Can do via a link in the chat which i just posted. We support our authors. With that out of the way, i welcome sonia shah the science of journalists and prizewinning author. Her writing on science, politics and human rights has appeared in the new york times, wall street journal and Foreign Affairs among many others and has been featured on a radio lab fresh air and ted. Com. With her talk, three reasons why we have not gotten rid of malaria. Also author of the 70 several books including pandemic. Today we will talk about her new book, the next great migration which provides an overview of migration and often the negative responses it provokes. Some may claim its a Destructive Force that she argues migration is an ancient lifesaving response to environmental change in the book makes the case for a future in which migration is not a source of a fear. Without further ado, here is sonia. Hello and thank you for joining us tonight. I wish i could see you in person , but im tired we can do at least. I will tell you about the background of how i came to write the book. My last book was called pandemic tracking contingents from colorado to ebola and beyond. Ive written other aspects of Global Health specifically focusing on contagions. After my last book was finished around 2015. It came out in 2016 but i finished in 2015 and it was around the time of the migrant crisis in the mediterranean when there was all these people leaving syria and afghanistan and they were trying to run away from bombings and beheadings and strife in poverty and they were trying to get to europe took many of them were stuck in the mediterranean with the drownings and people getting stuck in refugee camps and Detention Centers in European Countries were closing their borders. It was a domino effects and having written a lot about how populations on the move can cause disease and microbes and animals and people moving around can be quite disruptive to public health, i went to to greece to report on what i thought was the migrant crisis as everyone claimed it was the migrant crisis because i claimed there made afraid there was maybe outbreaks. They are under stress moving into new parts of the world where there are different disease environments in different populations with different immunity status, so i thought all this Mass Movement of people will it trigger disease outbreaks. I went to to greece to do reporting on that. Was doing an interview with a physician about i said something along the lines of you know what are some of the worst effects of the migrant crisis in your opinion, Something Like that and he stopped and said there is no migrant crisis. I was quite puzzled and i said well, theres all of this email people are dying and drowning in getting stuck in refugee camps and everyone is upset so whats happening then if there isnt a migrant crisis what is it and he said its not a crisis of migration because there are plenty of jobs for these people if they want to take them. Theres plenty of room, capacity to house them. There are accommodations. Its probably better for them if they move. It might contribute to the resilience of the society that they left behind. They may contribute to our society if they move, so the crisis isnt of migration. He said the crisis is a reception and i realized then that i had a truly asked those questions he was talking about. I had reflectively decided that if there is migration it must be some kind of crisis and in fact what i learned throughout the disease of status is that there were no disease outbreaks accept for the ones caused by the conditions that these people were kept in. They were being detained in unsanitary camps and a makeshift squats, abandoned schools and stadiums and things like that, and just by virtue of those conditions there were some outbreaks of things like scabies and chickenpox. There hadnt been any other outbreaks that spread, and what i learned is that a lot of migrants are actually healthier than the host populations they enter and thats welldocumented called a healthy migrant affect. This started me thinking about migration in a new way. I wanted to understand why did i obediently complete migration with crisis. That was very reflective for me. I think this really is a very personal issue for me also although, im not a xena phobic by any stretch and i am the daughter of immigrants. Im an immigrant myself. My family lived in australia for a few years of my parents are immigrants from india who settled in the us before i was born, but i think i had very much internalized the idea of migration as disruptive. That kind of came out in my work as a journalist and science journalists. I had been writing for a long time about the disruptive effects of people on the move and microbes on the move and animals on the move in the form of a contingents of various kinds, but even for myself like my identity i had internalized an idea of my own body in place, my own body on the north American Continent you know the product of this active longdistance migration that my parents undertook. Somehow it was problematic, somehow weird exceptional anomalous, and i think that expressed itself in the way i never really call myself a full american. Although, i was born in new york city. I have lived here all my life except for those few years in australia. I never called myself an american you know just a straight american. It was always some kind of american, salvation american, Asian American you know some kind of permutation of an american. All throughout my childhood, i was told by people around me that i didnt quite belong. And this is a common experience. I think for a lot of people of color in this country that we are asked where are you from and i would say im from new york because thats where i was born and i grew up there when i was little. They would say no, where are you really from because you cant really be from new york. You are obviously an outsider, foreigner because you dont look right. I got that same response when i was in india with when i visited india to see my relatives. Of a similarly would make it clear that i didnt talk right, didnt wear the close right, didnt eat the food rights you know that i was alien in some way. I had very much internalized this idea that i didnt belong and i traced it back to that active international longdistance migration my parents undertook. I think that colored how i looked at migration. I wanted to in interrogated idea and that is you know that was the spark that became the process that resulted in this about. I traced it back to this idea of things belong in certain pace places. The idea that certain people belong in certain places. Thats where they are from. Thats where they belong. They have evolved their. We think of that in terms of people, but also in terms of animals. Its why we have animal maps we give to our kids where the camel stands for the middle east and the calgary kangaroo for oesterle and the bear for north america because the underlying idea there is those animals belong in those places. To such an extent that they are almost one in the same. These arent specific ideas about migration, but they very much embrace the history of migration because its to say if the camel is from the middle east its never moved and never will move. In fact, what we know its none of that is true. Anyway, i traced this idea of everything belonging in a certain place back to the 18th century swedish nostril naturalists. That was historical moment that i anchored the book around and he was a very interesting character like a lot of naturalists at the time he was very religious. He saw nature as to the expression got protection. This is a time in 18th century in europe where europeans were traveling as never before discovering the new world, discovering polynesia, parts of africa, the whole world is kind of opening up to europeans through transoceanic travel for the first time so theres this wealth of diversity and human diversity that was confounding to European Society at the time. There is this big effort to figure out, what are these things always different species and animals and people that look different from us, where do they come from and where do they belong, what is their origins, how did they get to these places , and he is among many naturalists at that time who try to answer that question. The way he answered the question is to say, well, wherever we found them is where they belong because for him of course, nature is an expression of gods perfection. Everything is in its place where god put it, so just by the logic of that it was impossible that anything would go extinct or anything had mood in the past or anything would move in the future. He pictured nature and a Natural World and an ordering nature that was very stable and very still. He created a taxonomy naming thousands and thousands of species and he came up with a system of naming creatures that we have retained to this day. Linne and taxonomy is one of the bases for our modern increase into nature and biology. Of course its changed in many ways, but so many essential fundamentals are the same. He also categorized humans, so this is a big open question in 18th century European Society. Well, how did africans become so dark. They were very certain these people from asia and africa and the americas were savages. You know, not fully human, not as human mouth evolved as they were. That was very problematic intellectually because they were coming out of the christian tradition and all humans in the bible descended from adam and eve in the garden of eden. If that was true, how did they become what europeans felt was so strange looking at why did they have the they considered uncivilized and savage, so he didnt tackle that question headon, but he did in part so what he said is well, he wont shes not going to go into where they came from and how i got there but he said clearly and he came up the human taxonomy and said very clearly that those other people are not the same as us. They are biologically distinct and he came up with a system of classifying humans which there were four sub species of humans. There was a sub species of humans that were european and then there was a separate sub species of yellow people who were asian, red people who were americans and black people who were africans and he gave these long latin names for each of these what he called sub species and in he actually says africans were maybe not even as human as the other species. He speculated in some of his private papers that africans might be a cross between this monstrous kind of humanoid that he called you know not something thats real that we understand today is real but he decided there was this whole other category of humanlike species that were you know how my nose, albinos, gigantism, different kind of genetic conditions that we would say today and he categorized those as one category of kind of monsters, human monsters. It was interesting looking into the basis for how we put this together because he actually was not someone that traveled much. He hardly left sweden and was very provincial and didnt like to hear any other languages other than swedish and he would frown if someone spoke to him in french or wrote something in french or any other language he hated it. He didnt like to travel, so what he would do and this was not uncommon at the time with a lot of early biological investigations that things and collections so he would get collections and examine them and at that time was a common thing that european exporters would go to different places and capture people and bring them back to europe and put them on display as specimens of these other sub species and they would have African Women on display in museums and traveling exhibits and scientists would go to these exhibits and poke and prod of these women as if they were not human like themselves. You know, one of the most famous examples i discussed the book. So, this idea of people being separated, belonging to different state places to such a degree that we were biologically alien from each other really erased any notion that we could have migrated, so the more differentiated we are the less possible it becomes to imagine a history of migration in which we all started in one place and moved around and mixed and all of that. So, linnaeus set the stage and that was passed down into all of our future inquiries into various questions and biodiversity and human diversity. In the 1920s, scientists were really racking their brains to try to figure out how exactly the human sub species were different. Theres a lot of activity in and scientific inquiry into what exactly makes africans so different from us, what are the biological criteria so that we can define as different from them it was very difficult because we are to different. Of course, we are all the same of one human family, but they put themselves into not trying to figure out well, mangy maybe if you measure the circumference of the scope and divide it from the type of the top of the school you know to your back when youre sitting and they had all of these different measurements they would do at your bodily dimensions to try to pinpoint, okay, this is how they are different and none of it really worked. That was a very active area of inquiry at the time, and there was huge worries among some of the leading scientific figures in the earliest 20th century in the us like Madison Grant was the founder of the bronx zoo. Henry osborn who is the creator of the American Museum of natural history. They organized huge conferences where they would get scientists from all of the world together to try to figure out how exactly are all these racial groups different and what would be the impact if we were to allow them to migrate and mix around the other, so they were very worried when the era of mass migration started in the us and people started coming over from eastern europe, Southern Europe in these different parts of the world started to come into the americas in the 19th 19th century. A lot of the scientists felt it was biologically dangerous. President Calvin Coolidge actually said there was biological laws that prevented people who were born in different continents from mixing or melding with each other. The director of the president of the American Public Health Association in the 1920s said if the us was to allow immigrants in who came from these other racial groups, these other sub species that it would bring absolutely went to society. There was a big conference in new york all about this race science and gen x and how immigration would be really dangerous in the biological hazard of immigration and after that conference organized by Madison Grant and Henry Fairfield osborn, they put the events together and shipped them off to congress and they were exhibited in the halls of congress for members to look at as they walked into their chambers. The leading scientists that created the conference that on a created a committee and drafted a policy that was based on the cutting edge of science tracing the heritage back to linnaeus and taxonomy about how people that live on different continents belong there and were biologically alien from each other and if they mixed it would be catastrophic. It would be biologically hazardous for the nation and they drafted those laws and thats actually what became it was brought into congress and passed and that was our 1920s Immigration Law with very strict racial quotas basically say no one from asia or africa could command. Of those laws were in place up until the 1960s, so really shaped the base of the nation. There were these fears about immigration and at the same time i think there was a lot of just underestimation about that migration is and sort of the scale of it. One fun example a story i tell in the book is about the conti key wrath, its about polynesia and how in the early days of the european exploration captain james cook made his way to a rare Remote Island in the pacific of polynesia and it took a lot of navigational skill to get there. He had big ships and fancy compasses and the latest devices and knowhow to try to navigate to these very distant islands in the middle of the ocean that were difficult to get to. He figured it out and got there and then he was amazed to find there were people there already, tons of people per the islands were populated with these polynesian people. He couldnt understand it so he said they only have stone age technology. How did they get here. He couldnt fathom the idea that people had actually migrated to these very Remote Islands and the people there of course were like no, we paddled on canoes from asia and they got here and thats why we are here. Cook and all of the european explorers who followed him to polynesia said no, that cannot be true. These people have stone age technology. Those canoes can never do it. If you travel from asia to polynesia you will be going against the prevailing wind, against the prevailing currents, so there is no way they could have migrated here on their own. So, there was this huge conundrum like how did they get here. This was like a huge scientific mystery for many decades. In the 1940s, the norwegian explorer ended up in polynesia and he came up with a novel explanation for how polynesia must have been settled. His idea was he figured out there with a current and notion current that ran from the coast of peru into polynesia and he imagined that perhaps if there is some people fishing or Something Like that off the coast of peru and the cost swept up in the storm and then just by accident they drifted on this current all the way to polynesia and maybe thats what happened and he called them this accidental migration of white gods. That these white gods may be accidentally drifted to polynesia and then they slowly populated island. Of course, this didnt explain why the people polynesia had all these linguistic ties to Asian Countries and why they all seem to be related to each other with similar languages you know lots of things this theory didnt explain. Nevertheless, it became hugely popular in part because he actually decided to try to set himself and he built a raft in peru and got a crew of other young norwegian scientists and they set off from the coast of peru and they drifted for two or three weeks with sharks coming up around them and you know wales word look at them and they had all these adventures drifting for all of these weeks and they finally did land on some outer island in polynesia and they got okay, we proved it. That must have been what happened. He wrote a book about it. He did a film about it, documentary that won an academy award. A documentary on polynesian migration. This really captured the worlds attention for many years, so it was only later in recent years we uncovered the true story through archaeological evidence and genetic evidence, linguistic evidence that indeed yes the polynesians did come from asia in ancient times and probably used canoes. We now know that ancient polynesians and practice a traditional form of navigation and it allowed them to navigate with as much accuracy if not more accuracy than modern western Navigational Technology does. This is a way of understanding how to plot a course by taking thousands of observation today from behavior of fish, behavior of the birds you know the stars, cloud patterns in all different things. Sometimes they would lie down on their backs on the floor of their canoes to feel the ocean flow from the feeling of the ocean flow they could find hidden land passes. This is an amazing way of learning that took a lifetime to figure out. You had to learn it from your parents and it was semi religious kind of a sacred practice of the polynesians were never told told the european so they were like you could never do this. You dont have a compass. You dont have the great things we do and in fact they did, but they couldnt tell these outsiders because it was sacred knowledge for their own culture. Another example is a story in which i tell in the book is about bird migration. Bird migration, i mean, we think today we would understand birds migrate all the time. In fact, during world war ii, this is when the british first started using radar in the head and not all not all they would find the signals that would occur and nights with little blips and then it would look like enemy planes were coming so they would go on to red alerts and send out their fighter jets to fly out over the sea and look for these oncoming enemy planes and they would clap her nothing would be there and they would come back in the radar analysts would say those echoes are there and then they would just sort of disperse into a circle and then another circle and then they disappeared. Made no sense and these were like echoes of objects flying against the wind and nights over the ocean, over the sea and ornithologists at the time said i think that might be birds migrating and the military said that cant be. [inaudible] so what they decided that echoes were in this wasnt just the british that have this problem during military radar it was germans had issues also with their radar and they would find these echoes and they could not figure out what it was so came up with the idea that it must be echoes of dead soldiers from beyond the grave. Sending a little signal. They called them radar angels, and that was explanation for many years until ornithologists suddenly followed the radar angels and saw an trace them back to a tree covered in a starlings and as they were watching a saw the starlings fly sort of in one phenomenon together and land on another circle of trees and make a concentric circle around the first trees they were on just like the radar angels the strangest signals showed, so they proved it was birds migrating. There are two sides to this. We minimize the amount of migration around us and we have also emphasized the negative aspects and exaggerated the negative aspects. You you can see the legacy of that today where for example in the recent pandemic where we had this outbreak of the virus in wuhan, china in the First Response of many policymakers was closed down the borders. Dont let those people in and then we will be fine. That will keep it out. That with such a huge underestimation of the vast amount of human ability various because by the time even before wuhan, china shut down 7 Million People had left the city and dispersed around the whole region. Thousands of people who are already carrying the virus had made it to europe and they were pouring into all parts of the us meanwhile, we are saying lets close the borders to repel this thing from china. It was just a huge underestimation of the amount of mobility we have and its not just people moving around. We have animals moving around all the time and we underestimate that also. We overemphasize the negative impacts even in our policies. We know today that about 10 of all wild species introduced to a new area are actually [inaudible] of those only 10 can cause problems that we dont like whether its Economic Impact or ecological impact or maybe impacts to human health. We are talking 1 of the species moving around into new places actually cause a negative impacts. Yet, at the highest level throughout policymaking in the Un Convention this it is that we should repel all species on the move before they establish themselves in the port they can cause any problems because its easier to do that, but we are basically saying for that 1 was throughout the other 99 before anything happens, before we even know so comes back to the same idea like they are moving around [inaudible] its that reflective conflation that we see to this day. The other half of the book is really about how science has completely undermined that story we have this idea of human migration has a tree that we walked out of africa and populated this continent and basically stayed still on our separate little branches for a millennia until the modern era of migration when planes and trains traveling around easier. Where scientists understand now through paly a genetics they discover how to recover the past history of migration by looking at they were never able to capture before because they would only find ancient dna [inaudible] recently understood you can also get ancient dna inside the own, so theres a lot more ancient dna being recovered and they are analyzing it and telling a news story. The story is one of notch where an intermittent migration that happened once a long time ago and then along period a stillness until the modern era. It tells a story of continuous migration, so people walked out of africa and went into the americas they didnt just to stay there. Some came back to europe and went back to asia and back into africa. People went into the most for bid in parts of the planet, not just once or twice but multiple times in ancient days, so multiple waves of migration into the tibetan plateau. We had multiple waves of migration into polynesian islands picked these are people back on in canoes paddled out thousands of kilometers of open ocean to find tiny pieces of land. They didnt just do it once by mistake. They did it over and over and over again, so theres just been a history, our history is one of continuous migration. In fact, we have hardly ever been still and when i have been its been for a short time and then we mix and move again. We see the same recovery of migration capacity among our wild species where we have seen because of gps and Solar Technology that scientists are now able to track animals movements continuously over where they go which is something new. So many of these creatures dont stay in the boundaries of their little habitat that we decided they should stay in. They are not there. They are moving way farther and more complex ways a never before imagined some records are being broken all the time. Why is all this happening . I try and step back and look at the Bigger Picture. When you look at migration in all of its fullness now that we are learning about and we see how our view of migration has changed you have to wonder okay we know there are true disruptive effects of migration for sure. We are familiar with them, of course. Change is hard and disruptive. But, there has to be huge benefits that have outweighed those risks over the course of our history, the course of our evolution for so many species on the planet. As we enter into this period of massive change we are entering i met crisis and the habitability of the planet is being reconfigured. People have to move again. Animals have to move more. We already see 80 of wild species on the move now, shifting their range coming up into the polls, up into the hyatts hair to the mountains in sync with the changing climate and we see the same thing with humans. Theres more People Living in countries outside the countries of their birth than ever before. More people have been displaced from their home than at any time during the second world war. Our impulse is to [inaudible] migration became sort of conspicuous with rightwing populist leaders that came to power thing i will stop the spear, going to build a wall, put up fences. Im not going to allow asylum. All of these efforts to repel migration as if its something we can stop and they are very much looking at is as a crisis. They are going to close the doors on migration, but when you look at the Bigger Picture migration in the reality is part of our history and as much as we want to think of migration as a crisis, it could be seen in a totally different light where migration isnt the catastrophe we think it is, i mean, sometimes its a result of crises, but migration itself is the resilient response to that. So, migration is not a crisis at all. Its the solution. The exact opposite of where i started thinking when i first started writing this book, so its been a wonderful time writing the book and putting it together. For me, personally to understand migration in a new light helped to be to understand myself in a new way and not think of myself as sort of marginal but in fact a migrant like everyone else. We are all connected to the story of migration in some way or another. Its part of our resilience and our heritage, part of the human condition as we live on this dynamic planet together, so that is sort of where i kind of try to bring the book to also is to express some of those ideas and to tell it as a story. [inaudible] if you have any questions, ask them in the q and a section on your screen. Go to the bottom of your resume window and click on the q and a walk icon. We have one question thats in so far from bob as he asks with the notion of americas degeneracy in 18th century scientific describing scenic sni discuss this in the book. Buffon was a french naturalist around the same time as linnaeus and they had a very intense rivalry between them. Buffons idea was totally different from linnaeuss. His idea was. [inaudible] he saw this was in the time if there were any differences at all and had to be in the hierarchy. There wasnt really a concept of different categories of things that could be equivalent, morally equivalent so if there were any differences that all it had to be in hierarchy and so buffon idea was that all people originated in the garden of eden and was probably in europe. Thats what he decided and so thats why europeans didnt have to move much and stayed around europe and thats why they are so perfect. Other people had to move further and as they did they encountered these foreign climates that wasnt wellsuited to them. [inaudible] thats why they didnt have any good animals or poetry and hand this whole. And Thomas Jefferson was like that cant be true and Thomas Jefferson wrote a whole chapter in one of his books about buffons theory of degeneracy, but in the end buffons theories which were much more accepting of the idea of change and dynamism than linnaeuss idea, linnaeus really won the argument and he became the father of modern taxonomy. Lets see. Heres another question, what are some policy applications . We have the models for that the way to make migration safe, orderly, dignified and so the idea is instead of saying ive lived in this country and here are my borders and im going to decide who i lead in and i dont want to let in and if i dont want you people you cannot come. This migration is sort of a positive that i can turn off and on. Thats sort of how our policymaking is around migration is done now but with the un compaq says that migration is a reality. It happens whether we wanted to or not and its not something we can control and if its that and we know there are some a benefits to migration we should do. [inaudible] so we can minimize this destructive impact while maximizing the benefits and that will look different in different places. Sometimes it means managing the pace of migration because in a lot of places the main issue isnt that people are coming and going, but that they are coming all out once or really quickly or into certain places and not others so these are all things we can manage and decide this is capacity or heres where theres not enough capacity so lets send migrants to this other place or maybe we want to say lets make the places where migrants are leaving more resilient, so the plate pace can slow down. There are different ways to do it. [inaudible] theres a lot of good models out there. They are still basically theoretical limey there is one or two countries that have adopted the Global Compact into their laws. Nora has a similar question and i think is asking you to go into more detail as she says how can a welcoming migration look like cracks are there positive examples cracks. I think theres probably positive examples today, but also moments in time. I think in the us the history has been you know weve been ambivalent about immigration. I think we are looking at migration [inaudible] as sort of investment that well have to make, part of our common and shared reality that we all have to manage together. I dont think we are really doing that yet and i think the whole idea of sort of National Sovereignty is tricky. Its not just to say you cant have order and you cant have sovereignty, of course you can. I mean, the other part of this issue is that we dont track migration very well, so we only track certain kinds of migratory flows that we find problematic without we want to kind of scrutinize more, refugees, asylum seekers, certain kinds of migrants that we want to watch, but theres this other mobility that goes on that we dont look at or trackback how many people are leaving our borders or moving within our borders, how we move from one country to the next poor country, hardly any statistics. I think a lot of migration happens beneath our noses. Its not disruptive and its not leading to societal collapse. Its like the blood in our veins took its just happening all the time and we are unaware of it, but its making society function. We know migration is what allows systems to flourish. There are whole ecosystems that would collapse if you didnt have a wild creatures moving around creating the kind of botanicals kathleen around the planet. I think the models are out there , but we have a ways to go to get to place where we can have a good faith conversation about migration and a good faith effort of policymaking around it i have a question. You talk about migration in the Natural World. How do you account for conducive species and things like that, is that something we are overreacting to and should be more accepting of quebec i have a chapter in the book about this and i sort of trace how we came to think about certain species as invaders and its very much tied to world war ii and scientific ideas around the onslaught in the invasion of europe, by german said stuff like that, but anyway what we know and i think i mentioned this earlier is that Invasive Species is an issue. Certain species can come to a new place and can cause problems, absolutely. Whether that is a problem that we have created because we went to grow a crop here, you know we went to several cultural plant here so this other species is coming in and thats a problem. Thats not an ecological problem but its still a problem and we kind of collapse all the problems these species can cause together so sometimes the problems our economic problems that this novel species is coming in and will harm our honeybees and we need honeybees to pollinate crops. Honeybees also arent native. They are from europe. We have them in north america and that is fine, but we dont have to be moralistic about it and say we dont like those creatures because they are alien , because they are foreign to you know, we dont like them because they interfere with something we are trying to do and thats fair and those tests absolutely exist, but what im saying is that some because of where they are from. Only one only 10 of species that moved to a new place can establish themselves in only 10 of those actually cause these problems whether its human health, economic or ecological and thats 1 of all species on the move. 99 of them are causing problems , so its not to say the problems are real. They are just a small part of the overall picture, so the whole way we are thinking about species on the move as if if its native its good and alien is bad. Thats outdated and i think the scientists i talked to in invasion mousy themselves say that you know now, we have species moving into new places and do we want to call them all aliens and repel them when a wild creatures trying to survive Climate Change and moves further north. We want to preserve that resilience, so what we need to do is think about this in a whole different way. Its not about where you are from. Its about what is your function in this ecosystem and how can you contribute and i think in that parts of the scientific inquiry that ideas are really changing quickly. Thank you. Thats interesting. We just had a new question command. Person asks since you mention there may be virtually no data on certain human migration had we have any data points at all on these other types of migration . s individual researchers and doing modeling to get a better idea of the larger picture . Yeah, i mean, that is partially its, i mean, we have better mobility data nowadays because sort of big data and we can look at cell phones and things like that to see how Much Movement there is. We are getting exciting new data about wildlife and how expensive they are. Theres a website called move think and i think its on youtube. Move bank. Com. Its a repository scientists have come up with with thousands and thousands of animals they track around the globe. Many of them have satellite tags to see where they are moving and its all uploaded into this one data center and they have these beautiful visualizations you can see the tracks of animals moving all around the globe. I have seen similar with refugee and asylum seekers. Its very beautiful. Really hypnotic when you look at it, but i think we are still piecing it together. This is challenging writing this book its like where do you go to report on migration you know him and what i learned is migration is everywhere. Theres no one place you can go and say this is where the migration is happening. Migration is everywhere. That was a challenge. We still havent really wrapped our heads around the total scale up migration. In a way its like the human experience. We are moving around all the time at different time scales so putting it all together i think its definitely a challenge. Well, we have one final question and its a bit offtopic, but im going to ask anyway because i think it applies a bit here. Its about the origin of the covid virus. This person wants to know if theres credibility that it could have come from outer space and one of the capsules they came back. Its closely related to the virus the earlier sars virus, so no. I dont think i have not heard of any credible scientists whose theorized that its anything other than something related to the earlier sars virus and we know where that came from. It came from bats and from bats it went into cats and then entered humans. This is probably happening because humans are destroying so much about habitat so when you cut down the trees the bats dont just disappear. They live in your backyard and farms and gardens instead and that facilitates different kinds of interactions whether its while by trading bats or hunting of bats or wet markets for bats or just casual contact with bats , so through all of those new kinds of ways we interact with bats we are getting a lot of bad virus going to humans, not just the first sars and probably this one, but also people at ebola and other viruses we get from bats and rabies is the most common that there is a whole load of them. Great. Well, if there are no other questions, i just want to thank you very much for this very fascinating presentation. I think we all learned a lot and we have a lot to think about and i encourage everyone to purchase the next great migration there is a link in the chat. Go to politics and prose. Com. Sonja, thank you so much this is really accident to make great. Thank you. Nice talking to you. At night, everyone. Take care. Good night. Tonight on the tv and prime time on our Author Interview program afterwards msnbc political analyst offers her thoughts on identity politics and how to create a more inclusive democratic party. Fox news Chris Wallace talks about the lead up to the bombing of hiroshima in august 1945. Republican governor larry hogan of maryland the flex on his life and career. We followup with the coowners of source booksellers in detroit about how covid19 continues to impact their bookstores operations. For more scheduled information online, go to book tv. Org or consult your program guide. At an event at tufts universitys a toy or brown long discussed her journey from prison to reform juvenile sentencing guidelines. Cures a portion. There were several adults i was around and i was a child, so i had the wrong women who were teaching me that my body was a commodity, a means to get things from men and i was it was completely acceptable to expect things in return for my companionship for sex. I was told my entire existence resulted around pleasing a man in some form. I was 13 when they started teaching me these things. That is really what started me on the trajectory to be more vulnerable to being exploited. I was told these things were normal, so my worldview was reshaped to think this is how relationships work. This is how relationships between men and girls, which i was still a girl i was not a woman, that thats how this goes so by the time i meant a man that convinced me we were in a relationship and part of the relationship that i would go out and have sex with men for money and bring him back the money i thought was normal. Society where i was in at that point didnt call me a sex trafficking victim. I was called a prostitute. I was made to believe these are my choices that were made of my own volition and there was never any conversation about the adult had taught me these things, the worldview that had been skewed to convince me too do these things, not from the people i was around, not from the court system. To the here the rest of the story visit our website, book tv. Org or type her name or the title of her book into the search box at the top of the page. Heres a look at Publishing Industry news. Last week the Justice Department filed a claim for the royalty of the associated with the former cub Administration National security advisor john boltons recent book about his time in the white house the motion which would include mr. Bolts two milliondollar advance argues the book was released before the completion of the governments prepublication review. Book editor James Silverman died last week at the age of 93. Mr. Silverman edited such hot authors as james a baldwin during his career at random house and simon and schuster. In other news, the guardian reports are missed hemingways published works contained errors that of never been corrected. American literature scholar who study the manuscripts held at the john f. Kennedy president ial library reported the grammatical mistakes were made by editors or typesetters when publishing new additions and dont reflect hemingways original intent. Also a bookscan reports print book sales were up 20 in july. Adult nonfiction sales rose 23 and was led by barry trumps book critical of the president titled too much and never enough following the lead of other upcoming book festivals the brooklyn book festival announced it will be held virtually from september 28, to october 25. The event will feature over 150 authors. Book tv will bring you new programs and publish a new news. Watch all of our archived programs any time that book tv. Org. Joining us on the tv mitch kaplan. And virtually as well. Give us an update five months into this. Its been like a roller
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.