Fire reveals moor’s stone legacy

A carved stone thought to date back more the 4,000 years has been discovered following a large fire on the North York Moors.

The relic which is unique in England, was found after the blaze near Fylingdales in September 2003.

English Heritage archaeologists say the stone was one of 2,400 features uncovered by the fire.

It has a carved zigzag design and has been returned to the ground after being photographed and laser-scanned.

The fire was the biggest on the North York Moors in living memory and destroyed a huge area of heather moorland.

It was thought to have been started by a discarded cigarette in a waste bin on the nearby A171 Scarborough to Whitby road.

Neil Redfern, an English Heritage inspector of ancient monuments, said: "The fire had a devastating impact, but it has also revealed an astonishing archaeological landscape.

"When we stepped over the scorched terrain and reviewed aerial photographs we were confronted by a vast number of features we had no idea existed before.

"To find such well-preserved signs of settlement and human activity over such a long period in such a small area is amazing."

Apart from the stone other finds include Mesolithic flints, 185 carved rocks, old trackways and waterways linked to the alum industry together with slit trenches from World War II when the moor was used as a military training area.

A three-year project to restore the moor's range of habitats for wildlife and plants has been given a £200,000 grant from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra).

The vegetation will also protect the archaeology beneath the ground.

UK Coal rejects talks on takeover

A renewed offer for UK Coal could be made by venture capital group Alchemy Partners, it has emerged.

Alchemy confirmed it had been involved in an earlier takeover approach that was rejected by UK Coal.

The coal producer, based in Doncaster and formerly known as RJB Mining, said on 8 June it had terminated talks with a party it did not identify.

On Thursday, Alchemy said it had asked UK Coal to take part in discussions but it had been turned down.

Alchemy said in a statement: "There can be no certainty that any offer will be made and if made, there can be no certainty as to the terms of any such offer."

£51m losses

It said fundholders advised by Alchemy would provide the equity financing of any new company necessary to make an offer.

UK Coal, which owns seven UK pits, said last week's approach had been subject to pre-conditions and that sufficient clarification had not been received on a number of matters.

Its extensive property interests – valued at £174m in 2002 – are likely to be one of the main reasons for the interest in a firm which in March unveiled losses of £51.6m for its last financial year.

Chief executive Gerry Spindler is looking to lead the company back to profitability by 2006.

Bosnia helps trace tsunami dead

Forensic experts used to identifying bodies from mass graves in Bosnia are turning their expertise to help the Thai government identify victims of the Asian tsunami.

Renee Kosalka, a forensic anthropologist, is scraping the dirt from a bone found in a mass grave near the town of Zvornik in eastern Bosnia.

"It's difficult to say how many bodies are here," she tells me.

"It's a really difficult grave to deal with. It's been disturbed and it's been used as a rubbish tip after the bodies were dumped. Not only that, but we're close to the underground water level."

Ten years after the Bosnian war, mass graves are still being discovered. The remains are usually some jumbled up clothes and jumbled up bones. There are at least another three mass graves within a few hundred metres of this one.

"At this stage, all we can say is that they're mainly young males aged between 15 and their early 20s," says Renee.

And until a few years ago that is about as far as identification would get, investigators having to rely on relatives perhaps identifying some of the clothing in the graves.

But then the International Commission on Missing Persons (ICMP), set up in the aftermath of the war to try to identify thousands of victims, developed special DNA extraction techniques.

Justice

Their expertise has persuaded the government in Thailand to ask ICMP to try to identify up to 2,000 killed by the devastating tsunami at the end of last year.

Bone samples from the victims have already been flown to special laboratories in Bosnia, where ICMP scientists are applying the same techniques they have used for victims of the Bosnian War.

At ICMP headquarters in Sarajevo, the Canadian head of the DNA programme, John Davoren, shows me the techniques that have helped to identify the victims in mass graves.

The extraction of DNA from bones has been traditionally a very difficult process – especially if carried out on a mass scale.

"The bones are cleaned and bar coded. We then extract the DNA from the samples using special chemicals we have developed," says Mr Davoren.

"Once we have the DNA profile we use special computer software to match the DNA profile with the DNA of the relatives of the victims. The results are extremely accurate. We can identify bone samples with an accuracy of about 99.9999%."

The skills pioneered by ICMP have been used by those investigating the attacks on the World Trade Center in New York and also in attempts to identify up to a million people missing in Iraq.

At this stage, only the Thai government has formally asked ICMP to get involved in tsunami identification. But other countries in the region are thought to be interested in following their lead.

ICMP's principal mandate is to help identify the victims of war and human rights abuses. But they believe their specifically developed skills can help under different circumstances as well.

"By doing this work, by identifying victims you provide truth, a form of justice and that way you can help stabilise a peace process and hopefully bring some type of reconciliation," says Doune Porter, Director of Communications at ICMP.

And by identifying remains, a certain amount of peace is brought to the relatives of the victims, whether killed in a man-made disaster like the Bosnian war or a natural disaster like the tsunami.

BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Three share chemistry Nobel Prize

Three scientists have been awarded the 2005 Nobel Prize for Chemistry for improving a process used in making plastics and pharmaceuticals.

Frenchman Yves Chauvin and Americans Richard Schrock and Robert Grubbs were recognised for their contributions to a reaction process called metathesis.

Their work has made the process of synthesising carbon compounds simpler, more efficient and greener.

Swedish scientist Alfred Nobel founded the prizes in his will written in 1895.

The process of metathesis, or olefin methathesis, allows double bonds to be broken and made between carbon atoms in ways that make atomic groups swap places. The process has been likened to couples changing partners during a dance.

The chemical process takes place with the assistance of special catalyst molecules.

Metathesis is used on a daily basis in the chemical industry, mainly in the production of pharmaceuticals and advanced plastics.

"I am rather embarrassed, because I do not have the true profile," 74-year-old Yves Chauvin, of the French Institute for Petroleum, told Swedish radio after the laureates were announced.

Fundamental impact

Professor Laurence Harwood, an expert in organic chemistry at the University of Reading, UK, told the BBC News website he was "not one bit surprised" by the subjects of this year's prize.

"It is thoroughly deserved," he added. "The olefin metathesis has had a major and fundamental impact on how organic chemists build their molecules.

"Very rarely do people develop new reactions and this one has widespread applications."

The reaction itself was discovered in the 1950s, emerging out of industry. However, though scientists knew it worked, they could not explain how it worked.

They needed to understand the molecular mechanism by which the catalyst sped the reaction along.

Enter Yves Chauvin, who, in 1970, proposed that the catalyst was a metal carbene, or alkylide. He also presented a new mechanism for the way this metal compound functions in the reaction that explained all previous experimental results using metathesis.

Room for improvement

Later on, other researchers were to develop more efficient catalysts for use in metathesis. In 1990, Richard Schrock, of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), US, developed a highly efficient catalyst based on the metal molybdenum.

Another breakthrough came two years later, when Robert Grubbs, of the California Institute of Technology (Caltech), developed a catalyst based on another metal, ruthenium, which was stable in air.

This has found many applications in science and industry.

In its citation for the 2005 award for chemistry, the Nobel jury declared "fantastic opportunities" had resulted from the trio's work.

Benefits to arise from the findings include advanced herbicides, additives for polymers and fuels, and research into new treatments for bacterial infection, cancer, Alzheimer's disease, arthritis, migraine and HIV.

Their work has also been a step forward for "green chemistry", reducing potentially hazardous waste through smarter production.

"Imagination will soon be the only limit to the kind of molecules that could be built in the future," the Nobel jury said.

Ancient church found on jail site

Israeli officials say they have discovered what may be the oldest Christian Church in the Holy Land – on the site of a maximum security prison.

Israel's Antiquities Authority said the church at the Megiddo jail dated back to the third or fourth century AD and was "a once in a lifetime find".

It contained a mosaic bearing the name of Jesus Christ in ancient Greek, fish murals and an altar, officials said.

The dig took place near the biblical site of Armageddon in northern Israel.

'Great discovery'

"This is a once in a lifetime find and the inscriptions are very rare," excavation supervisor Jotham Tefer told Israel's Channel Two television.

"This is a very ancient structure, maybe the oldest in our area," he said.

Mr Tefer added that the discovery could help shed new light on an important period of Christianity, which was banned by the Romans until the fourth century.

"Normally we have from this period in our region historical evidence from literature, not archaeological evidence," he said.

"There is no structure you can compare it to, it is a very unique find."

The Vatican's ambassador to Israel, Pietro Sambi, described the find as a "great discovery".

According to Christian tradition Megiddo will be the site of Armageddon, the final battle between good and evil on the Day of Judgement.

A field of dreams?

It's like another gold rush, but is the race to grow crops for bio fuels such a field of dreams?

In the flatlands of the American interior, grain is flying off the fields. Corn, wheat and barley are thrashing through combines.

And to watch the farmers behind the harvest, you would think you were on Wall Street instead of Green Acres. Members of the boots-and-baseball hat crowd sound more like tassel-loafed brokers on a binge, spinning straw into gold. And in a sense, they are.

Welcome to the latest field of dreams. Farm prices have not been so high in a generation. Wheat has more than tripled from the price of a few years ago. Corn is up 80% or more.

I bring you this news from the farm, not as a discourse on why breakfast cereal may soon cost a bit more. But rather, consider this as another variation of the old saw about being careful what you wish for. Or perhaps it's simply a tale of supply-and-demand economics.

For years people in rural America have been touting ethanol as the best path to energy independence. It's easy to make. It's just refined alcohol, usually processed from corn.

There's a seemingly endless supply of it. It doesn't involve sending billions to foreign despots. It doesn't release as much carbon into the atmosphere as petrol-based fuels do. And for years, most everyone else rolled their eyes and continued to fill up their SUVs with cheap gasoline, ignoring ethanol.

It was a niche, at best. A political bargaining chip for farm states during presidential election years. See Iowa and ethanol – two words that tumble out of the mouths of political candidates with quadrennial regularity. But as oil prices have crept past $80 a barrel, that fuel from the farm started to look a lot better.

At the same time came hefty tax breaks, government mandates to quadruple ethanol production and Wall Street venture capital sniffing around the edges of the prairie. Just like that, the old scarecrow patch became a lot more profitable.

Now 129 plants are making ethanol, mostly in small towns dotting the American mid-section, and another 80 are under construction. Half the states in the US have ethanol plants and it may soon be the leading producer in the world of this home-grown fuel – right up there with Brazil, which makes its fuel from sugar cane.

Moonshine

That ka-ching you heard was coming from farmers making high-performance moonshine from amber fields of grain. In their vision there will soon be a "grass station" in every town, powering a fleet of new cars running on bio fuels.

What's left over might even be used for traditional moonshine. That is, grain alcohol. A plant in small-town Minnesota does just that, producing a high-end vodka in addition to several million gallons of transportation fuel.

One of the farmers I spoke to in the Interior West, a fellow named Read Smith, brought up the other reason people who work the land are so excited about ethanol: the prospect of a renaissance in rural America.

An evangelist for ethanol, Smith was so excited I had to check for dirt under his fingernails to make sure he was a farmer. Towns, now dying, would get a fresh lease on life through ethanol, he said.

The shuttered factory could re-open, with minimal investment, as a farmer-owned refinery, taking Jed's corn to make Jeremy's tractor fuel. Young people, now leaving in droves, would stay behind, lured by the promise of a new, $700bn-a-year industry.

On top of that is the draw of economic nationalism. Not long ago I drove through a small town in Missouri, where a new ethanol plant is the pride of the community.

A yard sign, showing a picture of corn, a gas pump and the American flag, carried the slogan: Our Crop. Our Fuel. Our Country. The not-so-subtle implication, which you hear farmers mention time and again is – stick it to those Arab oil billionaires.

The goal of the ethanol enthusiasts is to have farmers and foresters produce 25% of American energy by the year 2025. As it stands, the US now makes about six billion gallons of ethanol. It's barely enough to replace a mere 4% of the nation's gasoline consumption. And most of that is used in blends.

The "Big Vision" sounds wonderful to farmers who have long complained about bad weather, bad prices, bad rural economics, bad global economics, or some combination of woe.

Protests

Hard times in the wide open spaces date to the Dust Bowl storms of the 1930s. Since then, more than half of the counties in the western Great Plains have lost population – a steady drip, drip, drip of out-migration and loss. Banks are boarded up. Stores are shuttered. Schools are closed, never again to hold a child's voice.

So, you can see why ethanol is greeted as the salvation of the rural economy. But reality has intruded. This new fuel, after all, comes from food. Corn is used for everything from cereal to soda pop. Corn fattens hogs and chickens and cattle. So, of course, as the demand for corn in bio fuel has soared so too have food prices.

This makes corn farmers happy, but everybody else in the food production chain is not. Earlier this year there were large protests in Mexico by people who claimed that ethanol demand had caused tortilla prices to double.

Whether ethanol is truly to blame for higher food prices is debatable. No one ever thought it would take off this quickly and the market may be in for a settling, which will level prices. Still, enough economists say there is a lesson here – you can't have your fuel and your food come from the same source.

Also, environmentalists have weighed in, pointing out that while ethanol is much cleaner than fuels that come from oil, it is not the panacea for global warming.

The process of converting fields into corn and then into fuel requires intensive amounts of fertiliser and old-fashioned petrol in the refining – ultimately adding to the carbon in the atmosphere.

A cleaner method – the sort of Holy Grail of ethanol – is the process of making fuel from straw, or field waste, or wood chips. This is not a pipe dream. It can be done, as a small plant in Canada and other projects in Europe have demonstrated.

But the price, for now at least, is prohibitive because the processing is so much more difficult, although the hope is that costs will come down.

And of course, big oil has cast its shadow over the "field of ethanol dreams". The oil industry initially tried to get in on the boom. Most ethanol plants are now farmer-owned co-ops. The little guy can actually produce ethanol cheaper than the big guy.

Failing to get a toehold on the farm, the oil industry has since funded an anti-ethanol campaign. All sorts of so-called "experts" – many, it turns out, on the payrolls of oil companies – have been sounding alarms about bio fuels. But to be fair, some oil companies are still trying to partner with ethanol producers.

Cold and fallow

But perhaps the biggest blow yet has come from the free market. If it looked like a good thing to plough up prairie grass and plant corn for the ethanol boom in Kansas, it also looked the same way in Missouri, or Idaho.

I met a farmer outside the one-stoplight town of Burley, in the high desert of the Interior West, who told me he was going to rip out all his hay, which requires very little care, and plant a special kind of corn so he can make a killing in the ethanol boom.

Yes, sir, he told me – it's a sure thing. Right. Just like all gold rushes. Now, guess what? There's a glut. In fact, there's a huge glut.

Farmers and the small towns that service them built their refineries nearly overnight. But at the other end – cars that use ethanol, stations that pump it and actual consumers who will trade in their gas-fired rides for moonshine motors – they have not kept up.

So, while food prices remain high, ethanol prices are trending downward, off nearly 30% on the spot market since May. So, is this the beginning of the end of the big ethanol dream? Killed, just as it got going?

Most farm economists say no – ethanol will find its place. Now, maybe it won't replace all the imported oil – more than half of US consumption – and maybe it won't save the planet. Such overstatements, critics believe, set ethanol up for a fall to begin with.

But even if we can't farm our way to energy independence, it's a start toward a more local energy economy – connecting consumers to producers.

That may be enough to keep people on the land, people who dream of putting something in the ground just as it goes cold and fallow. Because, more than anything else, they are farming tomorrow.

Below is a selection of your comments.

Brazil has been doing this for decades, ever since they stopped supplying the USA with unfairly-traded sugar and decided to turn it into motor fuel. Why hasn't the world followed? Might it have something to do with the fact that "ethanol" is the same stuff that the food and drink industry calls "alcohol" or "spirits"? For centuries the distillation of spirits has been tightly controlled, with bonded warehouses and Customs and Excise inspections. To see the rise of a parallel industry producing the same stuff in massive quantities without the same controls must be daunting to our tax officials. But if the alternative is climate change from burning fossil fuel and our boys dying in Iraq in a vain attempt to guard our oil supplies, why don't our ministers tell HM Customs & Excise to exercise a little imagination over the problems involved?
Ian Clark, Whitby, England

Calculate the amount of land needed to produce even 10% of a country's current oil consumption and for many – like the African continent, already unable to feed itself, you will see the physical impossibility of making even a minor contribution to its total needs. Remove the subsidies then see what happens.
T B Muckle, KENYA

Bio fuels are a great boom for the Mid West states but at what cost. That tractor that plows the field is run on Diesel the plant runs on various oil products either to add to the ethanol or to run the plant such as the electricty it need to run. Then when we have a completed product it is put in a Diesel run truck to transport to the station. Now how about those grass lands that are set aside because they clean the ground water that is used for drinking and to water and other uses if we dig this up the aqua fur will no longer have a recharge zone. I grew up in the Iowa and i know how much this new means to the people in all of the mid west so i hope we can find ways to make this truly the fuel to atleast in part replace the oil that comes from the middle east and put the money back in our pockets.
Mark D, Austin USA

Do you want to pay $12.00 for a loaf of bread? Farmers want to max proffit potential, so growing fule may pay more than growing food and produces more pollution overall than what we have now.
Alistair Aldridge, Markham, Canada

It is fine until we can't afford the high price of food and we will have to compromise by not buying fuel
Brian Allman, Hyde Cheshire

BioFuels see to be the latest buzz work and will probably become a "gold rush" with farmers switching to growing biofuel crops instead of typical food crops (e.g. carrots). Eventually I can see certain food prices rising, likee bread or flour, as this will be diverted for fuel production. Mind you at least there will be more than enough Bio-Ethanol available to make starving to death once hell of a party!
Corsa Driver, Norfolk, UK

Degradation of arable land; wheat prices at record high; starving people. Growing crops for fuel is the dummest idea I have ever heard.
Joe H, Guildford

Although I welcome any idea that replaces petrol use with 'greener' fuel, I think that one of the reasons why we are being repeatedly disappointed by other fuels is that we are expecting them to work exactly the same way that petrol does. The sooner we go back to the drawing boards and find alternative ways to power our transport without pumping it into an internal combustion engine the better. Using any fuel that is farmed like corn will have an impact on the diet of someone elsewhere. This question and answer is all about looking at the problem in a new way rather than trying to fit a new fuel into the gap left by petrol or diesel.
Heather, Willenhall

As the farmers rip out yet more hedges and biodiversity to extract yet more money from the ground they are industrially and mechanically estranged from is there really any difference between these "modern" farmers and the slash and burners of the amazon? How much has the EEC agricultural policy contributed to global warming? History points to the eco collapse of ancient Egypt and Greece and their civilization demise. Should we subsidize the destruction of nature or should we only subsidize ecological growth? This means reduction of pesticides and nitrates drastically and growing natural field boundary of a biologically usefull density and spread.
themosthandsomemanever, UK

What about the billions of poor people in the world with no food to eat? Now the rich people can grab away food from their plates and burn it (literally) in their SUVs!
Abhishek Rawat, Pune India

Rainwater plan for Jersey Royals

Rainwater could be collected and used to wash next season's crop of Jersey Royal potatoes.

Scottish company A Bartlett and Sons has bought land at Haut Du Mont farm in Trinity and applied for permission to build a water treatment plant.

The environmentally friendly project would involve gathering rainwater from the plant's roofs which would be treated and used to wash the potatoes.

The soil from the potatoes would then go back onto the land.

Ronnie Bartlett, the company's managing director, said rainwater gives the famous potatoes an even better taste.

Fresh and fast

"Jersey's are such a fantastic product and one of the best in the UK, but we've got to make sure we're giving the consumer a better product," he told BBC News.

"Some people in Cornwall might want Cornish and people in Scotland want Ayrshires, but everyone in the UK wants Jerseys.

"By washing and packing the potatoes right there on the island, they're fresher and we can get them to the consumer more quickly."

Mr Bartlett, whose vegetable company is based in Airdrie, is hopeful planners will give their consent in time for next season's crop.

Jersey Royals are the island's highest crop export. The seasonal average for production is about 45,000 tonnes of which 99% is exported to mainland Britain.

At the peak of production in May, up to 1,500 tonnes are exported daily.

Walking with Cavemen: Your views

Walking with Cavemen is one of the BBC's most ambitious TV science projects, using the latest technology to bring the prehistoric world to life.

It follows the Walking with Dinosaurs and Walking with Beasts series and cost £4m to make.

The programmes take the viewer back three and a half million years to explain how modern man evolved from a common ancestor with apes.

So what do you think?

This debate is now closed. Please see below for a selection of your comments.

I did not watch the previous Walking with… series but was intrigued by this particular subject matter. Personally I would have liked the trivial style toned down just slightly in favour of more hard facts. But this is a minor quibble as undoubtedly this programme makes science more accessible to the masses. The subject matter is one that is rarely approached and yet should be of fundamental interest to us. Overall – excellent!
Dave, N Ireland

Possibly the most unintentionally hilarious programme I have ever seen. The least life-like funniest "beast" acting since Creature From The Black Lagoon.

Best bit was where the invading troupe was stood in a tree, in perfect symmetry, looking for all the world like a prehistoric White Helmets formation team.

I was embarrassed for Robert Winston – presumably Attenborough turned down the chance to narrate this fiasco.
Jeff, UK

I thought the programme was absolutely brilliant. There was a humanistic approach as well as a scientific one and it really works. The make-up was great and well done to the actors.
Dawn, UK

I suppose that after Walking with Dinosaurs and the Life of Mammals, my expectations were quite high. I like Robert Winston but this programme was dreadful. I watched it to learn something but found myself in hysterics and positively gobsmacked. I think the BBC has really let themselves down this time.
Nic, UK

The programme was wonderful, I can't wait for next week's show, roll on evolution!
Emma, England

Of course the biggest discussion today will be of how well all that applied make-up looked on the small screen, and in my opinion it was a success, as usual good old Dr Robert Winston looked great, Lucy and co I suppose looked alright too. As usual it was the science and historical revelations, delivered in RW's "detective/teacher/and the winner is" style, where the magic of this programme lay. The interactive segment was very good, but should have been integrated into the main programme…good work fellows.
James S, England

Oh no. This was dire beyond belief, TV by morons for morons. I can't believe they have wasted so much money and hype on little more than a children's basic learning programme, dressed up with a few effects and many wild scenarios.

Accessible? It patronised the viewer; does no-one want to watch academic documentaries any more? Whatever happened to Timewatch/Horizon/etc? The presenter has lost what little credibility he had left, pretending to perch on top of prehistoric trees and gurning at the camera.

Short of a few soap stars turning up as the cavemen, (Phil Mitchell?), or having a chance to vote off the least popular ape, I can't think how much worse it could get.

Appalling. Is this all we can expect from BBC One now?
Mark, UK

Astounding. Simply astounding. It's not the best science programme I've seen but it's a worthy addition to the BBC's documentaries. Looking forward to next Thursday.
Christopher Wright, Wales, UK

I can understand why people might want to see how cavemen may have acted, but to make it a soap opera overseen by a celebrated doctor placed into the scenario, as if he were "back in time", made it feel cheap.
Paul, UK

It was very interesting, and it was made to seem so easy to understand. It is really amazing what you can find out on TV now.
Robyn Dearden, Scotland

This must be one of the worst "science" programmes that the BBC has ever put on. It even beats Walking with Dinosaurs.

The adults are shown furred, like chimps. Why? We are not told. Yet the infant is shown naked? Why? Again we are not told. If the adults needed a covering of fur to keep warm, how come infants don't? They are MUCH smaller and need insulation far more.

The account of the origin of bipedalism was laughable in the extreme. Apparently there were no predators at all in that part of Africa during any part of that time. So Lucy and her companions could slowly walk around the landscape, thinking only of their "energy-efficiency".

A simple test for any article on human evolution is to ask: "Does the author use terms inappropriate to any dicussion on evolution?" The word "forced" is a classic instance. It is the mark of execrable science. It will not be found in any study of the evolution of other species.

There are many very serious problems in human evolution. Very few good answers are around. Only a trashy programme would seek to hide that fact and then come up with its own "solutions", all of which could be demolished by an intelligent seven-year-old.
Paul Crowley, Ireland

I have been watching the first episode and already I am worried. Much of what is being put forward about australopithicus afarensis is conjecture, such as their social structure. Yet it is making out that it is fact. This can lead to people who have not studied this subject assuming this is exactly what happened, and that can be very damaging.
Sarah, Wales

Absolute rubbish. We should be given a TV licence refund.
David Shute, England

Talk about dumbing down! I can only assume that this programme was some sort of misguided attempt to interest small and uncritical children in the subject of human evolution. It certainly didn't offer much for anyone with a modicum of interest in the subject – or a reasonably agile mind. People look to the BBC to tell the "truth" but this programme was one piece of unsubstantiated conjecture after another. Please BBC, don't dress up fiction as fact – it comes over as patronising twaddle and your viewers ARE able to tell the difference.
Susan, UK

My wife commented "What a load of guff" as we watched the first episode. However, I found it very interesting. I think that the viewing figures that the previous Walking With… series have had speak for themselves. The populist approach makes science more accessible and encourages more people to watch. I, for one, will watch the rest of the series with interest.
A McEwan, UK

A complete work of fiction. From a couple of nearly complete skeletons of A. Afarensis and a few jaw bones, they can really determine all this about behaviour? I was appalled.
Mike Salmon, UK

I thought it belonged more on children's TV than at prime time in the evening. It was presented without any real reference to the science behind the claims being made, which made it sound more like a bedtime story rather than a factual documentary. Even the accompanying commentary seemed very simplistic and (hopefully) aimed at children.
Susie, UK

I thought this prgramme was brilliant with superb writing and effects, especially the scene where both Robert Winston and "Lucy" were in the same tree but millions of years apart, the programme is a credit to the BBC for producing such entertaining viewing. roll on next week!
Adam, UK

Absolutely dire! Cheap-looking costumes inhabited by actors who looked like they had about five minutes to prepare. Really, really disappointed. Would have been more convinced if you'd shown the Fimbles populating the ancient plains. Dr Winston has done himself (apart from financially) no favours, when he is next on screen trying to give serious comment on some issue like genetics I will no longer be able to take him seriously, expecting at any time to see a pantomime ape appear from behind him cuddling a badly made ET doll.
Stuart, UK

Whilst I agree with a lot of the criticisms I have seen of this programme – I am definitely not a fan of "dumbing down" – the sad fact is that all TV shows need to get ratings and a dry scientific approach would not have filled many seats.

Maybe they could have included a disclaimer and emphasised the conjecture a bit more but overall an entertaining and informative episode. I look forward to seeing the rest.
Alan, England

Brilliant – the BBC win again for making the most of the interactive elements of my Sky box! It's worth the licence fee and the Sky subscription all by itself!
Julian Maurer, UK

How did Robert Winston manage to keep a straight face? The people in the ape-suits were deeply unconvincing in the way they moved, especially Lucy who looked like she was prancing across a netball court when running. They resembled nothing so much as a gathering of Big-Foot hoaxers. Terrible.
Hazel, UK

Very cringe-worthy.
Luke, UK

The acting was hammy in the extreme and the make-up was no better than the original version of Planet of the Apes. The computer effects were even worse. The scene with Robert Winston and Lucy in the tree looked like it had been done on a home computer and the rubber baby actually wobbled and bounced when it was picked up. People also have to remember the proportions are all wrong. Lucy and co were supposed to be little more than a metre tall and would have had an entirely different bulk and frame to a man in a furry suite. The opening scene of 2001: A Space Odyssey was far superior some 30 years ago. I am stunned that this cost £4m to make!
Christian, UK

I was slightly disappointed by the programme, since I had expected a lot more from the BBC and Robert Winston.

It seemed very dumbed down, and the only real thing I did learn was that Lucy was named after Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds by the Beatles.
Vinod Chhotu Patel, West Bromwich, UK

Very poor! The limited CG efects weren't great, it was patronising and I won't be watching it next week. I taped it for my 7-year-old; might suit his age-group better.
Eamonn, UK

Did anyone notice the similarity between the Australopithecus afarensis, and our current political leaders? The head of the featured tribe, leading his group towards battle but getting eaten by a crocodile, bore a striking resemblance to George W Bush. And his two possible successors included the brash, confident candidate (who looked like Tony Blair) and an individual the programme called "The Quiet Man", who honestly did resemble Iain Duncan Smith.
Michael, UK

The programme seemed to me to be mere conjecture, filmed in Jurassic Park-style to appeal to a wider audience. Those wishing to LEARN about our evolution would have been sorely disappointed. Dire.
Debs, England

Enjoyed every moment. Fantastic.
John, UK

The programme was dire. I am a research scientist who fully supports communicating science to the public in an easily accessible format. However, when theory is put forward as fact the producers are treading on dangerous ground. I find it hard to believe that bipedalism originated purely to conserve enough energy equivalent to a packet of biscuits over a year. If that was the case why aren't more animals bipedal?

Surely a more logical explanation is that it freed up their hands to utilise them in a more articulate way. The worst part of the programme was towards the end when the viewer was supposed to get sentimental about the death of Lucy and Robert carrying her to the riverside – do us a favour! More facts, less fiction please.
Kelvin, UK

I thought the programme was wonderful. It provided a fantastic insight into the early development of humans. Can't wait for next Thursday. 10 out of 10.
MJ Smith, England

A total disappointment if you ask me. Felt that the programme had been totally dumbed down. I think more focus on the facts was necessary. Attenborough would so have done this better.
Kunal Bid, UK

Why hasn't this been done before? Fascinating to see where I evolved from. Will definitely be watching next week.
Georgina Mansfield, England

If people want to think that we came from apes, then that is entirely up to them. Personally, I don't think so and it is ridiculous to suggest that we did.
James, Ireland

I am finding it very difficult to express how appallingly bad the programme was. It's only redeeming feature was the comedy value, my sides are still hurting.
Carl Robinson, UK

It was terrible, it was more like a cheap sci-fi drama than a factual documentary. It was very disappointing, I was expecting an interesting factual programme about the evolution of man and instead watched something that would have insulted a child's intelligence.
Kate, England

I thought the programme was wonderful. I did not move for the whole half hour. I can't understand why so many people did not like it. The format was good and the facts were handled in a clear fashion. I thought it was really sad when Lucy died at the end!
Alison, UK

Robert Winston often walks a narrow line between accessible science and patronising rubbish. Last night's programme saw him immerse himself in the latter, with only a large cheque to wipe away his embarrassment. The ape men were laughably unconvincing and the amount of pure conjecture was insulting. My girlfriend works as a primary school teacher, and I thought that her seven-year-olds might find it entertaining. However, I wouldn't want their early knowledge of natural history to be so poorly informed. Our standards are set when we are children – fortunately I had David Attenborough.
Michael Moreton, UK

Wonderful, really enjoyed.
Jackie, UK

Great subject matter, unfortunately it was presented in a way that could only appeal to soap fans or children. While I am interested in anthropology, last night's episode was little more than a re-hashed documentary on the life of chimps.

Obviously "Lucy" and her ancestors didn't leave too much info for the experts to get on with. I hope the following episodes aren't as soap opera-like in their approach.

Still, I'd rather see my licence fee go on this type of progamming than the continual DIY or real life shows that the BBC have been churning out recently. I wonder how long it will be before the Beeb sells this to one of the UK groups of satellite channels for a tidy profit. If the Beeb are going to sell progammes to commercial channels so that their logo appears before adverts, isn't it time to drop the licence and go the whole hog? Being non-commercial doesn't mean quality programming as the first episode of Cavemen clearly shows.
Paul, Scotland

I thought it was great but what was that ape in the shorts with the moustache all about?
Mark, UK

Having long wailed about the lack of anything on TV about Human Evolution, I was looking forward to Walking with Cavemen, but with trepidation. I enjoyed Walking with Dinosaurs, but was dismayed by speculation being presented as fact.

Walking with Beasts was very disappointing as the special effects quality seemed to have deteriorated. But last night, I think the BBC finally hit rock bottom.

Prof Wintston is fine – usually – but even he couldn't save a programme which was factually inaccurate, facile, patronising and frankly downright demeaning to us as viewers. The BBC took a very interesting concept and rubbished it. Please BBC, make amends and remake this series, treating the viewer as serious, intelligent adults.
Caity, Essex

I watched the first five minutes of this and Robert Winston's commentary so patronising that I switched off.
Lizzie, UK

This was by far the worst of the Walking With… series. Winston was his usual patronising self, talking about a subject in which he is far from expert. (His series on human nature was much the same). The BBC still cannot do hair in CGI with any great effectiveness, and there was even more dressing-up-speculation-as-fact than usual. There are several theories about why man is an upright animal, and none of them are totally convincing. The watchword seems to be "use the newest theory and treat it as fact."

Also, has it occured to anyone that there is no drama when the ending is known – dramatise using the record, certainly, but naming Lucy took all the fun out of guessing who was going to die…
Lil Shepherd, UK

Oh dear. Once again the viewing public have to swallow a great deal of speculation in order to hear the few actual facts concerning this distant relative. However, it does seem to demonstrate the huge leaps in science. You dig up a skull that's a few million years old and can work out, with the power of science, what tree the owner hid in. Come on BBC, you have a CBBC channel, keep the programmes shown at grown-up times for grown-ups please. I realise that science is not always easily understood but surely the viewers don't require such "dumbing down" of the facts? It wouldn't surprise me if the subtitles were in alphabetti spaghetti. Sorry BBC. Utter pony.
Martin, UK

I had to laugh because I thought one of the more modern cavemen looked strangely familiar, like Nick Knowles from DIY SOS! I did enjoy the interactive part of the programme. I have followed all the Walking With.. series, but I found myself day-dreaming through this one for some reason. Oh, that rubber baby…
Jules, UK

Walking with Cavemen was a major disappointment. The presence of the narrator was extremely intrusive, his script was banal and the monkey suits were no improvement on 2001, which was made 35 years ago.
Christopher Jofeh, Wales

Seems the moaning gene has had a successful journey down the evolutionary road.
Alan, UK

Congratulations BBC in making yet another first class programme to match the previous two. Hats off to the professionals involved, and long may you continue making programmes which set the standard to the rest of the world.
Jason Cairns, UK

I personally thought it a little silly and I should think the actors in the chimp suits were quite embarrassed but my 12-year-old son watched it with me and can't wait for the next one. 5/10 from me and 10/10 from him.
Steve Lane, England

Walking with Cavemen from the BBC's science team was sadly reminiscent of much of what comes out of the BBC's religious broadcasting: fanciful, patronising drivel presented as hard fact. This style is a danger to honest searching for truth.

I hope that as we get to the (alleged) transition from ape to human, that the real differences between humankind and other species, so blindingly obvious to any layman, are addressed with honesty. The search to understand the glory of the human spirit deserves more than the BBC has offered in recent years.

Has BBC One lost James Burke's and David Attenborough's phone number?
Rev Steve Stewart, United Kingdom

The theory is based on scant evidence and pretends evolution is fact when the fossil record fails to prove it.
Niall, UK

A fine example of how to make a few scientific facts fill half an hour of television. What a tragedy that the respected Dr Winston should be associated with such a shallow programme.

Far better to have spent the resources otherwise spent on special effects on producing a 'talking heads' programme such as Horizon used to be in which the research scientists could have discussed the little evidence that they do have and to allow an in-depth exploration of these topics.
SB, England

My husband and I thought we were watching one of the lost episodes of The Goodies.
Kim Gough, England

Is it just me or was this more like watching the dull and boring Planet of the Apes movie?
Z Ravat, UK

I was disappointed to see this "dumbing down" historical programme. The BBC seems to sacrifice hard facts and scientific evidence in favour of costume drama! Please, no more.
Gus Wright, england

I don't know if it was because we're not used to seeing ape-like creature standing upright, or if it was because the costumes weren't quite perfect, but I couldn't stop myself thinking I was watching "men-in-monkey-suits". That said, it was fabulously entertaining, and I can even remember bits too so I guess that makes it educational as well.
Angie, UK

It is a shame that more time is not spent looking into the possibility of an intelligent designer, who made us as wonderfully as we are. How could this happen by chance?
Collie, UK

I think Walking with Cavemen is really intersting and I can't wait till the next episode.
Star, England

Although I have reservations about its over-dramatisation, this programme has blasted my imagination and created a voracious appetite for more background.

This programme may well be seen as dumbing down, but if so it transforms that concept into the highest and most noble of arts.

To captivate such a huge audience as the £4m budget implies it will achieve globally, is quite brilliant.
A S Kavanagh, UK

What a great programme, may it continue. Well done.
Donna Marie Parkin (Miss), United Kingdom

Very informative but it was a shame Lucy died the way she did!! I nearly cried!!
Jim, England

Nothing more than a playground for the graphics creators and editors and out of touch scriptwriters…… a dreadful introduction into what might have been a very educational and interesting subject. It's a pity that such a well respected presenter has landed himself with this millstone about his neck.
Alan, UK

I was hooked as usual with a Dr Robert documentary.
Veronica Palmer-Robinson, England

Union attacks university pay ‘alchemy’

Education

Union attacks university pay 'alchemy'

The AUT complains of 'distortions' in the pay system

One of the main unions in higher education is saying that proposals to revise staff pay and conditions amount to little more than "dark arts" and "quackery".

The President of the Association of University Teachers (AUT), Chris Banister, says attempts by employers to assign points to jobs and put them into a rank order is a "pseudo-scientific" approach in an area in which it is completely inappropriate.

"Job evaluation is pure quackery and the sooner it is exposed as such the better," he said at the AUT's national council meeting in London.

Different ways in which the pay and conditions of higher education staff might be revised are being investigated by a committee under Sir Michael Bett. The committee, which has a number of trade union nominees, was set up as a result of a recommendation by the Dearing Report on Higher Education.

Evaluation program

The Higher Education Role Analysis scheme was singled out for specific criticism. It uses a points score, derived from questionnaire answers, which are then weighted to rank staff according to local circumstances.

"On this basis it is inevitable that the humanities as a whole will have smaller job sizes than the sciences but even in the humanities those who work with the new technologies, rather that using just say library resources, will again have larger job sizes," he argued.

"This will create distortions in the system with certain kinds of research clearly being valued on a job-evaluation basis above others.

"The concept of teamwork will disappear, and the much-vaunted flexibility that our employers allegedly like will disappear. We shall continue being a highly casualised workforce with a series of endless job demarcation disputes."

'Equitable'

The Universities and Colleges Employers' Association is arguing for local pay negotiations within a national framework. It wants individual institutions to allocate their staff to pay grades on the basis of a system of "suitable job evaluation".

The people behind the role analysis computer program Mr Banister complains about, Educational Competences Consortium, say it "can provide … an equitable, consistent and transparent means of establishing basic pay rates for all categories of staff".

The AUT council meeting was expected to endorse a pay claim of 10%, despite objections from some members that this is not enough. The Liverpool branch wanted the claim to be in the range of 25-40%, Bradford wanted 10% above inflation and Manchester argued for 34%.

The draft claim says that over the last 16 years average earnings have risen by 40% whereas those for lecturers are up by only 3.1%.

Preparations for industrial action are proposed which could include one-day strikes, boycotts of examinations and boycotts of admissions.

The settlement date for next year's pay award is set for 1 April for 'old' universities and 1 September for 'new' universities.

Stonehenge tunnel inquiry opens

Plans to build a road tunnel under Stonehenge are being scrutinised at a public inquiry.

Planners want to take the A303 under the World Heritage Site to reduce traffic congestion around the stones and improve visitor facilities

The £193m project's aim has widespread support, but campaign groups argue the proposed 2.1km (1.3 mile) tunnel is too short and will damage the site.

The inquiry, in Salisbury, Wiltshire, began on Tuesday.

Before the inquiry opened, the Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) said the government's plan did not go far enough.

The group said the road would have a "major impact" on the site, with tunnel portals degrading the landscape near the ancient stones and the road and associated earthworks affecting a large area.

CPRE's head of transport policy Paul Hamblin said there was agreement the tunnel was needed.

But he added: "When building new roads we should do all that we can to ensure they are of the highest environmental standards.

"The government needs to dig deep to find what it takes to deliver a longer tunnel for this priceless world asset."

21st century noise

The National Trust is also calling on the government to accept its case for a longer tunnel.

Director Martyn Heighton said: "The public inquiry needs to consider whether the proposed tunnel is long enough to conserve and enhance the spirit of place, landscape and archaeological interest of Stonehenge."

He said the Trust was concerned the tunnel exits would be places on archaeological and "visually sensitive ridgelines".

A Bronze Age earthwork – which formed the ceremonial approach to the stones – would remain severed by the A303 and further areas would continue to be plagued by traffic, the Trust will argue.

"We cannot sell Stonehenge short," he added.

English Heritage – which is sponsored by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport – said it supported the Highways Agency's proposals.

It said the road scheme would "rescue" the site from the "noise and clutter of the 21st century and give it the dignified setting it deserves".

Work will start by 2005 if the scheme is approved.