a function to a non-coding piece of DNA (and claim that the scientific community was surprised as well).

All that aside, I'm sure there are big breakthroughs in our understanding of the role of non-coding regions, and it probably deserves to be mentioned. However, one important point to make is that in spite of all this, there ARE parts of the genome that are unquestionably useless evolutionary vestiges. This is not necessarily mysterious, but it is interesting (for example, providing what is in my mind the most convincing evidence of evolution).

Prof. Higgins

[BCGlorfindel]

But Professor Higgins also sees philosophical implications in the work... Science is about trying to understand where we come from, what our purpose is.

Religion is about trying to understand what our purpose is. Anyone claiming science is for said purpose has merely made a religion for themselves out of science. Science is the accumulation of information using the scientific method. Repeat after me, science is in no way meant to be a search for our purpose as humans. Class dismissed. ;)

Re:Prof. Higgins

[abigor]

You are making the assumption that we have a purpose. There is no evidence indicating that might be the case, and in fact it is not at all necessary.

Re:Metaphysics

[maxwell demon]

There is no consciousness. All is reaction nuclear, chemical, quantum or beneath quantum. All actions, all events. All.

The second sentence doesn't imply the first. It's as if you said: "There is no music. There are only density waves in the air."

Hmm

[mcc]

What's up with this one then?

• Medicines for the World's Poor. "Public-private partnerships" emerged as a force in 2004, according to Science magazine, affecting the way medicines are developed and delivered to emerging nations.

Sounds like applied science to me.

Personally though if I were Science I wouldn't give SpaceShipOne a prize this year, since getting someone into space isn't technically by itself a new development in even applied science. I'd give it to them in a year or two-- once they manage to successfully begin operating their spaceliner business, since that IS going to be a dramatic change in how science is applied...