By Jamie Hale
Have you ever wondered what it would be like to sleep in the jungle or whitewater raft through the jungle? Adventure guide, Chris Begley knows and he’s here to tell us. National Geographic Traveler recently named one of Begley’s expeditions among 50Tours of a Lifetime!
What are Tropical Classroom Expeditions and The Exploration Foundation?
Tropical Classroom Expeditions and The Exploration Foundation are the two companies I founded to create the type of trip I thought was missing from the market. Tropical Classroom Expeditions focuses on creating international travel experiences for academic groups, from a travel course in a university to an alternative spring break trip. Most of these trips involve a service or volunteering component, and all of these courses get the travelers in close contact with the local communities. I’ve taken groups to Honduras, Costa Rica, and Iceland, and have upcoming trips to Peru, Jordan, and Suriname.
National Geographic Traveler recently named one of your expeditions among the 50 Tours of a Lifetime! Must be an exciting trip could you briefly describe?
The trip they named one of their ’50 Tours of a Lifetime’ is a 14-day trip down a jungle river in Honduras on whitewater rafts, from the headwaters to the ocean. We pass through the Rio Platano Biosphere reserve, the largest area of tropical rain forest in the Western Hemisphere outside of the Amazon. We also visit indigenous communities as we emerge from the jungle. The trip is spectacular – the river has Class III and IV rapids, so it is exciting from that point of view. We see lots of animals, including two or three types monkeys, macaws, toucans, tapirs, and occasionally a big cat like a jaguar or puma. Most people can’t believe that this type of place, and this type of trip, still exists.
Where is your favorite place to travel?
My favorite place is probably the jungles of eastern Honduras, where I did my dissertation research in archaeology and where I take some of the groups I guide. It is truly a wild place, in all the good and bad ways. It’s challenging and difficult, but that makes it rewarding.
Have you ever felt seriously endangered while on an expedition?
Yes, several times. A couple of times because of illness (I’ve had malaria once, dengue fever various times, among other things), a couple of times because of animals (usually close encounters with poisonous snakes such as the fer-de-lance, once in a river with crocodiles), but the most serious problems involve people. I was with a group of local guys with whom I worked often, in a very isolated area that had taken 5 days to walk to, when we ran into a group of heavily-armed bandits, one of which was a known killer who threatened us and clearly had bad intentions. We managed to escape in the night while he went to get his compatriots, but it was a close call. We ended up hiking 20 hours in a 24-hour period. I thought we might not make it out of that situation.
How do you balance your work as a University professor with your exotic travel? Would you rather be in a classroom or in the wild?
I am able to balance the two since I usually travel in the summer, and some of my trips are research, and other can sometimes be combined with research. For instance, next summer I’m working with a group of English students who will be helping me with an archaeological project in Honduras. Organizing the trips during the academic year really doesn’t take too much time. What I miss is any time off during the summer – it seems like the semester ends, I’m off on my trips, and I return just before the next semester. There is little time to unwind.
As to which I prefer, that’s hard to say. I think the balance is about right. By the time the academic year is ending, I’m reading to get out in the jungle. By the time my trips wind up, I’m ready to get back to something more stable, comfortable, and safe. Also, the interaction with students during the academic year is very energizing to me.
What is a typical day in the life of an adventure guide? What about the typical day of a college professor?
There is probably not a typical day in the life of an adventure guide. When I’m actually on a trip, I’m up early, checking everything for the upcoming day. I might be going through our gear checking to see if we have enough food for the next stage of a trip, enough paddles, water purifying drops, or if the zippers on the tents are in good shape. If we are back in town, I’ll be on the phone a lot, checking hotel and transportation arrangements, etc. Last summer I had a group in Honduras when the coup happened. We were just heading out into the jungle, so I spent a lot of time on the satellite phone getting information about the situation, letting people know we were alright, and assessing whether or not it was safe to return to the city. So, I spend a lot of time double-checking arrangements. Sometimes the day involves showing people certain techniques, like how to cross a deep river, how to choose a course through a rapid while rafting, or jungle survival techniques. I really like this aspect of being a guide.
Finally, of course, I end up doing a lot of things for the group – starting the campfire, preparing food, helping clear campsites, or checking to see what kind of insect bit somebody and assuring that they’ll be alright (they always are).
A typical day in the life of a university professor is a little more stable. I usually teach three days a week, and the rest of the time is spent preparing for classes, doing other university-related work, such as serving on committees, and doing research, writing, etc. I have a lot of flexibility, except for my actual classes, and that helps since I have three young children (ages 7, 6, and 2) and can work around their activities, school, etc.
Are you currently working on any new projects? Future expeditions?
I have a few trips upcoming. I’m taking a group from California to Jordan in January with Tropical Classroom Expeditions, looking at social justice issues such as the Palestinian refugee situation there. In May, I’m taking a group from Transylvania University to Guyana, Suriname, and French Guiana, looking at issues of race and ethnicity. Then, with The Exploration Foundation, I have a mountaineering trip to Peru in June, and then a rafting trip through the jungle in Honduras at the end of June. In July and August, I’ll be working with the Scientific Exploration Society from London, doing a trip through the jungle and about two weeks of archaeological work there.
Chris Begley’s sites
Tropical Classroom Expeditions @ www.tropicalclassroom.com
And The Exploration Foundation @ www.explorationfoundation.org
Jamie Hale
Friday, September 18, 2009
Friday, September 4, 2009
How We Know: A Guide To Reason
By Jamie Hale
How We Know: A Guide To Reason- this is the title of the new book Brian Jones (Author, University of Louisville Professor) and I are currently working on. I approached Jones with the idea of writing a book that goes a little further into analyzing information than the typical book on logic, knowledge acquisition, skepticism etc. There are tons of these books that do a good job explaining the philosophy of science, various methods of knowledge acquisition, logic and the importance of critical thinking. But there is a shortage of books that also explains scientific research methodology. Skeptics want to see evidence but often they lack the ability to adequately analyze the evidence. When referring to scientific data it’s important to distinguish between experimental and non-experimental research, causative vs. correlative etc. Scientific ideas, claims or ideas promoted by scientists should be analyzed and subjected to skeptical inquiry. You may be thinking “of course” this is part of the skeptic’s creed. It is supposed to be but I have spoken with many skeptics who commit the Appeal to Authority Fallacy (or Hero Fallacy) on a regular basis. Some skeptics also commit the Nonappeal to Non-authority Fallacy. This fallacy occurs when claims made by people not recognized as authorities are dismissed on the grounds of Non-authority. Each claim should stand on it’s own merit.
The book will be divided into two units 1- Science Matters 2- Understanding Scientific Research. What to expect:
What is Science
Science vs. Non-science
Scientific vs. Nonscientific Approaches to Knowledge
Skeptic vs. Cynic
Practical Skepticism
Are you a scientist?
Limitations of science
Fallacies associated with scientific terminology
Science of reason
Formal, symbolic and modern logic
Logical fallacies
How to Argue
Experimental vs. Non-experimental research
True and Quasi experiments
Internal and External Validity
Why science is the best method we have for acquiring knowledge
And more………………
There is mass confusion associated with defining science, what science does and how science works. Research results are often misconstrued and taken out of context. How many times have you heard a news reporter say “New research says” so and so. The type of research, the funding source, conflicting research, who conducted the research, the validity of the research etc are never considered. Most media sources are not concerned with truth or critical analysis. How We Know A Guide To Reason is concerned with truth and critical analysis. How do you know what you know? After reading How We Know A Guide To Reason you will be more confident in how you know.
How We Know: A Guide To Reason- this is the title of the new book Brian Jones (Author, University of Louisville Professor) and I are currently working on. I approached Jones with the idea of writing a book that goes a little further into analyzing information than the typical book on logic, knowledge acquisition, skepticism etc. There are tons of these books that do a good job explaining the philosophy of science, various methods of knowledge acquisition, logic and the importance of critical thinking. But there is a shortage of books that also explains scientific research methodology. Skeptics want to see evidence but often they lack the ability to adequately analyze the evidence. When referring to scientific data it’s important to distinguish between experimental and non-experimental research, causative vs. correlative etc. Scientific ideas, claims or ideas promoted by scientists should be analyzed and subjected to skeptical inquiry. You may be thinking “of course” this is part of the skeptic’s creed. It is supposed to be but I have spoken with many skeptics who commit the Appeal to Authority Fallacy (or Hero Fallacy) on a regular basis. Some skeptics also commit the Nonappeal to Non-authority Fallacy. This fallacy occurs when claims made by people not recognized as authorities are dismissed on the grounds of Non-authority. Each claim should stand on it’s own merit.
The book will be divided into two units 1- Science Matters 2- Understanding Scientific Research. What to expect:
What is Science
Science vs. Non-science
Scientific vs. Nonscientific Approaches to Knowledge
Skeptic vs. Cynic
Practical Skepticism
Are you a scientist?
Limitations of science
Fallacies associated with scientific terminology
Science of reason
Formal, symbolic and modern logic
Logical fallacies
How to Argue
Experimental vs. Non-experimental research
True and Quasi experiments
Internal and External Validity
Why science is the best method we have for acquiring knowledge
And more………………
There is mass confusion associated with defining science, what science does and how science works. Research results are often misconstrued and taken out of context. How many times have you heard a news reporter say “New research says” so and so. The type of research, the funding source, conflicting research, who conducted the research, the validity of the research etc are never considered. Most media sources are not concerned with truth or critical analysis. How We Know A Guide To Reason is concerned with truth and critical analysis. How do you know what you know? After reading How We Know A Guide To Reason you will be more confident in how you know.
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Science Matters
The information below was originally published at University of Louisville's Sciboard. It has be reprinted with permission from Univ of Louisville Professor Thomas Cleaver.
General Science
Q. What is a Scientist
Ans. Although a person with an advanced degree might claim to be a scientist, the true test of the scientist is how one thinks. A good scientist:
· Excepts nothing in science absolutely.
· Is willing to change his opinions based on new data.
· Does not rely on Authority.
· Thinks critically.
· Knows that extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.
· Has an open mind.
· Relies on logic and reason.
· Knows how to form hypotheses and test them.
· Respects the scientific method.
· Examines all the data, not just the data that support his or her view.
· Builds on the work of others, giving them appropriate credit.
· Documents his or her experiments so they can be duplicated by others.
· Knows that if a claim is made, the claimant must provide the proof. (It is not up to others to disprove it.)
· Is intellectually honest.
Q. What is a Science?
Ans. Many people think science is a collection of facts: Hydrogen combines with oxygen to form water. The speed of light is 299 800 000 meters/second. Man evolved from ape-like ancestors. These facts are the products of science but they themselves are not science.
Science is a method, a technique, for looking at the physical world and finding out the facts. It is a search for truth -- the kind of truth that can be verified and quantified.
The basic tool of science in its search for truth is called "the scientific method." This consists of making a "hypothesis" and conducting an experiment. A hypothesis is a theory or assumption that must be tested.
As an example, suppose a scientist forms the following hypothesis: "Light stunts the growth of mushrooms." She then tests the hypothesis with an experiment using 2 sets of mushrooms. One set (the control group) is put in a dark basement. The other (the test group) is put in a sun-lit yard. After a week, she measures the height of all the mushrooms in each group.
She finds that the test mushrooms raised in sunlight grew an average of 0.8 centimeters. The control group mushrooms raised in the dark grew an average of 1.5 centimeters. She then concludes that her hypotheis was correct: Light DOES stunt the growth of mushrooms.
No "fact" of science is ever proven beyond doubt. All conclusions of science are always open to question as discoveries and new understandings occur. A scientist must always stand ready to cast aside his fondly held beliefs as new evidence is discovered.
Returning to the mushroom example, suppose the scientist's conclusions were challenged. Someone says, "Dry soil stunts the growth of mushrooms. Your outdoor mushrooms were in dryer soil than your basement mushrooms." To prove her results are valid, the scientist may have to repeat her experiment while making sure that the moisture for both groups of mushrooms is the same.
An experiment that demonstrates a hypothesis must be "repeatable". This means that anyone who performs the experiment correctly should get the same results. In the above example, the scientist should be able to explain her methods carefully enough that her mushroom experiment succeeds when anyone does it. If the experiment is not "repeatable", no one should be expected to believe her results.
Good science is painstaking, slow, and full of disappointments. But its record of success is unsurpassed for determining the truth of how the world works.
Q. What is the Scientific Method?
Ans. The scientific method is the best way yet discovered for telling the difference between truth and lies and delusion. The simple version looks something like this:
1. Observe some aspect of the universe.
2. Invent a theory to explain what you have observed.
3. Use the theory to make predictions.
4. Test those predictions by experiment.
5. Modify the theory in the light of your results.
6. Go to Step 3.
Usually, you can trust other scientists to follow the scientific method. So when a scientist claims to have done a certain experiment and obtained a certain result, you can usually believe it. This allows scientists to build on the work of others.
Q. What is Theory?
Ans. In scientific terms, a "fact" is an observation, such as "the sun rose today". This fact is explained by the "theory" that the earth is round and spins on its axis.
Many times, theories are so widely accepted that they are treated as fact. The "theory of gravity" and the "theory of evolution" are accepted as fact by virtually all scientists.
A theory that has not yet been tested is called a "hypothesis".
Some "theories" are untestable, and are therefore unscientific. You assert, for example, that you are the only person in existence, and that all reality is but a product of your imagination. This is the theory of solipsism. There is no way that anyone can prove that your theory is false. Therefore it is unscientific.
The solipsist theory may be true, but it falls into the realm of philosophy, not science.
Q. Can Science Prove Anything?
Ans. Yes and no. It depends on what you mean by "prove".
Suppose you have a theory that when you throw something into the air, it will fall back down. You test your theory by throwing many objects into the air, and they all fall down.
Have you proven your theory beyond doubt? No. The next object you throw might hover, or go off into orbit. But the theory is "proved" for most practical purposes.
Theories and facts (even everyday ones, not scientific ones), can be thought of on a scale of certainty. Your theory that things fall down is near the top. Down near the bottom is "the Earth is flat". Near the middle might be "I will live to be 80."
On this scale, no scientific theory can ever get all the way to the top (or the bottom), but reasonable people accept those that are near the top.
Q. What is Occam's Razor?
Ans. This is the scientific principle that says we should look for the easy explanations first.
If you have 2 theories that both explain the facts, take the simplest one. You won't always be right, but that's where the smart money is.
Example:
Your friend calls you and says he's in Miami. Moments later, he knocks on your door.
Theory 1: You're friend teleported from Miami.
Theory 2: You're friend was lieing about being in Miami.
Occam's razor says to select Theory 2. It doesn't require belief in an unproven mode of travel (teleportation).
Visit University of Louisville Sciboard @
http://sciboard.louisville.edu/
General Science
Q. What is a Scientist
Ans. Although a person with an advanced degree might claim to be a scientist, the true test of the scientist is how one thinks. A good scientist:
· Excepts nothing in science absolutely.
· Is willing to change his opinions based on new data.
· Does not rely on Authority.
· Thinks critically.
· Knows that extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.
· Has an open mind.
· Relies on logic and reason.
· Knows how to form hypotheses and test them.
· Respects the scientific method.
· Examines all the data, not just the data that support his or her view.
· Builds on the work of others, giving them appropriate credit.
· Documents his or her experiments so they can be duplicated by others.
· Knows that if a claim is made, the claimant must provide the proof. (It is not up to others to disprove it.)
· Is intellectually honest.
Q. What is a Science?
Ans. Many people think science is a collection of facts: Hydrogen combines with oxygen to form water. The speed of light is 299 800 000 meters/second. Man evolved from ape-like ancestors. These facts are the products of science but they themselves are not science.
Science is a method, a technique, for looking at the physical world and finding out the facts. It is a search for truth -- the kind of truth that can be verified and quantified.
The basic tool of science in its search for truth is called "the scientific method." This consists of making a "hypothesis" and conducting an experiment. A hypothesis is a theory or assumption that must be tested.
As an example, suppose a scientist forms the following hypothesis: "Light stunts the growth of mushrooms." She then tests the hypothesis with an experiment using 2 sets of mushrooms. One set (the control group) is put in a dark basement. The other (the test group) is put in a sun-lit yard. After a week, she measures the height of all the mushrooms in each group.
She finds that the test mushrooms raised in sunlight grew an average of 0.8 centimeters. The control group mushrooms raised in the dark grew an average of 1.5 centimeters. She then concludes that her hypotheis was correct: Light DOES stunt the growth of mushrooms.
No "fact" of science is ever proven beyond doubt. All conclusions of science are always open to question as discoveries and new understandings occur. A scientist must always stand ready to cast aside his fondly held beliefs as new evidence is discovered.
Returning to the mushroom example, suppose the scientist's conclusions were challenged. Someone says, "Dry soil stunts the growth of mushrooms. Your outdoor mushrooms were in dryer soil than your basement mushrooms." To prove her results are valid, the scientist may have to repeat her experiment while making sure that the moisture for both groups of mushrooms is the same.
An experiment that demonstrates a hypothesis must be "repeatable". This means that anyone who performs the experiment correctly should get the same results. In the above example, the scientist should be able to explain her methods carefully enough that her mushroom experiment succeeds when anyone does it. If the experiment is not "repeatable", no one should be expected to believe her results.
Good science is painstaking, slow, and full of disappointments. But its record of success is unsurpassed for determining the truth of how the world works.
Q. What is the Scientific Method?
Ans. The scientific method is the best way yet discovered for telling the difference between truth and lies and delusion. The simple version looks something like this:
1. Observe some aspect of the universe.
2. Invent a theory to explain what you have observed.
3. Use the theory to make predictions.
4. Test those predictions by experiment.
5. Modify the theory in the light of your results.
6. Go to Step 3.
Usually, you can trust other scientists to follow the scientific method. So when a scientist claims to have done a certain experiment and obtained a certain result, you can usually believe it. This allows scientists to build on the work of others.
Q. What is Theory?
Ans. In scientific terms, a "fact" is an observation, such as "the sun rose today". This fact is explained by the "theory" that the earth is round and spins on its axis.
Many times, theories are so widely accepted that they are treated as fact. The "theory of gravity" and the "theory of evolution" are accepted as fact by virtually all scientists.
A theory that has not yet been tested is called a "hypothesis".
Some "theories" are untestable, and are therefore unscientific. You assert, for example, that you are the only person in existence, and that all reality is but a product of your imagination. This is the theory of solipsism. There is no way that anyone can prove that your theory is false. Therefore it is unscientific.
The solipsist theory may be true, but it falls into the realm of philosophy, not science.
Q. Can Science Prove Anything?
Ans. Yes and no. It depends on what you mean by "prove".
Suppose you have a theory that when you throw something into the air, it will fall back down. You test your theory by throwing many objects into the air, and they all fall down.
Have you proven your theory beyond doubt? No. The next object you throw might hover, or go off into orbit. But the theory is "proved" for most practical purposes.
Theories and facts (even everyday ones, not scientific ones), can be thought of on a scale of certainty. Your theory that things fall down is near the top. Down near the bottom is "the Earth is flat". Near the middle might be "I will live to be 80."
On this scale, no scientific theory can ever get all the way to the top (or the bottom), but reasonable people accept those that are near the top.
Q. What is Occam's Razor?
Ans. This is the scientific principle that says we should look for the easy explanations first.
If you have 2 theories that both explain the facts, take the simplest one. You won't always be right, but that's where the smart money is.
Example:
Your friend calls you and says he's in Miami. Moments later, he knocks on your door.
Theory 1: You're friend teleported from Miami.
Theory 2: You're friend was lieing about being in Miami.
Occam's razor says to select Theory 2. It doesn't require belief in an unproven mode of travel (teleportation).
Visit University of Louisville Sciboard @
http://sciboard.louisville.edu/
Friday, August 21, 2009
Interview with John Horgan
by Jamie Hale
JOHN HORGAN is a science journalist and Director of the Center for Science Writings at the Stevens Institute of Technology, Hoboken, New Jersey. He’s a former senior writer at Scientific American, author of several books and columnist for BBC’s Knowledge Magazine. He is not a big fan of Superstring Theory in fact he says…………
How many books have you written? Could you give readers a brief summary of each?
The End of Science: All the big discoveries have been made. We're down to details and applications now. The Undiscovered Mind. If there are any big discoveries to come, they'll emerge from the study of the brain and mind. But based on science's lousy track record so far, don't hold your breath for big breakthroughs. Rational Mysticism: There is only one common insight from science and mysticism: You are really, really lucky to be alive.
The title of one of your books is Where Was God on September 11th. It seems that the title would appear a little controversial to some. Did it cause much of an uproar? How much hate mail did you get?
Some hard-core Christians got mad at me, but they god even madder at my co-author, Frank, an Episcopal priest.
Do you have any suggestions for enhancing the general publics knowledge of popular science?
Yeah, buy my books.
Who is your favorite writer?
Jorge Luis Borges, the metaphysical fabulist.
Favorite book? Favorite Magazine?
Labyrinths, by Borges. New Yorker still kicks ass.
On what terms can religion and science live in harmony?
See above. And that isn’t enough for most folks. I'm hoping religion will just fade gracefully away.
You have a $1000 bet with Michio Kaku that Superstring Theory won't pan out by 2020. Why do you feel so strongly about this?
Because string theory is pseudo-science.
Do you any projects you are currently working on?
I'm writing a lot about how science can solve the problem of war.
If you had to rate the top three scientists off all times who would they be?
The greatest I've met personally are Francis Crick, Hans Bethe and John Wheeler. Great scientists, great characters. I profile them all in my first book, The End of Science.
Visit John Horgan’s website @ http://johnhorgan.org/
JOHN HORGAN is a science journalist and Director of the Center for Science Writings at the Stevens Institute of Technology, Hoboken, New Jersey. He’s a former senior writer at Scientific American, author of several books and columnist for BBC’s Knowledge Magazine. He is not a big fan of Superstring Theory in fact he says…………
How many books have you written? Could you give readers a brief summary of each?
The End of Science: All the big discoveries have been made. We're down to details and applications now. The Undiscovered Mind. If there are any big discoveries to come, they'll emerge from the study of the brain and mind. But based on science's lousy track record so far, don't hold your breath for big breakthroughs. Rational Mysticism: There is only one common insight from science and mysticism: You are really, really lucky to be alive.
The title of one of your books is Where Was God on September 11th. It seems that the title would appear a little controversial to some. Did it cause much of an uproar? How much hate mail did you get?
Some hard-core Christians got mad at me, but they god even madder at my co-author, Frank, an Episcopal priest.
Do you have any suggestions for enhancing the general publics knowledge of popular science?
Yeah, buy my books.
Who is your favorite writer?
Jorge Luis Borges, the metaphysical fabulist.
Favorite book? Favorite Magazine?
Labyrinths, by Borges. New Yorker still kicks ass.
On what terms can religion and science live in harmony?
See above. And that isn’t enough for most folks. I'm hoping religion will just fade gracefully away.
You have a $1000 bet with Michio Kaku that Superstring Theory won't pan out by 2020. Why do you feel so strongly about this?
Because string theory is pseudo-science.
Do you any projects you are currently working on?
I'm writing a lot about how science can solve the problem of war.
If you had to rate the top three scientists off all times who would they be?
The greatest I've met personally are Francis Crick, Hans Bethe and John Wheeler. Great scientists, great characters. I profile them all in my first book, The End of Science.
Visit John Horgan’s website @ http://johnhorgan.org/
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Interview with Carl Zimmer
by Jamie Hale
The following interview was conducted with Carl Zimmer science writer, Yale University Lecturer and author of The Tangled Bank: An Introduction to Evolution. E.O Wilson says " The Tangled Bank is the best written and best illustrated introduction to evolution of the Darwin centennial decade, and also the most conversant with ongoing research. It is excellent for students, the general public, and even other biologists.”
I have completed about 1/2 of your book Soul Made Flesh and I must compliment you on your writing style. Great job. What influenced you to write the book?
CZ: I like to write books about subjects I want to get more familiar with. In this case, I thought I wanted to learn more about the brain. But I didn't want to write yet another book about new developments in neuroscience. It's not that there aren't some great books on that particular subject, but there are so many that I didn't want to get lost in the crowd. It occurred to me that there hasn't been much written about the history of neuroscience. While there is a growing body of scholarship, few authors have written about that research for the public. So I started to nose around and discovered a period of history, in the mid-1600s, that was just incredible in its revolutionary discoveries and also in its political and religious turbulence. This was when the science of neurology was launched, when people came to recognize the brain as we see it today, as the center of our existence. Once I realized this, I knew I had to write the book.
How many books have you written? Do you have a favorite? Which one was the hardest to write?
CZ: I've written seven books now. I suppose my favorite is my first, At the Water's Edge, simply because it gave me the first experience of seeing my name on a book. That's a marvelous feeling.
Commenting on your soon to be released book (The Tangled Bank: An Introduction To Evolution) E.O Wilson says " The Tangled Bank is the best written and best illustrated introduction to evolution of the Darwin centennial decade, and also the most conversant with ongoing research. It is excellent for students, the general public, and even other biologists.” What do you think makes the book so great?
CZ: You'd have to ask Wilson or the other scientists who gave such wonderful endorsements why they like it so much. All I'd say is that it was a huge amount of fun to write, because there are so many fantastic lines of research in evolution these days to choose from. Making the experience even better was the opportunity to work with illustrators and photo editors to make the book as handsome as possible, and to use pictures to explain the science in ways words can't.
Do you think there will come a time in America where the majority of the population will believe in evolution?
CZ: I'm fairly optimistic, in the long term. For now I don't expect tremendous changes, though.
If Darwin were alive today and he were to modify his theory of evolution what would he change?
CZ: I think Darwin would be fascinated by the genome. Genomes are shaped by evolution in all sorts of complex ways. There are even virus-like stretches of DNA that make copies of themselves over time and gradually swamp their host genome. Most of our DNA comes from these genomic parasites. There's also plenty of evidence now that genes have moved many times from one species to another. So genomes are not just sculpted by mutations, drift, and selection from one generation to the next. They're also mosaics, made up of bits of genetic material from many different sources.
What does a typical day in the life of Carl Zimmer look like?
CZ: Breakfast with the family, then trundling off to my home office, where I interview, research, and write till dinner. I punctuate that sedentary work with the occasional trip to visit a scientist in his or her medium--a lab, a bog, a hospital, or wherever they may do their work.
Do you have a favorite writer? Favorite book?
CZ: I do love Melville--both the novels and the stories. The Loom's name is from one of my favorite passages from Moby Dick, where Melville describes how Pip, a cabin boy, was altered by a plunge into the sea:
"...among the joyous, heartless, ever-juvenile eternities, Pip saw the multitudinous, God-omnipresent, coral insects, that out of the firmament of waters, heaved the colossal orbs. He saw God's foot upon the treadle of the loom, and spoke it; and therefore his shipmates called him mad."
About the Author
Carl Zimmer bio http://carlzimmer.com/bio.html
The following interview was conducted with Carl Zimmer science writer, Yale University Lecturer and author of The Tangled Bank: An Introduction to Evolution. E.O Wilson says " The Tangled Bank is the best written and best illustrated introduction to evolution of the Darwin centennial decade, and also the most conversant with ongoing research. It is excellent for students, the general public, and even other biologists.”
I have completed about 1/2 of your book Soul Made Flesh and I must compliment you on your writing style. Great job. What influenced you to write the book?
CZ: I like to write books about subjects I want to get more familiar with. In this case, I thought I wanted to learn more about the brain. But I didn't want to write yet another book about new developments in neuroscience. It's not that there aren't some great books on that particular subject, but there are so many that I didn't want to get lost in the crowd. It occurred to me that there hasn't been much written about the history of neuroscience. While there is a growing body of scholarship, few authors have written about that research for the public. So I started to nose around and discovered a period of history, in the mid-1600s, that was just incredible in its revolutionary discoveries and also in its political and religious turbulence. This was when the science of neurology was launched, when people came to recognize the brain as we see it today, as the center of our existence. Once I realized this, I knew I had to write the book.
How many books have you written? Do you have a favorite? Which one was the hardest to write?
CZ: I've written seven books now. I suppose my favorite is my first, At the Water's Edge, simply because it gave me the first experience of seeing my name on a book. That's a marvelous feeling.
Commenting on your soon to be released book (The Tangled Bank: An Introduction To Evolution) E.O Wilson says " The Tangled Bank is the best written and best illustrated introduction to evolution of the Darwin centennial decade, and also the most conversant with ongoing research. It is excellent for students, the general public, and even other biologists.” What do you think makes the book so great?
CZ: You'd have to ask Wilson or the other scientists who gave such wonderful endorsements why they like it so much. All I'd say is that it was a huge amount of fun to write, because there are so many fantastic lines of research in evolution these days to choose from. Making the experience even better was the opportunity to work with illustrators and photo editors to make the book as handsome as possible, and to use pictures to explain the science in ways words can't.
Do you think there will come a time in America where the majority of the population will believe in evolution?
CZ: I'm fairly optimistic, in the long term. For now I don't expect tremendous changes, though.
If Darwin were alive today and he were to modify his theory of evolution what would he change?
CZ: I think Darwin would be fascinated by the genome. Genomes are shaped by evolution in all sorts of complex ways. There are even virus-like stretches of DNA that make copies of themselves over time and gradually swamp their host genome. Most of our DNA comes from these genomic parasites. There's also plenty of evidence now that genes have moved many times from one species to another. So genomes are not just sculpted by mutations, drift, and selection from one generation to the next. They're also mosaics, made up of bits of genetic material from many different sources.
What does a typical day in the life of Carl Zimmer look like?
CZ: Breakfast with the family, then trundling off to my home office, where I interview, research, and write till dinner. I punctuate that sedentary work with the occasional trip to visit a scientist in his or her medium--a lab, a bog, a hospital, or wherever they may do their work.
Do you have a favorite writer? Favorite book?
CZ: I do love Melville--both the novels and the stories. The Loom's name is from one of my favorite passages from Moby Dick, where Melville describes how Pip, a cabin boy, was altered by a plunge into the sea:
"...among the joyous, heartless, ever-juvenile eternities, Pip saw the multitudinous, God-omnipresent, coral insects, that out of the firmament of waters, heaved the colossal orbs. He saw God's foot upon the treadle of the loom, and spoke it; and therefore his shipmates called him mad."
About the Author
Carl Zimmer bio http://carlzimmer.com/bio.html
Monday, August 3, 2009
Knowledge Roundup 2
Brain Facts
A Primer on the Brain and Nervous System
Brain Facts is a 74-page primer on the brain and nervous system, published by SfN. Designed for a lay audience as an introduction to neuroscience, Brain Facts is a valuable educational resource
Free Ebook http://www.sfn.org/index.aspx?pagename=brainFacts§ion=publications
Mirror Neurons
You see a stranger stub her toe and you immediately flinch in sympathy. You watch a baseball outfielder run to catch a long fly ball and feel your heart racing and your leg muscles pumping along with him. You notice a friend wrinkle up his face in disgust while tasting some food and suddenly your own stomach recoils at the thought of eating. This ability to instinctively and immediately understand what other people are experiencing has long baffled neuroscientists, psychologists, and philosophers alike. Recent research now suggests a fascinating explanation: brain cells called mirror neurons. Read More http://www.sfn.org/index.aspx?pagename=brainBriefings_MirrorNeurons
The Science of Gossip: Why We Can’t Stop Ourselves
In the past few years I have heard more people than ever before puzzling over the 24/7 coverage of people such as Paris Hilton who are “celebrities” for no apparent reason other than we know who they are. And yet we can’t look away. The press about these individuals’ lives continues because people are obviously tuning in. Although many social critics have bemoaned this explosion of popular culture as if it reflects some kind of collective character flaw, it is in fact nothing more than the inevitable outcome of the collision between 21st-century media and Stone Age minds.
When you cut away its many layers, our fixation on popular culture reflects an intense interest in the doings of other people; this preoccupation with the lives of others is a by-product of the psychology that evolved in prehistoric times to make our ancestors socially successful. Thus, it appears that we are hardwired to be fascinated by gossip. Read more http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-science-of-gossip
I want to Believe
In a 1997 episode of The Simpsons entitled “The Springfield Files” — a parody of X-Files in which Homer has an alien encounter in the woods (after imbibing 10 bottles of Red Tick Beer) — Leonard Nimoy voices the intro as he once did for his post-Spock run on the television mystery series In Search of…: “The following tale of alien encounters is true. And by true, I mean false. It’s all lies. But they’re entertaining lies, and in the end isn’t that the real truth? The answer is no.”
Read more http://www.michaelshermer.com/2009/07/i-want-to-believe/
Darwin Myths
Darwin coined the phrase “survival of the fittest” (Herbert Spencer actually coined the phrase)
Darwin was an atheist (no he was agnostic)
Darwin was always an evolutionist which was passed down to him from his grandfather (Darwin was a creationist before and during the voyage of the Beagle and didn’t become an evolutionist until approximately a year after his return. Darwin did not devise his theory while in Galpagos)
A Primer on the Brain and Nervous System
Brain Facts is a 74-page primer on the brain and nervous system, published by SfN. Designed for a lay audience as an introduction to neuroscience, Brain Facts is a valuable educational resource
Free Ebook http://www.sfn.org/index.aspx?pagename=brainFacts§ion=publications
Mirror Neurons
You see a stranger stub her toe and you immediately flinch in sympathy. You watch a baseball outfielder run to catch a long fly ball and feel your heart racing and your leg muscles pumping along with him. You notice a friend wrinkle up his face in disgust while tasting some food and suddenly your own stomach recoils at the thought of eating. This ability to instinctively and immediately understand what other people are experiencing has long baffled neuroscientists, psychologists, and philosophers alike. Recent research now suggests a fascinating explanation: brain cells called mirror neurons. Read More http://www.sfn.org/index.aspx?pagename=brainBriefings_MirrorNeurons
The Science of Gossip: Why We Can’t Stop Ourselves
In the past few years I have heard more people than ever before puzzling over the 24/7 coverage of people such as Paris Hilton who are “celebrities” for no apparent reason other than we know who they are. And yet we can’t look away. The press about these individuals’ lives continues because people are obviously tuning in. Although many social critics have bemoaned this explosion of popular culture as if it reflects some kind of collective character flaw, it is in fact nothing more than the inevitable outcome of the collision between 21st-century media and Stone Age minds.
When you cut away its many layers, our fixation on popular culture reflects an intense interest in the doings of other people; this preoccupation with the lives of others is a by-product of the psychology that evolved in prehistoric times to make our ancestors socially successful. Thus, it appears that we are hardwired to be fascinated by gossip. Read more http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-science-of-gossip
I want to Believe
In a 1997 episode of The Simpsons entitled “The Springfield Files” — a parody of X-Files in which Homer has an alien encounter in the woods (after imbibing 10 bottles of Red Tick Beer) — Leonard Nimoy voices the intro as he once did for his post-Spock run on the television mystery series In Search of…: “The following tale of alien encounters is true. And by true, I mean false. It’s all lies. But they’re entertaining lies, and in the end isn’t that the real truth? The answer is no.”
Read more http://www.michaelshermer.com/2009/07/i-want-to-believe/
Darwin Myths
Darwin coined the phrase “survival of the fittest” (Herbert Spencer actually coined the phrase)
Darwin was an atheist (no he was agnostic)
Darwin was always an evolutionist which was passed down to him from his grandfather (Darwin was a creationist before and during the voyage of the Beagle and didn’t become an evolutionist until approximately a year after his return. Darwin did not devise his theory while in Galpagos)
Saturday, July 18, 2009
The Story of Science
The Story of Science
By Jamie Hale
One night while watching TV I stumbled across a program that featured Joy Hakim.
Hakim is an award winning writer who has written a series of book on US History and Science. After a couple of months of email exchanges I decided it was time to do an interview with Joy Hakim.
What does a day in the life of Joy Hakim look like?
When I'm writing (which is most of the time) I read the NYTimes with breakfast and then get to my desk (usually about 8:30 a.m.). I work until noon, trying to remember to get up every hour and stretch. Then lunch and--this is where my schedule varies--sometimes I do errands, or swim, or go to a yoga class, or go back to work. Sometimes I write into the evening, sometimes I play.
Of the books you have written do you have a favorite?
The book I'm currently working on is always my favorite. But I'm perhaps most proud of "Einstein Adds A New Dimension." It stretched my head and gave me a chance to get to know a wonderful MIT author/physicist, Edwin Taylor.
Was it harder to write the US History books or the science books?
The science books were harder to write because I had little background in the subject. I was trained as a journalist, so no subject intimidates me, still, quantum theory and relativity were tough. I'd like teachers to feel they can tackle any subject by being willing to learn along with their students. The old model of teacher as ultimate expert is out-of-date. Knowledge is increasing at exponential rates, no one can keep up. Teaching students how to find information and process it needs to become the ultimate school goal. If we can create real learning communities in our classrooms we can handle the abundance of information that is now available to all of us everywhere.
Did you have a team of researchers working with you on the history and science series?
I don't have any researchers helping me, I do contact lots of experts and have them read copy and answer questions. It's wonderful, when you are writing for young readers the best people are willing to help
What can we do to improve America’s History and Science programs in our schools?
We need to stop thinking of history and science as isolated stand-alone subjects. History is a great mother discipline. Everything that happens today will be history tomorrow. So history can tie all subjects together. It should be central to curricula. As to science, we live in the greatest scientific era ever. The scientific discoveries of recent times underlie and guide our society. And yet we keep today's most exciting science as an elite subject for a small percentage of our population. No wonder school seems irrelevant to many kids. Black holes, dark matter, dark energy are all out there ready to entice young minds. For heavens sake, why aren't we teaching physics and genetics to all our children? Teachers aren't trained in those subjects? Then they can learn with their students and tie the subject to history and literature too
Why is there such a huge lack of critical thinking courses offered in most school systems?
I don't think much of critical thinking courses. You learn to think critically by researching and writing. I have some experience in those disciplines. I promise--demand more research-based writing and critical thinking scores will soar.
What is your favorite book? Who is your favorite author?
I'm an eclectic reader and love to mix the ancients with 19th century fiction, but mostly I read current books for information, so it is in nonfiction that I spend much of my reading time. We have a group of science writers today who are astonishingly eloquent--they include Hans Christian von Baeyer, Alan Lightman, Richard Feynman, Marcia Bartusiak, and Brian Greene--for starters. Stephen Hawking and his daughter have written adventure books for young readers on space exploration, and they are page-turners. Among historians, David McCullough and Joseph Ellis are favorites. Christopher Buckley's recent book about his parents is a writer's gem. I just finished Jenny Uglow's wonderful book The Lunar Society, about a group of outrageous and amazing 18th century thinkers and doers.
Are you currently working on any new projects?
Yes, right now I am working on two books that are complementary approaches to biology and its process of change. I'm learning a lot.
Visit Joy Hakim's site at www.joyhakim.com
By Jamie Hale
One night while watching TV I stumbled across a program that featured Joy Hakim.
Hakim is an award winning writer who has written a series of book on US History and Science. After a couple of months of email exchanges I decided it was time to do an interview with Joy Hakim.
What does a day in the life of Joy Hakim look like?
When I'm writing (which is most of the time) I read the NYTimes with breakfast and then get to my desk (usually about 8:30 a.m.). I work until noon, trying to remember to get up every hour and stretch. Then lunch and--this is where my schedule varies--sometimes I do errands, or swim, or go to a yoga class, or go back to work. Sometimes I write into the evening, sometimes I play.
Of the books you have written do you have a favorite?
The book I'm currently working on is always my favorite. But I'm perhaps most proud of "Einstein Adds A New Dimension." It stretched my head and gave me a chance to get to know a wonderful MIT author/physicist, Edwin Taylor.
Was it harder to write the US History books or the science books?
The science books were harder to write because I had little background in the subject. I was trained as a journalist, so no subject intimidates me, still, quantum theory and relativity were tough. I'd like teachers to feel they can tackle any subject by being willing to learn along with their students. The old model of teacher as ultimate expert is out-of-date. Knowledge is increasing at exponential rates, no one can keep up. Teaching students how to find information and process it needs to become the ultimate school goal. If we can create real learning communities in our classrooms we can handle the abundance of information that is now available to all of us everywhere.
Did you have a team of researchers working with you on the history and science series?
I don't have any researchers helping me, I do contact lots of experts and have them read copy and answer questions. It's wonderful, when you are writing for young readers the best people are willing to help
What can we do to improve America’s History and Science programs in our schools?
We need to stop thinking of history and science as isolated stand-alone subjects. History is a great mother discipline. Everything that happens today will be history tomorrow. So history can tie all subjects together. It should be central to curricula. As to science, we live in the greatest scientific era ever. The scientific discoveries of recent times underlie and guide our society. And yet we keep today's most exciting science as an elite subject for a small percentage of our population. No wonder school seems irrelevant to many kids. Black holes, dark matter, dark energy are all out there ready to entice young minds. For heavens sake, why aren't we teaching physics and genetics to all our children? Teachers aren't trained in those subjects? Then they can learn with their students and tie the subject to history and literature too
Why is there such a huge lack of critical thinking courses offered in most school systems?
I don't think much of critical thinking courses. You learn to think critically by researching and writing. I have some experience in those disciplines. I promise--demand more research-based writing and critical thinking scores will soar.
What is your favorite book? Who is your favorite author?
I'm an eclectic reader and love to mix the ancients with 19th century fiction, but mostly I read current books for information, so it is in nonfiction that I spend much of my reading time. We have a group of science writers today who are astonishingly eloquent--they include Hans Christian von Baeyer, Alan Lightman, Richard Feynman, Marcia Bartusiak, and Brian Greene--for starters. Stephen Hawking and his daughter have written adventure books for young readers on space exploration, and they are page-turners. Among historians, David McCullough and Joseph Ellis are favorites. Christopher Buckley's recent book about his parents is a writer's gem. I just finished Jenny Uglow's wonderful book The Lunar Society, about a group of outrageous and amazing 18th century thinkers and doers.
Are you currently working on any new projects?
Yes, right now I am working on two books that are complementary approaches to biology and its process of change. I'm learning a lot.
Visit Joy Hakim's site at www.joyhakim.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
