Mavericks. People showing great independence of thought*.

Some of the greatest discoveries in science have been made by mavericks. Nonsensical untruths have been promulgated by those very same mavericks. Mavericks stimulate the imagination - they lend themselves naturally as protagonists in a stimulating narrative, generating public interest. Heroes like Galileo and denialists like Duesberg all share one thing in common: going against the grain.

The latest Skeptics' Circle is finally here, written by yours truly! By way of a teaser, I'll relay the first few words. *Hypnotic voice* As you read them you can feel the need to find out more rise up within you...breathe deeply...relax...and follow the link.

Academician: Welcome, one and all, to the 123rd meeting of the Skeptics’ Circle. Hat tip to one of the most important men ever to stand up and say ‘Er…hang on’ for tonight’s theme...

Ladies and Gentlemen! Carnival Season is upon us, or rather: carnival season is upon Blue-Genes.net. For the uninitiated: the Skeptics' Circle is an ancient (by intertube standards) rite where the cleverest clogs in the world get together fortnightly to share their thoughts on many issues that have become clouded by poor logic, bias, and silliness.

Yesterday saw the release of the paper published in the New England Journal of Medicine containing the hotly awaited data concerning the HIV vaccine trial that took place in Thailand. There was already some discussion of the initial results, which were reported in September and discussed by Colin and Martin. As has already been discussed, there is a very cautious consensus due to the statistical analysis of the trial only *just* falling on the side of significant.

Most denizens of the interwebs (at least of this corner of the interwebs) will have heard the announcement that the 2009 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine will be given to Elizabeth Blackburn, Carol Greider and Jack Szostak for their work on telomeres - the structures found at the ends of human chromosomes. You may already have read a little about the research behind it (if not, the NobelPrize.org press release is a very good place to start) so I’ll try to keep the background as short as possible. What I would like to do here is to explain the assertions that “cancer research has also benefited from the Nobel-winning trio's work”.