CLIMATE SCIENCE EDUCATION
By playing defense instead of offense, the Department of Education missed an opportunity to turn the recent squall over SpongeBob Square Pants’s book about climate change into a hurricane of science education.
BIOETHICS
Hollywood once again helps us understand why what biologists could do scares the hell out of us.
CLIMATE SCIENCE
A group of Australian scientists have published an uncharacteristically blunt letter reiterating yet again that the public debate about climate science is “phony.” It’s real, it’s here, and its time to suck it up and deal.
BIOETHICS
The debate over embryonic stem cell research has been wrought with hype. Here are the top five over-hyped claims made by critics, and why they are wrong.
SCIENCE AND SOCIETY
Year after year the worriers and fretters would come to me with awful predictions of the outbreak of war. I denied it each time. I was only wrong twice. -Senior British intelligence official, retiring in 1950 after 47 years of [...]
Innovation
Public policymakers need to grasp these converging distinctions to ensure our economy remains competitive and entrepreneurial.
Science Communication
Despite Fox News’s attempts to stir up controversy over the terminology of global warming, academics have been touting the more accurate term “global climate disruption” for years.
SCIENCE COMMUNICATION
The time has come for scientists to stand up and communicate to policymakers the reasons why science helps Americans live safer, healthier, and more productive lives.
COMMUNICATING SCIENCE
Contemporary rhetorical tactics designed to confuse politicians and the public about scientific issues are as old as antiquity. The methods are just as disingenuous 2,500 years after their invention.
FRAMING SCIENCE
By constantly criticizing and responding to anti-science forces, are we only strengthening and propping them up?
CULTIVATING SCIENCE
Members of the Science Progress advisory board and editorial staff express their support for the Science Debate 2008 initiative and encourage the presidential candidates of both major political parties to devote one nationally televised debate specifically to issues related to science, technology, and innovation.
DEFINING SCIENCE
How are Americans supposed to figure out the candidates’ stances on matters of science and technology policy? Answer: They won’t unless they strongly care to know in the first place—and even then, they can’t learn much of anything directly from the candidates themselves.
The National Academy of Sciences just released a new book, Science, Evolution, and Creationism, which “provides information about the role that evolution plays in modern biology and the reasons why only scientifically based explanations should be included in public school science courses.”
The House Oversight Committee on Bush Administration interference with climate science; Atlantis grounded; framing nanotech; sex difference in math and science; Nobel Peace Prize ceremonies; VCs doubtful on carbon regulation from the government.
Three young women scientists make history; arguments over the impact of climate change on global health; how not to get funding from the NSF; John Marburger talks with the National Journal; conflicts of interest at the FDA; the ailing Discovery Corps Fellowship program; and what is Evo-Devo?
The future of the Hubble Space Telescope, a new map of Antarctica, post-Katrina mental health, and metaphors for the climate crisis: in this week’s Science Times section of The New York Times, several stories covering science, health, and technology policy.
DEFINING SCIENCE
How U.S. media coverage of global warming finally moved past “he said, she said, we’re clueless.”
Talking about about climate change solely in terms of impending catastrophe may still be reasonable from a factual standpoint, but it may not be the most effective frame for debates on climate and energy policy. Here are four other frames in current discussions.
DEFINING SCIENCE
How should we think about the relationship between global warming and an increased risk of wildfires to the United States?
Andrew A. Rosenberg on how “emphasizing what we don’t know often drowns out what we do know.” Also, a new Urban Institute study claims that the U.S. has more than enough scientists and engineers.
Science Progress and American Progress's Doing What Works project teamed up to produce a set of policy proposals that the Obama administration and Congress can adopt to reinvest in the building blocks of American science, innovation, and economic competitiveness. Read the overview of the five reports.
Science Progress proceeds from the propositions that scientific inquiry is among the finest expressions of human excellence, that it is a crucial source of human flourishing, a critical engine of economic growth, and must be dedicated to the common good. Scientific inquiry entails global responsibilities. It should lead to a more equitable, safer, and healthier future for all of humankind.