The Science & Entertainment is proud to show you the full unedited video of our Comic-con panel. Just posted on Science Not Fiction. Watch brilliant minds of science and entertainment waxing poetic on all things SciFi. Jaime Paglia (co-Executive Producer of Eureka), Kevin Grazier (Battlestar Galactica and Eureka science adviser), Jane Espenson (Dollhouse, Battlestar, Caprica, and lots more), Ricardo Gil da Costa (science adviser for Fringe), and Rob Chiappetta and Glenn Whitman (writers for Fringe).

Fans of the old TV series Flipper might not know about Ric O'Barry, a one-time dolphin trainer who trained the two female bottlenose dolphins featured on that show. But that could change with the release this weekend of The Cove, a hard-hitting documentary O'Barry made with former National Geographic photographer Louie Psihoyas about the "dolphinarium" market -- the worldwide trade in captive dolphins.

Ever notice how often the alien spaceship lands in Washington, DC, or New York City rather than Paris, Beijing, or Rio de Janeiro? Since the big science-fiction blockbusters are Hollywood products, it’s not surprising that these films are U.S.-centric and it’s also true that Washington and New York are major world cities. Even if the aliens want to reach Earthlings via the United Nations that too requires a stop-off in Manhattan.

But CNN headquarters might be a better choice, because there’s a whole big globe out there becoming increasingly interconnected by more than the UN International Telecommunication Union, Internet, and 24-hour news cycle. International trade and finance, terrorism, global warming, job outsourcing, immigration – all of these are linking people and nations more closely. Like any other cultural product, science fiction must reflect this reality sooner or later.

One early entry in globalized science fiction is an independent film out of Mexico, Sleep Dealer, now in limited theatrical release after winning the Alfred P. Sloan Prize at the 2008 Sundance Film Festival. Directed and co-written by Alex Rivera, it explores the impact of technology outside the United States. In an unspecified near future, Memo, a young Mexican man, leaves his home village. The border with the United States has been completely sealed, but that’s no problem because technology still allows him to find a job there – sort of. Using metal nodes implanted into his body, Memo “jacks in” to a network from a cyberfactory in Tijuana to remotely operate a machine that’s welding a steel skyscraper frame somewhere in San Diego. His fellow cyberworkers perform other jobs all over the world.

The political reality underlying this technology is spelled out when Memo’s foreman says that the United States “wants our work but doesn’t want our workers.” When I appeared recently with Alex Rivera on Ira Flatow’s NPR show “Science Friday,” Rivera related that the film was sparked when he first heard about the outsourcing of U.S. jobs. Sleep Dealer extends the idea. In the film, jacking in provides jobs across the border while keeping the first world safely insulated from the third. It also allows a pilot to remotely fly an armed drone to track and kill “aqua-terrorists” suspected of stealing some of the world’s dwindling fresh water; and it permits Luz, Memo’s love interest, to share her feelings and memories with paid subscribers over the Internet, and with Memo when they have sex.

Technologically speaking, these projections are on track. Jacking in a person to operate devices outside his body by direct neural control has been a reality in the lab for several years. That’s now under study for military use by the U.S. Department of Defense. Drone aircraft, though still remotely controlled by a joystick rather than a neural connection, are used daily in Afghanistan and Pakistan by the United States. And consider the astonishing technique of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), which can correlate signals from the brain with specific thoughts and emotions. Couple this with social networking and the next step will be to download people’s deepest feelings to the Web, though maybe not with sex included.

In presenting a possible future as seen by one particular young Mexican, Sleep Dealer also presents a wider future that’s rushing toward us all. The best literary science fiction has predicted, sometimes decades early, major social trends like the implications of genetic engineering and the impact of the Internet. With some notable exceptions, science-fiction film has been less prophetic and less driven by ideas. Sleep Dealer shows that a film that approaches technology from a global perspective can offer a fresh and thoughtful look at a host of today’s issues that will continue into tomorrow.

For more about “Science Friday” with Sidney Perkowitz and Alex Rivera, visit: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=105962361&ft=1&f=1007

For more about Sidney Perkowitz and science in film, visit http://www.sidneyperkowitz.net/

The Science & Entertainment Exchange co-hosted a panel discussion over the weekend in conjunction with Discover Magazine at San Diego Comic-Con. Bad Astronomer Phil Plait served as moderator for the event, which featured Jaime Paglia (Eureka Showrunner), Kevin Grazier (JPL and technical consultant for Eureka and Battlestar Galactica) Rob Chiappetta and Glen Whitma (Fringe staff writers), Ricardo Gil da Costa (The Salk Institute and a consultant on Fringe), and Jane Espenson (Caprica showrunner). It was a lively discourse on the interplay between science and science fiction that explored many questions regarding moral quandaries with which humanity may grapple in coming years.

The panelists mused on ethical and philosophical issues that may trouble future generations and how they are depicted in science fiction. The topics discussed ranged from downloading someone's consciousness into a cloned body to the chilling question of who owns the data in a corpse's brain. Gil da Costa, as the representative neuroscientist, assured us that "the neurobiology happening at the Salk Institute is a lot more tame than what what you see on Fringe." Fringe writer, Whitman, then quipped: "We need a Law & Order: Fringe to debate the ethical issues."

The panel also discussed the importance of maintaining a balance between science and science fiction. "From an audience perspective, you want to start with something that's more grounded, and then take them on that ride," said Chiappetta of the approach on Fringe. "Start with familiar, easy to understand concepts, because then you get the opportunity to push people's buttons." He and Whitman acknowledge that much of the audience doesn't really want in-depth explanations on primetime TV, and will "tune out the science if it starts getting too complicated."

Ultimately, the panel demonstrated how shows like Caprica, Eureka, and Fringe serve a broader purpose of inspiring audiences to take a closer look at real-world science. "So many scientists go into science because they want to be Captain Kirk or Spock," Grazier said. The questions that science fiction shows pose today may one day be answered in the real world... by their loving fans.

Photo: (top) Jane Espenson waxes profound while Jaime Paglia and Kevin Grazier look on. Source: Phil Plait, via Twitter.

With G-Force entering the market this week, an underdog to supplant the mighty Harry Potter, we at The Exchange immediately thought, "there's no science here." Then, we realized that in the scientific community guinea pigs have a special history, a centuries-old relationship. It's a little known tale of love, loss, and even triumph. So here it is: the true guinea pig, selfless helper of humanity.

Neither a pig nor from Guinea, these strange rodents evolved to maximum cuteness in the Andes. They immediately became popular as household pets upon their introduction to Europeans in the 16th century due to their relative low maintenance, good looks, and easy temperament - in other words: their high threshold for being abused by children without seeking revenge.

The use of guinea pigs as, well, guinea pigs in laboratories began in the the 17th century, when they played a significant role in several major discoveries. Louis Pasteur made use of them in establishing germ theory on his way to co-founding the field of microbiology. Guinea pigs also helped fuel research that lead to a better understanding of anatomy and the way mammals burn calories. Years later, they were made into some of the world's first astronauts when the USSR launched them into orbit in the early 1960s.

While their popularity today in scientific research has waned in favor of rats and mice, guinea pigs are still used in the development of anti-virals, vaccines, and also as simulators of the human body's reaction to several major diseases.

So, maybe guinea pigs don't need to wield a machine gun, drive a motorized ball like a race car, or have latest spy gadgetry to be considered heroes. The next time you find yourself face to face with one of these little guys, consider shaking a paw and saying a simple, "thanks" - though we hear they may appreciate an alfalfa pellet more than your sincere gratitude.

So, the Moon has been on my radar lately. Our lonely, pock-marked orbiter is pretty cool…even just to stare at. And I’m obviously not the only one who thinks so. The X-Change Files has already seen a couple of posts here on the subject. At the risk of posting redundancy, I wanted to get my blog in edgewise.

I recently saw Duncan Jones’ new feature, Moon. It’s clear to me that there must have been some serious cooperation between scientists and the creatives behind the film. The setting both inside the station and out in the cold, vast lunar surface is as compelling as it is realistic. As someone who watches television and film with an eye towards production, constantly considering “how’d they pull that off,” thoughts of miniature models and CGI didn’t enter my mind. It was like they actually got the permits and shot there. On the Moon. And that’s what makes the Moon such a great setting for storytelling. It’s another world entirely, but one within our reach. There are folks walking the earth today, nine of them to be exact, who have traipsed across the distant lunar surface. The Moon is a natural bridge between sci-fi fantasy and scientific reality.

Watching Moon, I couldn’t help but focus on the exterior establishing shots. Staid, placid, perfect for the lifeless, monochromatic setting. The perceived authenticity of these shots is one key element where the believability of this film could live or die. A word on the establishing shot (probably unnecessary, but humor me). Film and television rely on these shots to establish settings. For the CSI series, they’ve become a hallmark of the franchise. These flyovers open each episode and each act after a commercial, set the mood and convey the passage of time. On CSI: MIAMI, we send a helicopter up over the city to capture ski-doos skimming by beaches, glass towers reflecting sunlight or the occasional gator darting for brackish water. If we were to set a series on the Moon, what would be the equivalent of this type of dynamic establishing shot? And more importantly, if we had to produce it from thin air (pardon the pun), how might we make it believable? It occurred to me that we already have some pretty remarkable flyover footage from the Apollo Space Missions, though it is on the grainy, dated side.

And then I came across SELENE, the Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency’s Selenological and Engineering Explorer. A spacecraft launched in September of 2007. Nicknamed “Kaguya” by the public, after a popular character in a Japanese folktale, the orbiter went equipped with a high-definition camera, complete with telephoto lens, as well as terrain cameras capable of capturing 3-D stereo imagery of the lunar surface. Since early 2009, Kaguya has been orbiting the Moon, capturing the most amazing, hi-def and 3-D footage of any lunar orbiter before it. Every nook, cranny and crater can be witnessed in striking detail and clarity, like you’re flying over it yourself. So close, you could reach out and run your hand through the grey powdery surface. CGI and miniature models are now totally unnecessary. Sure, rights may need to be secured, but we actually have broadcast-quality flyovers of the Moon!

I scoured the Internet for videos from Kaguya and found inspiration in one in particular. The footage is desolate and haunting. Lonely. And it’s made even more chilling by what it depicts. On June 11, Kaguya’s orbit terminated in a controlled impact on the lunar surface. Its poignant fate was caught on camera, so to speak, as Kaguya transmitted to the end. I know I’m anthropomorphizing Kaguya, but there’s something sad about witnessing this little orbiter’s final moments. Watching the minute-long video, I find myself on the edge of my seat, holding my breath as its view of the terrain fills the frame. As it glides closer and closer, just missing the peaks of craters. Dropping further, toward the dusty surface. No ski-doos, no gators, no bustling cityscapes. Just rocks, mysterious shadows and loneliness. And in that final moment before the transmission is lost, as Kaguya descends into a shaded area of the Moon and it becomes too dark to capture an image, the landscape just drops off to nothing. Black. A void. Scientifically speaking, simply the absence of data. For me though, watching this moment, science is more gut-wrenching than any feature or television show.

In that instance, I forget that I’m watching an incredible scientific achievement and think only about Clint Mansell’s eerie score to Moon, the sad little robot eyes of Wall-E and the millions of earthlings back here at home watching as that final lunar establishing shot came to an end.

We do a lot with film and TV here at the Science & Entertainment Exchange, but we also have a strong appreciation for the world of comics/graphics novels -- often a source of inspiration for the rest of the entertainment industry. So we were thrilled to learn, via io9, of a fabulous new Webcomic, The Thrilling Adventures of Lovelace and Babbage.

In the last decade, there has been a resurgence in mainstream Hollywood of zombie projects. Notably, DAWN OF THE DEAD, 28 DAYS LATER (as a franchise), RESIDENT EVIL (as a franchise), I AM LEGEND, QUARANTINE, SHAUN OF THE DEAD, as well as the upcoming films ZOMBIELAND, WORLD WAR Z, and PRIDE AND PREJUDICE AND ZOMBIES. With this classic monster in mind, we wondered at The Science & Entertainment Exchange, where one can find teaching moments that could inspire science-based conversation on the undead. You’d be surprised, there’s a lot to learn from our brain-eating buddies.

Recently, Harvard Professor of Psychiatry, Dr. Steven C. Schlozman drafted a fake medical journal article on Ataxic Neurodegenerative Satiety Deficiency Syndrome or ANSD. The piece was authored by five researchers, including three who worked on the piece posthumously and one “humanoid infected.” While the premise of walking dead was obviously conjured for the article, the remaining science was real. The essay inspired many zombie fans to read about neuroscience and think about the structure of the brain in a way they may not have otherwise. So there’s an example of fiction exciting people to learn facts about their own brains, but are there examples of real zombie-like creatures?

Enter Canadian ethnobotanist Wade Davis, who made a pretty strong case for the pharmacological basis of zombification in his 1985 book, The Serpent and the Rainbow (which was later made into a film directed by Wes Craven). Davis also penned a more scholarly tome, Passage of Darkness: The Ethnobiology of the Haitian Zombie, in 1988. He discovered that Haitian voodoo priests relied on complex powders in their rituals. The ingredients differed according to region, but of seven of the eight samples he managed to collect contained pufferfish, a marine toad, a hyla tree frog, and human remains. The first two are the most pertinent, since both animals secrete powerful neurotoxins - chemicals that change the way neurons in the brain function, either by inhibiting the release of neurotransmitters or enhancing them to harmful levels. Interfere with this complex communication system, and you can interrupt speech, thought processes, motor function, even respiration.

According to Davis, Tetrodoxin - a powerful neurotoxin - is a key ingredient in Haitian zombification rituals. The other crucial ingredient is a toxin produced by the sea toad (bufo Marinas) as a defense mechanism. A voodoo priest (boko) will poison a victim, causing him or her to become catatonic, and often mistaken for dead. Said victim is buried, the drug wears off after a few days, and the boko can exhume the "zombie" to make them a personal slave. Ah, but how to get the victim to do the boko's bidding, like any good zombie should? Apparently, this is achieved via regular doses of datura stramonium (more commonly known as jimson weed), an extract of the thorn apple, which makes the victim docile and biddable.

While the ritualistic practices Dr. Davis documented were further confirmed by British researchers in the 1990s, they didn't find any examples of real zombies. Usually, people labeled as such were suffering from mental diseases, such as catatonic schizophrenia or an organic brain disorder. In other cases, it was as simple as mistaken identity.

Perhaps human zombies are a tall order, however there does seem be a living example of zombification in Nature. Scientists at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev in Israel figured out how a certain species of wasp (the emerald cockroach wasp/jewel wasp, or Ampulex Compressa) managed to turn innocent cockroaches into willing "zombie slaves." Lots of venomous creatures stun their victims before devouring them, but this particular species of wasp will sting its victim, so that the prey is able to walk, but can't do so of its own accord. The predator-wasp literally grabs the roach's antenna and leads it back to the wasp nest. There, instead of eating the roach, the wasp lays an egg on its belly. Eventually a larva hatches and devours the still-docile roach.

BGU researcher Frederic Liberstat and his colleagues knew the secret lay in "a rich cocktail of toxins" that the wasp injects into its victims. They theorized that the venom blocks a key chemical messenger in the brain called octopamine. This chemical is what makes insects alert, motivates them to move and perform physical tasks. It serves a similar purpose as noradrenaline, a chemical messenger involved in the "flight or fight" response. To test their hypothesis, they managed to replicate the effect by injecting cockroaches in the lab, and even figured out how to "un-zombify" the bugs by following up with an antidote injection.

So, the next time someone tells you that zombies are the creation of overactive imaginations, remember the Ampulex Compressa and it's pacified roach incubators. And, go ahead, settle in and enjoy a zombie flick now and again, it just might turn into valuable a learning experience.

This week marks the 40th anniversary of the Apollo 11 Moon Landing on July 19, 1969, and there has been a predictable flurry of reporting about the event. The New York Times asked me and a few others to recall our memories of the 1969 events, in which I recalled how enthralled I was as a 15-year-old, staying home from school to chart the entire missions, building scale models, and dreaming of one day perhaps being the first Canadian Astronaut.

My opinions have changed considerably, although not completely, since that time. I would still jump at the chance to go into space. I also recognize that human space exploration may be the height of exciting adventure, but that is about all it is. The best science we will ever do, and the most exciting knowledge we will ever gain, will involve unmanned space vehicles, robotic devices, and a lot less money than the $200 billion we are going to spend getting Americans back on the Moon 50 years after they left.

This past year also saw the 40th anniversary of another space event, 2001: A Space Odyssey, Stanley Kubrick’s remarkably realistically rendered version of Arthur C. Clarke’s vision of a future in which humans would travel throughout the solar system with abandon.

The movie now reminds me of a John Prine song, Living in the Future, where he jokingly argues that by now, based on reading the newspapers 15 years earlier, “We're all driving rocket ships, and talking with our minds.”

While no one might have guessed we would leave the moon in 1969 and not return again ‘til perhaps 2020, we should have guessed that the real world in 2001 would not resemble Clarke’s vision. What we have learned in the last 40 years is that human space exploration is inordinately costly and far more dangerous than we were led to believe by the successes of the Apollo program.

Moreover, the limitations on human space travel are far more mundane than science fiction on television or in the movies suggests. We are not held back for lack of a warp drive, although real fuel costs are another reason why it is so much cheaper to send unmanned missions into space. Rather, the chief obstacle against human travel to Mars is simply cosmic radiation. During the 18 months or so to do the round trip journey a lethal dose of radiation is likely to be received.

Television and movies have built on our innate human desire to explore the universe by inventing fictitious ways that we can tool around the galaxy. I have no problem with this, especially if it gets people thinking about what might be possible without giving them the misimpression that fiction and reality are the same thing.

And none of this suggests to me that we shouldn’t go into space. Rather, we should do it realistically; recognizing that if we are to continue doing science we need to separate science from the manned space program, and also not waste huge amounts of money on things like the International Space Station under the guise that anything useful will be learned there outside of how humans can live 200 miles above Earth’s surface for extended periods. And, finally, we should come to grips with the limitations that physics and biology put on human space travel.

Frankly, I have always thought that one of the things that makes human space travel so exciting for people is the possibility that the astronauts may die in the process. It is, in a sense, the ultimate reality show, where the odds are life and death. So maybe there is room for a movie in which the NASA of the future requires astronauts who want to go to Mars to make it a one-way trip, focusing on the wrenching choices they would have to make in order to live out their dreams. That would certainly be less disconnected with reality than the gap between 2001: A Space Odyssey and the space program circa 2009.

Magician and escape artist James Randi (a.k.a., The Amazing Randi) has had a long illustrious career in entertainment, including a stint traveling with Alice Cooper's Billion Dollar Babies tour in the 1970s. He has had an equally illustrious career promoting science and skepticism -- and "debunking" charlatans, a la Harry Houdini. (He broke Houdini's record for survival in a sealed coffin by 11 minutes in 1955.)

On June July 20th, 1969, more than five hundred million people witnessed a monumental scientific achievement in the most viewed television event of its day. With the fortieth anniversary of Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin’s first steps on the moon coming up this month, we’re reminded of science’s ability to inspire us as well as human innovation and creativity’s capacity to advance our kind.

Since the invention of language, people have romanticized and marveled at the soft glowing orb that passes us by nightly. Whether it was worshiping it as a God or promising it to a loved one, the moon has always fascinated humanity - Hollywood is no different.

From George Melies’ early silent film A TRIP TO THE MOON, to Duncan Jones’ MOON, there will always be compelling story to tell in moon adventures. Just as JFK captured our imagination with the promise that a man would walk on the moon in 1961, so does Hollywood today as it postulates on the future, dreaming of colonies and space stations. And if history is any measure, the science fiction films we see today will inspire technical innovation and new technologies in future generations.

[CORRECTION: The moon landing occurred on July 20th, 1969, not June 20th. Thanks to steven for catching that.]

Well Jerry, you’ve done it again. And not just in bringing to light Jessica Alba’s groundbreaking work, most of which was conducted in between takes on Fantastic Four 2: the search for a spin-off. No, what you have proposed is much bigger than Miss Alba’s theories into time and space. Using the fool-proof Hollywood studio method of nurturing creativity and ingenuity and applying it to the science community? Brilliant! I was such a fan of this idea that after reading your blog I quickly jumped in my car, made sure my precious dogs were strapped in, remembered I had forgotten my BlackBerry, hurried to my office only stopping off at the gym, the coffee shop on Montana Avenue, a few boutiques, a breakfast meeting at Urth Café, back to the gym to see if my BlackBerry was there (it wasn’t), then to my office. There was no time to spare; I was inspired and my work was about to begin. As soon as I could find my blackberry that is!

The timing could not have been better. See, I was planning on going out with a pitch. To those in the science community, “going out with a pitch” is basically the equivalent of giving birth to a beautiful baby, then having a series of doctors inspect it, only to be told how hideous the child is until finally one lone nurse says how beautiful she thinks the baby is, leading to every doctor changing their minds, claiming the baby is beautiful and bidding on the rights to the baby. That was my goal this week, to sell my baby to the highest bidder. But after I read your blog, I thought, why not sell my baby to scientists. Scientists who could—on their own without any sheep mentality—appreciate my baby for how beautiful it really is. I told my office we were going to sell a baby to a scientist and find my BlackBerry. Today was shaping up quite nicely.

I informed my office to bump Fox, bump Universal, bump Warner, Sony, Paramount, Disney, DreamWorks, etc., and instead line up meetings at MIT, Johns Hopkins, and Berkeley. Surprisingly enough, none of these universities were in my contacts. The first obstacle had been reached. Luckily, there was the Science & Entertainment Exchange to come to the rescue. They were able to set up pitch meetings with the heads of these prestigious universities, who all just happened to be in Los Angeles that day, right away without any problems. This was extremely helpful, because I had my office spending their efforts searching for my BlackBerry. Without The Exchange, everything might have fallen apart!

The pitch was set and I walked into that room full of confidence. The scientists who awaited me were the best and the brightest, and therefore the perfect audience to pitch my movie. As I launched into the idea, I could see their eyes fill with the possibilities. We could go after Brad or Leo for the role of Chase Manly, the space fighter pilot who may be Earth’s last hope. For the headstrong physicist, we could approach Cate, Kate, or any other A-List actress nominated for multiple Oscars whose name is short for Katharine. Or Catherine. Or Quatherine. What a space fighter pilot and a physicist have to do with the rom-com set in Santa Fe that I pitched them, I don’t know, but something great was hatched in this meeting. Whether it was science improving entertainment or entertainment enhancing science, we’ll never know. Either way, with just a few minor rewrites, we were looking at a huge box office, with critical acclaim and awards all but guaranteed.

I waited with bated breath as the heads of the science community discussed. Finally, an offer was made! There were a few change: the aliens wouldn’t speak French slang, but instead an actual made up language, time travel had to be presented in a realistic way (more Back to the Future than Austin Powers), and the use of cloning could not just be thrown in as a twist in the end. Also, they suggested adding in a robotic duck because it’s proven to increase box office take by $5 million domestic, their words. I agreed and a baby was sold!

I’m currently out on set, shoot day 158 on this movie. Slightly over budget and over schedule but the dailies look amazing and Quatherine’s performance is mesmerizing. And the best part is the entire project is scientifically accurate. See, The Exchange works! Now if I could just find my BlackBerry…

When we tell you that there are teaching moments in every film that could get a conversation started about science, we really do mean every film. We can prove it too. We’re not afraid to put our money where our mouth is: HARRY POTTER AND THE HALF-BLOOD PRINCE. Here’s a film about magic that takes place in a fantastical land where anything seems possible and Muggle science feels misguided and trivial… or so you thought.

Dr. Roger Highfield, the Science Editor of The Daily Telegraph and BBC Commentator, wrote a book in 2002 called The Science of Harry Potter that covers many of the “teaching moments” that could get a conversation started using the brilliant world of J.K. Rowling. Wondering how a flying broom could be a reality? There’s a chapter on “gravity-shielding effects.” Fiber optics can actually create a real life invisibility cloak. The Marauder’s Map? Electronic paper that could help you get up to no good is right around the corner (though, come on, doesn’t this seem like it could already be an iPhone App?).

As technology evolves, it can feel like magic sometimes, and the wizardry we see on screen excites people into developing real-world electronic sorcery. So, as we move into the heart of Hollywood’s popcorn movie season, don’t forget that science truly is everywhere and big screen magic can inspire imagination and innovation.

With ICE AGE: DAWN OF THE DINOSAURS hitting theaters this weekend, we have a good example of a film that may play fast and loose with reality, but nonetheless serves to inspire kids to think about science.

Last we checked, no reputable scholar believes that the Woolly Mammoth and the T-Rex occupied the same homestead. In fact, they missed each other to the tune of more than 60 million years. The first Tyrannosaurus likely terrorized its first Duck-Bill about 70 million years ago. Saber-Toothed cats came on the scene about 40 million years later – though excavations at the La Brea Tar Pits have revealed that big cats lived on the strip where The Walk of Fame resides today, so Saber-Tooths in Hollywood actually do have factual underpinnings.

There may be little actual accurate science in the premise of ICE AGE: DAWN OF THE DINOSAURS, however, in personifying these ancient creatures with identifiable characters, parents and children can start a rare fun and educational discussion. Is it possible that some Jurassic Dinosaurs might have survived long enough to share wacky misadventures with Saber-Toothed cats and Mammoths? Um, probably not – though it’s fun to imagine what that might have looked like. And why not turn an entertaining summer movie into a conversation starter? Maybe swinging by the La Brea Tar Pits or your local Natural History Museum on the way home from the theater could start a life-long passion in a little one close to you.

There is a scene that takes place at a math tournament in the 2004 film Mean Girls wherein each team must pick the weakest member from the other team to compete in a tie-breaking “sudden death” round. The boys on one team don’t even need to mull it over: they automatically pick the token female on the opposing team – because everyone knows girls aren’t as good as boys at math. Right?

Wrong. A new report on “Gender, Culture and Mathematics Performance,” concludes that there is no innate difference in the mathematical ability of girls and boys. Authored by Janet Hyde and Janet Mertz of the University of Wisconsin, Madison, the report appeared in June in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Hyde and Mertz’s latest report builds on their 2008 study that appeared in Science, which examined the SAT results and math scores of 7 million students and found that the girls matched the performance of the boys from second grade all the way through to the eleventh grade.

Granted, there were a few minor gender disparities, but Hyde and Mertz argue that these are not due to biological differences, but to socio-cultural factors. They point to the World Economic Forum’s measure of gender equality in various countries as evidence. “In countries where there is little or no measured gap between boys and girls in math performance, those are the countries with the greatest gender equality,” said Mertz. “That leads us to believe any math gender gap is cultural, not biological.”

This prejudice against women in math and science dates back thousands of years and still pervades popular culture. History gives us the occasional rare exception to the rule. In 18th-century France, Emilie du Chatelet defied her father’s protests to pursue her interest in math and science. Fifty years later, Sophie Germain studied math in secret under the bedclothes at night, and masqueraded as a male student at the Ecole Polytechnique in Paris, eventually developing Germain primes – prime numbers where, if you double them and add 1, the answer is another prime number. Victorian England had Mary Somerville, another self-taught mathematician who defied the cultural stereotypes of her age. Her passion for math was so strong, she was revising a paper the day before she died at 92.

Such figures are often dismissed as anomalies, which is why we need more researchers like Hyde and Mertz to collect more and more data on this topic. And it’s why we need skilled communicators to spread the word and erode all those lingering negative assumptions. “There is a persistent stereotype that girls and women are just not as good at math as boys and men,” Hyde said. “The data we have indicate that’s just not true. I really think it’s important to get that word out and to chip away at that myth.”

That’s where Hollywood can help, bringing its consummate skill at communicating with mass audiences via an entertaining medium. People are inspired by what they see on the screen, and the images they see invariably color their perceptions. In the United States, for instance, skill in mathematics isn’t highly valued: both boys and girls who are good at math are labeled “nerds,” whereas in other cultures, proficiency with numbers is an admirable quality. The hit TV show Numb3rs counters that stereotype every week, by providing real-world contexts to demonstrate its tagline: “We all use math every day.”

Mean Girls perfectly captures those cultural factors – like peer pressure and social stereotypes – that traditionally have impeded the performance of girls in mathematics. Homeschooled in Africa for most of her early life by her anthropologist parents, Cady (played by Lindsay Lohan) didn’t absorb the subliminal message that women can’t do math – at least until she begins attending a regular high school. Then the inevitable peer pressure kicks in. She is urged by her peers not to join the high school math team, despite the fact that she has a gift for numbers. “It’s social suicide!” she is told. Within a few weeks, she is pretending to be bad at math to win over the cute boy in her calculus class.

But Hollywood gives us a happy ending. Cady embraces her gift for calculus, and also gets to be homecoming queen, proving that a girl can be pretty, popular, very smart, and even snag the cutest boy in school, just by being true to herself. It’s a message more young girls need to hear. Mean Girls is one tiny yet critical blow in the ongoing effort to shatter those lingering stereotypes. One day there won’t just be a token girl on high school math squads, there will be several, and they will match their male classmates in skill. That’s the kind of revolutionary long-term change that can happen when science and Hollywood combine forces.