In a bid to avoid regulations on the greenhouse gas emissions contributing to climate change, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce wants to put the science of global warming on trial. "It would be evolution versus creationism," the chamber's William Kovacs, senior vice president for environment, technology and regulatory affairs, told the Los Angeles Times.

In other words, the chamber hopes for a "Scopes monkey trial for the 21st century," referring to the famous 1925 court case that determined whether evolution could be taught in Tennessee (a battle that has broken out again in states like Texas). The chamber, which represents millions of U.S. businesses, is urging the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to set up a hearing to discuss the science behind that agency's move to declare carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases a threat to human health and therefore subject to regulation under the Clean Air Act.

Today the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) and the Pew Research Center released results of a survey examining the attitudes of the general public and the scientific community as they regard to science.

The results, collected from 2,553 AAAS members and 2,001 public respondents, suggest that although average Americans hold a positive view of scientists and support the funding of research, they do not share the same perspectives as the scientific community on a variety of science issues.

Only 17 percent of the public feels that U.S. scientific achievements rank first in the world, far less than the 49 percent of scientists who think so.  Alan Leshner, chief executive officer of the AAAS, was surprised by the low percentage of both numbers, stating in a telephone press conference today that much of the world considers American science as the standard to seek.  He goes on to note that U.S. science papers are still the most frequently cited in the world.

A new estimate puts maximum global sea level rise from the collapse of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet at 10.5 feet (3.2 meters)—not the 16 feet (five meters) or more predicted in the past.

The latest research indicates that this massive ice sheet is unlikely to disappear completely, limiting the damage as it melts. Glaciologist Jonathan Bamber of the University of Bristol in England and his colleagues modeled the collapse of the ice sheet based on the relative likelihood of a given section vanishing completely.

Their work suggests only those parts of the ice sheet that are grounded below sea level or sloping downwards would collapse. Those parts of the sheet grounded above sea level or on bedrock that slopes upwards would remain in place.

Fifteen female researchers are celebrating International Women's Day (March 8) a few days early. They've received fellowships of up to $40,000 each to pursue doctoral or post-doctoral research through the United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)-L'Oréal For Women in Science International Fellowship program, announced this week in Paris.

This year marks a full decade of the program, which has funded 135 women from more than 70 countries. Christine Ouinsavi from Benin, who received funds to research forest conservation in 2007, is now that country's Minister of Trade and Industry, and Pascale Cossart, who won a fellowship in 1998 has gone on to become an award-winning bacteriologist at the Institut Pasteur of Paris.