What's wrong with this picture?: Georges Melies' 1902 fantasy film; A Trip to the Moon (Le Voyage dans la Lune), has very little to do with actual science, although it does contain some similarities with the Apollo missions of the 1960s.
Courtesy Mark RyanSidney Perkowitz is not a happy camper, or rather I should say not a happy moviegoer. The American physicist has been taking Hollywood to task for all the bad science portrayed in the movies. He recently told a meeting of American scientists that movies should be allowed to contain only one major scientific flaw. This isn’t new territory for Perkowitz, who teaches physics at Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia. He published a book titled Hollywood Science in 2007, and has done numerous appearances, and written several articles on the subject.
One of the recent films Perkowitz complains about is Deep Blue Sea where careless scientists meddle with the brains of sharks that become super-smart and wreak havoc on the underwater laboratory. Great science? Not on your life, according to the crabby Professor Perkowitz. He says tests like those shown in the film where proteins are extracted directly from the super-sized shark brains would actually take place in large vats in a controlled laboratory setting. Think of the excitement watching that process! But as far as I’m concerned Samuel L. Jackson's inspiring rah-rah speech in the middle of the film makes any and all the bad science totally worth any money spent to see the movie.
But what’s the big deal, really? There’s always been a demand for suspension of disbelief in the movies especially in the oxymoronic genre of science fiction. Look at Georges Melies’ fantastical A Trip to the Moon (1902). Based on the written works of Jules Verne and H. G. Wells, most of the film lacks any scientific truth. Oh, sure it has some prophetic parallels to the actual 60’s Apollo missions. A NASA-like organization of space scientists and technicians is shown launching a manned capsule in an actual “moon shot”. Once there the astronauts (in top hats!) do witness Earthrise from the lunar surface. And when they return to Earth, they’re picked up in the ocean by a ship. But the rest of the classic film is crazy, and has more scientific holes than the Moon has craters. But, again, so what?
My whole childhood was spent absorbing bad science in movies. But I don’t think it was harmful. If anything it fired my interest in science, and gave me a sense of curiosity and wonderment of the natural world. In 1960’s Dinosaurus!, a caveman, Tyrannosaurus rex, and Brontosaurus (its very name a scientific faux pas) are all dredged up frozen from bottom of the Caribbean Sea, all in one tight little group, despite the fact they all lived millions and millions of years apart in time from each other. Did I care? Naw. I doubt anybody did back then. It was just a blast watching them terrorize the island.
The Time Machine (1960) was another favorite that came out the same year. Using a modified Everglades airboat, Rod Taylor travels through time to wage a personal war against the underground Warlocks and save the grazing Eloi. Was it believable? It was for me. I thought it had some real interesting hypotheses. But was it good science? Not really. Was it in any way prophetic? Not yet, but I guess time will tell.
Perkowitz isn’t bother by a little inaccurate science in a movie, but he wants to put a limit on it. To this end, Perkowitz serves as a member of the Science and Entertainment Exchange, an organization bent on aligning movie producers with competent science advisors in hopes of improving the portrayal of scientists (less nerdiness, fewer pipes and eyeglasses, more witty banter) and scientific ideas in their motion pictures. Perkowitz thinks it will be good for everyone involved.
"The Core did not make money because people understood the science was so out to lunch," he said.
If you saw the 2003 movie, I think you’ll agree bad science was the least of The Core’s problems. The real problem was someone gave the script a green light in the first place. Perkowitz reasoning doesn't explain why an error-riddled movie like The Day After Tomorrow, and a ton of similar science clunkers out there bring in money. Of course, movies in no way have a corner on the market for bad science. Television is full of it, too (pun intended). On the TV series Star Trek, chief engineer Mr. Scott was always saying he couldn't defy the laws of physics whenever Captain Kirk insisted they power-up to Warp 9. And it looks like Scotty was right, as evidenced in a recent post by JGordon. I admit, however, I do enjoy the current show, Bones. Some of the lab equipment used may be questionable and before its time, but the lead character is a woman of pure science. A humorless woman at that, but she does adhere to the scientific method. And she does smile sometimes.
So what do you think? Do you agree with Professor Perkowitz, that bad science needs to be reined in, or do you think the whole purpose of Hollywood motion pictures is merely to entertain our socks off, no matter how mangled the facts? Are there movies you’ve seen where the science portrayed made you wince? Or made you think? Or yell at the screen? Let us know.
SOURCES
BBC story
Guardian story
Professor Perkowitz’s Emory University page
Sidney Perkowitz homepage
The 20 worst science and tech errors in films
Tags : A picture is worth how many words?
Effective illustration
Courtesy Da Vinci
When attempting to communicate the world of science, visualization often works better than words. Illustrations are a quick and effective means for communicating science, engineering and technology to an often scientifically challenged population.
Competition makes us better
The National Science Foundation and the journal, Science, created the International Science & Engineering Visualization Challenge to encourage the continued growth toward this journalistic goal.
Judges appointed by the National Science Foundation and the journal Science will select winners in each of five categories: photographs, illustrations, informational graphics, interactive media and non-interactive media. NSF.gov
Want to see the winners?
This link will take you to the 2004-2009 International Science & Engineering Visualization Challenge winners. I am also embedding a You Tube video of past competitions below.
.
Is it a bird? Is it a plane? No, it is clearly a balloon: People will do some crazy stuff for a little attention.
Courtesy Ferran Publicity, no matter how you get it, is still publicity, right? Whether it’s by making your kid hide in the attic while telling police he’s actually in a weather balloon careening toward earth, or by paying hundreds of thousands of dollars to own a tiny fragment of history, you still get fame. At least that’s what Southwestern Baptists Theological Seminary (SBTS) and Azusa Pacific University (APU) were hoping when they bought 3 and 5 fragments of the Dead Sea Scrolls, respectively. Isn’t that illegal?! That’s what I was asking myself when I read the article detailing this transaction. Apparently the purchase was entirely legal because the institutions bought the scroll fragments from a private collector; a family who, in the 1960’s, legally acquired some fragments and stored them in a bank vault (I wonder if bank vaults are humidity-controlled). They put some pieces up for sale whenever they feel like they need a little extra cash, I guess. Like you do with any culturally, historically, archaeologically, and religiously significant artifacts you have lying around. And it’s precisely this importance that seduced the aforementioned institutions into buying them- they assumed that by simply possessing little Dead Sea Scroll fragments, their credibility and academic prestige would skyrocket.
Perhaps this is true. Maybe by having these very important pieces of history will attract more scholars or research-oriented professors who, in turn, write a lot of grants and bring in more money for the university (not to mention the money they’ll rake in from ticket sales when they put the fragments on display, which APU intends to do). But from a student’s perspective, if a university has a fragment of the Dead Sea Scrolls, as cool as they are, it probably won’t influence my decision about whether or not to attend. A university’s priority should be on teaching their students, and I’m not sure that spending hundreds of thousands of dollars (maybe even millions) on bragging rights is the best way to go about it. I know! SBTS and APU could use the money they spent purchasing tiny, fragile artifacts to fund a scholarship that allows students to study biblical archaeology abroad. That kind of publicity is what can put your university on the map in a sustainable way. Of course, you could just tell your students to pretend they went abroad and use the money to buy a bunch of weather balloons… just in case you need them for future publicity.
The owner probably drives a big, fast car.
Courtesy Poco a pocoHave you ever played that little mental game where you pretend that you won the lottery a few dozen times, or that your eleven billionaire uncles all died in a Thunderdome-style cage match, and left all their money to you? How you get the money isn’t that important in the game. That you have more money than you could possibly know what to do with is a given, and your feeble attempts at finding something to do with it is the game. New robot servants every day, all of which will be forced to tear each other to scraps each evening. Stradivari-smoked barbeque every weekend. A private mountain with guard dragons. A solid gold ocean. That sort of thing.
It’s a fun game, especially if you’re one of the elite of the United Arab Emirates, because then the game is pretty much real. I don’t think anyone has made his own solid gold ocean yet, but, at least when it comes to architecture, pretty much everything else is fair game. The UAE, see, is a federation of very small political territories on the Arabian Peninsula, and thanks to oil and some favorable trade-laws (or lack of them?) some people there have lots and lots and lots of money. And that money goes into things like building fake islands shaped like the world and palm trees large enough for hundreds of thousands of people to live on, or hotels shaped like thousand-foot-tall sailboats.
Supposedly there has been some sort of global economic issue recently (I don’t really read the news, seeing as how it takes time away from my fancy rat hobby), and that has put the brakes on a few of the UAE’s more shark-jumping projects… but not before they finished building the tallest freakin’ building in the world, the Burj Dubai! Today was the building’s grand opening, and it turns out that it’s super tall. Like, two Sears Towers tall. Like, half a mile tall. Like, really, very tall. Like, 2,717 feet tall.
When dealing with something that tall, sciency things are unavoidable. A lot of it is physics and engineering, and therefore the details are beyond me. Seriously, it took all I’ve got to wrote “details” instead of “deets,” so the deets of what it takes to erect something that tall, and keep it erected are a little more than I can reasonably be expected to reproduce. But consider the following: temperatures in Dubai, the emirate the Burj Dubai building is in, can reach 122 degrees, and concrete that cures in the heat isn’t as strong as concrete that cures in cooler temperatures, so the concrete had to be mixed at night, or with ice; the temperature at the top of the structure is 11 degrees cooler than at the base (or as much as 20 degrees cooler, according to this article); heat from the sun can cause one side of the building to expand more than the other, making the top of the building lean 3 feet in one direction; the structure had to be designed to cope with high winds, and can sway up to 6 feet at the top; the structure will use about 250,000 gallons of water a day (and, because we’re sort of in the desert here, it’ll be desalinated ocean water); captured condensation on the building’s exterior is expected to supply about 3500 gallons of water a year, to be used to help irrigate the building’s landscaping; to cool the building, it will need cooling facilities “equivalent to 10,000 tons of melting ice”; the foundations needed to keep the 2,717-foot structure up are 150 feet deep; the building has already sunk an additional 2.5 inches into the ground; and… everything else. How bizarre. If the building every catches fire, the 25,000 people who could be in it at any one time won’t necessarily have to run down half a mile of steps—supposedly there are pressurized, air-conditioned rooms throughout the building where people can “huddle to await rescue.” Huddling in a hopefully fireproof room a thousand feet up a burning building sounds awesome.
Anyway, look into it, Buzzketeers. Whatever your science preferences are, the Burj Dubai probably has something for you. (Including social sciences—you don’t building the tallest man-made structure in the history of the world without involving lots of people. You astrophysicists might be out of luck, though.)
This just in...instant weight loss without dieting courtesy of space and Albert Einstein!
in Earth and Space Science, Physical Science, Earth Structure and Processes, Scientific World View, Structure of Matter, Math, Scientific Inquiry, The Water Cycle, Weather and Climate, Scientific Enterprise, The Universe, Motion, Forces of Nature, and Historic Perspectives
GOCE Satellite: The Gravity field and steady-state Ocean Circulation Explorer
Courtesy ESACan it be true? Yes, for a mere $5,544 dollars round-trip airfare to Greenland! In March 2009, the European Space Agency launched the Gravity field and steady-state Ocean Circulation Explorer (GOCE) into orbit around our planet, which is now transmitting detailed data about the Earth’s gravity. The GOCE satellite uses a gradiometer to map tiny variations in the Earth’s gravity caused by the planet’s rotation, mountains, ocean trenches, and interior density. New maps illustrating gravity gradients on the Earth are being produced from the information beamed back from GOCE. Preliminary data suggests that there is a negative shift in gravity in the northeastern region of Greenland where the Earth’s tug is a little less, which means you might weigh a fraction of a pound lighter there (a very small fraction, so it may not be worth the plane fare)!
In America, NASA and Stanford University are also working on the gravity issue. Gravity Probe B (GP-B) is a satellite orbiting 642 km (400 miles) above the Earth and uses four gyroscopes and a telescope to measure two physical effects of Einstein’s Theory of General Relativity on the Earth: the Geodetic Effect, which is the amount the earth warps its spacetime, and the Frame-Dragging Effect, the amount of spacetime the earth drags with it as it rotates. (Spacetime is the combination of the three dimensions of space with the one dimension of time into a mathematical model.)
Quick overview time. The Theory of General Relativity is simply defined as: matter telling spacetime how to curve, and curved spacetime telling matter how to move. Imagine that the Earth (matter) is a bowling ball and spacetime is a trampoline. If you place the bowling ball in the center of the trampoline it stretches the trampoline down. Matter (the bowling ball) curves or distorts the spacetime (trampoline). Now toss a smaller ball, like a marble, onto the trampoline. Naturally, it will roll towards the bowling ball, but the bowling ball isn’t ‘attracting’ the marble, the path or movement of the marble towards the center is affected by the deformed shape of the trampoline. The spacetime (trampoline) is telling the matter (marble) how to move. This is different than Newton’s theory of gravity, which implies that the earth is attracting or pulling objects towards it in a straight line. Of course, this is just a simplified explanation; the real physics can be more complicated because of other factors like acceleration.
Albert Einstein
Courtesy noneSo what is the point of all this high-tech gravity testing? First of all, our current understanding of the structure of the universe and the motion of matter is based on Albert Einstein’s Theory of General Relativity; elaborate concepts and mathematical equations conceived by a genius long before we had the technology to directly test them for accuracy. The Theory of General Relativity is the cornerstone of modern physics, used to describe the universe and everything in it, and yet it is the least tested of Einstein’s amazing theories. Testing the Frame-Dragging Effect is particularly exciting for physicists because they can use the data about the Earth’s influence on spacetime to measure the properties of black holes and quasars.
Second, the data from the GOCE satellite will help accurately measure the real acceleration due to gravity on the earth, which can vary from 9.78 to 9.83 meters per second squared around the planet. This will help scientists analyze ocean circulation and sea level changes, which are influenced by our climate and climate change. The information that the GOCE beams back will also assist researchers studying geological processes such as earthquakes and volcanoes.
So, as I gobble down another mouthful of leftover turkey and mashed potatoes, I can feel confident that my holiday weight gain and the structure of the universe are of grave importance to the physicists of the world!
Wadena county, Minnesota
Courtesy wikipedia imageDuring the summer of 2009, I had the opportunity to spend four weeks in the field doing actual scientific investigation. From mid-June until mid-July, I was a participant in the University of Minnesota's archeology summer field school run by Professor Kat Hayes. The mission of the field school was to attempt to confirm the presence of a European footprint in this remote part of what would become a young Minnesota territory.
The site of Little Round Hill is located in Wadena County, Minnesota, part way between the towns of Staples and Wadena. Currently, it is part of a county park system. Located at the confluence of the Crow Wing River and the Partridge River, Little Round Hill is believed to be a historical site from the early French fur trading days.
The story goes something like this. In the mid- 1800's, William Warren wrote an account of Ojibwe life in a growing Minnesota territory. In his work, Warren interviewed an elderly Ojibwe man. This elderly man recounted days spent at a fur trading encampment while he was just a young boy. The encampment centered around the dwelling of a French fur trader and his handful or so of Coureur-des-bois . Staying with this trader were around ten Ojibwe hunters and their families. According to the account, Little Round Hill became the focus of contention between rival bands of Ojibwe and Lakota hunters. By oral recollection, there was an incident of more than 200 Lakota warriors approaching and attacking the outpost. The Frenchmen and Ojibwe held the attackers at bay with guns while barricading themselves into the main encampment. The attackers, with only a few guns and armed mainly with bow and arrow for projectiles, were unable to overcome the defenses and eventually retreated.
The site itself had been recognized for its historical implications for quite some time. For years, local residents have pondered that possible remains may lie buried at the Little Round Hill location. In 1992, Douglas Birk conducted an initial survey of the site. While artifact remains spanning several centuries were recovered in his explorations, they didn’t produce evidence of any of the structures described in the oral account.
The summer of 2009 excavations started out with a whimper. Rain and uncooperative weather hampered our beginning efforts. As the clouds passed, the field crew opened a handful of excavation pits and began searching for artifacts. The results were productive and encouraging. Items of distinct European influence started to appear in most of the test areas including musket balls, cut pieces of finished copper, small trade beads, a couple pieces of worked metal (still of undetermined nature), a few pottery shards and even a small ring (possibly silver).
musket ball: the first such item found and it came from my pit!
Courtesy K.Kmitch
Additional materials such as a stone arrowhead, lithic debris, and animal bones both broken and charred were recovered. After a month of work and close to a dozen open explorations, much more habitation evidence was revealed. While no sign was uncovered of the fortifications mentioned in the oral account, at least three of the excavation points did expose strong support for likely hearth locations. These may have been centered near the possible dwellings of the occupants.
Alas, the season of excavation is a short one in Minnesota. After a month of work, the crew retreated home with bags of evidence in hand. During the 2009-2010 academic year, the materials are being analyzed and cataloged at the University of Minnesota. A full report on the findings is expected this coming spring. While the preliminary data does not show conclusive evidence of the mentioned encampment, enough material was recovered to warrant further investigation. Plans are to return to the site next summer to resume excavations and expand exploration of the area. I, for one, can not wait and hope to have my hand in the dirt once again come summer 2010.
Declared by the "The No Child Left Behind Program" (NCLBP) and the State of Minnesota, science is an important subject and required for student's after the graduating class of 2011 to pass in order to graduate. The first MCA Science test was handed out last year to students in 6th and 8th grade, since it was their first year testing students on Science the scores has not yet been posted.
In the past, there were different types of MCA's passed out to student's, there was the MCA 1 and the MCA 2 and there is a plan for an MCA 3 in the year of 2014. With each different tests, it gets more and more rigorous, but the question is why? For each tests the standards have changed ( if you want to check out the standard for science in the MCA check out this link http://education.state.mn.us/MDE/Academic_Excellence/Academic_Standards/... and download Academic Standards: Science K-12 (2009)) in the past few years and the standards are changing to be a set higher than the years before. Could this be the reason why many students are not able to meet the standards for the MCA? The groups that tend to not meet the standards are special education and the limited English students, these groups will have a handicaps for the test. We also know that if any group of students who did not meet the standards the entire school suffers the consequences. The problem is not that these students will always fail but that the school should do is provide these students with resources that they need to help pass this test and especially Science. Science does not only consistences of just reading but also math and critical thinking, all of the students should also have the opportunity and resources to help pass these tests. What the N.C.L.B.P. should do is not place the entire school under academic probation but to step back and provide helpful resources to students who are willing to step up and take responsibility for themselves.
Every time I requested or asked for information about the standards from the years of 2004- present from those who worked for the MCA, my question was either avoided or never answered, I decided to interview people who works for the state, I asked Roger Anderson who worked for the Research and Assessment and a few other people who works or had information about the MCA and it's standards. I had sent my interview questions to all of them and never got a reply in return. I meet Ms. Wilson at school after she gave a power point presentation about the MCA and how Harding students did last year on the test. I was quite surprised to see the data and the dramatic change in the scores from the MCA 1 and MCA 2, compared to MCA 1, the MCA 2 was made more rigorous because of the scoring and the standards set higher than the MCA 1. In result with the changes in the different test more students had failed or did worse than the previous year.
I am almost positive that the MCA's for Science will also be following the same pattern where the standards will continue to get more and more rigorous as the years go by. I understand that it may not always be the tests fault that students fail, most of the time students are not prepared for the test because for two reasons. One they chose not to study or prepare for the test, or two the teachers did not teach the MCA requirements for the student's. With these constant changes in the MCA standards it has effected how the students perform on the tests and how the teachers teach their students. It is just as important that student's prepare themselves for the test just as that those who work for the MCA keep the standards the same. For more information go to education.state.mn.us/ about the MCA.
A new exhibit featuring artwork by geologists, other earth scientists, and geoscience students is being presented this month at the Two Wall Gallery on Vashon Island, Washington.
Fabric art
Courtesy Linda Hope Ponting“Geo sapiens, Geology and Art” could be the first-ever show of its kind, and will feature artwork from entrants from such places as the US, Canada, Great Britain, France, Australia, New Zealand, and Okinawa. Artwork includes sculpture, painting, photography and fabric art.
Block print
Courtesy Greg WesselCurator Greg Wessel, who co-owns the gallery - and is also a working geologist - put out a call for submissions to geo-science websites and magazines.
Meteor Crater
Courtesy Mark Ryan"There is a lot of potential to generate works of art that exhibit the wonder and beauty of nature,” Wessel said. “Most geologists take a lot of photos, for example. But in addition, I'm looking for connections both in the brains of the geologists and in their conscious application of geologic themes to the creation of artworks."
Stone Sculpture
Courtesy Bill LapradeWessel received nearly twice as many entries than his small gallery can hold but he promised to show as many pieces as possible. And I’m happy to report that a photograph by yours truly is included in the exhibit.
“Geo sapiens, Geology and Art” opens tomorrow and runs though November. Vashon Island is located in Puget Sound about 8 miles from Seattle.
How to torture a physicist
in Physical Science, History and Nature of Science, Scientific World View, Structure of Matter, Energy Transformations, The Universe, and Forces of Nature
For me, the greatest mystery in the universe is Lindsay Price, and how she continues to find work.: Not that great a mystery, I guess…
Courtesy catechism
And, let’s face it, who hasn’t had the urge now and then? At the “Quantum to Cosmos” physics conference in Waterloo, Canada, seven physicists were asked, "What keeps you awake at night?" (Apparently, they meant “what issue in science” as opposed to love, money, or lack thereof.) The panel came up with some pretty heavy questions:
Why are the fundamental laws of nature the way that they are? There doesn’t seem to be any reason why they couldn’t be some other way. Are there, perhaps, other universes with other rules?
How does the Observer Effect work? This is a little deep for me, but apparently at the sub-atomic level, simply observing a particle over here can effect another particle thousands of miles away. How does nature do that?
What is the nature of matter, anyway? Especially the “dark matter” which is theorized to exist in outer space, messing up all our gravity calculations.
On a related note, will string theory ever be proven? String theory is the latest theory for how matter and energy interact at the sub-sub-sub-atomic level. And while it is very elegant and seems right on paper, no one has any idea how to conduct an experiment to prove or disprove it.
How do complex systems arise out of simple, basic particles and forces? You know, complex systems. Like life, the universe, and everything.
How did the universe begin, anyway? Physics can only take us back to a few fractions of a second after the Big Bang, a moment at which the universe was very small, very hot, and very dense. Before that, the laws of physics break down. No one knows how to describe the Bang itself, or how / why it happened.
Which brings us to, what are the limits of science? Science is based on observation and experiment. But, at some point, you run into ideas that can’t be tested. In theory, it’s entirely possible that there are other universes. But we’re stuck in this one—how would we ever know?
If anyone has answers to any of these questions, please send them to Canada ASAP. It sounds like there’s a bunch of scientists up there who could use a good night’s sleep.
The Minnesota State Fair is in full swing this week, and lest you think it's just a band of hucksters pandering to a bunch of yokels, you couldn't be more wrong. Science is evident all over the fair, no matter where you look. I didn't capture everything but in my short amble around the fairgrounds I came across all sorts of examples of science and science in action, as the photographs illustrate. Of course, it's just a small sample of what's out there. The fair runs through Labor Day so there's still time to get there and discover for yourself all the fun science that can be found at the Great Minnesota Get Together.
Geology: The Geological Society of Minnesota booth in the Education Building.
Courtesy Mark Ryan
Biology and nature: The Department of Natural Resources building is a great place to experience the call of nature.
Courtesy Mark Ryan
Paleontology: Dinosaur World is a new exhibit at the fair this year. Inside are skeletons, fossils, and information about dinosaurs and other prehistoric life.
Courtesy Mark Ryan
Population and habitat studies: Determine the time it takes a species to fill its range.
Courtesy Mark Ryan
Winds of change: If you're into controversial ideas like climate change, head over to the Eco building where you can see new innovations in sustainability. They've got electric cars, solar cells, and other new eco-friendly stuff. It used to be called the Technology building. What's up with that?
Courtesy Mark Ryan
Gravitation: Fair-goers can experience the persistent tug of gravity for just three bucks.
Courtesy Mark Ryan
Food science: Sometimes experiments go awry, but it's all just part of the scientific process.
Courtesy Mark Ryan
Evolution: Transitional fossils? Sure, there are plenty to see in museums around the world, but who needs them? Fair-goers can witness for themselves one species evolving into another.
Courtesy Mark Ryan
Space exploration: To boldly go where a lot of people have gone before.
Courtesy Mark Ryan
Electromagnetism: The wonder of it all!
Courtesy Mark Ryan
Angular momentum: P = mv. Oh boy!
Courtesy Mark Ryan
Orogeny: Mountain building at its finest.
Courtesy Mark Ryan
Immunology: It was reported today that 120 4-H'ers were sent home from the fair as a precaution because 4 members tested positive for the H1N1 flu virus. But assistant state health commissioner John Stine said "it is perfectly safe for people to come to the State Fair."
Courtesy Mark Ryan
Probability: See if you can scientifically calculate if this guy's girlfriend goes home with a giant Sponge Bob Squarepants.
Courtesy Mark Ryan
Subscribe
I want to learn about
Science Buzz is supported by the National Science Foundation.Copyright © Science Museum of Minnesota, 2004-2010, except where noted.
Add a new comment