A Video For Sunday

Here is a beautiful time lapse video of the starts with a guide to the different constilations in the sky.  Enjoy!

A Video for Sunday

The great Richard Dawkins give us a brief lesson on our ancestors while promoting his book, The Magic of Reality.

Why Breaking Bad Makes Science Look Good

Photo from Deadline.com

I love the show Breaking Bad. The show about Walter White, a cancer-stricken chemistry teacher turned crystal meth cooker, is well written, well acted, highly suspenseful, and one of the best shows on TV.  And one of the things I have thought to myself when watching the show is that Walter makes chemistry look like a lot of fun, and I'm not talking about the fact that he cooks meth (that part of it is quite wrong).  Throughout the series, Walter has used chemistry in various scenarios to either get what he wants, or get out of difficult situations. 

He is like a chemical McGiver.  I have often thought to myself, "I wish this show wasn't so inappropriate, so a high school science teacher could show it to their class, because it makes chemistry look like so much cool."  That isn't to say that I want the show to start making the show more tailored towards young people (the show wouldn't be very good then).  But I bet there might be some young people who would find science more fascinating.

 

Photo from About.com

Alexander Russo from This Week In Education seems to agree:

Previous generations have had friendly people like Isaac Asimov and Bill Nye to make the sciences more friendly to everyone. In recent years there's been all that CSI-style TV science that supposedly makes kids want to become crime scene investigators. Now we have Breaking Bad, the NSFW (warning!) cable drama that is extremely disturbing and violent and whose main character Walter is a high school chemistry teacher turned meth magician.

Also, check out this scene which lists "The 10 Most Bad-Ass Chemistry Scenes From Breaking Bad".  Here is a sample:

A video for Sunday II

Just found this video on PZ Myer's blog.  The band They Might Be Giants sings a song about something obvious: science is real.



If I were a Science teacher, I would show this to my class.

Happy Birthday, Carl Sagan

Being Left Behind Never Looked So Good

Cartoon courtesy of Join the Future

A Crisis in American Biology Classrooms

 

Picture from Baloo's Cartoon Blog

This should be alarming to all who love science and truthfullness in education:

Researchers found that only 28 percent of biology teachers consistently follow the recommendations of the National Research Council to describe straightforwardly the evidence for evolution and explain the ways in which it is a unifying theme in all of biology. At the other extreme, 13 percent explicitly advocate creationism, and spend at least an hour of class time presenting it in a positive light.

That leaves what the authors call “the cautious 60 percent,” who avoid controversy by endorsing neither evolution nor its unscientific alternatives. In various ways, they compromise.

It is one thing for teachers to want to avoiding offending the beliefs of students, but it should not come at the expense of the truth.  End of discussion!

A Video for Sunday

A classic from Carl Sagan which also highlights the insignificance of mankind and our planet in the greater scheme of the universe.

A Video for Sunday

Here is an awe-inspiring video that should be seen by as many people as possible.

It does showcase the man-made evil that is organized religion. But more importantly, the video showcases the absolutely phenomenal scope of the cosmos, and how insignificant (and yet, still special) we as humans being are in the grander scheme of our Universe.

What better way to celebrate the Sabbath?

The Ineffectiveness of D.A.R.E.

To say that the Drug Abuse Resistance Education (D.A.R.E.) program is ineffective, as well intentioned as the program is, should not be a surprise to anyone.  If it were effective, the number of youth who refuse to turn to drugs and alcohol would be significantly less.  But a new study has discovered that the program is not only ineffective, but counterproductive:

Scientific evaluation studies have consistently shown that DARE is ineffective in reducing the use of alcohol and drugs and is sometimes even counterproductive -- worse than doing nothing. That's the conclusion of the U.S. General Accounting Office, 1 the U.S. Surgeon General, 2 the National Academy of Sciences, 3 and the U.S. Department of Education, 4 among many others. 5

How do supporters of the D.A.R.E. program react to these findings?  By disregarding them, or flat out criticizing the scientists as having some type of pro-drug agenda.

Leaders of DARE say the program shouldn't be judged by evidence from empirical research studies. They tend to be indifferent to factual evidence and prefer to rely on feelings, impressions and hopes. As one DARE leader explained: "I don't have any statistics for you. Our strongest numbers are the numbers that don't show up.” 6

 Another excerpt:

DARE leaders not only tend to ignore scientific evidence but even challenge science itself. On one occasion, when confronted with the scientific evidence found by a major study, DARE leadership retorted that "Scientists tell you that bumblebees can't fly, but we know better." 15 Of course, scientists don't tell us that bumblebees can't fly and this statement illustrates a complete lack of any understanding of science. Similarly, the leadership sometimes seems to dismiss scientific evidence as nothing more than opinion or preference." 16

 "Our detractors like to characterize DARE as an 'Orwellian reality' or 'Big Brother' at work," says DARE. "These bush-league tactics are transparent for what they are: attempts to support various individual personal agendas at the expense of our children." 17

Rather than learn from the scientific findings, those in charge of the D.A.R.E. refuse to even acknowledge the damaging reality of their own program.  The dismissal of scientific evidence by the program reminds me of the stubbornness Christian fundamentalists have when refusing to acknowledge the scientific realities of things like comprehensive sex-education and evolution.