Banner
If RFK Jr. Wasn't Good Enough For Pres. Obama, He Shouldn't Be Good Enough For Trump

Earlier today, President-Elect Donald Trump met with Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and, at least according...

Environmental Opportunity In A Trump Presidency

Though environmental activists are aghast that Republicans now control the White House, the Senate...

Baby Boomers Unbound: Marijuana Surges In The Elderly

When the oddly-named Baby Boom generation (the "boom" happened in 1946, after soldiers returned...

Mark Bittman Can't Succeed In Food, So He'll Teach It

Mark Bittman, cookbook guru and former New York Times columnist for those who self-identify as...

User picture.
picture for Robert H Olleypicture for Steve Hentgespicture for Tommaso Dorigopicture for Camilo Tabinas y Apitapicture for Bente Lilja Byepicture for Josh Bloom
Hank CampbellRSS Feed of this column.

I'm the founder of Science 2.0® in 2006 and, since June of 2015, the President of the American Council on Science and Health.

Revolutionizing... Read More »

Blogroll
If a site like the Huffington Post takes a fair use snippet of your article here and then links to you, their snippet will rank higher in Google than your actual article in keywords related to your article.

A little crazy but okay, you might say, they earned that, right?   With content and quality.
We'd like to believe the political blogosphere, and certainly the political populace, has confrontational overtones science does not, but who are we kidding?   If you get on the wrong side of a science blogging mullah's pet position, they will whip the faithful into a militant frenzy that would make any cult leader proud.

It's the science way; science is about clarity and facts and that means going after someone if they are wrong (and sometimes just if they disagree but that is less common) - the downside to that is it means everyone thinks they can tee off on scientists, including if the critics know nothing at all.
Science and religion have always been in something of a conflict.   Science seeks to explain the world according to natural laws while religion leaves larger questions as articles of faith.    There is some overlap - 40% of AAAS member scientists in their recent survey are also religious - but AAAS covers a broad cross-section of scientists whereas biology is ground zero for a conflict with religion over man as we exist today and how we came to be.  So there is less overlap in the life sciences but there have been ongoing attempts to reconcile the two camps, usually with scientists conceding that whatever 'sparked' life has no basis in current data so it is left to philosophy or religion as well.
Results of a survey in Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy titled "How Much Is Enough? Examining the Public’s Beliefs About Consumption" showed no huge surprise, people think we should consume less, but how the authors interpret the results is.
Yesterday I wrote about journalist and science blogger Ed Yong's unfortunate run-in with the kind of anachronistic journalism dinosaur that will be extinct one day soon - a PIO who resents blogging.
I'll tell you flat out, I love Public Information Officers - PIOs in journalism parlance.  Without them, I would never get anywhere near the good stuff I get to write about.   I would much, much rather deal with PIOs directly than through paid clearinghouses like AAAS Eurekalert, which seems to be run by sub-literate pygmies bent on keeping science from being written about.   PIOs, on the other hand, love to get more coverage for their researchers without having to bribe AAAS.