35 Scientists Share That “One Science Fact” They Wish The Whole World Would Know
Each and every single one of us has at least one pearl of wisdom that we feel needs to be shared with everyone else. Something that the world definitely needs to hear. A piece of information, a tiny parcel of a fact that might change everything for the better. Scientists are no different in that regard. They do, however, have access to far more interesting facts and revelations than anyone not from their field. From biology, physics and chemistry to medicine and beyond.
Today, we're bringing you a whole host of intriguing science facts and opinions about science. All those brainy and bright scientists shared their insights under the #MyOneScienceTweet hashtag, started by entomologist Dalton Ludwick, and it’s eye-opening, to say the least.
Scroll down, upvote the facts you thought were the most illuminating, and let us know in the comments what you think. We can’t wait to hear your top science facts, too, Pandas!
Bored Panda wanted to learn more about the way good scientists should approach things and why there have recently been more people mistrusting science in general, so we reached out for a chat to Steven Wooding, a member of the Institute of Physics in the UK. He is also a member of the Omni Calculator Project which hosts a lot of interesting and frankly fun tools like the Weird Units Converter.
To start things off, Steven shared with Bored Panda the most interesting science fact that he knows: "A photon created at the sun's center takes up to 100,000 years to get to the surface but then only 8 minutes to get to Earth. Due to the density of the sun, the newly created photon encounters an atom after a few millimeters; it is absorbed then re-emitted in a random direction. So most of the time, it will not be making progress towards the surface. Once in the emptiness of space, most photons make an uninterrupted journey to Earth." We're willing to bet you probably didn't know that, dear Pandas.
This post may include affiliate links.
If the genetic material in any organism is not a naturally occurring mutation, ie would never be naturally feasible, then it is GMO. Just because they took insect DNA and through multiple modifications that would never occur naturally, have it combine with say Human DNA to form a new organism does not mean it is not GMO. This new non naturally occurring organism is indeed GMO
Well that’s a little specious because it’s one thing to domesticate and propagate to go from mustard seed to Brussels' sprouts and adding genes from other animals and plants to get traits you can’t get any other way.
No it isn't, it's literally the same thing. Both instances you're talking about are instances of humans interfering with nature to genetically modify plants (and animals). Humans have been genetically modifying both for centuries. It's just that people who either are scared of or hate science take the anti-scientific "GMO = boogeymen" propaganda nonsense seriously. FYI, a lot of that propaganda is from organic manufacturers/businesses that have a vested interest in profiting off of people's ignorance and those businesses do a lot more harm to the environment than do GMO manufacturers/businesses and produce such terrible yields overall that if all crops were to be switched over to organic it would cause a neo-Malthusian event that would kill off billions of the poorest people in the world, something a lot of pro-organic advocates wouldn't have a problem with.
Load More Replies...
The "humble" apple tree and many other plants that feed us every day are taken to a whole other level. If you bought an apple or many other fruits from a store, its almost certain to come from a Frankenstein tree. The roots are one genetic variety, the trunk a second genetic variety, and branch the apple was picked from a third one. Arborists graft them together to create the best tree. The roots are strongest and uptake nutrients the best, the trunk can support the most amount of apples, and the branches grafted on produce the best version of the apple variety you are looking for. Its not uncommon for a single tree, (especially a hobbyist) to have multiple genetic apple types (Gala, Fuji, etc) being produced from the same tree. There may be different races of a single apple like Gala so one group of branches bears fruit one month and another group bears fruit 2 months later. Many varieties like McIntosh produce seeds that can't grow into the type of fruit it is. Grafting is the only way.
That's all well and good until Monsanto patents the genetic code for food and owns the rights.
For me the issue was when Monsanto was doing things like building wheat plants to generate their own insecticides...impossible to believe that company would do something like that in a responsible way, and am scared that the insecticides are unremovable for being inside the wheat. So it's like atomic energy -- could be fine, but you can't trust the people doing it to do it responsibly because of greed and a proven track record of psychopathic carelessness.
This 100%, but also fu€k Monsanto, I’m not having any glyphosates in my food.
Oh. I give up. There's no reasoning with bull-headedness.
Load More Replies...
Yep it makes about as much sense as saying chemical are bad, natural is better
You don't seem to understand that genetically modifying something means tinkering DIRECTLY with the GENES, which are microscopic. Humans have been selectively breeding and hybridizing but that's not GMO.
no, it is. selectively breeding is still deliberately changing genes, the method is just different
Load More Replies...
I get what is being said, but, natural selection - cross breeding that occurs from accidents, cross pollination, Nature doing what Nature does or early experiments involving honest, clean experiments looking for cures or better output is different than some company messing with the entire production of crops so they can literally patent corn, wheat and other products so they can jail and sue people who don't comply with planting it. It's all too young of a science to know what it's doing to those eating it. And if things are happening, like increased cancer, etc., no one is doing anything to see about it because it's Corporation. There's a diff between Nature genetically modifying it, and chemical companies doing it
Also all food is organic, if it has carbon atoms than it is organic, regardless of how it is grown.
Corn is a great example. Have you ever considered that corn grows in the similar way grass does? High with a stalk and few leaves with all the kernels in a bunch at the top. Genetically corn is a kind of grass. And when humans started cultivating it, it would have looked much more like the grass in meadows that we know today. It has just been breed into what it is today.
I explained this process to a person I know once. She went sheet white at the concept of "intelligent design" and breeding specific males and females to enhance desired characteristics. Her Mom breeds show horses.
YES!! Years and years of careful domestication of animals and grafting of plants have produced the things we have today.
From the Wikipedia article: "Golden Rice is a variety of rice (Oryza sativa) produced through genetic engineering to biosynthesize beta-carotene, a precursor of vitamin A, in the edible parts of rice. It is intended to produce a fortified food to be grown and consumed in areas with a shortage of dietary vitamin A. Vitamin A deficiency causes xerophthalmia, a range of eye conditions from night blindness to more severe clinical outcomes such as keratomalacia and corneal scars, and permanent blindness. It also increases risk of mortality from measles and diarrhea in children." "Greenpeace opposes the use of any patented genetically modified organisms in agriculture and opposes the cultivation of golden rice," From other sources: It could save millions of lives and avoid the blindness of many people, if it wasn't blocked for the general hate on GMO.
I understand this but object to GM of crops that are pesticide resistant (pesticide sprayed on crops to kill weeds and coat the food crop), and need more fertiliser and water than the traditional higher protein food crops grown by smallholders.
This is not actually true. Selective breeding is not the same thing as adding fish genes into a tomato etc.
Thank you thank you thank you! I've been trying to explain that to certain people for a L-O-N-G time!
Most relatively recent GMO plants were developed to withstand cancer-causing pesticides. Unhealthy for consumption in humans and other animals. https://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2015/gmos-and-pesticides/
The difference is that, with directly modifying the DNA, you've removed the element of evolution. You cannot compare the two as if they were essentially identical processes.
i mean, you can. because theyre the same thing except the one in a lab is faster
Load More Replies... gmo's today are artificial. selective breeding, cross breeding are not the same thing as they are natural. ALSO, big pharma uses gmo to push pesticides into seeds as well as forcing the new product NOT to be able to replicate so you HAVE to go back to them each time to grow more... Profits over people
uhh, selective breeding isn't natural, humans did that deliberately
Load More Replies...
The second most common genetic modification in GMO organisms is Bt, an insecticide originally from a bacterium. The most common organic insecticide in the world it Bt. Spraying it on crops kills all of the insects in the field; GMO's only kill the pest species.
People do not care about taking a hundred years to modify a plant, it's supposed to work that way. people do not want you adding animal genes or insecticide to our food plants. duh.
This is misleading. There is a difference between genetic engineering and genetic modification. Genetic engineering is a type of genetic modification, but not all genetic modification is genetic engineering.
Steven told Bored Panda that the fundamental basis of the scientific method involves proposing an idea of how the world works and then proving it by experiment. In short, scientists have to set their egos and feelings aside for the sake of getting a step or two closer to the truth. However, that's far easier said than done! We sometimes forget that scientists are human beings just like we are.
"To be a good scientist, you have to be open to your original notion being wrong. However, scientists are also humans, so it can be incredibly tough emotionally to accept that you are wrong. It's best to look at the bigger picture of human knowledge and progression. You being proved wrong will help focus effort on other ideas that might be correct. In this way, you play your part in building knowledge," the scientist explained.
It's impossible to argue against this and it a good explanation of why god doesn't exist. If it created us to be the master species, why did it make us so selfish and irresponsible as a whole? "I have created people to destroy this planet in a relatively short period of time. Not one of my best ideas, but I've had enough, really."
Steven agrees with the idea that there generally seems to be less trust in scientists and science itself by the public. "You have to have an open mind to accept ideas from others. A great example is the flat earthers. They what to check and verify that the Earth is round by themselves and don't trust anything anyone says on the subject," he pointed out how some people can be misguided.
"One reason for mistrust in the latest science is that the public see the scientific method playing out in real-time. As more data comes in, the scientists change what they say, which can confuse the public. They may see a scientist admit they were wrong, which raises doubts about everything scientists say. A better understanding of the scientific method would certainly help the public's trust in science," the expert shared a possible reason for all the mistrust.
A major study published this week estimated 1.2 million deaths last year from drug-resistant infections. That's more than malaria or AIDS and it's only getting worse.
Drives me nuts when people complain about scary "chemicals" or "toxins", but are completely unable to say exactly which chemical is bad or why. Or assume anything with a long scientific name is bad. Just consider the dangers of dihydrogen monoxide, it causes thousands of deaths and millions in property damage, but that doesn't mean we should ban it.
One thing that many of us are likely to agree on is that the flood of information in the Digital Age can be overwhelming at times. It sometimes makes us dream of running away to an uninhabited island that doesn’t have tech or internet access. Alas! Not everyone has that luxury.
So the next best alternative is learning to navigate the choppy waters of information overload. We’ve got to learn to distinguish between reliable and unreliable sources, and learn to fight back against our diminishing attention spans.
This. February 2020 to January 2022, for example. New/more data means you change conclusions. If it's science.
Entertainment and pop culture expert Mike Sington from Hollywood knows all about how info overload, especially on social media, can make it hard for some of us to distinguish between facts and fiction. Earlier, he went into detail with Bored Panda about some of the red flags we should watch out for, indicating that a fact or source isn’t trustworthy.
"Red flags to watch out for that a claim may be fake: it's outlandish, it's too good to be true, you haven't seen the claim anywhere else, you've never heard the source, the source isn't reputable, you can't find two other sources making the same claim, your gut tells you, 'this can't be true,'" Mike shared.
Just 100 corporations are responsible for 71% of global emissions. So stop blaming the population. Start with the 100 corps. https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2017/jul/10/100-fossil-fuel-companies-investors-responsible-71-global-emissions-cdp-study-climate-change
Less than 10 percent will ever wake up at all. If you have to do CPR and the person still dies, you didn't do anything wrong. Do not feel any guilt.
"The rise of social media has decreased the reliability of information because misinformation can spread so quickly before it can be corrected," the entertainment industry expert shared.
Even a simple Google check can help fight back against the spread of misinformation. If you take the time to double-check something that sounds iffy, you’re better off than you’d be if you just straight-up believed it. If you can’t find any reliable sources backing up the ‘fact,’ odds are that it’s fake.
Yes! It's just a few people every year that gets killed by a shark, humans on the other hand kill lots of sharks all the time. They are of utterly importance to the oceans!
This should be #1. The biggest problem in science is biases because it cripples growth. The Earth remained the center of the universe for 1000s of years longer than it should because we knew that it was true. Millions of women die unnecessarily every year from heart attacks because the entire detection and treatment regime was developed on men. Contextual biases like racial profiling have dramatically affected the African American community's treatment options for chronic diseases. Way too much psychological theory is all based on first world1 8-22 year old college students who, unsurprisingly, do not reflect the overall psychological spectrum of our planet. How many of us can say our own psyche worked the same at 8, 18, 38, and 88? Outright racism gave Hitler proof the Jews were inferior.
Mike suggests that everyone should remain skeptical and try to find additional evidence and supporting sourcing before reposting any bit of info. Otherwise, they might be contributing to the problem. “Amplification doesn’t make a claim true or accurate," he said that just because a lot of people believe something doesn’t make it true.
The expert pointed out that the personally trusts the Associated Press, Reuters, and The New York Times the most. "They employ fact-checkers and editors that ensure the information they post is correct. They’re basically doing the research and homework for you," he told Bored Panda.
100%. I don't know a single domestic cat who's ever been responsible for a wind farm.
"There are literally too many online sources to list that can’t be trusted and should be avoided. Anyone can basically post anything they want… proceed with caution.”
Mike noted that our attention spans have been “reduced to mere seconds at a time.” That’s because this is the way that information and entertainment are fed to us right now.
“People get tiny bite-sized bits of news by scrolling a Twitter feed, they entertain themselves by scrolling quickly through Instagram and TikTok. It’s creating a habit that doesn’t have to be," he warned.
"The good news is there’s plenty of long-form entertainment and news available, you just have to seek it out. I believe the benefit is worth it. I’ve discovered it improves your ability to focus, it’s more calming, you retain more information, and it gives you a more balanced and nuanced view of the world."
Again . . . birth control would reverse this cycle. Human answer to just about everything is MORE MORE MORE, and supply will NEVER keep up . . .
I work in a hospital lab, we run 24/7 to get results for patients. We get almost no recognition despite how qualified and hard we all work. Hospitals would not be able to operate without us, unless you just want to guess how sick people actually are. Same goes for pharmacy
This is why the US practice of 8 weeks of maternity leave is so damaging. I firmly believe that one parent needs to stay with kids until they're old enough for school, and it doesn't matter which parent. The fact that families now need two full-time incomes to survive is proof that capitalism is deadly to a healthy society.
There is a whole industry about this for years. From how we can learn how to compute like a cell to collecting water like a beetle
From all of the light thrown out by the sun, a miniscule amount of it reaches the earth, but it's enough to keep the planet alive and it will do this for billions of years.
Note: this post originally had 100 images. It’s been shortened to the top 35 images based on user votes.
Wildfires are not "bad". They have been around millions of years longer than we have. Many ecosystems ans species depend on them.
They are very bad in Australia when they have become unprecedented in size, the air quality becomes dangerous and millions of animals are lost to the flames
Load More Replies...
Just 222 (including mine) up - vote clicks??????????????? What does it tell you about people?
So cool to come on here to relax and see people arguing that cats have done nothing wrong and in fact dogs are the real monsters, and we shouldn’t do anything to keep cats in check but also it’s entirely your fault that pollution exists and corporations are not responsible at all.
Actually humans population need to be kept in check, they destroy everything thousands of species extinct thanks to humans
Load More Replies... From medicine: No, WebMD is not more accurate than "real doctors". You get a few dunces in any field, but some diseases are harder to pin down than you think, b/c they all start with "aches and fatigue" or such.
I need to disagree in that one. It is important to take what you read online with skepticism. And to use trustworthy sources (like PubMed). But doctors are very very uneducated when it comes to non basic illneses (flu, cold...). And are very often dismissive of their patients. So for many, the only chance of diagnosis and improvement is to do their own research and then find a specialist in that area. Believe me, it took me 10 years to get diagnosed with endometriosis with textbook symptoms just because nobody listened to me. And thats the case for most chronic or not obvious diseases. Most doctors prefer to lie and say that you are healthy than to admit that they dont know something.
Load More Replies...
#3 You're talking about hybridization, NOT genetically engineering, which is what GMO products are. GMO soy and corn have been genetically engineered to accept glyphosate aka herbicide ROUNDUP and not whither and die. And these GMO crops ABSORB that herbicide! And WE ingest it. GMO foods are not innocuous. They are NOT natural. They are genetically engineered by man and are no longer 'natural'. No longer 'normal'. They've been tinkered with and have had genes inserted that don't belong and were never there naturally. So stop saying GMO is natural. It isn't. Hybridization is natural. Genetically engineering is not.
If you actually support data based policies and personal experience in regards to prostitution, you wouldn't be supportive of it. 9 out of 10 women want to leave the industry, the average age of entry is 13, prostituted women have higher rates of PTSD than veterans, many of them are murdered at the hands of pimps and John's, the younger the girl, they higher price they fetch. THOSE ARE FACTS.
Its funny how conservatives find so much "anger" in people disagreeing with them but mock others for being "emotional"
Load More Replies...
Wildfires are not "bad". They have been around millions of years longer than we have. Many ecosystems ans species depend on them.
They are very bad in Australia when they have become unprecedented in size, the air quality becomes dangerous and millions of animals are lost to the flames
Load More Replies... Just 222 (including mine) up - vote clicks??????????????? What does it tell you about people?
So cool to come on here to relax and see people arguing that cats have done nothing wrong and in fact dogs are the real monsters, and we shouldn’t do anything to keep cats in check but also it’s entirely your fault that pollution exists and corporations are not responsible at all.
Actually humans population need to be kept in check, they destroy everything thousands of species extinct thanks to humans
Load More Replies... From medicine: No, WebMD is not more accurate than "real doctors". You get a few dunces in any field, but some diseases are harder to pin down than you think, b/c they all start with "aches and fatigue" or such.
I need to disagree in that one. It is important to take what you read online with skepticism. And to use trustworthy sources (like PubMed). But doctors are very very uneducated when it comes to non basic illneses (flu, cold...). And are very often dismissive of their patients. So for many, the only chance of diagnosis and improvement is to do their own research and then find a specialist in that area. Believe me, it took me 10 years to get diagnosed with endometriosis with textbook symptoms just because nobody listened to me. And thats the case for most chronic or not obvious diseases. Most doctors prefer to lie and say that you are healthy than to admit that they dont know something.
Load More Replies... #3 You're talking about hybridization, NOT genetically engineering, which is what GMO products are. GMO soy and corn have been genetically engineered to accept glyphosate aka herbicide ROUNDUP and not whither and die. And these GMO crops ABSORB that herbicide! And WE ingest it. GMO foods are not innocuous. They are NOT natural. They are genetically engineered by man and are no longer 'natural'. No longer 'normal'. They've been tinkered with and have had genes inserted that don't belong and were never there naturally. So stop saying GMO is natural. It isn't. Hybridization is natural. Genetically engineering is not.
If you actually support data based policies and personal experience in regards to prostitution, you wouldn't be supportive of it. 9 out of 10 women want to leave the industry, the average age of entry is 13, prostituted women have higher rates of PTSD than veterans, many of them are murdered at the hands of pimps and John's, the younger the girl, they higher price they fetch. THOSE ARE FACTS.
Its funny how conservatives find so much "anger" in people disagreeing with them but mock others for being "emotional"
Load More Replies...