It turns out that it’s not as simple as going “eww, ick” at that breastfeeding scene on Game of Thrones. Katie Hinde explains the science of weaning — there’s lots of solid information there, but the bottom line is this:
So proscriptive attitudes about what women should and shouldn’t do with their bodies can suck it.
His “Crash Course in Astronomy” is pretty good — the first part of this talk is universally (see what I did there?) applicable, since it’s a solid general description of science and how it works.
The The Crafoord Prize in Biosciences has been announced. For those who don’t know, this is a very prestigious award, comparable to the Nobel prize, only not as well known. The categories are specifically designed to complement the Nobel.
This year’s winners are Richard Lewontin and Tomoko Ohta, and it’s about time.
The results of a survey of university scientists are surprising and odd.
Surprisingly, 87% of scientists think there is a scientific method that describes the way scientists do their work. Most of them believe in the old hypothesis → testing –→ theory view that hasn’t been popular among experts for many decades.
Almost half (49%) of natural scientists and 29% of social scientists thought that science was independent of social and cultural biases.
Almost half (48%) of all scientists believed that a theory becomes a law when it is proven.
You were planning to come out to Morris and visit anyway, weren’t you? January and February are the best months to tour this part of the country.
I found this picture on a site called “Wedding Flowers”, which is kind of interesting, since 30% of yellow evening primroses reproduce asexually. I think that means it’s the best wedding flower for marriages in which the partners intend to clone themselves.
Perhaps you’ve heard of these absurd creationist challenges: Kent Hovind challenge of $250,000 for scientific evidence of evolution; Joseph Mastropaolo’s challenge of $10,000 to “prove evolution”; Ray Comfort’s challenge of $10,000 to show him a transitional fossil. They all sound like easy money, but don’t try: they’ve loaded the dice in every case.
Dana Hunter gives a 19th century example I did not know about before. Alfred Russel Wallace accepted a bet to show the curvature of the earth by a flat-earther, and he did it, too, with a simple and clever observation. You’d think he’d be wallowing in the cash — £500 — that he’d won, but you don’t know denialists. They never change.
It’s got a beat you can perform emetic retroperistalsis to!
