If talking about fruit fly research is hurting McCain's poll numbers, it's mostly because he's talking about FRUIT FLY RESEARCH. As Samuel Johnson said, "the sight of the gallows doth wonderfully concentrate the mind." We have a lot of very big problems that only good governance can solve, and voters aren't getting as distracted as usual by trivia like a few millionths of the federal budget going to studies on fruit flies and bears.
On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 9:26 PM, malcolm McCallum < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Most of these things are not stupidity or lack of exposure, they are > simply ignorance. People in general have better science educations > now than they did 20 yrs ago. That is why these kinds of comments > seem to be hurting McCain's campaign. Just a few elections ago, a > rudimentary understanding of the "food chain" did not exist. Today, > most people have learned about it in High school biology class. Ditto > for genetics. Who doesn't know that fruit flys are a primary model in > genetics? Most baby boombers. They didn't teach it much in High > schools back then. Now, mendelian inheritance is regularly taught. I > suspect that many high school students are telling their 50-60 year > old parents that fruit flies are used to study human genetics . This > is probably a strong reason why is campaign is in the tank. > > On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 11:22 AM, William Silvert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > It isn't just the public Joes that pose a problem. Governments too tend > to > > dump basic research when funding gets tight, failing to realise that this > is > > the resource on which all our scientific advances are based. The past few > > decades have seen drastic cuts in research funding around the globe, with > > only the most obvious applied projects being funded. > > > > Science education tends to be very much targetted on details. I do not > > recall any texts that connected basic science to applied results. I used > to > > teach courses in which I tried to develop a general understanding of > science > > rather than put forth a collection of facts, and I always began which an > > exercise where first I asked my students to name the great scientists in > > history, and then identify the ways in which science affected their > lives. I > > then asked them to connect the two, and they could come up with very few > > links. Aside from Einstein and nuclear energy, virtually none. > > > > I like to think that by the end of the course they had a better > > understanding of how science had changed their lives, but many of these > > changes are not of obvious benefit. For example, the work of Copernicus, > > Gallileo, Lyell, Darwin and others have profoundly affected our lives by > > changing the role of religion and traditional beliefs about the > centrality > > of humans in the universe, but that is hardly what we think about when we > > discuss applied science! > > > > Bill Silvert > > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jason L Kindall" > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU> > > Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008 2:41 PM > > Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Palin laughs at fruit fly research > > > > > >> The political implications alone are troubling. The larger issue in my > >> mind is that this is a real reflection of the general lack of > understanding > >> by the general public about what scientific research is and isn't. > Viewed > >> alone, it might be pretty hard to justify research on fruit flies to the > >> average Joe (plumber or six-pack). Connect it with autism or human > health > >> and then it becomes more palatable to the public. However, it doesn't > get > >> there in the popular media, does it? > >> > >> We're up against a real wall here, folks. As our economy gets more > >> turbulent there will be more uninformed remarks about research dollars > being > >> spent on projects that the public has a hard time connecting with. > >> > >> So where do we fight the good fight of science education? In schools? > In > >> colleges? At home? I interact with *great* teachers that don't > understand > >> scientific inquiry. The education system for our nations teachers > doesn't > >> include much in the way of what science is for anyone but actual science > >> teachers in training (and that is sparse at best). We should do what we > can > >> to diversify science courses in core curriculum across all majors. > > > > > > -- > Malcolm L. McCallum > Associate Professor of Biology > Texas A&M University-Texarkana > Editor, Herpetological Conservation and Biology > http://www.herpconbio.org > > Summer Teaching Schedule & Office Hours: > Ecology: M,W 1-2:40 pm > Cell Biology: M 6-9:40 pm (don't ask!) > Forensic Science: T,R 10-11:40am > Office Hours: MW 12-1, 5-6, TR 11:40-12:30, > > "Every once in a while, there's an aberration, a crack in the > pavement..., because it's just so good, that it slides in between all > of the meaningless, tasteless, cardboard cut-out crap." > -David Crosby (of the Byrds, Crosby Stills, Nash [& Young], etc.) > -- James Crants PhD, Ecology and Evolutionary Biology University of Michigan Cell: (734) 474-7478
