Science2009
10.13.09 by FundScience
The University of Pittsburgh’s Science2009 event happens this Thursday and Friday. The event is free and open to the public, and includes lectures on a variety of scientific topics, including cutting edge technology such as microRNAs, evolutionary biology, renewable energy, and infectious diseases. Anyone in the area should take a look and consider attending sessions they are interested in.
FundScience will have a presence at Science2009 in the form of a booth where you can meet FundScience members and obtain more detailed information about our mission and our upcoming funding opportunities. We are excited to meet members of our community and share the progress we have made over the past few months, so please stop by and, as always, spread the word!
Science2009—Unplugged, the University’s ninth annual celebration of science, technology, and research, is coming on Thursday and Friday, 15 and 16 October, to Alumni Hall (with two special preview events on Wednesday, 14 October). Here are six great reasons to attend:
1. Highlighting the program will be plenary lectures by four distinguished scientists: Victor Ambros, PhD, of the University of Massachusetts Medical School; Michael Graetzel, PhD, of Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne; Cori Bargmann, PhD, of the Rockefeller University; and Bruce Beutler, MD, of The Scripps Research Institute.
2. Pitt and Carnegie Mellon researchers will present Spotlight Sessions on a dozen timely topics in which they are actively engaged. Likewise, five Science at Work Sessions will draw on expertise from local industry.
3. Some of the latest laboratory equipment that makes today’s research possible will be on display at the Science2009 Supplier Showcase from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. Wednesday, 14 October, at the Petersen Events Center.
What would science look like if it were invented today?
07.13.09 by Daniel Mietchen
Editor’s Note: The following is an article by guest blogger Daniel Mietchen, PhD, originially written up for the Euroscientist, the blog of Euroscience.org. This first part of a two-part series on “What would science look like if it were invented today?” deals specifically with the implications of the transition from paper-based to electronic communication for the process of knowledge creation. It delves into the importance of collaboration and openness in science. FundScience.org cross-posts this article, as well as the forthcoming second installment, because of our passion to promote open science and collaboration, not only between scientists, but between the scientific community and the public. Note that the drafting takes place in a wiki, so you can join in.
The Internet represents an opportunity to change this system, one which has created a 300-year-old, collective long-term memory, into something new and more efficient, perhaps adding in a current, collective short-term working memory at the same time. With new online tools, scientists could begin to share techniques, data and ideas online to the benefit of all parties, and the public at large. (Robert J. Simpson, paraphrasing Michael Nielsen)
Sure, it is hard to imagine you reading this blog post in a world which hadn’t yet engaged in science but the question “What would email look like if it were invented today” was recently addressed during the presentation of the Wave protocol, and entertaining some similar ideas on reinventing science may perhaps be worthwhile: how would a system have to be designed that creates and structures knowledge such that these two complex processes can effectively feed on and adapt to each other, making use of the most appropriate technologies at hand? Both processes are highly interrelated but to facilitate the discussion, we will first consider them separately (in this and the next issue of the Euroscientist), and then provide a synthesis (to which you can contribute).
| Posted in Research Resources | Comments Off
Perceptions of Science – Scientist vs Public
07.10.09 by Michelle Kienholz
As summarized this week in Science, the Pew Research Center for People and the Press reported results of a series of 3 surveys of the public and scientists on their perception of science and scientists as well as the public’s general knowledge of science:
The survey of the general public was conducted on landlines and cell phones among 2,001 adults April 28-May 12; the online survey of scientists was conducted among a sample of 2,533 members of the AAAS from May 1-June 14. Science knowledge questions were included in a separate survey of the general public, conducted on landlines and cell phones among 1,005 adults June 18-21.
Not sure what to make of the public ranking members of the military as those who most “contribute a lot to society’s well-being” … 84% versus 70% for scientists and … in a little dig to that other class of doctors … 69% for medical doctors.
A bigger concern is the public response to “which comes closer to your view …”
Govt investment in research is essential for scientific progress – 60% [!!]
Private investment ensures enough progress w/out govt investment – 29% [!!!]
No wonder Congress doesn’t have a fire lit under them to increase and stabilize research funding …
You can take the general science knowledge quiz and, when you are done, raise your eyebrows at the perhaps not entirely surprising results in the elegant Tufte-esque display of the data by demographic and question.
The reason for FundScience
12.21.08 by Sharmila Pejawar-Gaddy
As a member of The American Association of Immunologists (AAI), I receive the monthly AAI newsletter that keeps me up-to-date on current happenings in the world of Immunology (and sometimes science in general). This month’s newsletter also included a letter to members from the Executive Director of AAI, where she was asking members to “continue their support to AAI by renewing their membership, which is so important specifically in this current economic climate, where a strong AAI voice in Washington is essential to Immunologists”. The letter continued to tell us, in actual numbers, what a hard hit science has taken in these last 8 years. According to this newsletter, the NIH has had a 14% loss in purchasing power since 2003. 14% in 5 years, think about it! Stepping out of my scientist-skin, I ask a serious, unbiased question: what type of a society takes money away from medical advancement? As a person who is witnessing this first-hand, I cannot tell you how many cases I have heard off in which brilliant scientists have lost their funding and have either had to leave research all together or move to another country like Singapore, which has realized that advancement in science and healthcare is the touchstone of any successful civilization. If history has taught us a few things it is that many ancient civilizations were wiped off the face of the earth due to their inability to deal with disease, famine and draught, all which can have solutions in science.
This is where non-profit organizations like FundScience come into play. The unique thing about FundScience is that the general public is put in direct access with the scientific method. This begins to disslove the misunderstandings about science, scientific techniques and the timeline from the advent of a thought/idea to the fruition of that idea.
| Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off
| Posted in FundScience News, Research Resources | 1 Comment »