Author: Josh Witten

http://www.thefinchandpea.com

Fukushima Revisited – Science for The People

sftp-fullsize-redbgIn the most recent episode of Science for The People*, host Rachelle Saunders discusses the Fukushima nuclear accident with nuclear energy expert Charles Ferguson and Rob Tarzwell, a medical doctor with focuses on nuclear medicine and psychiatry. The interview provides a nuanced view of the disaster – helping the rest of us to understand what happened, why it happened, and how things stand for the future.

The guest discuss the idea that we do not really know what constitutes a “safe” level of radiation exposure and how what impacts our decisions – mass evacuations around Fukushima may have killed more people than exposure would have. They also talk about what this disaster will mean for nuclear power use and how that will impact efforts to increase use of clean energy sources.

If you want a clear understanding of the events at Fukushima and their ongoing context, make some time to listen to Rachelle Saunders, Charles Ferguson, and Rob Tarzwell on Science for the People (Episode #236).

*Disclosure: I provide research assistance to Science for The People. So, while my opinion is inarguably correct, it is biased.

Political Polarization

Elkanah Tisdale, 1812 (Public Domain)

The current levels of political polarization and partisanship, which we are keenly aware of in the wake of the US Federal Government shutdown, get blamed on many factors, especially the bogeyman of new technology, the internet and social media.

Political critic Dan Carlin makes the point in his most recent Common Sense podcast (“The Shutdown Sideshow” at about 8:30) that increased political polarization should be an expected consequence of increased gerrymandering. In gerrymandered voting districts engineered to effectively guarantee the victory of a particular party, the winner of the election is primarily determined by the party primary elections. The winner of the party primaries is determined by each party’s “base” voters.

The inevitable result of such a system is the election of progressively more extreme politicians selected by gerrymandered districts, which effectively cut the majority of moderate voters out of the process. Responses to the activity of these politicians would then drive polarization among voters.

Is Dan Carlin right on this one? I cannot say for certain, but after five minutes of thought, it seems like increased political polarization is the expected consequence of an increasingly gerrymandered system, with or without modern communication technology. The burden of proof, therefore, falls more heavily on those arguing that it is the result of some other factor (eg, internet) or that political polarization has not increased.

$cientists on Money

Jacob Bourjaily, a theoretical physicist, has collected a variety of banknotes from around the world that feature scientists, mathematicians, philosophers, etc. in the notes artwork. For me, it underscores the diverse locations that take pride in these individuals that have contributed so much to scientific progress (and their diverse backgrounds). It is also amusing to have such individuals on denominations that are best expressed in scientific notation (eg, Tesla on a 1010 Yugoslavian Dinar note, pictured).

In another way, the notes highlight the lack of diversity in our society’s perception of who great scientists are. While there are five notes honoring scientific concepts or technological feats, there are only three non-European scientists featured, and only one woman (Marie Curie).

I do not blame Jacob Bourjaily for the imbalance. First, it is unreasonable to expect the collection to be exhaustive or to not focus on the cultures most proximate to one’s own. Second, scientific research has been structured (ie, women forced to work for free without their own labs or titles) so that the credit for the work of clever women has invariable been handed to men. Remember when they did not really want to give Marie Curie the Nobel prize because of lady-bits?

Putting a more diverse representation of scientists on the money seems like a great way to promote science education, as well as present role models. I’ve got Andrew Jackson on a $20 in my wallet. I think we can safely say that no one with any sense wants any of our kids to grow up to be like genocidal Old Hickory. With that in mind, who would you like to see on our cash?

*Hat tip to Tyler Cowen at Marginal Revolution.

Food Sustainability – Science for The People

Science for The People, Episode #235: Food SustainabilityFood sustainability is a hot topic. Food everything is a hot topic. The most recent episode (#235) of Science for The People (née Skeptically Speaking) is exceptionally good* on this topic. Host Desiree Schell and guests Valentine Cadieux and Emily Cassidy cover standard topics of food sustainability, but address controversial areas like GMOs and “eating local” with nuance that gets beyond simplistic arguments over whether GMOs are safe or if “eating local” is environmentally friendly.

They also raise the issue of honoring food cultures as an important element of pragmatic discussions about feeding the ever growing human population. A potential result of our desire to provide adequate calories and nutrition to impoverished areas of the globe is the destruction of traditional food cultures in poor societies, while promoting those of rich societies – a kind of benign, cultural imperialism. Continue reading “Food Sustainability – Science for The People”

My Ada – #findingada

Image courtesy of South Carolina Governor's School for Science & Mathematics
Image courtesy of South Carolina Governor’s School for Science & Mathematics

As she is every Ada Lovelace Day, my “Ada” is Jenn Taylor. She doesn’t just talk about inspiring students to become scientists (in their approach to life or professionally), she does it. Every. Single. Day.

Here she is with her Advanced Genetics class. At the request of students (inspired by her college-credit introductory biology classes), Jenn created a college-level Advanced Genetics course at the South Carolina Governor’s School for Science & Mathematics. The material is challenging (I’ve seen the problem sets); but the students rise to the challenge, especially when they are given the confidence that they can handle it and the support when they need a little boost.

I also get to see her the time and effort she puts into recommendation letters, using her reputation and track record to makes sure students have all the opportunity they can handle when they leave her classroom.

Everyday is Ada Lovelace Day in my house.