On Wednesday, President Obama outlined his proposals for gun control. Among them was a request to Congress for $10 million to study the impact of media on violence, with a nod specifically to video games. Brooke talks to Jason Schreier, a reporter for Kotaku, about 25 years' worth of studies on the effect of violent games, and what researchers have found.

A hundred years ago this week, a human-like skull and ape-like jaw were presented at a special meeting of the Geological Society in London. The so-called "Piltdown Man" became widely accepted as a crucial link in the human evolutionary chain; crucial, that is, until 1953, when the bones were exposed as a total hoax. Nova Senior Science Editor Evan Hadingham talks to Brooke about this tantalizing example of "scientific skullduggery." 

Califone - Lunar H

This week, daredevil skydiver Felix Baumgartner broke the sound barrier—and world records—when he jumped in free fall from 24 miles above the earth’s surface. People around the world watched in awe, but some criticized the jump as a mere publicity stunt for its corporate sponsor, Red Bull Energy Drink. Bob talks with Esquire contributing editor Luke Dittrich about how Baumgartner's jump, publicity stunt or not, has valuable scientific implications beyond being a PR triumph.

Aphex Twin - Untitled (Four Tet Remix)

Last week, a group of scientists in France released a study linking genetically modified food with cancer. Journalists who wanted to see an advanced copy of the research had to sign a confidentially agreement that ensured they wouldn't be able to get other scientists to weigh in on the study. Brooke speaks to science writer Carl Zimmer, who says the researchers were trying to manipulate journalists in order to skew the coverage in their favor.

There's often a really interesting story behind a retraction. That's what Ivan Oransky told us. He's a doctor and journalist and founder, along with Adam Marcus, of a blog called Retraction Watch. They monitor scientific journals and investigate why articles were retracted. They uncovered serious ethical breaches at a variety of journals. Oransky tells Brooke about some of the stories he's covered this year.

Quantic - Una Tarde en Mariquita

When a paper released by a scientific journal turns out to be wrong, either due to human error or intentional fraud , the journal’s editors often will issue a retraction advising scientists to disregard the research. A Wall Street Journal study has found the number of such retractions to be soaring. New Yorker science writer Jonah Lehrer tells Brooke what he thinks is going on.

Slate writer Daniel Engber set out to debunk the idea of the 5-second rule -- the myth that if you drop food on the floor and pick it up quickly, it’s still clean enough to eat. Engber's quest led him onto a bigger story, about a wellspring of scientific misinformation that's flowing into American papers from Britain. 

When a paper released by a scientific journal turns out to be wrong – either due to human error or intentional fraud – the journal’s editors often will issue a retraction advising scientists to disregard the research. A recent Wall Street Journal study has found the number of such retractions to be soaring. We asked Wired Magazine science writer Jonah Lehrer what he thinks is going on.

There's often a really interesting story behind a retraction. That's what Ivan Oransky told us. He's a doctor and journalist and founder, along with Adam Marcus, of a blog called Retraction Watch. They monitor scientific journals and investigate why articles were retracted. They uncovered serious ethical breaches at a variety of journals. We asked Oransky to tell us about some of the stories he's covered this year.

Song: Lead Us To The End

Artist: The Quantic Soul Orchestra

Last week, a team of scientists at Columbia University published a study that said thanks to our instant access to nearly unlimited information via the internet, the way that we remember is changing. And almost immediately, the blogosphere lost its mind (pun intended), posting articles with titles like "Is Google Ruining Your Memory?," "Poor Memory? Blame Google," and the Pièce de résistance,"Google Turning us Into Forgetful Morons."  But is the story really that cut and dry?