Ignorance, according to Firestein, is what drives science because discoveries do not happen as a result of sequential studies and reasoning. It is more like searching in a dark room for a black cat (his example), although sometimes there won’t be a black cat at all. It may be difficult for career scientists to admit that they don’t have a clear idea of what they are doing or looking for, but asking those questions to get at what we don’t know and how to get there is what is important to the process.

I put ignorance in quotes because it does have a lot of negative connotations, like Firestein admits, but I think those negative connotations are sometimes too dominant to justify using the word plainly. I think there should be a better word for it, but don’t have something in mind at the moment, so the quotation marks.

Another issue he talks about is the vastness of knowledge. How can we possibly keep up with all of the knowledge found and advances in science? I cannot keep up with ecology journal articles, much less the weekly issues of Nature and Science (which are the gold standard in academic publishing). With the increasing pace of publishing academic articles, there is also an increase in field-specific jargon. The bar to enter a field and be an expert gets set higher and higher each year, and to know one’s field becomes a really tough prerequisite to being a respected researcher (and to getting tenure for those who really care about that).

Dr. Firestein teaches an interesting seminar course at Columbia University, where prominent researchers come in and discuss what they don’t know and what they want to know in their field. It is this type of discussion that brings the research to a more universally understandable level, because the jargon doesn’t exist yet for things we don’t know about. I really like this point because I agree that it is so hard to even read a single academic article in a field that I am not active in, but I can relate to discussion in terms of the unknowns.

Firestein also said some interesting things about hypotheses (and the scientific method). He doesn’t like them, and I agree. He argues that hypotheses open up research to biases (or, more boldly put, pigeonhole research into biases and expectations), whereas more curiosity-driven open-ended questioning avoids bias in some ways. But the way to get funding for your research is to describe and structure your studies in a hypothesis-driven way. Basically, the scientific method is bogus!

If I was able to ask Dr. Firestein a question, I would ask him how he feels about the lack of interest in publishing negative results. Meaning, studies that come up short of significant results, but still might have some interesting intellectual value by informing people about what didn’t happen. I can imagine a new academic journal going by the title of “Ignorance,” but that might not give much confidence to researchers who are looking to publish.

This talk couldn’t have come at a better time as I’m getting closer to doing my own research projects (I’ll post more on this later). I don’t have any hypotheses, although I have some questions, some thoughts and a short plan. But, I think it’s ok not to have set plan. Most of the time.

My book club read a few months ago a book by that name, Covering by Kenji Yoshino (more info at his website). He talks about the history of the gay rights movements, but also makes it clear that the covering phenomenon is universal and does not only occur in members of the gay community, for all types of people who may be discriminated against.

The first “phase” is converting, where the group feels the social pressure to “convert” to the norm that is accepted. There may even be direct actions taken by society in order to try to convert those individuals, such as sending people to places where they can be “cured” of homosexuality.

The next phase is passing, where the individuals will seem on the surface to be an average member of the larger group, such that the individual can “pass” for a member of the larger group. This is a sort of unspoken social camouflage. Others may know the underlying truth, but do not acknowledge it publicly.

The last phase, covering, is where individuals downplay certain aspects of themselves in order to present an image that is expected, such as changing your hairstyle from a ethnic style to a more commonly “acceptable” style. They may be asked to do this, or may do this on their own. This could also include things like not talking about family in the workplace as a woman because you would not like to seem too feminine.

“Appearance concerns how an individual physically presents herself to the world.
Affiliation concerns her cultural identifications.
Activism concerns how much she politicizes her identity.
Association concerns her choice of fellow travelers – lovers, friends, colleagues.”

These are the different avenues by which we may assimilate, or cover, in society. Why would anyone do this? Subconsciously or not? In a way, social interactions are biological adaptations for living in a community with many other individuals who may be different from yourself. Those differences could lead to conflicts, which may be better off avoided. It would be interesting to see if there are psychological or behavioral studies along these lines.

I can relate to each of these 4 aspects as a Chinese American growing up in New York City. I didn’t grow up in a very Asian neighborhood, and did not attend high school with many other Asian Americans until high school (where Asians made up nearly half of the student body). The Asians, of course, were drawn to each other and formed social groups, sometimes along very stark lines. These groups, or cliques, tended to look alike and dress alike, probably as a phenomenon of sorting and/or peer effects. There were those that rejected association with these groups, and seemed to not be Asian at all except for their Asian looks that that were given to them. They were Asian on the outside, but white or black or latino on the inside.

Yoshino makes the argument that covering inhibits our ability to communicate honestly and effectively. The projections of ourselves are what we think others expect to see. We feel the need to live up to expectations in order to maintain social balance, but where do those expectations come from?

Yoshino also talks about reverse covering, where individuals go to extra lengths to express their specialness (such as joining all the Asian culture groups in high school, or only dating within your ethnic group). I found that the pressures of both covering and reverse covering can occur in tandem, and makes for a confusing adolescence.

The take away in this book is that the conversation about covering is not happening enough, and if it does, it is not occurring in the right way. Several court cases discussed in the book were decided with assumptions that if a person could assimilate, that they should. These past few days I’ve been at a meeting held by the Convention on Biological Diversity. Perhaps we need a Convention on Human Diversity as well.

I’ll end with one of my favorite quotes from the book:

“It is a sad truth that one of the most potent psychic antidotes to racism is racism.”

There is an estimated 600 people here, with delegates and parties representing around 150 – 190 countries, and also attendees representing international organizations like FAO, UNEP, UNDP, DIVERSITAS, and nonprofit organizations in science and technology. It’s a super diplomatic event!

This is the first event I’ve been to where more languages other than English is spoken, and interpreted, for attendees to communicate, make statements and come to decisions. Yes, they have those things you put on your ear to hear the interpretation in real time!

We are here because we have a side event tonight after the working group sessions. The topic is biodiversity and health, with an emphasis on the ecosystem or ecohealth approach to research, policy, and collaboration. We are putting on this side event with DIVERSITAS and the CBD.

The conference is being held at the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) in Montreal, QC, Canada. The building has many interesting art pieces and historical artifacts. Here is one photo of a cool aviation related thing in the building:

The academic journal EcoHealth proudly announces our 2nd Biennial International Art Competition. We would like to extend an open invitation to students, graphic artists, and any other interested individuals to participate. Artwork should exemplify the IAEH mission: To strive for sustainable health of people, wildlife, and ecosystems by promoting discovery, understanding, and transdisciplinarity.

The top nominees will be displayed during the biennial EcoHealth 2012 conference in Kunming, China from October 15-18, 2012. The winning artwork will be decided during this event, which will include $1,000 for first prize, $500 and $250 for 2nd and 3rd, and one-year subscriptions to the print-version of the journal EcoHealth. Artwork will be judged upon its relevance to the mission of our organization and winners will have a chance to be featured on the cover of an upcoming issue of EcoHealth.

For full details go to this webpage, and this page to see past winners (first prize was on the cover of Volume 7 Issue 3!

Pinterest is a way to visualize things from the internet or real life by showing the photo of interest with your own caption underneath. It is a nice way to visually show things according to topics of interest. “Pin” links with photos or videos or upload your own, and assign them to a “board” where you keep other pins of similar topic.

You can follow me on Pinterest, and I have a specific board for science related things.

Some ways I’ve started to use Pinterest:

• Science and other interesting articles
• Food and recipes I’d like to try
• Cool objects (that are cool but I would never need)
• Books I should read
• Crafty things like knitting
• And the only bit of consumerism I will publicly partake in, a Style board with clothes and objects that I like

Pins that tend to dominate Pinterest boards seem to be related to various kinds of photography and style (my sister uses it to collect wedding ideas), although I am not super familiar with it yet. BUT, I do see a cool niche for science here. Aside from the cute photos of http://pinterest.com/pin/262194009525901784/ praying otters and videos of baby animals in buckets http://pinterest.com/pin/100768110382346218/, I imagine scientists sharing photos from field trips, or videos from conferences. It would be really awesome to see one day a community of sharing that connects the scientist’s world to the non-scientist’s world. And if that means first posting some really cute photos, maybe that is just another path to getting people to know more about science.

I’m not closed off to the possibility of going back to graduate school, and if I do I’d probably do another masters with the same reasoning as before for avoiding PhD programs. I am, however, feeling much less positively towards universities in the United States of America. For masters programs, tuition fees are high, and stipends and scholarships are hard to come by. This is even if you are able to get into the school of your choice. And with the economy the way that it is, the competition is the stiffest it has ever been with people applying for graduate school who would normally be pursuing other opportunities.

I have been doing some research on graduate programs abroad. There are some good opportunities for scholarships, and some schools waive tuition fees completely. Even if that were not the case, many of the programs I’ve looked at have much lower tuition fees than in the US.

This article in the Economist details the rankings, costs and figures of business schools internationally. The interesting part is comparing the costs of tuition and length of program, and the increase in earning power after completing the program. Some of the less expensive programs ($33K per year vs. >$60K) still produce good results, with earning power increasing by 64 to 100+ percent (although this may not be a perfect metric).

But that isn’t what I’m mostly concerned about. Sure, I would like my earning potential to increase. But mostly, I want to add to my skill set so that I can do more interesting things. It’s why I’m taking part in online courses and learning coding. The arguable leader in this area is MIT, with their OpenCourseWare. Online learning resources are so hot right now, that it would be a shame not to take advantage. This Stanford professor left academia after teaching an online course, so that he could create an online education startup.

For now, to me it is much less about getting the credentials, and more about transfer of knowledge and development of skills. At least, this seems to be the bandwagon that I have found myself on.

As much as academia may think that they are insulated against modern affairs, what they do in their labs and in their field research often is greatly connected to the daily concerns of global citizens. This is normally not so visible through the current system of publishing in high-level peer reviewed journals, which may or may not trickle down through media outlets.

But as much as the general citizen should like to know about their research, this opens up the possibility of good work to be co-opted by less good people. This is where the danger lies. Many folks are concerned that this H5N1 research is too dangerous to publish, because it involved experiments with a strain in a model organism and could lead to “weaponizing” of the virus to infect and transmit between humans easily.

To view the video recordings of the panel discussion, go to the NYAS website.

Should they extend the moratorium? How much should they publish about their research? Would it help or hurt?

This is an interesting issue because never before have we been at this point where we need to know more to understand, but by finding out more we are also creating new problems with security risk. How can we censor science? Should we? To what extent?

For more reading:

• NPR
• Genetic Engineering News

This is an opportunity to catch up on the green building industry from an expert! Making Green Buildings is being offered as an online course for the masses, and it is completely free as part of an innovative online course initiative and through the participation of professors from Stanford and other universities.

I’ve signed up, and so has thousands of others. The format will be weekly short video lectures, with some questions and quizzes.

I’ll be blogging about this more as the course starts getting going!

• Databases
• Model Thinking – preview videos are available
• Computer Science 101
• Making Green Buildings

Take a look and see if any of the courses offered past and present interest you! I’ll blog more about them as they start up.

Projects range from microbiology to conservation to ancient Roman DNA to zombie research. Some of my favorite projects (to which I have donated to) are:

• Communicating science the Beethoven way
• Mathematics of Direct Democracy
• What’s that Weed? (field guide for local urban plants)
• Mapping a Bornean soundscape

These projects have 18 days left to reach their funding goals, so give to these projects while you can!