and your electron microscope

Category: science

The problem with Q&A’s…

Ok here’s the script. Over on the Twenty-first floor is where you will likely find most of my “science writing” and a fair whack of my skeptical stuff as well. Which leaves… well it leaves the more controversial/political and ranty topics for the microscope.

Today perhaps unfairly I want to have a wee rant about science communication and the Q&A. Presumably it’s intended as a means for an audience to seek clarification on points the speaker has just mentioned or to seek further information about topics raised.

I doubt somehow that anyone has told the general public this as there appear to be a few common types of questioner present at such events:

The Pet theorist: No not someone with a novel view about Positron emission tomography but someone with a little (or perhaps a lot – but nearly always less than the academic) knowledge of a few concepts or ideas in an area or field who wants to ask a question about their own pet theory for why shit happens or why shit is shit. This type of question can be cringeworthy as the academic deals with it politely whilst you get the impression they are wondering why the fuck they are bothering.

Creationists and their ilk form a sub-category of the pet theorist who bypass the bit about knowledge of concepts and ideas and jump straight to nonsensical pet theories like intelligent design.

The missed the point completely: The most excuciating to listen to and probably the most demoralising to answer. Someone who either hasn’t listended or utterly failed to understand the point of the talk (I usually avoid asking questions just in case I am one of these people!). When someone asks a question like this I often wonder if the academic attributes this to their ignorance or some failing in their presentation. Whichever way it is vexing for the audience members who were listening and understood to hear the speaker go over the same ground again… I mean – JUST. FUCKING. LISTEN.  If you don’t understand then perhaps that’s fair enough – though if you are asking the SAME FUCKING QUESTION as someone else but in a different way… YOU ARE A FUCKING IDIOT. Cheers.

The “I’m going to ask a scientist a question”: The type of person who doesn’t understand how highly specialised science is these days and that one type of scientists won’t likely be able to answer a question on another area. I think perhaps most lay people probably fall into this category to an extent – so it’s perhaps unfair to pick on folk who make this schoolboy error. Especially when the confusion arises from asking a human cellular biologists questions about plant cellular biology or an experimental physicist about string theory or the like. But there is an element of “this hasn’t really got anything to do with what you said but I’ll ask it anyway” to it: should a guitarist expect to field questions about drumming? I think people perhaps have this ridiculous notion that science is some monolithic endeavour rather than a complex mish-mash of interwoven and in some cases interlocked fields that share a common method!

Anyway I just wanted to have a wee rant about the inane and utterly banal questions people seem to ask scientists – admitadly I couldn’t think of anything interesting to ask but as a wooster recently commented on a blog of mine “It is better to keep one’s mouth shut and be thought a fool than it is to open it and remove all doubt”

Gay genes?

Research from Andrea Camperio Ciani and colleagues at the University of Padua, Italy has suggested that bisexuality has a genetic root.  It is reported in New Scientist here journal reference: Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences (DOI: 10.10.98/rspb.2004). Read the rest of this entry »

Littlejohn on torture.

Richard Littlejohns’ latest column in the Daily Fail is a torturous exercise in justifying the unjustifiable: in this case torture. Read the rest of this entry »

McCarthy Madness

Jenny McCarthy is one of the leading lights of Americas anti-vaccination movement (vocal to the extent that some sceptical wag has created this  and her most recent pronouncement relates to the discrediting of the paper that many blame for launching the MMR “controversy” (Or more accurately the Medias MMR hoax). Read the rest of this entry »

Simple Simon…

If anyone hasn’t read my post on the twenty-first floor about Simon Jenkins then I advise you to. Thats the longer less ranty version. This isn’t. Read the rest of this entry »

Acceptance Speech

Well it has come to pass that I am Scottish Roundup’s Science blog of the year!

Thanks to everyone who voted. Read the rest of this entry »

AD hom and on and on and on… AD HOM!

Despite what some folks may think I am not a Nazi and I am a skeptic!

The 1023 campaign is not about restricting freedom of choice, it is not about banning homeopathy rather it is about raising awareness of the scientific evidence that shows homeopathy doesn’t work.

Now I’m very sorry if hearing the scientific fact that “Homeopathy doesn’t work”  causes you some discomfort or upset and you are of course allowed to reject the massive weight of empirical and scientific evidence that suggests there is nothing in homeopathy. You can ignore the laws of the universe as discovered by physicists and chemists that state the memory of water is impossible and that you would need to drink the oceans dry to find an active ingredient in your homeopathic remedy.

Such is your right to freedom of belief.

You can ignore the science and you can ignore the evidence based medicine all you want.

What you don’t have the right to do is engage is baseless ad hominem attacks on those who disagree with you.

Read the rest of this entry »

1023: suffering from the Dawkins effect?

Richard Dawkins is a man who, at the least it would be fair to say, divides opinion. For some he is an evangelical atheist with a deep hatred and mistrust of religion and yet others find him tiresome still because of his criticisms of religion and the religious. Now I’m not going to blog too much about Richard Dawkins – though no doubt that could start some reasonably active and impassioned debate…

What I want to blog about is something I’m going to call the “Dawkins effect” this is where what someone says – the content and logic of their arguments seem to be treated as secondary to what people think their motivations and intent is.

Or rather that peoples preconceptions and stereotypes about a person or group of people overrides what they actually say and encourages attribution of motives that may or may not be there to the person/group.

Read the rest of this entry »

After the quacklash…

The backlash begins…

The 1023 campaign has already, predictably enough, encouraged somewhat of a “quacklash” – just look
at the homeopaths spamming the #ten23 hashtag on twitter or the copycat pro-homeopathy campaign that has arisen.

However now it seems those outside the homeopathy and skeptical communities are getting involved in the debate… And some tired and cliched arguments are surfacing…

Chief among these seems to be “what’s the harm?”. Why should there be a campaign against something as harmless as homeopathy? I mean it’s their money and their choice isn’t it?

Well yes it is their money and their choice – but if someone was putting their health at direct risk you’d likely intervene or at least comment wouldn’t you?

Read the rest of this entry »

Dana and me

I’m a patient man in most respects. I am also very much aware that when declaring myself as a skeptic there are certain people who may be uncomfortable answering questions I may ask.

Perhaps they fear being caught out in some sketi-trap of my malicious creation?

Certainly my last post, again inspired by the 1023 campaign, has attracted one drive by comment from the homeopathic community and no more. (Perhaps just having one comment means that from a homeopathic perspective the debate is settled?)

However when you ask a question of a well known member of the homeopathic community, some might say leading, who runs a homeopathic educational organisation no less. That they would have a vested interest in politely answering your queries in the name of public enagement?

Read the rest of this entry »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.