The Intersection

The Intersection Moves To Discover Blogs

Mon, 23 Mar 2009 15:50:11 -0500

Today, we move to our new home at Discover Blogs: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection

While we have immensely enjoyed being a part of Scienceblogs, we've decided together that it is time to move on. Our tremendous thanks go out to Seed for hosting The Intersection since 2006 where we've been honored to share the network with such an esteemed community of bloggers--many of whom have become good friends.

While we're excited to join Carl, Phil, and Sean, it is a bittersweet decision as we will miss the Sb 'family' tremendously. Of course, we will never be far--the blogosphere has no boundaries after all--and the discussion grows larger and more interesting every day...

The Intersection at Discover will maintain its archive of posts and comments, growing as we continue to explore the intersections of science, politics, and society. We're also preparing to announce some exciting new projects so stay tuned! Most of all, as we make this transition, the blog will become the central clearinghouse for discussions relating to our new book, Unscientific America, which we're very proud of and which hits this June/July.

Thanks to sciblings, readers, and Scienceblogs for years of support and friendship! Please update your feed, bookmarks, links, and blogrolls with our new address
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection and come visit us as we settle in!

Discover The Intersection 3.0

Another Big Announcement Coming...

Mon, 23 Mar 2009 13:04:21 -0500

Every now and then we plan something big and today's no exception so check back this afternoon...

Read the comments on this post...

Our Blogger Panel At Duke

Mon, 23 Mar 2009 08:25:30 -0500

As promised, photos* from last Friday with 'the Bloggerati'. Here I'm in terrific company with Misha, Bora, and Abel over lunch in Durham:

Bora and I chat with students about why we blog:

* Special thanks to Abel for sharing the images! For a terrific detailed description of the day, visit Terra Sigillata...

Read the comments on this post...

George Will Op-Ed Second Most Viewed Article at Washington Post.com

Sat, 21 Mar 2009 17:09:26 -0500

My oped is second only to a roundup of business news, as of 4 pm ET. See here.

The op-ed has generated some 440 comments, too, at last count. I wonder if we will hear anything further from Mr. Will....

UPDATE: Scratch that, as of 7 ET, it is the number one article on the website.... Read the comments on this post...

My Washington Post Answer to George Will

Sat, 21 Mar 2009 06:26:43 -0500

As any reader of this blog knows, I was for a while very critical of the Washington Post editorial page amid the George Will affair. Now, my view has changed.

Today the Post publishes, replete with links to many scientific sources, my op-ed answering three claims Will made in his now infamous "Dark Green Doomsayers" column, and also making a broader point about why we need standards in science-centered journalism and commentary.

I'm extremely heartened that the Post ran the piece, and has at least allowed me to correct Will--or, to "debate" him. Without further ado, the oped begins like this:

A recent controversy over claims about climate science by Post op-ed columnist George F. Will raises a critical question: Can we ever know, on any contentious or politicized topic, how to recognize the real conclusions of science and how to distinguish them from scientific-sounding spin or misinformation?
Congress will soon consider global-warming legislation, and the debate comes as contradictory claims about climate science abound. Partisans of this issue often wield vastly different facts and sometimes seem to even live in different realities.

In this context, finding common ground will be very difficult. Perhaps the only hope involves taking a stand for a breed of journalism and commentary that is not permitted to simply say anything; that is constrained by standards of evidence, rigor and reproducibility that are similar to the canons of modern science itself....

You can read the rest here.

I spent a weekend doing this column, wondering if I was wasting my time. Now I'm very glad I did it.

UPDATE: I didn't realize it until just now, but my column is paired with a letter from the secretary general of the World Meteorological Organization, Michel Jarraud, further debunking Will. In combination, this is a pretty powerful riposte, to say the least. Read Jarraud's letter here.

UPDATE II: Wow. Over at the Post there are already over 80 comments (as of 9:30 ET)...now there are 200 as of 12:30 ET....

UPDATE III: Linkage: Adam Siegel, Joe Romm, Michael Tobis, John Fleck, Think Progress, Mike Dunford, Tim Lambert, Abel Pharmboy, Carl Zimmer, David Roberts, Matthew Yglesias, Atrios, Brad Johnson (Wonk Room), Jamison Foser (Media Matters), Steve Benen, Simon Donner, John Fleck (again), John Quiggin, Adam Stein..... Read the comments on this post...

On Michael Steele's 'Cooling Process'

Fri, 20 Mar 2009 16:30:09 -0500

Several readers have emailed me to comment on Michael Steele's ummmm...imaginative explanations of both global 'cooling' and Greenland:

"We are cooling. We are not warming. The warming you see out there, the supposed warming, and I am using my finger quotation marks here, is part of the cooling process. Greenland, which is now covered in ice, it was once called Greenland for a reason, right? Iceland, which is now green. Oh I love this. Like we know what this planet is all about. How long have we been here? How long? No very long."

You want me to respond to that gibberish? Seriously? The man got the history of Greenland wrong... need I really wax poetic on the rest? It's not a question of 'what this planet is all about', but rather what planet is the RNC Chairman on?

My take is that I'm embarrassed for the Republicans. No, I may not always agree with their policies, but in terms of who is representing their image right now, surely they can do so much better...

Read the comments on this post...

Morning With 'The Bloggerati'

Fri, 20 Mar 2009 14:10:22 -0500

Today Bora, Abel, and I visited Duke's Sanford Institute on Public Policy for the second year in a row to discuss the coverage of science, health, and policy. We chatted with a group of undergraduates about the evolution of science blogs, the emergence of blogging networks, the role of science blogs vs the MSM, and where open-access fits in. Our beloved scibling Isis even made a guest appearance via gchat!

We had a lot of fun and special thanks to GenomeBoy for inviting us to explore ideas with his terrific class! The other 'Beacons of the Bloggerati' had cameras, so photo to come.

After the morning in such wonderful company, I'm already looking forward to next year!

Read the comments on this post...

The Frakkin' Finale of Battlestar Galactica

Fri, 20 Mar 2009 09:23:17 -0500

Nothing else matters today. Nothing except what is going to happen in the very last episode of Battlestar, which has been running since 2004 and now culminates in a two hour extravaganza. We know the Battlestar is about to jump into the Cylon colony to rescue Hera, the human-Cylon hybrid child, and to make a last stand with guns blazing...what the frak is going to happen?

This thread is for you, nerds of the universe....

Read the comments on this post...

About That 'Something Called 'Volcano Monitoring'

Thu, 19 Mar 2009 18:08:12 -0500

'Instead of monitoring volcanoes, what Congress should be monitoring is the eruption of spending in Washington.'
- Governor Bobby Jindal, February 24, 2009

If this video is any indication, both eruptions have the potential to do a lot of damage and it seems to me they're not mutually exclusive. So let's keep an eye on each.

(And spare the fruit fly funding too).

Read the comments on this post...

Go Tell Bobby Jindal...

Thu, 19 Mar 2009 11:10:12 -0500

..about the undersea volcano that's been erupting over the last four days in the South Pacific!

What you see is smoke, steam, and ash shooting up thousands of feet near Tonga. And while this activity poses little threat to islanders right now, the image reminds me why I'm in favor of "something called 'volcano monitoring'," even if the Louisiana governor disagrees.

Read the comments on this post...

Don't Bash "Bad Science Reporting" While Ignoring the Broader Economic Context!

Thu, 19 Mar 2009 09:09:20 -0500

Ed Brayton, who I admire greatly, has a post that runs afoul of my "death of science journalism" sensitivity meter. You see, Ed came across a National Geographic story that says something dumb about "carbon dating." Ed is surely right on the point of substance, and National Geographic should not have made the error. I certainly don't mind him pointing that out; but when you also get something like this--"I've bitched and complained about the sorry state of popular science writing for years. Here's another textbook example..."--I get uppity.

The sorry state of popular science writing is not a matter of errors in stories. These will always occur; they're regrettable but unavoidable; and most important, they're relatively trivial in comparison with the carnage currently happening in the science journalism world. The "sorry state of popular science writing" is a product of the ongoing collapse of the newspaper industry--the Seattle Post-Intelligencer just printed its last copy, and its science writer Tom Paulson, a guy I greatly admire, is now out of work--and a variety of other factors that are structural and economic in nature: The decline of newspaper science sections (the Boston Globe is the latest to go), the near total lack of substantive science on cable news, and so forth.

Or to put it another way--the writer Ed excoriates made a mistake, but by God, at least she still has a job and cares about science. That's the broader context that I believe must be highlighted before any more bashing of individual science writers is justified.

Read the comments on this post...

When Will Geoengineering 'Tip'?

Wed, 18 Mar 2009 14:56:43 -0500

My latest Science Progress column contemplates this question, in the wake of a spot of news that doesn't seem to have caused any uproar (yet)--namely, that DARPA, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, is apparently holding an event to discuss the prospect of geoengineering the climate.

As I write in the column:

This is newsworthy for at least two reasons: The U.S. government has, thus far, kept the subject of geoengineering at a relative arm's-length; and one reason for that shyness is the extremely checkered past history of U.S. military ventures in weather modification, including the notorious attempt to use "weather warfare" to our advantage in Vietnam.
I'm not personally scandalized to learn of DARPA holding a conference or having a discussion. One thing about geoengineering, after all, is that not only may we want to do it, but we might also have reason to be concerned about someone else doing it--so the more dialogue, the better.

Indeed, I suspect that at some point soon this topic, currently off the radar of most Americans, is going to come up in a very big way, whether through politico-media scandal or, very preferably, otherwise.

Why? Put simply, because at least in some versions, geoengineering is likely to be cheap, and likely to work. These two attributes are already proving intellectually irresistible to many climate scientists, who at minimum call for geoengineering to be "studied," and who are already doing so themselves in climate models. At some point, as we continue to struggle to get a handle on the global warming problem, they may also prove practically irresistible to politicians and governments.

I then call for a much broader public discussion of the pros and cons of geoengineering now, at the highest levels of policymaking and the media. We need to decide, as a society, what we think about direct and intentional climate modification before somebody goes ahead and actually tries it. You can read the full column here.

Read the comments on this post...

The Evolution of Beauty

Wed, 18 Mar 2009 11:47:46 -0500

A couple weeks back, I composed a post entitled 'Science Reveals How To Lose Weight And Keep It Off'. The results weren't surprising... research out of Harvard found that calories are the most significant part of the equation. However, what really resonated with a number of readers turned out to be a different topic related to this point:

Weightwise, my take is that we humans have an interesting habit of coming in all shapes and sizes and the most beautiful tend not to fit a particular mold. That said, being healthy--inside and out--is everything.

I received several emails in agreement, and especially enjoyed hearing some of your own stories and challenges. A young woman named Marguerie requested that I post this video to support her 'commitment to improving the self-esteem of girls everywhere.' Sure sounds good to me! So without further ado, from Dove's fantastic Campaign For Real Beauty:

The Evolution Of Beauty

Read the comments on this post...

Agenda For The "Two Cultures" Conference

Wed, 18 Mar 2009 09:16:35 -0500

Last week we told you about the NYAS Two Cultures Conference coming up on May 9, 2009 in celebration of the 50 year anniversary of C.P. Snow's famous Rede lecture. Politicians, academics, writers, and the media will converge to discuss science and society--including keynote addresses by E.O. Wilson, John Porter, and Dean Kamen.

Today we're pleased to announce that the website for the event featuring the full schedule is now available here. Tickets are going fast so we encourage readers to take a look at the agenda and register soon. We hope to see you there!

Read the comments on this post...

Dora Revealed

Tue, 17 Mar 2009 11:27:02 -0500

Here she is...

You've read about the controversy and now it's time to weigh in. According to Reuters, Dora will continue solving mysteries related to the environment, wildlife, and school while maintaining her sense of adventure.

As I wrote last week, I hope the middle school aged explorer remains curious, clever, self confident, and kind. And if she chooses to do so while wearing cute shoes, she's entitled. Isis and I agree that brains and social consciousness are not defined by appearances.

So folks, what do you think?

Read the comments on this post...