Photovet 97

Eugenics isn't exactly a good idea. Attempting to select only the "desired" genes would decrease genetic diversity. Besides, we've come so far with natural selection.

Hello, There was in interesting article in this Sunday's Chicago Tribune titled, "Science on verge of new 'Creation'" Scientists at Los Alamos and Argonne National Laboratories have devised an experimental process to create and reproduce artificial cells that could eventually be used to make self-repairing materials, among other things. I'm still reading the article, but I thought I'd post where to find the article. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-0403280359mar28,1,7950284.story

In undergrad, we had biology classes called the "Biology Core Curriculum," or Biocore. The classes included Evolution and Ecology, Cellular Biology, Organismal Biology, and the corresponding lab classes. The exams in these classes were not just multiple choice or regurgitate lecture notes. The questions presented you situations or problems that forced you to think about your answer and logically back up your answer. Yes, you had to know your material, but the impetus was on critical thinking and problem solving.

Critical thinking in schools is a good start. I think that most science writers in the media have a difficult job as to communicating technical information to the public. Does that excuse inaccurate reporting? Absolutely not. However, is that the writer's fault, or the editor''s fault for trying to make the story "readable"?

I agree that we should "smarten up" the general public. However, how do you do that without making it too technical? The mass media is in a bit of a catch-22 in that regard, I guess.