Here is a round-up of the articles featured on SCBN in its first 5 days:
From ‘Science Hubb’, Nov 19, 2012
“If there’s one thing that biologists agree on, it’s that sex is good. Really good*.
Huge amounts of time and energy are invested in it. Well, alas, not so much in the act per se, as much as in finding a way to have sex; to tempt a mate or dispatch a rival. But is it really worth the ego busting knock-backs, the frustration, the time and energy?”
—– —– —– —– —–From ‘Seeds For Rewilding’, Nov 27, 2012
C.P. Snow, cultural history and the pursuit of knowledge.
A consideration of why science and society find it so hard to get on, and the consequences of such an icy relationship.
—– —– —– —– —–From ‘Green Tea and Velociraptors’, Dec 3, 2012
“What comes to your mind when someone says ‘theropod dinosaurs’ to you? Does the mind conjour images of Tyrannosaurus rex noshing on lawyers, packs of voracious Deinonychus ambushing unsuspecting ornithopods, or perhaps you’re quite progressive and thought about flocks of birds migrating south for the winter…”
—– —– —– —– —–From ‘Inspiring Science’, Dec 6, 2012
“In 1991, researchers at the California Institute of Technology described the basic genetic system behind how flowers are made… I remember being fascinated the first time I heard about it. This was the sort of thing that got me really excited — disparate facts were brought together in an elegant mechanism that could robustly set up a flower but was still flexible enough to create different forms.”
—– —– —– —– —–From ‘Geo-HeritageScience’, Dec 7, 2012
“you say that we go round the sun. If we went round the moon it would not make a pennyworth of difference to me or to my work.”
Why public engagement with science matters, and how even scientists appear ‘scientifically illiterate’ when public engagement emphasizes textbook fact rather than the nature and process of science.
—– —– —– —– —–From ‘Speaking of Science’, Dec 10, 2012
This is part of a series of interviews with science communicators about science communication called Speaking to…
Actor and former MSc Science Communication student talks to Julie Gould on why science communication matters.
—– —– —– —– —–From ‘Geo-HeritageScience’, Dec 11, 2012
Geology is a real interdisciplinary science, but has its refusal to sit at its own table only made it harder to talk about?
“The problem with geology…is that it is not well enough known in the science arena. Not enough (high impact) science communication and public engagement connects broad audiences with geology, even with its fascinating hooks for many people.”
—– —– —– —– —–From ‘Alexander Brown’, Dec 12, 2012
“Put yourself in the place of “the public”. In fact, when it comes to most science that isn’t your own field, you are the public. How would you like it if experts in other fields were bad at communicating their science? Treat others as you would like to be treated.”
—– —– —– —– —–From ‘Speaking of Science’, Dec 13, 2012
Martha Henson on the use of technology and games in public engagement.
“The potential for games with a scientific basis is huge, and largely untapped. All kinds of areas of science would be absolutely ripe for mining for game rules. Maybe chemical bonding, electricity and magnetism, larger systems such as weather patterns or all kinds of cell behaviour…”
—– —– —– —– —–From ‘Science Hubb’, Dec 13, 2012
How one type of fat can help reduce body weight, and potentially aid in the treatment of diabetes…