Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
Laid Back Lounge / Re: Things that make you chuckle
« Last post by Dragonia on Today at 06:45:53 PM »
^^^  :snicker:
My 13 year old son's life right now.....
Parenting Beyond Belief / Re: Harry Potter Books
« Last post by Dragonia on Today at 06:41:53 PM »
So basically, to sum up everything sister Agatha has ever posted..... it all means nothing, none of it is true, joke's on us.

It's why I won't waste my very limited time and posts responding to anything she says any more.
Social Issues and Causes / Re: Why People Dislike Really Smart Leaders
« Last post by Dave on Today at 05:42:27 PM »
Yeah, in this country at least scientists have been trying to get the public on their side dince the days of Hunphrey Davy and Michael Faraday - who's Christmas Lectures are still  a TV favourite. There are a couple of "professors" tasked with getting the public in touch with dcience and, on the perdonal front, BBC's "The Life Scientific" series, with Jim Al Khalili interviewing nin-famous scientists from all disciplines about their work and drives, on the radio. Then there was the castaway science series (can't remember its name), the "Great Egg Race" and others.

But many of these either appealed to educated and/or already interested people or were almost "party trick" shows - rarely connecting with the everyday lives of ordinary people. "Preaching to the converted" does not spread the word that much, and it is not "the converted" we need to worry about - it's the guy watching only football or the woman watching only soaps.

But, we are probably never going to get through to those sort of people, but do we concentrate too much on their opinion? The media, no matter what they say, want the unusual, the radical, the strident - nice quiet, comfortable, non-controversial people with well educated and/or considered opinions don't attract public attention. The media live on public attention. I wonder if surveys into this ask much about the responder's social ranking, education, employment etc.
Music / Re: What are you listening to?
« Last post by Tank on Today at 05:39:49 PM »
Politics / Re: Duke of Bullshit: "The" Donald
« Last post by xSilverPhinx on Today at 04:57:06 PM »
Politics / Re: Sigh
« Last post by xSilverPhinx on Today at 04:50:52 PM »

Surely this is unethical from a medical standpoint.
Laid Back Lounge / Re: What's on your mind today?
« Last post by xSilverPhinx on Today at 04:39:37 PM »
Hmm, lotsa factors here! Yes, historically most rulers had donething going for them, good governors, good strategusts etc. A few had religion, cusyom and law on their side (Caligula, Nero) or were just tools of ambitious men. But they all had some sort of power, from respect tp threat.

Today, in general, I think we have far more freedoms, probably than our parents even. Most of us have a democratic(?) choice of government, most of us have some freedom on speech, a degree of education, some choice of employment etc etc. We are, generally, not cowed into subission by our "rulers" (excepting Iran, Saudi Arabia etc). Few countries have a history of feudalism that came into quite modern times then morphed into totalitarianism (Russia and Cina). But we did have millennia of feudal or near feudal cintrol over our lives even in the top 1st world countries.

How much of that "conditioned" our evolutuon I wonder? Power is still seen as something to be sudpicious of by most people I woukd bet, at least power that we have had no personal contact with. Perhaps we instinctively understand politics, that runs from interpersonal to international with rather blurred barriers - we all have experience somewhere on that spectrum and project or extrapolate it beyond that experience.

Scientists though (sound of air being sucked in through pursed lips and teeth), dodgy lot them, who knows what they are up to, all them long words and big sums . . . Actually scientists do not factor on any of the "10 Most Hated Profession" lists I have found. Lawyers seem to factor quite high... We need a version of James' Burke's "Connections" to link things like the LHD, or maybe its predecessors, to actual benefit. A link could be drawn between the "blue-sky" research of Curie and others to radiotherapy or even just the ability to measue the pumping efficiency/volume of the heart from outside the body.

Scientists are, for the most part, lousy at the dissemination of their areas of expertise to the wider population. There are too few Carl Sagans and Bill Nyes in the world to translate all the formulas and jargon into speech and concepts we can all understand. If I remember correctly, Carl Sagan was even barred from getting into the National Academy of Sciences because of his efforts to popularise science. It's a pity things are this ways because in order for people to support funding the sciences, they have to have a better idea of why they're important. It seems like a lot of people don't see that.

As for the general population, a lot of people still have some weird disdain for the method even though science gave us a lot. It's a method that seems to be steadily losing credibility, with people instead seeking and accepting pseudo-scientific and religious explanations for natural phenomena. As an aspiring scientist, I find this a little sad. And am a little desperate that willful ignorance abounds.     
Science / Re: Science image dump
« Last post by Tank on Today at 04:28:01 PM »
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10