Sammy Science back in the house, ready to talk science. I don’t know why I keep writing for this website, since so few of the people who write in believe in science. Either that, or they’re completely off the wall. Not that it matters much to scientists or to science itself who believes in it. What is, is, period amen. Facts don’t cooperate with delusions. That said, let’s see what’s in the inbox this week:

Dear Sammy Science: When’s that Singularity coming, Science Boy? You know, where we all get our brains hooked up to the internet, grow our own artificial replacement parts and live forever. I’m getting a little impatient here. – Levon Thyme

Dear Levon Thyme: I wouldn’t hold my breath if I were you, sir. Those developments are only theories, the wishful thinking part of science. Theories don’t become hard science until they are proven. So far stem cell research isn’t close to providing you with viable replacement organs, never mind eternal life. The chips to be implanted in your body to allow you to interface with the internet are also pipe dreams, with the research, experimentation and creation of such chips in their infancies. If and when these things are ever proven to be viable, the technology will be prohibitively expensive.

Are you very wealthy? If not, you’ll be included out of that whole immortal  loop, and you’ll be looking up stuff on the internet like you do now, which is incredibly advanced compared to humanity of only two decades ago. You have the largest library ever assembled at the tops of your fingers! You want more? You want it fed to you like some intravenous data drip with no intellectual effort at all on your part? That would just be a waste of good data.

As far as living forever, what about injury, accidents, disease, murder and natural disasters? Death by starvation already claims 36 thousand people every single day on this planet. With nobody dying of old age, people will still be humping like bunnies, but only for a lot longer, and producing children well into what we consider “old” age. Can you imagine Food Wars, Energy Wars and Living Space Wars with a population of 20 or 30 billion people, with every square inch of space being occupied or farmed, and every natural resource taxed to their limits? Sounds like hell on earth.

The better deal for all of us is to take care of our health, learn all we possibly can and enjoy the years we’ve been given. The Singularity sounds good until you start examining the nuts and bolts of the whole thing. It’s impossible today and impractical tomorrow.

Dear Sammy Science: Since when do you science guys have all the answers? Some of us are getting a little sick and tired of your smug, know-it-all attitude! – Gene Poole

Dear Gene Poole: Science has all the answers? Hardly, sir, or what would be the point of pursuing science? Heck, we don’t even have all the questions! The pursuit of science is the admission that there are things you do not know but want to find out. Science is the act of truth seeking through careful observation, extensive study, sustained effort, experimentation and proof. The reason why Einstein was a genius is not because he formulated his incredibly complex Theory of Relativity, but because experimentation and observation proved it to be completely accurate. You can guess all you like about the nature of things, but until you are proven right, yours is just another theory, or an article of faith, never to be confused with facts.

Dear Sammy Science: So, you think science has it all over religion, eh? Can you prove that? – Reverend Winsome Loosum

Dear Reverend Winsome Loosum: I never said that. What I said was that they were two completely different pursuits, and not necessarily hostile towards one another. My specialty is astrophysics, and as an astrophysicist I spend a lot of time observing the known universe. The more astounding natural wonders I observe, the more I notice how very similar are the building blocks and the order of all life and creation in the universe, from the atomic level to molecular structure right up to solar systems and galaxies; a nucleus surrounded by orbiting bodies, with just the right amount of gravitational “pull” and “magnetic” push to keep these structures stable, whole and functioning.

To these scientifically trained eyes emerges an incredibly advanced intelligence at work; for lack of a scientific explanation, God. Of course I can’t prove this any more than you can prove the tenets of your faith, Reverend, but the feeling is a powerful one and the existence of God would explain the intricate and unchanging natural laws. Don’t think of science as your religion’s enemy, but an ally. We just go about our truth-seeking another way.

Sammy Science back in the house. A lot of people have been asking us scientists what to do about the massive oil leak fouling the Gulf of Mexico, a huge ecological disaster. Unfortunately, scientists are not really experts on this sort of thing, it’s more of a technology problem, or rather, a massive failure of technology. What’s the difference between science and technology, you wonder?

Well, science is what led humans to discover all the endless uses of petroleum, from gasoline to tar to plastics, while technology is the means to apply these scientific discoveries, more engineering than pure science. Scientists can describe the laws of physics and aeronautics, but building an aircraft is the technician’s achievement.

While a scientist may have discovered that uranium atoms can be split to unleash incredible amounts of energy, they have no control over how that information is applied. Science tells us what is possible, technology makes these possibilities a reality. The line between the two can be very fine, but generally the pure scientist, since he is trying to know the unknown, does not concern himself with practical application, but hard facts and truth.

Once his or her theory or discovery is found to be true, it becomes technology. For the most part scientists build no bridges or aircraft, do no actual farming or create any medicines, but their ideas and laboratory work are the basis for the technicians who have revolutionized these disparate fields.

Not all inventors have been scientists, or at least not formally trained as such, so the line gets even more blurry. And most scientists in reality “discover” nothing, they merely interpret what they see, they “uncover” things. Isaac Newton certainly didn’t discover gravity, only explained its laws. No one invented the atom or DNA, only ways to peek inside them.

Then there are the great synthesists, first-rate minds who incorporate the work of many scientists and inventors, further blurring the lines. For example, Henry Ford did not invent internal combustion engines, automobiles, rubber tires or mass production, but nevertheless changed the world by incorporating all these ideas in a practical application of disparate technologies on a grand scale.

The modern counterparts to Ford Motors would be Bill Gates of Microsoft and  Steve Jobs of Apple, leaders in another world-changing wave of technology that flowed from various scientific discoveries. Both men were trained as engineers, not scientists. What both disciplines have in common, as always, is that they are merely working with the materials at hand, those substances provided by nature.

Unlike artists, we cannot make stuff up to improve the narrative or enhance the drama. Songs and movies don’t have to make sense to be great. Science must be exact. No dream sequences allowed. Let’s check the in-box:

Dear Sammy Science: What’s up with this Gulf oil leak? Who’s fault is it? – Kerwood Derby

Dear Kerwood Derby: It is British Petroleum’s fault, of course, but they wouldn’t be out there in the middle of the sea performing the very dangerous task of sucking oil from a mile underwater if we did not pay them a fortune to so so. What kind of car do you drive? How well is your house insulated? In a sense, it’s all of our faults. While the Gulf Spill looks like a classic case of failed technology and criminal negligence, this might be a good time to look at the ridiculous lengths we go to to obtain petroleum. This disaster proves we are willing to risk destroying large segments of our own habitat to obtain oil. The Gulf Stream Current circles the world and is a major factor in regulating global climate, as if our climate needed another challenge. Never mind the mammoth loss of marine life, the homes, farms and businesses destroyed or how scientifically unsound that is, it’s just plain nuts! It is time for an all-out effort to find petroleum’s replacement. It’s either fund that effort, or fund a dozen more Gulf spills and kill another piece of our planet.

Dear Sammy Science: You claim to be a scientist, all detached and neutral,  interested in only the facts. Okay, so where do you stand on the superiority of the Caucasian Race to all the other human races? I’ve included several scholarly dissertations to back up my claim. – Angelo Saxon

Dear Angelo Saxon: Angelo, those “scientific papers” got to me just in time and were a real life saver! I had just run out of toiled paper. Here’s my unbiased scientific opinion on all this: You’re an asshole.

Dear Sammy Science: I know you are are an astrophysicist and so you must be interested in space travel. What do you think of all the private companies obtaining their own space craft? Should the government allow this? – Marcia from Boca

Dear Marcia from Boca: Why should the government have anything to say about it as long as they obey the law and pay their taxes? Spacecraft are the first major advance in transportation that was not created by and for private companies and individuals. Ships, trains, cars and airplanes were civilian commercial products before they were military craft. Government-owned spacecraft were designed and built by private corporations, and advances in technology have made private ownership of space craft a real possibility. Much like the internet, private space craft is an industry and a technology in its infancy, going in directions no one can predict, certain to benefit from scientific principles yet to be uncovered. Why stifle such an exciting thing?

Sammy Science back in the house, readers, ready to talk science. At least, that’s the whole idea of this web forum. I’m the scientist, you’re the readers, you write e-mails about science and I answer them as best I can. What I don’t know I find out from experts. It’s not a new idea and it’s not rocket science (That would be my department). This isn’t meant to be a debate over the merits of science. Why read a damned science Q&A blog if you don’t believe in science? By the way, the science you don’t believe in has provided your computer and the Internet, which lets you tell the whole world that you don’t believe in science. Maybe logic’s not your forte either. If this sounds like you, here’s a time saving tip: Don’t try to convince science people that science is wrong and you’re right. Huge waste of time. You see, science can be proven. Can you? Let’s see what’s in the inbox.

Dear Sammy Science: What’s the deal with that Large Hadron Collider? Who put up the dough to build the thing and why? – Benny Blanco from the Bronx

Dear Benny Blanco from the Bronx: The “deal” with the Large Hadron Collider is to search for the basic laws of science governing all matter. This elusive “Grand Unification Theory” is the holy grail of Physics. By colliding electrons at super high speeds, it will try to replicate conditions immediately following the Big Bang that was the birth of the universe as we know it. It will also seek to confirm theories on the existence of Dark Matter, attempt to reconcile anomalies at the intersection of Quantum Mechanics and the Theory of Relativity, investigate the formation of black holes and address many other complex questions. It was built for pure scientific research by the European Organization For Nuclear Research and funded by hundreds of universities and thousands of scientists and engineers from over 100 nations. It is a valuable tool for observing matter in it’s most basic, subatomic form. All in all, a pretty impressive global collaboration working to increase our collective human knowledge in many fields, and learning new stuff is always a good thing.

Dear Sammy Science: What good is science when the Mayans already told us the world will end in 2012? – Bob N. Weaver

Dear Bob N. Weaver: You’re an idiot and the world ended for the Mayans a long time ago.

Dear Sammy Science: If our bodies replace every cell every 7 years, why do our bodies age?  -  Cheri Pye

Dear Cheri Pye: Good question. It’s in our genetic code to grow old and die. Our DNA provides the blueprint for who we are, who we will become, what debilitating conditions and diseases we will develop and when we will die, subject, of course, to a million variables. There are accidents, plagues, natural disasters, pollution, exposure to toxins, famine and homicides, for example, that cause many early deaths. We can adversely affect our own life spans by smoking, drinking to excess, eating poorly, and not exercising, or positively affect how long we live by eating right, drinking moderately and regularly exercising, but for the most part some people live to be 99 and some only get 60 or 70 years because of their DNA. The nature of life is birth, growth and eventual death, and humans are no different in this respect than any other life form. Whether or not our recent breakthrough in reading DNA codes can lead us to be able to alter our natural cycle remains to be seen. Since we can’t even cure the common cold, that seems doubtful, so if you are preparing for eternal life, expect to be sorely disappointed.

Dear Sammy Science: When we eat, we do not consume human DNA, but plant or animal DNA. How does that become human DNA? – Duke Sullivan

Dear Duke Sullivan: Our bodies break the down organic matter we eat to the molecular level, and the DNA of our meals gets broken down into simple protein which is then converted to human tissue cells with our DNA code embedded therein. Much DNA does, however, survive the digestive process, seeds and other hard tissue for example, and is excreted as waste by our bodies. Even if we were cannibals and did consume human DNA, it would still be broken down by our bodies like any other meal. The old saying, “You are what you eat,” which never made much sense in the first place, should really be “you are what your DNA says you are.”

Dear Sammy Science: Does science disprove the existence of God? My friend says it only confirms it. What’s the truth? – Jack Ofalotte

Dear Jack Ofalotte: Science neither proves nor disproves the existence of God. What science and religion have in common is a search for truth, some solid explanations for the wondrous things we see and experience. Where they part ways, however, is the methods employed to discover these truths. Religion seems content to take things on faith, while science is constantly looking for proof positive. I for one am definitely not one of those scientists who feel that the discovery of scientific explanations precludes the existence of God. My specialty is the heavens, after all, and the unbelievable beauty and complexity of the universe sometimes strikes me as the handiwork of a mind far greater than we can imagine, a God if you will. When engaged in some exciting scientific observations, I feel an elevation of my spirit (a very unscientific term, to be sure) that no amount of scientific jargon about adrenaline levels or other body chemistry can fully explain.

When one looks into the structure of molecules and atoms, you can’t help but notice that these invisible building blocks of matter mirror the architecture of star systems, planets, and galaxies. There is a nucleus and orbiting bodies held in just the right balance of gravitational attraction and  magnetic repulsion so that each piece remains in it’s proper place, so there seems to be an underlying and unifying simplicity to nature that works both on the atomic and the stellar level. Contrary to what many think, scientists are very often awed and humbled by what we learn, and amazed at how much we do not know. For at least this one scientist, there is a God, and his work and his mind are even more wondrous and breathtaking than even the most religious mind can imagine.

Then there’s the ability of humans to create art, something no scientist can explain, even if we can identify what side of our brains create that art. The human mind cannot explain a great many things, and in their seeking for answers to the Big Questions, Science and Religion are not incompatible. As well as directing mankind’s minds towards something greater than ourselves in order to gain knowledge and understanding, they both have a lot of grief to answer for when both have been misapplied. For all the concrete benefits Science and Religion have given mankind, the death and destruction that have been the direct result of both quests powerfully illustrate how very far we have to go before our questions are answered. No doubt the answers will astound us.

Sammy Science back in the house. I’ve decided to avoid engaging in debates with those who dispute proven scientific facts. Once something is proven beyond doubt, what else I can say? If people don’t want to believe in proven facts there’s not much to be done. Insisting you are right won’t help with people who are uncomfortable with truth. Ask Galileo how beating his head against that wall worked out for him. Almost cost him his life and the rest us his crucial life’s work. As just one scientist among millions across the globe, let me just say to some of my religious antagonists that my team has proven a whole lot more of our claims that their team has. If these debates were a basketball game, the score would be more one-sided than a Harlem Globetrotters rout of the Washington Generals, something like a 5,000 – 0 shutout.  Let’s see what’s in the inbox:

Dear Sammy Science: It gets me steamed when a construction project is held up because it “might” be hazardous to some endangered species. This time around it’s a wildflower that’s holding up an important development that will provide vital jobs and services. Don’t we have enough damned flowers? – Rocky Mountain Joe

Dear Rocky Mountain Joe: With a name like that you ought to be more aware of the interdependence of flora and fauna. Who knows what this flower provides the ecosystem? What if it is the plant where Fig Wasps nest and lay their eggs? No big deal, you’re thinking, there’s plenty of other wasps around, and you would be right. But if you like figs that might be a problem, since the Fig Wasp is the only pollinator of fig trees. No flowers for Fig Wasp larvae, no more Fig Wasps, no more Fig Wasps, no more figs. Ever. Who’s going to pollinate the millions of fig trees, you? There are other wildflowers that have provided us lifesaving medicines. I’m not saying that the particular flower you refer to is that important. Perhaps it is only beautiful. Isn’t that quite enough in itself? We already have plenty of box stores and luxury condos, not one of them as beautiful as a flower.

Dear Sammy Science: What’s up with this whole Green Movement thing? Aren’t these people politically motivated? I think they are for the most part crazy liberals who go too far. – Boris DeSpida

Dear Boris DeSpida: Perhaps some of the more extreme Green Movement people are politically motivated demagogues, but that’s what you get when for the whole of the Industrial Revolution we have been shitting where we eat. Had we followed from the beginning the simple laws laid down by our mothers about cleaning up after ourselves, we wouldn’t have to put up with a lot of the fools who advocate that mankind revert to living as we did before we invented electricity, internal combustion and little amenities like modern medicine. That’s not going to happen nor should it. Life spans back in those days were roughly half of ours. The idea of progress is to progress, not go backwards. Being clean is merely common sense. How many ruined pastures and waterways and deaths from pollution do we need before that sinks in? Mankind is a long way from inhabiting another planet so it’s a good idea to make sure that living on this one isn’t like living in a subway men’s room. To my mind, being Green is being clean, and both liberals and conservatives should be able to agree on that. Who wants to be identified with filth and poison?

Dear Sammy Science: I say there is no such thing as ESP. What do you think? – Doubting Thomas

Dear Doubting Thomas: I knew you were going to ask that! Just kidding. The truth is that ESP, or extra-sensory perception, is a real form of communication, just one we do not understand. Ants, for example, have no vocal cords or ears, yet they communicate quite effectively over some distance. While some humans have been proven to have an ability to sense things or to communicate in non-traditional ways, there is of yet no solid method of measuring or even identifying the source of these extrasensory receptors and transmitters. To deny something exists because you yourself do not experience it is ridiculous. As a male, you cannot menstruate or give birth. Do you deny that these physiological functions are part of the human experience? The Flat Earth Society went out of business a long time ago, Thomas. Keep your eyes and your mind wide open.

Dear Sammy Science: Does science recognize that man has a soul? This is not a religious question, and you can call our souls whatever you like; spirits, life essence, whatever. It just seems to me that the life force that distinguishes a living creature from a dead one is quite palpable and of interest to a scientist. – Lance Boyle

Dear Lance Boyle: Man’s soul, or spirit, or life essence, seems to at least this scientist to be a separate and identifiable part of a human being, as much as toes, fingers, eyes or kidneys. Unfortunately, just as with ESP, there is currently no sure scientific method of identifying our souls. Barring a clear and concise way of identifying its components, some scientists deny the existence of the human soul. Others study what we came to call our souls, and I for one welcome their efforts since it seems obvious that people do have an element within us that makes us human, and often more than human. No other species practices kindness towards others, or cruelty either for that matter. No other creature writes poetry. No other creature seems capable of the intuitive leaps of intellect that have provided mankind with technology far beyond beaver dams, gopher holes, ant hills and birds’ nests.

Human beings are creatures with a wider range of personalities within a species that any other life form we have studied. Frogs, for example, never exhibit any behavior that is un-froglike, and there are no frog priests, frog scientists or frog entertainers. Other creatures do, however, possess what we can call a life essence, a soul if you will, since we can tell a dead one from a living one. Whether or not our souls rot along with our bodies when we die is a powerful question, and I think one worthy of scientific research. Every new generation of scientists proves somebody wrong and confirms others’ suspicions, and perhaps someday science will discover and map the soul like we have our organs and our DNA. Good question, Lance, and good questions are the basis of all science. We wonder, and so we investigate.

Dear readers: Sammy Science here. It seems that our previous discussion of mankind’s baby steps into space that has been going on since the late 1950s has provoked some pretty nutty responses. Since sociology and psychiatry are not my specialties, I can’t say who’s nuts any better than the next guy, but that should be sufficient. Most people are very well versed in the ins and outs of the human psyche, and pretty much anyone can tell a kook from a serious person. Let’s look at the shitstorm we’ve unleashed with a spirited exchange of e-mails from two Creationists:

Dear Sammy Science: Are you or are you not a supporter of allowing science teachers in public schools the option to discuss Creationism alongside Darwinism? – Reverend Ray Bob

Dear Reverend Ray Bob: No, no I am not. Then it wouldn’t be a science class anymore, would it?

Dear Sammy Science: It seems to me that in your last blog you intimated that man is evolving. My question is this: How can you go against the Holy Word of God in a public forum and not expect to be cast into the eternal damnation of Hell Fire? – Reverend Bobby Ray

Dear Reverend Bobby Ray: I’ll take my chances.

Dear Sammy Science: That’s no answer! How can we raise God-fearing children in an atmosphere that allows the likes of you to spread the lies of Darwinism and Global Warmingism? – Reverend Bobby Ray

Dear Reverend Bobby Ray: Global Warmingism? Are you sure you’re a Reverend, sir? I was under the impression that an education was required in order to receive a degree in Divinity and the right be called Reverend. I’ve had more insightful and intelligent letters from small children. Do you dispute the theory of gravity too?

Dear Sammy Science: Some of us are called to the Lord’s Word and need no book learning but the Holy Bible! – Reverend Ray Bob

Dear Reverend Ray Bob: Are you two clowns working together? As far as your status as Reverends, just be glad for your children’s sake that there are no self-appointed doctors.

Dear Sammy Science: We home-school and home-doctor our children! – The Reverends Ray Bob and Bobby Ray

Dear Double Reverends: Then Darwin is correct and natural selection should weed out you and yours in only a few generations. Natural selection does not look kindly on nature’s misfits.

Dear Sammy Science: Now you’re calling good Christians misfits! We’re not filthy Jews or Muslims or no towel head Hindoos, neither! What kind of American are you? – The Double Reverends

Dear Double Reverends: Hindoos? Wow. You people are crazy on so many levels it’s hard to know where to begin. I’m guessing (hoping, really) that your respective congregations are very small. As far as the Bible goes, what about the love, peace and tolerance parts, sort of the whole idea of the thing? As far as being an American, what the hell is that supposed to mean? Who are you two clods to say that shit? You punks are small time hustlers cashing in on other people’s faith, the same kind of power-mad racist assholes that Jesus Christ spent his life resisting.

Dear Sammy Science: Now you’ve done it! We command all God Fearing Loyal Christian Americans to hunt you down and make you repent! – The Double Reverends

Dear Double Reverends: Have I just had a Fatwah issued against me? Bring it on, Goobers!

Dear Sammy Science: A Fat what? Being fat is going to be the least of your worries when you answer for your blasphemy, spawn of the devil! – The Double Reverends

Dear Double Reverends: I want to thank you both, Reverend Ray Bob and Reverent Bobby Ray, for doing so much to advance the cause of science and to underscore the dangers of mixing religion with proven fact. You see, Reverends, science is what can be proven, and I believe you two have given the world of science some concrete evidence of unfit natural specimens on the fast track to extinction. Mind if we ear-tag you two, maybe fit you with a radio collar? You’ll being doing science a favor to let us track you on your way to Dodo Bird Land.

While Darwinism has not been definitively proven to every human being, it has been accepted by enough of them and by the right people. The Magic Man In The Sky Theory, on the other hand, cannot be proven or even tested, and so does not qualify for being called a branch of science,  and won’t be taught in the science classrooms and laboratories of America anytime soon. You have the option to preach what you want since no religion is banned here, you just cannot preach it in the halls of government, and our public schools are government buildings bound by the laws of the land. In private forums, however, the sky’s the limit for your fantasies and racist rages, so knock yourselves out.

Just don’t get upset when no one takes you all that seriously or confuses you with the second coming of Christ. The rest of us are allowed to poke fun at you and can be just as skeptical of your hypocrisy and self-serving misinterpretation of scripture as you are of proven fact. When you are gone, we’ll make a nice diorama if you in our museums, depicting Creationists in their natural habitat, right next to the Neanderthal and Cro Magnon Man displays. Meanwhile, the marriage of human knowledge and curiosity that is science will miss you, but not all that much. Maybe social scientists will mourn your passing, but then again, maybe not. It’s sort of like having a stone in your show. You miss it when it is removed, but not for very long, and then you are relieved.

It’s Sammy Science back in the house, answering your science questions as best I can. From what I gather from some of your letters and e-mails, I can see why America needs a huge upgrade in our general science awareness. President Obama is right when he says that science and technology education in America needs to be a priority. Throughout history, the civilizations that were the most scientifically and technologically advanced were the ones who flourished, while those who ignored the advances in these vital areas fell by the wayside. The dominance of Western industrialized nations these past several centuries was no accident, but a conscious effort to discover and exploit the secrets of the natural world in order to benefit both individuals and society as a whole.

Today the world is carved up roughly according to technological prowess, with the haves being on the cutting edge or progress, and the have-not nations beset with starvation, disease and poverty due to their lack of technological and scientific progress. This is not a judgement on the worth of any particular cultures or groups of people, merely hard facts, the stuff that science is made of. Truth does not care who does or does not believe it, it merely exists. We can recognize truth and act to make it work for our benefit, or dismiss it out of hand as being contrary to long-held beliefs. Denying the truth never made a bit of difference to the facts. They are what they are and that’s that. Let’s get to your letters:

Dear Sammy Science: My mother tells me that girls can’t be good scientists and that I should study something else. My marks in all my science classes are the best in my school and I want to be a scientist when I grow up. She says the best I can do is to marry a scientist! What should I tell my mother? – Samantha from Little Rock

Dear Samantha: Your Mom ever hear of Marie Curie, the only person to win a Nobel Prize in two different branches of science? She also married a scientist, but other than the Curie family and the scientific community, not many people remember Pierre Curie, while the name Madame Curie is synonymous with great scientist. She and the 15 other females who won Nobel Prizes in the sciences didn’t get them for baking cookies, making needlepoint or listening to the popular wisdom of the day. Popular wisdom is what scientists constantly revise. Tell mom about these women and follow your dream, Samantha.

Dear Sammy Science: I am Samantha’s mother. How dare you advise her to follow her dream? I am her mother and I know best! She is to be a wife and a mother. Period! – Samantha’s Mom

Dear Samantha’s Mom: Damn, but doesn’t this internet work swiftly! Well, Ma’am, it sounds like you’ve attained your dream. Unfortunately for your daughter, however, your dream is crushing the dreams of others. Too bad for the rest of us too. Perhaps Samantha would have be the one to finally cure cancer or diabetes. Looks like we’ll never know if you get your way.

Dear Sammy Science: Can man really change the atmosphere and temperature of Mars and inhabit the Red Planet? How long would the process take? I’m ready now! – Hugo Ghurl

Dear Hugo Ghurl: Yes, yes we can. The process would take many centuries, first to free the frozen water, then seed the ground with simple lichens and mosses, leading eventually to more and more complex plants that will over time infuse the planet’s atmosphere with the proper combination of oxygen and carbon dioxide so that we can breathe outdoors without artificial means. As far as the temperature, the thicker atmosphere will warm up the surface temperature to about that of Minnesota. It will be close to 1,000 years of living in sealed underground quarters and special suits before we can live unaided on Mars. Perhaps Hugo Ghurl the 50th will be able to live on Mars like we do on Earth, by which time mankind will probably have dozens of colonies on different planets and moons of nearby star systems.

Dear Sammy Science: It’s me again. Will all this other-planet stuff change humans? – Hugo Ghurl

Dear Mr. Ghurl: This internet speed is getting spooky fast! Anyway, Hugo, humans will undoubtedly begin to exhibit different physiological changes on planets where there is a greater or lesser gravitational pull, where the length of days vary widely from our 24-hour cycle and a single trip around the sun could take hundreds of our own years. Think of the differences between the 4 known kinds of elephants on earth, the African, Indian, Sumatran and the Forest Elephant, with differences in the amount of toes, their physical size and the enhanced or diminished functions of various organs. Man is also a large complex mammal that will over time adapt physically to their surroundings but will basically still be recognizably human.

Dear Sammy Science: How about people developing a third eye? – Hugo

Dear Hugo: Enough, already! Gives someone else a chance.

Dear Sammy Science: When our space program really gets going, will we have big fleets of war ships and other really cool stuff like they do in Star Trek? – Roger Overnowt

Dear Roger Overnowt: Unfortunately, too many if us think weapons are “really cool,” so undoubtedly mankind will venture to the stars armed to the teeth. What we won’t see, however, is fiery and noisy explosions in the sterile wastes of frozen space. That only happens with an oxygen-rich atmosphere to support all those orange fireballs and carry the sounds of destruction. Out in space, the destruction will from be a range of thousands if not millions of kilometers, and will be silent and nearly invisible. As for all those tractor beams, laser swords and beaming people aboard, that makes for good entertainment but unrealistic science.

Space exploration and colonization will unfold like the evolutionary steps of any large species, over thousands and thousands of years, imperceptible to individual generations of humans. That doesn’t make the concept of going to the stars any less exciting, but it won’t be Captain Kirk, Luke Skywalker and Hollywood leading the way. It will be scientists, technicians and brave adventurers, like it’s always been. Don’t forget that 300 years ago New York City was a smallish town on the edge of an uncharted wilderness. Little by little it became the citiest of cities, and we’re still building the place. As for our space program so far, our generation is witnessing the equivalent of building the first crude log cabin in Manhattan. The skyscrapers come later. We are the very first generation of human beings who are not earth-bound, and whose liberated minds and imaginations are expanding accordingly. That’s exciting.

Greetings, interneteers, science lovers and the curious. Curiosity is the root of all science, by the way. While much of science has to do with invention and innovation, it’s origins were attempts by man to explain the natural phenomena that surround us every minute of every day. Observation led early man to realize that clouds held water, and that it could be delivered by gravity in the form of rain, sleet or snow. We looked at the stars and discerned a repeating pattern, and thereby learned to navigate the land and the sea by them. We experimented with fire (often with disastrous results) and learned to cook our food, heat our homes and power our engines. And so it goes throughout history, curiosity triggering observation and experimentation, and the provable results are what is left over, and we call these hard-learned facts science. Lets see what is piquing your interest today:

Dear Sammy Science: Will biofuels replace petroleum? – Akbar The Nervous

Dear Akbar The Nervous: While biofuels are promising and quite feasible, they may create as many problems as they solve. They will be every bit as expensive per gallon to produce, and as dirty a fuel as petroleum, and may cause even worse worldwide hunger than the planet currently experiences as farmers turn from producing food crops to more profitable fuel crops. This will in turn trigger the cutting down of even more of our vital rain forests, the planet’s lungs, so to speak, to replace the lost food production, triggering a climatic and ecological disaster. In this scientist’s opinion, greater fuel efficiency is the key to replacing or reducing our dependence on petroleum. To blandly think that because a fuel is possible to produce and is endlessly renewable it will solve our pollution and energy problems is naive. For the time being, Akbar, your little oil-producing tyranny will be still be excused for your barbaric behavior until greater fuel efficiency puts you out of business. That could take decades to happen or as little as one year, so it might be a good idea for your little sandbox satrapy to start investing in education and other industries so you don’t have to go back to being camel riding nomads wandering the barren wastes when one of my colleagues cries “Eureka!”

Dear Sammy Science: My Mom and Dad say that what I am being taught in science class is all wrong and that the earth is only 6,000 years old and that there is no such thing as evolution. I love science. Can they be right about this? – Billy Datt

Dear Billy Datt: I hate to be the one to break it to you, son, but your parents are backwards assholes. Do they at least believe in the theory of gravity? They can test that one quite easily on the tallest building in town. Just kidding, Billy. I’m sure your parents love you, but just not enough to let you learn the truth. I can show them evolution right in my laboratory as viruses mutate and evolve before our eyes to resist vaccines. Ask them if their preacher can explain that one away, kiddo. Do yourself a favor and just humor them, but study hard and learn your science. Your teachers are telling you the truth. Let’s let that be our little secret, Billy, since there’s no way you’ll ever convince Creationists to pull their heads out of their butts.

Dear Sammy Science: If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear it fall, does it still make a sound? – Al Dontay

Dear Al Dontay: Well, by your own admission, no one is there in the forest, so how the hell do you know a tree fell? And yes, of course it makes a sound, you boob! The laws of physics do no change when we have our backs turned. When a person is deaf or blind, does that mean that sound and light do not exist for them simply because they cannot perceive them? Your farts still stink when you’re asleep and can’t smell them, right? At least that’s that’s your wife tells me. And oh, by the way, she hates you.

Dear Sammy Science: Does Iran sending worms, a turtle and a mouse into space really mean that they can defeat us with their advanced technology like their president said? Shouldn’t we just attack them now?-  Bull O’Really

Dear Bull O’Really: I may have studied science, but I recall taking all the required history courses in school too and if memory serves, America and Russia sent dogs and monkeys into space 50 years ago and the space shuttles and orbiting space stations have been host to all manner of animals and smaller organisms for decades now. As far as the lawn jockey that passes for the President of Iran, don’t forget that he answers to bearded old crackpots in wizard robes who think that suicide bombers go to heaven and get to screw 72 virgins. The better deal would be to encourage them to continue along their path. This way they remain a backward nation run by lunatics who pose no threat to anyone, and quite amusing to boot. How many world-class universities and high tech industries does Iran have?  Last anyone checked, approximately zero. If it wasn’t for their oil, few Westerners would be able to find the place on a map. The last time Iran mattered, it was called Persia, and then Alexander The Great conquered it. That was in 334 B.C. and it’s been downhill ever since. Let the little guy have his illusions, and leave the war making for when there is absolutely no other choice. People like you give humanity a bad name, Bull.

Editors’ note: In our never-ending quest to bring the readers of bobcrespo.com a broad array of topics to enjoy, we proudly introduce Sammy Science, a man who explains complex scientific subjects in easy-to-understand laymen’s terms. In our increasingly technology and science-dependant modern world, let Sammy Science walk you through the perplexing array of science and technology. He will answer your questions, so feel free to send them in. Meet Sammy Science:

Greetings, interneteers! This is Sammy Science, PhD, here to answer your questions about science and technology. I am a Doctor of Biochemistry with a minor in Astrophysics, and studied at both Stanford University and Harvard. These days there’s a lot of new technology and scientific breakthroughs coming our way at dizzying speed, so this is a good forum to clear the air about many misunderstandings and to shed some light on what’s new and exciting. Let’s get right to it, shall we?

Dear Sammy Science: What’s the real deal with global warming? I’ve lived in Virginia all my life and I don’t remember so much damned snow and such cold winters! What’s the story? – Buried Alive in The Whites

Dear Buried Alive: The truth is, that we really don’t know anymore! It sure looked that way for a while, but now? Your guess is as good as mine.

Dear Sammy Science: I am a freshman in high school and I’m interested in a career in science. Which branch of science will offer me the best opportunity to make a difference in 10 years? – Jimmy The Geek

Dear Jimmy The Geek: In 10 years’ time robotics and genetics will be hot. Human replicas programmed for sex will be quite popular, and for a guy named Jimmy The Geek, probably your best shot at get laid on a regular basis. Someone’s got to field test the things! The field of genetics will also be booming, with scientists raking in big bucks to provide cloned organs for rich old coots who want to live forever. And Jimmy, a difference in what?

Dear Sammy Science: Is wind power feasible? – Joe Bagadonitz

Dear Joe Bagadonitz: Ask the Dutch, meathead! They’ve had windmills there for like, forever.

Dear Sammy Science: What do you think of the exciting reports that some dinosaurs had brightly colored feathers? – Eileen Ova

Dear Eileen Ova: Not much.

Dear Sammy Science: Is it true that elephants never forget? – Jim Dundee

Dear Jim Dundee: Yeah, sure, Jim, if that’s what you want to believe, fine. It sure makes no difference at all in the grand scheme of things, so why not? Elephants never forget.

Dear Sammy Science: As an eminent scientist, I think it is your duty to speak out against using animals in laboratory experiments. What do you have to say to that? – Ophelia Kidney

Dear Ophelia Kidney: No. Unless of course, you are volunteering to take their place, Ophelia. I’ve been working on a neurotoxin to attack only cancer cells in the human body and leave healthy cells unaffected, but it needs to be tested further. So far I’ve used it only on pigs, who are anatomically the most similar mammal to humans, and while it has worked against the cancer cells, the dosage needs to be adjusted because the pigs keep getting paralyzed on the left side. You game? Just like pigs, I will treat you as humanely as possible, since no scientist is intentionally cruel to animals. You could help save human lives if you let me test my dosage levels on you. If not, please shut the fuck up about lab animals and let scientists save human lives.

Dear Sammy Science: I have a theory about black holes. I say that they are formed by beings from a parallel universe trying to get our attention. What do you think? – Marion Merriwether

Dear Marion: You’ve got a black hole of you own where the sun don’t shine where you can stick that theory, Marion.

Dear Sammy Science: How much wood could a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood? – Aldo Raimee

Dear Aldo Raimee: Good news, Aldo! About enough to make you a second wooden head. Then maybe you can think up a real science question.