Category: Natural Sciences

Scientists, Give Up Your Emails

January 18, 2016

“Last August, a colleague and I wrote an article on the importance of transparency in science for one of the blogs of the science journal publisher PLOS. The argument was fairly simple: When research is paid for by the public, the public has a right to demand transparency and to have access to documents related to the research. This might strike most people as reasonable.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/10/opinion/sunday/scientists-give-up-your-emails.html?_r=0

The Experiment Experiment

January 18, 2016

Reproducibility is a central part of producing knowledge in both the natural and human sciences. Production of knowledge in the sciences is also supposed to be “objective.” What happens when you can produced a statistically significance conclusion but it turns out to be false? What happens when other scientists cannot confirm your conclusions when they try to recreate your experiments? Is it in any way practical to redo others’ experiments consistently?

“How much of published scientific research is false? Scientists are trying to figure it out.”

http://www.npr.org/player/embed/463233921/463238448

Two Flaws of Human Rationality May Make It Impossible to Solve the Climate Crisis

January 5, 2016

“In working toward a climate deal, the leaders face high odds. Sweeping changes are needed, but the political will for change does not appear up to the task. The rational thing to do, of course, is to save the planet. But the way that human rationality works makes it unlikely that even the best minds working conscientiously will be able to do that.

“There are two fundamental problems: a collective action conundrum, and a preference for benefits in the short term.”

http://bigthink.com/praxis/two-flaws-of-human-rationality-may-make-it-impossible-to-solve-the-climate-crisis?mc_cid=f607b9a6a4&mc_eid=34e2887073

Can you be a scientist and have religious faith?

January 5, 2016

“I’ve been a scientist for as long as I can remember. Children are born scientists; they experiment with everything, are naturally inquisitive and through this exploration they learn about how the world works. And I’ve never grown out of it. Of course, for many people, their modes of thought change as they find or are brought up with faith. Some manage, somehow, to hold religious beliefs alongside a dedication to the rationality of science.”

https://newhumanist.org.uk/articles/4889/can-you-be-a-scientist-and-have-religious-faith?mc_cid=f607b9a6a4&mc_eid=34e2887073

All Gene-Editing Research Should Proceed Cautiously, Scientists Conclude

December 8, 2015

“The official statement, which says work altering human germ lines should remain only in the lab, caps a three-day summit on using technology to alter the human genome”

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/all-gene-editing-research-should-proceed-cautiously-scientists-conclude1/

And a second article on the subject

“Improving” Humans with Customized Genes Sparks Debate among Scientists”

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/improving-humans-with-customized-genes-sparks-debate-among-scientists1/

Can science and religion coexist? Not on Mauna Kea, say Hawaiians.

November 18, 2015

What takes precedent when one particular location has religious but also scientific significance? Do people have a responsibility to make sacrifices in the name of scientific progress?

“Debate over the Mauna Kea project seems to pit conservationists against industry, and religion against science. But for native Hawaiians for whom worship intersects stewardship of the environment, concerns about conservation and freedom of religion have blended into a common cause.”

http://m.csmonitor.com/USA/USA-Update/2015/1111/Can-science-and-religion-coexist-Not-on-Mauna-Kea-say-Hawaiians?cmpid=TW

Believing What You Don’t Believe

November 7, 2015

“t’s not that people don’t understand that it’s scientifically impossible for their lucky hats to help their team hit a home run or turn a double play — all but the most superstitious would acknowledge that. It’s that they have a powerful intuition and, despite its utter implausibility, they just can’t shake it.”

Is Cold Medicine a Waste of Time?

November 5, 2015

“A 2009 study that will sound especially sinister to anyone who suffers from allergies put 39 patients with a grass allergy into a sealed room called the “Vienna Challenge Chamber.” Then, the scientists piped in grass pollen. The people were given phenylephrine, a sugar pill or another decongestant called pseudoephedrine. Phenylephrine did no better than the placebo, while pseudoephedrine — which must be obtained by going to the pharmacist’s counter — beat them both.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/rweb/biz/is-cold-medicine-a-waste-of-time/2015/11/04/8eb5c907f9ec9b32832cfe3f6862729d_story.html?wpisrc=nl_draw2

Why are placebos getting more effective?

November 5, 2015

“When new drugs are put on the market, clinical trials determine whether they perform better than inactive pills known as “placebos”. Research shows that over the last 25 years the difference in effectiveness between real drugs and these fake ones has narrowed – but more in the US than elsewhere. Are Americans really more susceptible to placebo effects, or is something else going on?”

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34572482?mc_cid=bed065a83a&mc_eid=34e2887073