Article about misrepresentation of science

[Atellus]

I'm posting this here because it doesn't strictly fit into any particular category.

 

I came across this article whilst browsing and found it interesting.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/badscience/story/0,12980,1564369,00.html

[timo]

For future posts like that please give at least some small summary (two or three sentences should suffice) of what the article is about so that people might get an idea of whether they´d like reading the article or not. A well-chosen thread topic (which already is a good start) and the statement that you found the article interesting for me is too little information to decide that.

 

Don´t get the dry formulation in above wrong, this is not supposed to be a rant but rather a hint.

[Martin]

For future posts like that please give at least some small summary (two or three sentences should suffice) of what the article is about ...

 

that's a good idea, for sure.

 

BTW what is the article about? Anybody know? I'd like to have some idea before I click.

What type of science? What sort of misrep, by whom?

[Skye]

The main point is that science is misrepresented as parodies: wacky stories, scary stories or breakthroughs. This is largely due to reporting single studies and unpublished research. The reporting itself is criticised because it is deviod of the pertinent information, i.e. research methodology and statistical analysis. The root cause of it all is that science communicators are humanities graduates and don't understand or like science.

[swansont]

It's The Guardian "Bad Science" column. Pretty much spot-on, about how science journalists are often bad at their jobs (with which I agree), and the different types of bad science articles that appear in the popular press.

 

On the fear of statistics: "science isn't about something being true or not true: that's a humanities graduate parody. It's about the error bar, statistical significance, it's about how reliable and valid the experiment was, it's about coming to a verdict, about a hypothesis, on the back of lots of bits of evidence."

[Martin]

here goes unintentional piracy

I havent read the article but there's something Ive been wanting to say.

 

some french blogger said science is done "for the honor of the human mind"

 

the taxpayer pays for a lot of the unprofitable or not directly patentable science

 

can you tell a guy to reach in his wallet and give you $20 bill "for the honor of the human mind"

 

(I really think the french blogger was right, it is about that, although sometimes beneficial side effects)

 

no, you can't. so you are SELLING him something (unless you believe in conning him with phony promises)

 

what are you selling him?

 

YOU ARE SELLING HIM THE VICARIOUS EXPERIENCE OF IMAGINING THAT HE IS THERE, stepping on the soil of the moon, finding a chemical in a laboratory, firing up a collider, whatever.

 

so basically books, like by Carl Sagan and Brian Greene, sometimes really odious books, like by Stephen Hawking etc. etc., these books which put the vicarious experience out there within reach, are, regretfully perhaps, PART OF THE DEAL.

 

Galileo's dialogs. he wrote some pretty amusing dialogs about science. Maybe that was the beginning of the "business model".

 

If that is true, then ultimately you don't have to promise taxpayers that your research will give their military a weaponry advantage, or their companies new consumer electronics. maybe you do have to do those things. But the basic rule would seem to be

(not sure I believe this) MAKE SURE IT'S GOOD READING.

 

strange idea.

 

maybe Science Journalism should be a required course for all English Majors:-)

[swansont]

maybe Science Journalism should be a required course for all English Majors:-)

 

 

I think that science courses should be required for science journalists and their editors.

[CPL.Luke]

agreed martin, when von braun was trying to tget the american space program off the ground in the 40's and 50's he turned to walt disney to help get his message across that space was in our grasp and that there is a whole world of adventure out there for us to explore.

[AL]

John Tesh (the pianist and former host of Entertainment Tonight) has a nationally syndicated radio show called "Intelligence for Your Life," which could easily have provided numerous examples for this article. Did you know, for instance, that reading emails lowers your IQ? Studies have shown that people who read emails prior to taking an IQ test scored lower on said test than those who did not. Tesh recommends taking a break from your emails now and again (and I was hoping to do an email read-a-thon this weekend...rats). And did you know that caffeine improves your relationship skills? Studies show that people who drink coffee regularly are rated as more fun and likeable by their dates than people who don't drink coffee. Tesh recommends drinking some coffee before going out, but also offered the useful caveat not to drink too much, else you'll be jittery and nature may call in the middle of an engaging conversation.

 

I learned all these nifty things from his show. And I use the word "learn" very loosely there.