Science In Action – BBC World Service
Episode: "A mystery satellite has been jamming GPS in Europe"
Date: October 2, 2025

Episode Overview

This engaging episode of "Science In Action" explores three distinct yet urgent science issues:

1. The emerging threat of GPS jamming, possibly from a mystery satellite in Earth orbit.
2. The dual-use risks of AI-driven protein design, and new research offering hope for biosecurity.
3. Challenging common fears about wolves, revealing just how profoundly they fear humans—and the consequences for wildlife behavior and policy.

Each segment features expert guests and the host, Roland Pease, delving deeply into the evidence, implications, and responses to these scientific challenges.

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. Satellite-Driven GPS Jamming: A Growing Threat

The Problem (01:50–03:55)

• Recent deliberate jamming disrupted GPS in sensitive Baltic regions, impacting commercial flights (including one carrying the EU chief) and maritime navigation.
• GPS vulnerability arises from the inherent weakness of GNSS signals after traveling from outer space.
• Interference can be ground-based (deliberate jamming) or from space (accidental or intentional)—with both "jamming" (overpowering signals) and "spoofing" (sending fake location data) now on the rise.

“These deliberate attempts have begun to attack aircraft…not just from jamming…but also by spoofing, where you falsely generate signals that look very much like the authentic ones and can confuse airplanes…” – Todd Humphreys, 02:57

Evidence of a Satellite Source (03:55–06:36)

• Communications researcher Todd Humphreys describes his student Zach Clements’ work, which traced recurrent, brief episodes of GPS jamming—since 2019—to space, likely a single geostationary satellite.
• The jamming events are simultaneous across wide areas, ruling out Earth-based sources.

"The jamming occurred simultaneously across hundreds of these stations, even despite their vast geographical separation. So this was obviously not coming from the surface of the Earth…” – Todd Humphreys, 04:46

How the Culprit was Narrowed Down (06:36–08:26)

• Using data from global GPS reference stations, researchers pinpointed interference patterns and timing to select a handful of likely satellites, focusing especially on geostationary and Russian Molniya-class satellites.

“By putting this pattern together, the timing...and also the spatial distribution...we're able to reduce the number of candidate satellites down to just those that you could count on one hand.” – Todd Humphreys, 06:45

Intentional or Accidental? (08:26–10:35)

• The jamming pattern is highly regular (every Wednesday, during European working hours).
• The team suspects human involvement (e.g. satellite maintenance) but cannot confirm whether it’s intentional jamming.
• Those involved may not realize the GPS disruption (“blasting jamming signals across all of Europe”).

“We think that humans are involved in triggering the event, but they may not be doing it for the purpose of jamming. They may be doing it for some sort of satellite maintenance.” – Todd Humphreys, 10:15

Industry and Security Response (10:35–11:33)

• Senior figures in GPS operations were unaware of the phenomenon—possibly because the interference is brief (“within about five seconds...easy to miss unless you know what you're looking for”).
• A prolonged burst would be a serious threat to aviation and shipping.

“If it had been a sustained burst, then yes, you would see effects on aviation, maritime shipping, on timing across the continents.” – Todd Humphreys, 11:33

Making GPS More Robust (12:04–13:21)

• Existing aviation receivers are outdated and often only use a single GPS frequency.
• Future resilience may depend on incorporating multiple signals, newer GNSS constellations (like Starlink), and more powerful signals.

“If we want to overcome this problem of easy jamming...low Earth orbit constellations like Starlink...could be the key to making much louder, stronger, authentic signals that would be harder to jam.” – Todd Humphreys, 13:04

What Next? (13:21–14:57)

• Once the team confirms the culprit satellite, European radio-astronomers plan to track and record its radio emissions directly.
• The source may be using as much as 2,000 watts on the GPS L1 frequency—an enormous share of a satellite's power budget.

“It is definitely something that causes a big change on the satellite...they're diverting power from the satellite into this band and it's hitting the most popular, the most useful band of all...the GPS L1 band.” – Todd Humphreys, 14:39

2. AI, Protein Design, and Biosecurity: A “Zero-Day” Biological Threat?

The Dual-Use Dilemma (15:01–17:02)

• Advanced AI tools can now design completely new proteins, raising the possibility that malevolent actors could invent dangerous, weaponizable toxins.
• Screening DNA orders is the first line of defense—but can existing tools catch “paraphrased” toxins created by AI?

“So there’s a whole world of protein design where you can get variants. We call the tool paraphrase, because you’re...getting a slightly paraphrased version of [the protein] that ought to take about the same structure…” – Tessa Alexanian, 17:02

How Gene Synthesis is Controlled—and Challenged (17:43–19:21)

• Biotech labs routinely order custom DNA to express proteins; safeguards screen DNA and protein sequences for dangerous matches.
• Codon optimization and AI-designed sequences make screening harder—the danger isn’t just known toxins, but novel, equally harmful variants.

“With all of these new AI tools for designing proteins, we’re now in a space where you can’t screen just the protein sequence for close matches. You have to...think about the sort of space of protein that should fold similarly or...act similarly.” – Tessa Alexanian, 19:00

Research Findings: Improving the Defenses (20:28–21:44)

• The study simulated 70,000 potentially dangerous protein variants and tested whether current screening tools would detect them.
• Most tools performed well, but not perfectly.
• Crucially, all tools could be “patched” to better detect these “biological zero-days.”

“Broadly what we found is that it was possible for all of the tools to be patched to sort of respond to this vulnerability. Disclosure. We've called it the first biological zero day.” – Tessa Alexanian, 21:44

Screening at Scale (21:44–23:05)

• Companies face high volumes (“one order for 150,000 sequences”), so computational efficiency is crucial.
• Some tools can analyze each sequence in milliseconds—fast enough for commercial needs.

The Policy Gap (23:05–24:30)

• Improved software isn’t universally adopted; many DNA providers lack rigorous frameworks.
• International cooperation and government incentives are essential to ensure widespread adoption of protective screening.

“We found that there are many providers that are not members of this consortium...and their screening approaches tend to be much more ad hoc, of the sort that wouldn't catch this kind of reformulated variant.” – Tessa Alexanian, 24:17

3. Who’s Afraid of Whom? Wolves and the Super-Predator Effect

The Prevalence of Human Fear in Wildlife (25:50–28:12)

• Wolves and other animals show greater fear responses to human sounds than to other potential threats (even lions).
• Dr. Liana Zanet’s team used motion-activated speakers to play human voices, observing predator and prey reactions.

“Fear, you know, is a pretty straightforward behavioral response to measure because you know that when an animal is running, it is afraid...that's how we measure it.” – Liana Zanet, 27:10

The European Wolf Comeback and Fear Debate (28:12–31:01)

• As legal protections aid wolf recovery in Europe, fears grow that wolves are “losing their fear of humans.”
• Zanet's experiments in Polish forests show wolves remain deeply fearful, even with strict human protections.

“There’s no experimental evidence whatsoever that even when legally protected, a large carnivore like a wolf would lose its fear of humans.” – Liana Zanet, 28:58

What the Experiments Show (31:01–34:21)

• Video evidence: wolves are twice as likely to flee from human voices, and they abandon sites twice as fast as with other sounds.
• Prey animals show the same pattern.
• Wolves’ nocturnal habits are driven by avoidance of humans, not natural instinct—except in “rewilded” areas like Chernobyl, where human presence is absent.

“The wolves of this Tukala forest in Poland, they were 4.9 times more nocturnal than were humans. So they're out during the night, they're avoiding humans.” – Liana Zanet, 33:42

The Human "Super-Predator" (34:21–36:50)

• Humans kill large carnivores at rates far exceeding natural predation—even in legally protected populations.
• Legal protection often only reduces the severity, not the presence, of human-caused mortality.

“Humans kill large carnivores at nine times the rate at which they're killed, killed or die naturally. So humans definitely are super lethal.” – Liana Zanet, 34:38

Emotional and Global Impact (36:50–37:17)

• Human voices strike terror throughout the animal kingdom.
• With 8 billion of us, this “super-predator effect” has global behavioral consequences for wildlife.

“Given that there’s so many of us, 8 billion of us, you know...we’re having an effect on animal behavior at a massive, massive scale.” – Liana Zanet, 37:04

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• “If you have a satellite in geostationary orbit that's putting out 2,000 watts in the GPS band, that's...blasting it. This is a sizable fraction of the total amount of power that would be available to the satellite.” – Todd Humphreys [14:39]
• “We’ve called it the first biological zero day.” – Tessa Alexanian [21:44]
• “There’s no experimental evidence whatsoever that even when legally protected, a large carnivore like a wolf would lose its fear of humans.” – Liana Zanet [28:58]
• “Humans kill large carnivores at nine times the rate at which they're killed, killed or die naturally.” – Liana Zanet [34:38]
• “It is so sobering...that a human voice should instill such fear...I think it's quite chilling.” – Roland Pease [36:50]

Timestamps for Key Segments

• GPS Satellite Jamming

  • Rising threat and recent events: 01:50–03:55
  • Scientific investigation and findings: 03:55–08:26
  • Intentional or accidental? Regularity of the events: 08:26–10:35
  • Industry awareness and risks: 10:35–11:33
  • Solutions and next steps: 12:04–14:57

• AI and Protein Biosecurity

  • AI-designed proteins and the risk: 15:01–19:21
  • Testing and patching screening tools: 20:28–21:44
  • Screening at scale: 21:44–23:05
  • Policy and provider gaps: 23:05–24:30

• Wolf Fear and Human Impact

  • Wolves' fear experiments: 25:50–28:12
  • Legal protection and wolf behavior: 28:12–31:01
  • Nocturnality and Chernobyl findings: 31:01–34:21
  • The “super-predator” concept: 34:21–36:50
  • Emotional reflection: 36:50–37:17

Summary

This week’s episode of "Science In Action" offers a sobering look at the unseen technological and ecological forces shaping our world. Satellite interference with GPS threatens essential services, but new research is closing in on the culprit. In biotechnology, AI's power adds new layers to old biosecurity challenges, but careful adaptation of screening software and regulation can keep us safe. Finally, the deep-seated fear wild animals have of humans is perhaps a more potent legacy of our species than mere folklore—one with lasting consequences for conservation and policy.

End of Summary