A recent article in Live
Science has outlined the list of the most loved and hated science
stories of the year 2009.
At number 9
is the story that boys' issues are neglected in comparison to girls.
this year suggested that compared with girls, American boys have
lower literacy rates, lower grades, less engagement during school
and higher dropout rates, as boys have been neglected to their
At number 8
is the story that spanking children is bad for the brain, as it can
lower their IQ score.
suggested that spanking is a traumatic experience that can adversely
affect the brain.
At number 7
is the story that dinosaurs might have been wiped off due to toxic
researchers suggested that toxin-producing algae not only killed off
the dinosaurs, but also had a hand in four other mass extinctions.
At number 6
is the story that at just 30 weeks of age, fetuses have short-term
age, fetuses became habituated to a low sound that makes a
vibration, and so weren't startled after repeated stimulation.
At number 5
is a research that revealed the happiest states, which showed that
the wealthiest and most tolerant states stood out as particularly
At number 4
which revealed that scrawny people perceive approaching sounds to be
closer than strong people, which means wimps might benefit from
having a greater safety margin of potential hazards on the way.
At number 3
is the discovery of a 47-million year old primate fossil dubbed
discovery grabbed plenty of headlines and even got scientists
debating over how to interpret Ida's remains, with some saying her
features could redraw the evolutionary tree of life, going as far as
saying Ida is an early precursor of humans.
At number 2
is the story about the US Government's focus on climate issues, thus
moving away from more pressing issues like a failing economy.
At number 1
is the story of 'climate gate', which saw e-mails and files of
prominent climate scientists being hacked from
at the University of East Anglia in
a leading climate research center.
e-mails, which were made public, appeared to show scientific
misconduct with some addressing ways to combat skeptics, whether
certain data should be released and some derisive comments about
people known for their skeptical views, according to news accounts.