Uploaded August 2026 | Updated September 2026, 3 weeks ago
In July the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announced changes to how key parts of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) will be implemented, including a new definition of what it means to “harm” an endangered species. To discuss the history of the ESA, the impact its made on at-risk wildlife and the importance of habitat preservation, Science Quickly host Rachel Feltman talks to marine biologist Lynne Barre, who recently left the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration after a 25-year career at the agency. They talk about the gray whale comeback that the ESA helped bring about, the earlier Supreme Court dissent that the current administration is using to define “harm” and the government workforce problem that could put animals at risk.
Recommended Reading
Protecting Plants and Animals at Risk Must Start before They Need the Endangered Species Act
scientificamerican.com/article/protecting-plants-and-animals-at-risk-must-start-before-they-need-the-endangered-species-act
Can We Save Every Species from Extinction?
scientificamerican.com/article/can-we-save-every-species-from-extinction
E-mail us at sciencequickly@sciam.com if you have any questions, comments or ideas for stories we should cover!
Discover something new every day. Subscribe to Scientific American: scientificamerican.com/getsciam
And sign up for Today in Science, our daily newsletter: scientificamerican.com/account/email-preferences
Science Quickly is produced by Rachel Feltman, Fonda Mwangi, Allison Rodgers and Jeff DelViscio. This episode was edited by Alex Sugiura, with fact-checking by Marielle Issa and Aaron Shattuck. Our theme music was composed by Dominic Smith.
In July the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announced changes to how key parts of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) will be implemented, including a new definition of what it means to “harm” an endangered species. To discuss the history of the ESA, the impact its made on at-risk wildlife and the importance of habitat preservation, Science Quickly host Rachel Feltman talks to marine biologist Lynne Barre, who recently left the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration after a 25-year career at the agency. They talk about the gray whale comeback that the ESA helped bring about, the earlier Supreme Court dissent that the current administration is using to define “harm” and the government workforce problem that could put animals at risk.
Recommended Reading
Protecting Plants and Animals at Risk Must Start before They Need the Endangered Species Act
scientificamerican.com/article/protecting-plants-and-animals-at-risk-must-start-before-they-need-the-endangered-species-act
Can We Save Every Species from Extinction?
scientificamerican.com/article/can-we-save-every-species-from-extinction
E-mail us at sciencequickly@sciam.com if you have any questions, comments or ideas for stories we should cover!
Discover something new every day. Subscribe to Scientific American: scientificamerican.com/getsciam
And sign up for Today in Science, our daily newsletter: scientificamerican.com/account/email-preferences
Science Quickly is produced by Rachel Feltman, Fonda Mwangi, Allison Rodgers and Jeff DelViscio. This episode was edited by Alex Sugiura, with fact-checking by Marielle Issa and Aaron Shattuck. Our theme music was composed by Dominic Smith.



![She studies why we see the same thing different ways - Emily Finn - Young American Scientists 2026
Neuroscientist Emily Finn often trawls Reddit for disagreements about television shows, movies, books or podcasts—any narratives that “evoke really different reactions in different people,” she explains. She is fascinated by the way individuals can walk away from the same story with vastly different takes. “What’s different across the brains of people who ultimately arrive at really different interpretations?” she asks. That question is especially relevant in a time of increasing political polarization, as people’s perspectives on the world sharply diverge.
Finn, who works at Dartmouth College, has focused her career on finding what makes individual brains unique. In 2014 she and her colleagues discovered that scans of people’s brain networks are different enough to function like fingerprints. What’s more, these particular patterns could be used to predict types of intelligence.
These findings flip the neuroscientist’s typical approach to studying the brain. Usually researchers look for commonalities across groups of similar people rather than differences. They do so because of imprecise scanning technology—you can be more certain about your results if you see the same patterns across many people. But Finn’s findings have shown that there is meaningful information in the differences, too. To find those differences, her team measures brain activity as different people watch the same video clips or listen to the same stories.
Our divergent brains—which can see the same movie, TV show or scientific dataset and interpret it completely differently—are a blessing, Finn thinks. “We don’t want to live in a world where everyone thinks exactly the same way,” she says. Cognitive variation is what allows our species to be so creative and innovative. But this divergence can divide us, too. “It’s definitely a double-edged sword,” Finn says. “But I really think, at the core, [this variation] is a true strength.” —Allison Parshall She studies why we see the same thing different ways - Emily Finn - Young American Scientists 2026](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/eT3UFoWEqe8/mqdefault.jpg)






