Your Government In Action Options

[Guest_BruceMoomaw_*]

http://sciencedems.house.gov/press/PRArtic...spx?NewsID=1007 :

"[House] Science [Committee] Democrats lauded an agreement reached today on
the Conference Report for S. 1281, the NASA Authorization Act of 2005.
Following today's approval by the conference committee, the legislation is
tentatively scheduled for consideration by the full House this week...

"During the conference, Rep. Jackson-Lee was a strong proponent for... more
educational programs in the sciences for minorities..."

I should hope so, given that she showed up at JPL a few days after the Mars
Pathfinder landing and asked if it could photograph Neil Armstrong's
footprints.

[RedSky]

Here's an example from about 15 years ago on some educational deficiencies (or worse):

In my previous job, I was sort of a liason between the sciences and insurance companies... providing pertinent research and information on meteorology and geology (i.e., hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, etc). I used to give talks about this at insurance trade seminars. As is typical, I'd open with describing my background and a little joke: My undergraduate degree was in physics and astronomy... but I "came down to earth" and got my masters in meteorology.

Some middle aged woman in the front row, wearing a smart gray business suit... she might have been an executive secretary, a middle manager, or actuary for all I know... asked me: "Does your astrology background help you in your forecasts?" Not sure what she meant, I said that... well, a lot of the physics, math and planetary science in astronomy was applicable in earth science. She replied... "No, I mean did your background in astrology ... forecasting the future by the stars, help in your weather forecasts?"

I could hear some chuckles in the audience... and I didn't really want to embarrass her, so I just said something like.. "If I could really forecast that well, I wouldn't be here." Well, I guess most newspapers do have daily horoscopes.


Similar to the previous post on someone not knowing that stars are "suns": My father was not well educated. Once, as a kid (probably in the mid 1960's), we were watching on TV the old 1950's classic movie "When Worlds Collide". Near then end, when the star Zyra collides with and destroys the earth... he said "Isn't that a bit far fetched: stars are tiny, and fall to the earth as shooting stars." When I said "Gee, Dad, stars are like the sun... some much bigger. Don't you KNOW that!" He seemed quite taken aback and embarrassed by that.

For someone not into science, I could easily see with our educational program here in the U.S. how this fact could be overlooked or forgotten. Especially for those who were not interested, and just sort of slept through 7th grade science (which was the last time in grades K-12 that we dealt with astronomy in my school system).

[Guest_Richard Trigaux_*]

Similar to the previous post on someone not knowing that stars are "suns":  My father was not well educated.  Once, as a kid (probably in the mid 1960's), we were watching on TV the old 1950's classic movie "When Worlds Collide".  Near then end, when the star Zyra collides with and destroys the earth... he said "Isn't that a bit far fetched: stars are tiny, and fall to the earth as shooting stars."  When I said "Gee, Dad, stars are like the sun... some much bigger.  Don't you KNOW that!"  He seemed quite taken aback and embarrassed by that. 

For someone not into science, I could easily see with our educational program here in the U.S. how this fact could be overlooked or forgotten.  Especially for those who were not interested, and just sort of slept through 7th grade science (which was the last time in grades K-12 that we dealt with astronomy in my school system).

My father too was thinking that the spots on the Moon were clouds (in our atmosphere).
That in prehistory people were afraid of eclipses is understandable (it is a breathtaking view, and seeing the daylight switching off like a lamp could be really frightening if you don't know what happens). But since at least one century we have SCHOOL with (in theory) basic explanations about what are stars, planets, eclipses, etc. So the problem is
1) either these basic science notions are not really presented in school curicula
2) there are still many persons who are not interested by the world they live in, just into their personnal surrounding.

A third point is about science-fiction, which often presents things in a fancy way, not helping people to sort what is real science extrapolation and what is pure fantazy. For instance a recent movie like "fusion" contains many grossly inexact statements (the solar wind able to melt massive steel structures!), not accounting with enormous calculation mistakes (a machine able to melt millions of tons of rock at a second, powered by a nuclear reactor, and when you remove the plutonium bar of the reactor, it is not so hot that you can touch it! Whooaaaaa!) This does not help to bring basic science education to people.

[ljk4-1]

In Sunday's Book Review: 'A People's History of Science,'

by Clifford D. Conner
=====================================================

Review by JONATHAN WEINER

Clifford D. Conner thinks snobbery has distorted the writing
of history from ancient times to the present. In writing
about science, for instance, historians celebrate a few great
names - Galileo, Newton, Darwin, Einstein - and neglect the
contributions of common, ordinary people who were not afraid
to get their hands dirty. With "A People's History of
Science," Conner tries to help right the balance. The
triumphs of science rest on a "massive foundation created by
humble laborers," he writes.

Unfortunately, this people's history isn't very good with
people. Conner is too busy counterbalancing the Great Man
theory to tell us about, say, Newton's extraordinary mind.
The Great Man theory may not make a good history of science,
but neither does what you might call the Great Mass theory.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/18/books/re...html?8bu&emc=bu

[Tom Ames]

The review that follows, of Chris Mooney's bok The Republican War on Science is also very good.