Science reporting

(OOOOOOPS - click on it to see the whole thing, while I work on my margins.)

This is from the very brilliant xkcd.com , source of one of my coveted items, a t-shirt with this



Readers who have been with me a while may recognize it from this post , which statcounter (which I check about once a year when I suddenly remember what the password is) tells me is my most popular page.

???????

Since no new peeps are commenting on that post, I can only guess that people are coming again & again to either also covet the shirt with this slogan (but why not go straight to the source?) OR, and this is an exciting possibility, to figure out what size I might like. Unisex Medium, people! Medium!!!!

Mwah.

In other funny science news, the Guardian explains how to write a science article for a news website:

This is a news website article about a scientific paper

In the standfirst I will make a fairly obvious pun about the subject matter before posing an inane question I have no intention of really answering: is this an important scientific finding?

You must go & read it. Really. You will plotz.

I was especially taken by the sub-headings.

This is a sub-heading that gives the impression I am about to add useful context.

None actually follows.

and

This subheading hints at controversy with a curt phrase and a question mark?
This paragraph will explain that while some scientists believe one thing to be true, other people believe another, different thing to be true.

In this paragraph I will provide balance with a quote from another scientist in the field. Since I picked their name at random from a Google search, and since the research probably hasn't even been published yet for them to see it, their response to my e-mail will be bland and non-committal.

"The research is useful", they will say, "and gives us new information. However, we need more research before we can say if the conclusions are correct, so I would advise caution for now."

I promise you, you will read all science & health reporting with a fresh eye having seen this template on how it's done.

And do stick around & check out the comments on that Guardian article because many are just as hilarious as the article itself - right down to mentions of Dawkins & Godwin's law, as well as grammar & spelling trolls.

In definitely not funny science news,

The federal government engages in "unacceptable political interference" in the communication of government science, says the head of a group that represents both government press officers and science journalists.

"Openness is being held ransom to media messages that serve the government's political agenda," wrote Kathryn O'Hara, president of the Canadian Science Writers' Association, in an opinion published online Wednesday in the international scientific journal Nature.

Read more

This is a government run by a control freak.

This: Harperland: The Politics of Control is going on my TBR pile.

"Harperland" describes Harper as a political success story but paints a portrait of a ruthless strategist and control freak who insists that he approve every move of his government.

"This is the most massive centralization of power of any government in the history of Canada," Martin said.

First though, I have to unclench my teeth from reading this:
The Armageddon Factor: The Rise of Christian Nationalism in Canada


Oh dear. That's taken the entire post in a depressing direction, hasn't it?

Let's cheer ourselves up:



Er.........