There’s more to science than ridiculing fools

Posted on by

An interesting article that raises the question, I think, of how well scientists understand media image or contextual analysis or cultural studies.

This entry was posted in Discuss, Media, National, Qld by Susan Kirk. Bookmark the permalink.

About Susan Kirk

Susan Kirk is a freelance science journalist, with a degree in journalism and qualifications in horticulture. She has written for many different publications but lately writes extensively for Fairfax media. She wrote a number of the Taste booklets (Global Food and Wine) which showcased Australian produce and producers and even did a stint as a restaurant critique. She loves growing, cooking and consuming food so over the years the interest in ornamental plants turned into an interest in food plants, especially herbs. She is a member of the Media Alliance, and is a member of and the Queensland web editor for the Australian Science Communicators.

2 thoughts on “There’s more to science than ridiculing fools”

  1. I think David Perks, author of ‘There’s more to science than ridiculing fools’ misses several points. It’s the provence of any ‘clear thinking person’ to debunk hockum especially if someone is benefitting from espousing such quackery. ‘Clear thinking people’ includes anyone who recognises a lie and feels compelled to speak against it. The magicians, Penn and Teller, have a documentary series which aired from 2003-201o called Penn & Teller: Bullshit!, (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penn_%26_Teller:_Bullshit!). The Mythbusters also do a good job of pointing out the busted from the plausible. Yes, there is more to science than ridiculing fools, but that doesn’t exclude scientists from shining a light on explotative pseudoscience or superstition. Maybe it’s the tone of voice that Perks objects to in Singh’s efforts. Or perhaps Perks wants Singh to rail against the issues that Perks feels are important. For my view we need to hear more from Singh. If Perks feels strongly about a science based issue facing society than he should go into battle (maybe he already does) and leave other scientists to pick other fights which they feel are important. Much is said about the rights of free speech but falsehood in advertising is regulated. I’ll end here because I see dead people and the pattern of my tea leaves warn of ill winds. Or maybe that’s just more bulls..t.

  2. I’m not sure I agree with what this guy is saying but I think its a very interesting topic which could perhaps be a panel discussion at the conference in February — assuming the program isn’t filled yet.

Leave a Reply