Science: April 2006 Archive Page

CHERYL:
Wait a minute! Did you see that? An apple fell out of that tree!
[dramatic music; slow motion shot of falling apple]
This means there must be some sort of FORCE!

DARREN:
A force -- a gravitational force!

CHERYL:
Yes -- and wait a minute -- suppose the force stretched all the way to the moon!
Could that solve the problem?

VOICEOVER:
To check on her theory, Cheryl must now do some abstruse calculations?
[CUT to images of Cheryl scratching head, blowing wisps of hair out of eyes, staring into computer screen, scribbling copious mathematics on paper (speeding up to very fast pace at the end)]

{Producer's note -- use that Tensor Calculus maths stuff from the Einstein program, it looks really good}

CHERYL
(Throwing down pencil): Got it! Its the INVERSE SQUARE!
[CUT to large red-painted plywood square on studio floor. Enter four men in white coats, who turn it over]

PRESENTER:
Cheryl has found that an inverse square law of gravity can explain the path of the moon and the sun around the earth. The crystal sphere theory is finally laid to rest!

[CUT to slow motion shattering of glass globe. Hold 2 minutes.] --The Science Detectives (Lab Lit)

A great spoof of fluffy science lite TV shows, from a website that focuses on the literary representation of scientists.

Science for non-majors offers an important chance to reach out to students outside the sciences, and try to give them some appreciation for scientific inquiry. This is critically important, as we live in a time where science itself is under political assault from both the left and right. People with political agendas are constantly peddling distorted views of science, from conspiracy theories regarding pharmaceutical companies and drug development, to industry-backed attempts to challenge the scientific findings regarding global climate change, to the well-documented attempts to force religion into science curricula under the guise of "intelligent design." It's more important than ever for our students to be able to understand and critically evaluate competing claims about science.

I worry, however, that our approach to teaching science as a part of a liberal education is undermining the goals we have set for our classes. --Edward Morley --It's Time to End ''Physics for Poets'' (Inside Higher Ed)

I took "Physics as a Liberal Art," which did include equations and formulas, but which was more like watching an episode of Cosmos, in that the instructor (James Trefil) focused on the cultural backdrop that indicated why this particular discovery or refinement was important to civilization and the advancement of knowledge. A lesson that has had lasting impact involved the professor giving you a phase of the moon, and requiring you to correctly place the moon, earth, and sun on a diagram. (I mentally give myself that test question whenever I look up at the moon.)

The course that I took was definitely softball science, but it was heavy on humanities content, so I did find it intellectually challenging. (Trefil co-authored The Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, with E.D. Hirsch, Jr.) So the course I took does not sound like the trendy "ripped from the headlines" course that Morley criticizes here. To quote Morley,

Science is more than just a collection of difficult facts to be learned. It's a way of looking at the universe, a systematic approach to studying the world around us, and understanding how things work. As such, it's as fundamental a part of human civilization as anything to be found in art or literature. The skills needed to do science are the same skills needed to excel in most other fields: careful observation, critical thinking, and an ability to support arguments with evidence.

I never took a college science lab. In fact, about a year ago I took my molecule-obsessed son to our school's science labs for a tour with one of the faculty (John Cramer), and that was the first time I'd ever been in a college science lab.

Of course, at the time I had no idea that I would end up teaching technical writing to engineering students, or that my first full-time job would be a technical writing instructor. I'm not sure that taking a science lab would have automatically made me a better tech writing teacher.

At any rate, since these last few years I've taught an American Lit survey course that includes many gen-ed students, I can certainly understand what's at stake when an instructor is faced with the question of stoking the fear and wrath of students who don't want to be in the class in the first place, or simplifying and lowering your expectations, thus robbing the committed students from a truly challenging classroom experience.

Veteran commander John Young and his rookie pilot Robert Crippen faced a lot of uncertainties April 12, 1981, as they waited for the space shuttle Columbia to lift off from Florida's Kennedy Space Flight Center. --STS-1: 'A test pilot's dream': Columbia astronaut recalls first shuttle flight on 25th anniversary (CNN)

When my class was watching the launch live on TV in the classroom, and the countdown approached zero, my "friend" came up behind me and put his hands over my eyes.

Yes, you did read that right. And also, yes, this eight-year period of temperature stasis did coincide with society's continued power station and SUV-inspired pumping of yet more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

In response to these facts, a global warming devotee will chuckle and say "how silly to judge climate change over such a short period". Yet in the next breath, the same person will assure you that the 28-year-long period of warming which occurred between 1970 and 1998 constitutes a dangerous (and man-made) warming. Tosh. Our devotee will also pass by the curious additional facts that a period of similar warming occurred between 1918 and 1940, well prior to the greatest phase of world industrialisation, and that cooling occurred between 1940 and 1965, at precisely the time that human emissions were increasing at their greatest rate.

Does something not strike you as odd here? --Bob Carter -- There IS a problem with global warming... it stopped in 1998 (Telegraph)

I'm not really sure what I think. Certainly recycling and avoiding waste are sensible, but when well-meaning activists use bad science to back up their claims, reason suffers.

Fully HALF of all children who grow up in bread-consuming households score below average on standardized tests. --!!! BREAD IS DANGEROUS !!!