This article is part of TPM Cafe, TPM’s home for opinion and news analysis. It was originally published at The Conversation.

If you pay any attention to politics and polling, you have likely heard that your friends and neighbors are not very happy with the direction of the country. You might not be, either.

One ABC News/Ipsos survey in November 2023 showed three-quarters of Americans believed the country was on the “wrong track.” Only 23% believed it was headed in the “right direction.”

And the survey was not an outlier. Poll after poll shows a sizable majority of the nation’s residents disapprove of its course.

Have Americans — long seen as upbeat, can-do optimists — really grown dour about the state of the nation and where it’s headed?

The answer, we think, is yes and no. Or, to be more direct, as the researchers who run the American Communities Project, which explores the differences in 15 different types of community in the United States, we believe the surveys are asking a question with no real meaning in the United States in 2024 — a question that may have outlived its usefulness.

An ‘astonishing finding’

“Do you feel things in the country are generally going in the right direction, or do you feel things have gotten off on the wrong track?”

That question or one very much like it is well known to anyone who has glanced at a poll story or studied the data of a survey in the past 50 years.

These public opinion surveys, often sponsored by news organizations, seek to understand where the public stands on the key issues of the day. In essence, they tell the public about itself. Political parties and candidates often conduct their own surveys with a version of the “right direction/wrong track” question to better understand their constituencies and potential voters.

The American Communities Project, based at Michigan State University, uses demographic and socioeconomic measures to break the nation’s 3,100 counties into 15 different types of communities — everything from what we label as “big cities” to “aging farmlands.” In our work with the project, we’ve found a strong reason to be skeptical of the “right direction/wrong track” question. Simply put, the divisions in the country have rendered the question obsolete.

In 2023, we worked with Ipsos to survey more than 5,000 people across the country in all those community types. We asked the survey participants what issues they were concerned about locally and nationally. How did they feel about the Second Amendment? About gender identity? About institutional racism? We found a lot of disagreement on those and other controversial issues.

But there were also a few areas of agreement. One of the big ones: In every community we surveyed, at least 70% said the country was on the “wrong track.” And that is an astonishing finding.

Agreement for different reasons

Why was that response so surprising?

The community types we study are radically different from each other. Some are urban and some are rural. Some are full of people with bachelor’s degrees, while others have few. Racially and ethnically, some look like America as it is projected to be in 30 years — multicultural — and some look like the nation did 50 years ago, very white and non-Hispanic. Some of the communities voted for President Joe Biden by landslide numbers in 2020, while others did the same for Donald Trump.

Given those differences, how could they be in such a high level of agreement on the direction of the country?

To answer that question, we visited two counties in New York state in January that are 3½ hours and several worlds away from each other: New York County, which is labeled a “big city” in our typology and encompasses Manhattan, and Chenango County, labeled “rural middle America” in our work, located in the south-central part of the state.

In 2020, Biden won 86% of the vote in big metropolitan Manhattan, and Trump won 60% in aging, rural Chenango.

When we visited those two counties, we heard a lot of talk of America’s “wrong track” in both places from almost everyone. More important, we heard huge differences in “why” the country was on the wrong track.

“If something don’t change in the next election, we’re going to be done. We’re going to be a socialist country. They’re trying to tell you what you can do and can’t do. That’s dictatorship, isn’t it? Isn’t this a free country?” said James Stone, 75, in Chenango County.

Also in Chenango County, Leon Lamb, 69, is concerned about the next generation.

“I’m worried about them training the kids in school,” he said. “You got kids today who don’t even want to work. They get free handouts … I worked when I was a kid … I couldn’t wait to get out of the house. I wanted to be on my own.”

In New York City, meanwhile, Emily Boggs, 34, a theater artist, bartender and swim instructor, sees things differently as she struggles to make ends meet.

“We’ve been pitched since we were young, that like, America is the best country in the world. Everyone wants to be here, you’re free, and you can do whatever you want,” Boggs said. “And it’s like, well, if you have the money … I’ve got major issues with millionaires and billionaires not having to pay their full share of taxes, just billionaires existing … It’s the inequality.”

A lifelong New York City resident, Harvey Leibovitz, 89, told us: “The country is on the wrong direction completely. But it’s based upon a very extreme but significant minority that has no regard to democracy, and basically, in my opinion, is racist and worried about the color of the population.”

Opposite views in same answer

To be clear, we are not saying that asking people about the direction of the country is completely worthless. There may be some value in chronicling Americans’ unhappiness with the state of their country, but as a stand-alone question, “right direction/wrong track” is not very helpful. It’s the beginning of a conversation, not a meaningful measure.

It turns out that one person’s idea about the country being on the wrong track may be completely the opposite of another person’s version of America’s wrong direction.

It’s easy to grasp the appeal of one broad question aimed at summarizing people’s thoughts. But in a complicated and deeply fragmented country, a more nuanced view of the public’s perceptions of the nation would help Americans understand more about themselves and their country.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

This article is part of TPM Cafe, TPM’s home for opinion and news analysis. It was originally published at The Conversation.

Coral reefs are some of the oldest, most diverse ecosystems on Earth, and among the most valuable. They nurture 25% of all ocean life, protect coasts from storms and add billions of dollars yearly to the global economy through their influences on fisheries, new pharmaceuticals, tourism and recreation.

Today, the world’s coral reefs are degrading at unprecedented rates due to pollution, overfishing and destructive forestry and mining practices on land. Climate change driven by human activities is warming and acidifying the ocean, triggering what could be the largest coral bleaching event on record. Under these combined pressures, scientists project that most corals could go extinct within a few generations.

I am a marine biologist at the Smithsonian’s National Zoo and Conservation Biology Institute. For 17 years, I have worked with colleagues to create a global science program called the Reef Recovery Initiative that aims to help save coral reefs by using the science of cryopreservation.

This novel approach involves storing and cooling coral sperm and larvae, or germ cells, at very low temperatures and holding them in government biorepositories.

These repositories are an important hedge against extinction for corals. Managed effectively, they can help offset threats to the Earth’s reefs on a global scale. These frozen assets can be used today, 10 years or even 100 years from now to help reseed the oceans and restore living reefs.

Safely frozen alive

Cryopreservation is a process for freezing biological material while maintaining its viability. It involves introducing sugarlike substances, called cryoprotectants, into cells to help prevent lethal ice formation during the freezing phase. If done properly, the cells remain frozen and alive in liquid nitrogen, unchanged, for many years.

Many organisms survive through cold winters in nature by becoming naturally cryopreserved as temperatures in their habitats drop below freezing, Two examples that are common across North America are tardigrades — microscopic animals that live in mosses and lichens — and wood frogs.

Today, coral cryopreservation techniques rely largely on freezing sperm and larvae. Since 2007, I have trained many colleagues in coral cryopreservation and worked with them to successfully preserve coral sperm. Today we have sperm from over 50 species of corals preserved in biorepositories worldwide.

We have used this cryopreserved sperm to produce new coral across the Caribbean via a selective breeding process called assisted gene flow. The goal was to use cryopreserved sperm and interbreed corals that would not necessarily have encountered each other — a type of long-distance matchmaking.

Genetic diversity is maintained by combining as many different parents as possible to produce new sexually produced offspring. Since corals are cemented to the seabed, when population numbers in their area decline, new individuals can be introduced via cryopreservation. The hope is that these new genetic combinations might have an adaptation that will help coral survive changes in future warming oceans.

These assisted gene flow studies produced 600 new genetic-assorted individuals of the threatened elkhorn coral Acropora palmata. As of early 2024, there are only about 150 elkhorn individuals left in the wild in the Florida population. If given the chance, these selectively bred corals held in captivity could significantly increase the wild elkhorn gene pool.

Preserving sperm cells and larvae is an important hedge against the loss of biodiversity and species extinctions. But we can only collect this material during fleeting spawning events when corals release egg and sperm into the water.

These episodes occur over just a few days a year — a small time window that poses logistical challenges for researchers and conservationists, and limits the speed at which we can successfully cryo-bank coral species.

To complicate matters further, warming oceans and increasingly frequent marine heat waves can biologically stress corals. This can make their reproductive material too weak to withstand the rigors of being cryopreserved and thawed.

Scaling up the rescue

To collect coral material faster, we are developing a cryopreservation process for whole coral fragments, using a method called isochoric vitrification. This technique is still developing. However, if fully successful, it will preserve whole coral fragments without causing ice to form in their tissues, thus producing viable fragments after they’ve thawed that thrive and can be placed back out on the reef.

To do this, we dehydrate the fragment by exposing it to a viscous cryoprotectant cocktail. Then we place it into a small aluminum cylinder and immerse the cylinder in liquid nitrogen, which has a temperature of minus 320 degrees Fahrenheit (minus 196 Celsius).

This process freezes the cylinder’s contents so fast that the cryoprotectant forms a clear glass instead of allowing ice crystals to develop. When we want to thaw the fragments, we place them into a warm water bath for a few minutes, then rehydrate them in seawater.

Using this method, we can collect and cryopreserve coral fragments year-round, since we don’t have to wait and watch for fleeting spawning events. This approach greatly accelerates our conservation efforts.

Protecting as many species as possible will require expanding and sharing our science to create robust cryopreserved-and-thawed coral material through multiple methods. My colleagues and I want the technology to be easy, fast and cheap so any professional can replicate our process and help us preserve corals across the globe.

We have created a video-based coral cryo-training program that includes directions for building simple, 3D-printed cryo-freezers, and have collaborated with engineers to develop new methods that now allow coral larvae to be frozen by the hundreds on simple, inexpensive metal meshes. These new tools will make it possible for labs around the world to significantly accelerate coral collection around the globe within the next five years.

Safeguarding the future

Recent climate models estimate that if greenhouse gas emissions continue unabated, 95% or more of the world’s corals could die by the mid-2030s. This leaves precious little time to conserve the biodiversity and genetic diversity of reefs.

One approach, which is already under way, is bringing all coral species into human care. The Smithsonian is part of the Coral Biobank Alliance, an international collaboration to conserve corals by collecting live colonies, skeletons and genetic samples and using the best scientific practices to help rebuild reefs.

To date, over 200 coral species, out of some 1,000 known hard coral species, and thousands of colonies are under human care in institutions around the world, including organizations connected with the U.S. and European arms of the Association of Zoos and Aquariums. Although these are clones of colonies from the wild, these individuals could be put into coral breeding systems that could be used for later cryopreservation of their genetically-assorted larvae. Alternatively, their larvae could be used for reef restoration projects.

Until climate change is slowed and reversed, reefs will continue to degrade. Ensuring a better future for coral reefs will require building up coral biorepositories, establishing on-land nurseries to hold coral colonies and develop new larval settlers, and training new cryo-professionals.

For decades, zoos have used captive breeding and reintroduction to protect animals species that have fallen to critically low levels. Similarly, I believe our novel solutions can create hope and help save coral reefs to reseed our oceans today and long into the future.

This article has been updated to include the development of a global-scale coral bleaching event in the spring 2024. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.