Many people might find this to be an easy question and simple concept – what is your favorite color? In fact it was used as the quintessential easy question by the bridge guardian in Monty Python and the Holy Grail. But it is a good rule of thumb that everything is much more complicated than you think or than it may at first appear, and this is no exception. We recently had a casual discussion about this topic on the SGU, and it left me unsatisfied, so I thought I would do a deeper dive. Perhaps there is a neuroscientific answer to this question.
The panel differed in their reactions to the question of favorite color (we were just giving our subjective feelings, not discussing research or evidence). Cara felt that “favorite color” is largely arbitrary. Kids are asked to pick a favorite color, which they do (under pressure) and then often just stick with that answer as they get older. She also felt the question was meaningless without context – are you referring to clothes, cars, house color, or something else? Jay was at the other end of the spectrum – he has a strong affiliation for the color orange which gives him a pleasant feeling. The rest were somewhere in between these two extremes.
I knew there had to be a science of “favorite color”, which I thought might be interesting. Indeed there is – and it is interesting.
First, what is the distribution of favorite color, across the world and demographically? Blue is, far and away, the most favorite color, in most countries across the world, so it seems to be very cross-cultural. It is also the favorite across age groups and gender. The second-most favorite color is either green, red, or purple. Brown is almost universally the least favorite color. Gender has an effect on favorite color, with more women favoring pink, and reds in general (but still preferring blue overall). Republicans still prefer blue over red, but more Republicans prefer red than Democrats. There are country-specific differences as well. Red is a higher preference in China than many other countries, for example.
The demographics of favorite color are clues as to potential underlying causes. Is favorite color purely a cultural phenomenon? It does not seem to be, but there are some minor cultural influences. Is it a neuro-biological phenomenon? It could be, but not purely. If it is partly neurological, what does it track with? How about personality. The evidence is, in short, mixed, and reveals the hidden complexity of seemingly straightforward questions.
Most people think of color preference as referring to hue, but saturation and brightness have just as much of an influence on color choice. When you consider all aspects of color, the picture becomes more complex. Extroverts, for example, prefer bright colors. Adults tend to prefer more saturated colors. The results of studies, therefore, depend on how the questions were asked. But an overall summary is – you can make some statistical predictions about the big five personality types (extroversion, openness, agreeableness, neuroticism, and conscientiousness) from color choice. But this is one factor among many, and depend on multiple factors (the context, the object, and all three color traits). There does seem to be an actual phenomenon here – an influence of personality on color choice – but it’s mixed and complicated.
So far we have mostly just been describing who has which color preferences, but not why or how. We have some clues from the demographics of color choice, but no answers. Given everything above, it is still possible that color choice is entirely learned, or partly learned but mostly an inherited trait. What does the evidence say about this question? Well, there is no current answer, but there is a strong theory that is a good fit to the evidence – the ecological valence theory.
According to this theory color preferences emerge from the totality of our life experience mainly through emotional association. We have a partly associatative memory, in that we tend to remember things partly by associating them with other things that occur together. This includes color. If green things tend to be associated with good experiences, then we will begin to associate the color green with good feelings. According to EVT blue is the most common favorite color because we associate with blue clear skies and clean water, which tend to be associated with happy experiences. We tend to associate brown with feces or rotten food, so that is consistently the least favorite color.
The strength of EVT is that it allows for biological, cultural, experiential, and personality factors all at once. They all can affect our associations with colors, and contribute to how they make us feel. Some associations may be natural, like blue skies, green vegetation, and putrid yellow and brown. Others can be purely cultural, like pink for girls or purple with royalty. Different personalities would be drawn to different colors that tend to be associated with congruent moods, like vibrant reds for extroverts, or calming blues for introverts. And then there are likely to be some quirky individual factors as well – extreme individual experiences, or social group sorting (which color wedge do you typically play in Trivial Pursuit).
Does neuroscience add anything to this picture? So far, neuroscientific studies have elucidated some of the underlying brain regions that relate to color preference and processing, but don’t really provide any insight into why color preferences exist. Here is the most relevant study I could find:
These results demonstrate that brain activity is modulated by color preference, even when such preferences are irrelevant to the ongoing task the participants are engaged. They also suggest that color preferences automatically influence our processing of the visual world. Interestingly, the effect in the PMC overlaps with regions identified in neuroimaging studies of preference and value judgements of other types of stimuli.
Sure – color preferences and experiences happen in the brain, and involve a brain region generally involved in value judgement. This is a piece to the puzzle, but itself does not really address the cause of color preferences, just some of the neurological mechanisms.
There is still a lot to learn about color preferences. The evidence does not support the notion that color preference is a purely arbitrary phenomenon, but rather that it has a psychological, cultural, and neurological basis. But there is still a lot of research to be done in terms of the nature and causes of color preferences.
The post What Is Your Favorite Color? first appeared on NeuroLogica Blog.
Today the Artemis 2 capsule with its four astronauts does its transit around the Moon, going further into space than any human have gone into space. They’ll also see parts of the Moon’s backside that have never been seen by the living human eye, though the backside has been amply photographed.
Shortly after midnight this morning, the capsule entered the Moon’s “sphere of influence,” meaning the part of space where the gravity of the Moon exceeds the gravity of Earth. The schedule is below, and I’ve put a video of the live proceedings below.
From the Space.com site:
The Artemis 2 astronauts have arrived in the moon’s sphere of influence, and are now preparing for a very full day of lunar observations.
They crossed the celestial threshold early Monday morning (April 6), becoming the first people to do so since the crew of Apollo 17, in 1972.
The pull of the moon’s gravity on the Artemis 2 Orion capsule officially became stronger than Earth’s influence on the spcecraft at 12:37 a.m. EDT (0437 GMT), as Orion flew 39,000 miles (62,764 kilometers) above the moon and 232,000 miles (373,368 km) from Earth.
Today, they will break the distance record set by Apollo 13, which flew 248,655 miles (400,171 kilometers) from Earth. Artemis 2 reach that, and then some, but between breaking the record and setting their own, they will have hours of lunar observations to conduct as Orion makes its closest approach to the moon.
Here’s a full breakdown of what to expect today (all times in EDT):
There will be about a 40-minute communications blackout (starting at about 6:47 pm) when they go around the Moon. Here’s today’s schedule:
1 p.m.: NASA lunar flyby coverage begins.
1:56 p.m.: Apollo 13 distance record broken
2:10 p.m.: Crew remarks about record
2:15 p.m.: Crew configures Orion for flyby
2:45 p.m.: Lunar observation period begins
6:47 p.m.: Loss of communications (estimated 40-min.)
7:02 p.m.: Closest approach to the moon
7:05 p.m.: Maximum distance from Earth
8:35 p.m.: Orion enters solar eclipse period
9:20 p.m.: Lunar observation period ends
9:32 p.m.: Solar eclipse period concludes
Watching a bit this morning, I see there is a possible cabin leak, which is worrying, but it may have been a false alarm.
If the video is not working, you can see it on the Space.com site: You can also scroll back and see what was going on previously.
h/t: Bat
Today’s photo come from reader Jan Malik, who took them in New Jersay. Jan’s captions are indented, and you can enlarge the photos by clicking on them.
As an appendix to the earlier Tree Swallow pictures, here are a few more from the New Jersey Botanical Garden. A walk in that park on the first day of spring is a ritual of mine—to ensure all observable phenomena related to spring are happening again and that the thermal death of the Universe is postponed for yet another year.
Red-bellied Woodpecker (Melanerpes carolinus) pausing mid-search for food. This is a female; in this species, the red plumage is restricted to the nape and the area above the bill, whereas males sport a continuous red cap:
Spring Snowflake (Leucojum vernum, possibly var. carpathicum), a Eurasian transplant. It looks succulent, but this perennial defends itself against mammalian browsing by producing bitter, poisonous alkaloids:
Eastern Cottontail (Sylvilagus floridanus) hiding in bearberry brambles. Against this notorious garden destroyer, only the Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch offers a true degree of protection:
Forsythia (Genus Forsythia) in bloom—the unmistakable sign that spring has arrived:
White-breasted Nuthatch (Sitta carolinensis). Like the woodpecker, it is a connoisseur of arthropods hiding in bark. however, by being equally adept at feeding head-down or head-up, it finds insects that a woodpecker might miss:
Common Water Strider (likely Aquarius remigis) emerged from its winter hiding. These are predators and scavengers of insects trapped on the surface of slow-flowing streams. As a “true bug,” it has evolved to exploit surface tension. However, surface tension alone doesn’t keep it dry; the secret lies in the dense, hydrophobic hairs on its tarsi. These trap air to act as tiny “dinghies,” preventing the legs from being wetted by capillary action:
Crocus flower (likely a Woodland Crocus, Crocus tommasinianus). The flowers emerge before the leaves, which then die back in late spring after accumulating enough biomass for the year. This adaptation to montane meadows and early forests allows them to bloom early, while withdrawing underground provides a defense against browsing:
Northern Mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos) picking bittersweet fruit (likely the introduced Oriental Bittersweet, Celastrus orbiculatus). The fruit is indeed slightly sweet—a fact I confirmed before spitting it out, as they are reportedly toxic to humans. As they say: don’t try this at home; try it in nature instead:
After the meal, the mockingbird sits quietly in a nearby bush. They mimic other birds’ calls, possibly to fool rivals into thinking a territory is already occupied. It doesn’t work on me, though—I can always tell the original bird from the imitation:
Snowdrop (Genus Galanthus), another Eurasian immigrant. Most of the plants in these pictures were introduced from Eurasia to the Americas; however, with the exception of the Bittersweet, they are generally not considered invasive:
A Jumping Spider. I can’t vouch for the exact ID, but it resembles Phidippus princeps. While not my best shot, it’s worth noting that, like all others in this series, it was taken with a single lens (Canon RF 100-500mm)—a blessing for a lazy photographer.
An Eastern Gray Squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis), looking lean after winter and digging for roots and grubs in the lawn. This species is an unwelcome sight in Europe, where its introduction is displacing the native Red Squirrel. But can we really blame them? They are simply good at being squirrels. It is entirely a human fault that geographical barriers are collapsing. In this “Homogecene” era of a connected world, the total number of species will inevitably decline:
Everything old is new again, even when AI is involved, as a very old antivax trope is rediscovered for a new generation.
The post Antivax tech bro Steve Kirsch uses AI to rediscover the Jock Doubleday challenge first appeared on Science-Based Medicine.Star formation is a dramatic and complex process that erupts throughout the Universe. Yet, a lot of the action gets hidden by clouds of gas and dust. That's where observatories such as the James Webb Telescope JWST and the Atacama Large Millimeter Array (ALMA) come in handy. They use infrared light and radio waves, respectively, to pierce the veil surrounding the process of starbirth.
NASA astronaut and Artemis II Commander Reid Wiseman took this picture of Earth from the Orion spacecraft's window after completing the translunar injection burn. There are two auroras (top right and bottom left) and zodiacal light (bottom right) is visible as the Earth eclipses the Sun.
I guess the Torygraph is considered “mainstream media” in the UK, and, like American MSM, seems to be touting religion in a way we didn’t see a few years ago. In this short article, which I found through the disparaging tweet below (an accurate, tweet, it seems), Baron David Frost, a conservative political bigwig in the UK, tells us why we should be going to church this Easter. He seems to love “full-fat supernatural Christianity,” which apparently means the whole Catholic hog, from snout to tail. No “skim Christianity” for him!
Go below to read the article.
Hello, I am mental.
— Richard Smyth (@rsmythfreelance.bsky.social) 2026-04-03T07:46:00.501Z
Click the screenshot below to go to an archived version of the Torygraph piece, which describes Lord Frost (is that the same thing as a Baron?) this way:
Lord Frost led the negotiations that finally took Britain out of the EU in 2020. A Cabinet minister in the Boris Johnson government, he resigned in protest at the handling of Covid lockdowns, and has since been a persistent advocate of a more fully conservative approach to policy on the Right. He is a non-affiliated peer in the House of Lords.
Wikipedia adds this:
David George Hamilton Frost, Baron Frost (born 21 February 1965) is a British diplomat, civil servant and politician who served as a Minister of State at the Cabinet Office between March and December 2021. Frost was Chief Negotiator of Task Force Europe from January 2020 until his resignation in December 2021.
Frost spent his early professional career in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO), becoming Ambassador to Denmark, EU Director at the FCO, and Director for Europe and International Trade at the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills. He was a special adviser to Boris Johnson when the latter was Foreign Secretary in Theresa May’s government.
And yes, I have to say, although it’s Easter, the guy is mental, for he thinks that anybody who has had an elevating aesthetic or emotional experience is providing evidence not just for God, but for the God of Rome.
I’ll put a few topics under bold headings (mine). The indented parts are from the article by Baron Frost.
The evidence for a revival of Christianity is weak. First, Frost makes this admission:
The Quiet Revival – the view that people are coming back to church and the long years of decline might be over – has been much discussed in ecclesiastical circles this last year. A YouGov poll in a Bible Society report seemed to vindicate it by asserting the number of 18 to 24-year-olds attending church monthly had jumped from 4 per cent in 2018 to 16 per cent in 2024.
It’s fair to say that these figures were a bit controversial right from the start. And the doubts were justified last week, when YouGov, in its latest polling flop, had to admit it had made an error and had not applied proper quality control to its sample.
So are we back to square one? Is the whole thing just confirmation bias and wishful thinking?
So he gives the “evidence” for the revival, which he has to find in places other than the polls. One is in hearsay, another his own behavior:
I don’t think so. Something is definitely happening, if not exactly what the Bible Society described. There is too much other evidence. Numbers coming into the Catholic Church each Easter, here and across the West, are increasing (I was one in 2025). Footballers are open about their faith in a way that didn’t happen a decade back. Sales of printed Bibles have doubled. There is even a mini boom in the Greek Orthodox Church going on.
Summing it up, the Rev Daniel French, chaplain at Greenwich University and Irreverend podcaster, said: “I see considerable curiosity about faith, particularly from young adults, often men. The old assumptions that religious conversations are taboo have evaporated. My week is filled with impromptu chats about God in a way it wasn’t ten years ago.”
Why is the West becoming more Christian? It isn’t, but this is what the sweating Baron says: it’s the Internet and the stagnation of society, Jake!
Why might this be? It’s speculative, but my experience suggests several different reasons. One is the simple availability of different Christian voices on the internet. If your only exposure to Christianity is in your school religious studies class with a dull and inexpert teacher, as it might have been in the past, it could turn you off for good. But if you can hear Glen Scrivener or Bishop Robert Barron online, you are more likely to think: “I need to take this seriously.”
There is also the collapse of the narrative of inevitable progress, the belief that young people will always be economically better off than their parents, the growing dysfunction in society starting with the pandemic, all may be generating a tendency to look beyond economics for life satisfaction.
Of course we know that there is a negative correlation between religiosity and well-being, a correlation that holds across both nations and U.S. states. The worse off you are, the more religious you are. Further, there’s a positive correlation between income inequality (measured by the “Gini index”) and religiosity: the higher the inequality, the more religious people are. That the former produces the latter, so it’s not a spurious correlation, is supported by the fact that religiosity rises a year after inequality rises. Likewise with falls of inequality and falls of religiosity. That’s not proof, but is support for the connection made famous by Karl Marx, a quotation that is often truncated to distort its meaning:
Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.
What Marx was saying was not that religion was good for people because it soothed them, but that it was bad for people because it was what people did when they could not find relief from their suffering and oppression through means that could actually improve their situation. They thus have to turn to the opium of belief.
The Baron sees evidence for God every time people have an aesthetic or spiritual experience. Not just evidence for God, apparently, but evidence for Catholicism!:
Reflect on the experiences in your life where you feel, for a moment, you might have had an experience of something beyond this world, a moment in the English countryside, a phrase of music that tugs at the heartstrings, and ask yourself why you feel that, if material reality is really all there is. Consider too that most people in history, and indeed most people in the world today, have not had that belief, and maybe aren’t all wrong. Maybe western secular society doesn’t know everything about everything.
But of course people throughout the world have this kind of experience, people including atheists like Richard Dawkins and me. And not for a minute do we think that emotionality is evidence for gods. Is it evidence for Allah, and also for Xenu and Vishnu?
The evidence that these emotions and epiphanies are the product of material reality can be seen, for one thing, because you can have them simply by taking drugs. I remember once when I was in college, doing a science fellowship during the summer, I took LSD and walked through the quad (the “Sunken Garden”) at William and Mary. There were high-school brass bands having some kind of competition, and, in my psychedelic daze, their ragged, dissonant music seemed like the most beautiful thing I’d ever heard. Was that evidence for God? Had I not been tripping, I would have run away in horror.
The Baron admits that Christianity is meaningless unles you believe its foundational truths. You don’t often see this kind of admission since “sophisticated” believers don’t like to admit it, nor will they say explicitly what they believe:
After all, the important thing about Christianity is not whether it makes you feel better or whether it is good for society, but whether it is true. If it is, we should all want to know that, and if it isn’t, we are right to reject it. The one thing we should not do is not properly consider it. And in Western society that is all too easy.
I’ve considered the “evidence”, which of course is almost entirely what’s in the Bible. And I don’t buy it, as I suspect most of the readers here don’t. And what about the gazillion other faiths of the world. Why does Frost reject Mormonism, Hinduism, Islam, and cargo cults but accept the “truth” of Christianity? (Like Christians, adherents to cargo cults keep waiting for a savior who never comes.) I’d like the Baron to tell me how he knows not just the Resurrection and Jesus’s “miracles” were true, but why the writing of the Quran is a bogus story. And why, among Christian religions, are the dictates of Catholicm true? (The Baron touts the revival of religion as involving mainly Catholicism and “Protestant evangelicals.) Gimme that full-fat religion!
The Baron tells us why we should go to Church.
In an essay entitled Man or Rabbit?, CS Lewis gently mocked those who didn’t reject Christianity but tried to ignore it, not from disbelief, but from a suspicion that it might be true after all and that acknowledging it would be inconvenient – rather like someone who doesn’t open their bank statements for fear of what might be in them. Don’t be like that person. Face the issue head on. At least give Christianity a fair hearing. Show up to church this Easter. You never know what might happen.
I ignore Christianity because it’s a full-fat superstition supported by no evidence. I’m amused that he quotes C. S. Lewis, who I admit I find hilariously stupid about religion even though his Mere Christianity is probably the most influential work of popular theology ever. I’ve read it, of course, and I always have to laugh when I read “Lewis’s trilemma“—an argument for the divinity of Jesus and truth of his message. Lewis actually stole this argument from others, as several people had made it before him. Here’s Lewis’s version:
I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept his claim to be God. That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic—on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg—or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up for a fool, you can spit at him and kill him as a demon or you can fall at his feet and call him Lord and God, but let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to. … Now it seems to me obvious that He was neither a lunatic nor a fiend: and consequently, however strange or terrifying or unlikely it may seem, I have to accept the view that He was and is God.
Of course there are alternatives to “liar, lunatic, or Lord”; I’m sure you can think of at least one: people made up what Jesus said in the Bible. You can read alternative criticisms here.
But the real question is whether Frost himself is a liar, lunatic, or Lord. And we already know the answer: he’s a Lord.
I guess I’m just splenetic on this day when people go to Church to worship something for which there’s no evidence. And, contra Frost, I won’t be showing up to church this Easter. Instead, I’m writing this post.
The Cambrian Period, beginning at 538.8 Ma (million years ago) and lasting about 52 million years, is famous for marking the transition from simple and largely unicellular animals to, beginning at the period’s inception, representatives of modern groups. This apparently rapid onset of modern forms of multicellular animals constitutes the famous “Cambrian Explosion.”
The Cambrian was preceded by the 96-million-year-long Ediacaran period, extending from 635 million years ago to the beginning of the Cambrian. The Ediacaran fauna, consisting of some multicellular animals of unknown affinity and things looking like members of some modern groups like cnidarians (represented today by jellyfish, corals and anemone). But most of the Ediacaran groups appeared to have died out at the end of the Ediacaran, and for unknown reasons.
The boundary between the Ediacran and the Cambrian thus marks a major transition in animal life. Many of the “modern” groups that first arose during the Cambrian don’t have apparent ancestors in the Ediacaran, and so those modern groups were thought to have evolved almost instantaneously (in geological time!). But surely modern groups had ancestors during the Ediacaran: unless you’re a Biblical fundamentalist, you realize that ancestors of modern groups had to have existed well before the Cambrian explosion.
Now a paper in Science, based on a fossil group called the Jiangchuan Biota that spans the period from 559-534 million years ago, shows that representatives of “modern” groups seen in the Cambrian explosion were indeed present in the late Ediacaran, pushing back the time of origin of modern phyla 4-5 million years. This conclusion was possible because of the remarkable preservation of the animals (and some algae), all present as carbonaceous films on rocks—the same kind of films (presumably due to rapid burial) that enabled us to see the remarkable Burgess Shale fauna of the middle Cambrian. The new find was in the province of Yunnan in Southwestern China.
You can see the paper by clicking the screenshot below, reading the pdf here, or reading the shorter blurb at an Oxford University sit. at the bottom. All photos below are taken from the paper.
I won’t go into all the terminology involved in identifying the groups but will show a few fossils from the paper strongly suggesting that some “modern” groups arose in the late Ediacaran.
First, an anomalous animal that appears to be some kind of worm, but one with a “holdfast” disc on its butt. We don’t know what this one is, but it has oral projections or tentacles. The disc is very clear:
Another wormlike animal (note that these are small: a few millimeters) having a clear oral region. Again, we’re not sure what this is, but the preservation as a carbon film is remarkable:
A deuterostome (animals where the first opening in the embryo becomes the anus rather than the mouth), a group thought to have appeared in the Cambrian but here seen in the Ediacaran: this one resembles Herpetogaster, known from the early Cambrian which, according to Wikipedia, “possessed a pair of branching tentacles and a tough but flexible body that curved helically to the right like a ram’s horn and was divided into at least 13 segments”. This one, like Herpetogaster, has tentacles (at leat four) and a stalk. It’s interpreted as a relative of acorn worms, relatives of modern echinoderms which are hemichordates, the closest living group to modern chordates (animals with notochords and a dorsal nerve chord, which include all vertebrates).
The one below,described in the paper as “Margaretia-like animal now known as a dwelling tube for an enteropneust hemichordate worm”. It’s also described as having “regular, oval-shaped holes running along its length”. Again, we see what is likely an early hemichordate, showing that the relatives of modern chordates seem to have been present several million years before the Cambrian explosion began.
The one below is identified as a ctenophore, or comb jelly, a phylum of early animals previously known only from the mid-Cambrian. “OS” stands for “oral skirt”, described as “a specialized, often scalloped, muscular, or rigid structure surrounding the mouth, primarily found in Cambrian-era fossil comb jellies such as Ctenorhabdotus and Thalassostaphylos. Unlike modern ctenophores, these ancient species used the skirt for feeding, potentially to engulf large prey.”
Finally, this animal is thought to be an early cnidarian with tentacles and a holdfast (HF). Although one form identified as a cnidarian had already been recognized from the Ediacaran, here we have another that’s different, showing a radiation of cnidarians before the Cambrian.
These fossil data support already-existing molecular data suggesting that animal groups had already evolved and diversified before the Cambrian, though until now no fossils, or only a few suggestive fossils, were known.
The authors’ summary below, though written in scient-ese, basically says that a major radiation of animal phyla had already begun before the Ediacran/Cambrian boundary, but we did not know about it because the conditions for forming this kind of trace fossil, requiring rapid burial in marine sediment (and subsequent finding by investigators!) were infrequent:
The new Jiangchuan animal fossils, dominated by bilaterians of apparently diverse affinities, with rarer fossils more typical of late Ediacaran deposits, could be described as a “Cambrian-type” assemblage from the late Ediacaran. A dominantly bilaterian assemblage from the late Ediacaran may not have been discovered until now as a result of the paucity of carbonaceous compressions from this time, hinting at a broader taphonomic bias (51).
If you want a short, readable summary of the importance of this fine, click below to read a shorter summary from Oxford University.
It turns out that Tweeting about RCTs 100+ times is a lot easier than delivering even a single RCT.
The post Dr. Vinay Prasad Said He Would Deliver New COVID Vaccine RCTs. He Failed and Should STFU. first appeared on Science-Based Medicine.A new study presented at the 2026 LPSC suggests that if life does exist in Venus' clouds, there's a chance it came from Earth.