With great trepidation, I criticize Dan Sarewitz
Dan Sarewitz worries about creeping bias in science (emphasis added): Alarming cracks are starting to penetrate deep into the scientific edifice. They threaten ...
Dan Sarewitz worries about creeping bias in science (emphasis added): Alarming cracks are starting to penetrate deep into the scientific edifice. They threaten ...
While asking presidential candidates to engage in a meaningful science policy debate, G. Pascal Zachary wonders: Is there a way to discuss efficiency and outcom...
David Bruggeman’s sharp comment is worth reprinting in full: From where I sit, both Stilgoe and Macilwain are attempting to remind the community of two th...
Via the Jack Stilgoe post I just discussed, Colin Macilwain exhorts scientists to deal with a world in crisis: Those involved in science policy sometimes seem t...
Jack Stilgoe criticizes scientists for not doing more to address the economic crisis: Much of the rhetoric of the scientific community has been about protecting...
As much as it annoys me, I can’t bring myself to complain too much about Marcelo Gleiser’s short essay: This shaping of our worldview is not restric...
In a recent exchange, Peter decries “overblown public assessments” of the benefits of science, and warns that “putting out hype that encourage...
In the context of discussing the status of science in the federal budget, Matt Nisbet asks: “as a matter of social responsibility, do scientists have an o...
A couple months ago I was a bit too glib in some of my writing on basic research. From my comment on Ryan’s blog: I think it’s perfectly understandable a...
Over at Adapt Already Ryan Meyer highlights a recent Times article about the disappointing output from the Human Genome Project. In typical fashion scientists ...