Along with Nisbet, I continue to give various versions of the Speaking Science 2.0 talk frequently--even though we are not always so good about updating the Speaking Science 2.0 webpage. Um, intern, anybody? Oh wait, that was my little sister, and now she's back at college...
...anyways, we're doing two more presentations together this week. The first will be in New York, sponsored by the Center for Inquiry--that's Wednesday night. Details here. If you missed us at the New York Academy of Sciences in June, this is the next Big Apple trip.
The next talk, Thursday, will be at Bucknell University in Pennsylvania. Details here.
Finally, Friday, I'm speaking at the renowned bioethics think tank, the Hastings Center, in Garrison, NY. That talk will be about the good old "war on science." So it's busy, busy, lately....Indeed, I'm currently writing from College Park, Maryland, where I have been on hand to discuss the work of Mike Tidwell, author of The Ravaging Tide: Strange Weather, Future Katrinas, and the Coming Death of America's Coastal Cities. This book has been assigned as the "first year book" for some 4,000 University of Maryland freshmen.
I'm going to have more to say about that shortly. But if any of you have read Ravaging Tide, or know of Tidwell's writing and activism more generally, feel free to start up a conversation thread here...
- Log in to post comments
Did you catch Tidwell's talk today? After that, I think I've had enough politicization of science, enough unapologetic authoritarianism, and enough claims of opponents' politically-motivated pseudoscience to suffice for quite a while.
Some of the assertions with which he finds fault are certainly bought and unreliable, and I don't exactly disagree with his primary goal. However, dismissing criticism as invalid instead of spreading understanding -- "[By questioning the revealed truth, think tanks and Limbaugh manipulate] people like you," he told a student, instead of explaining what 'they' misrepresent -- or limiting freedom without acknowledging the costs, or pushing 'belief' in a simple explanation for a huge issue are definitely not good ways to go about reaching that goal.
Unfortunately I missed the lecture. Did he really use the phrase "revealed truth"? Anyways, more from me really soon. And I'm glad UMD students are checking in, because that's who I really want to reach with my remarks on Tidwell.
Nope, he didn't actually use that phrase, but it's certainly how that part of his talk (in the Q&A) sounded. He did mention Limbaugh two or three times, though, and the "people like you" part is what really stood out.
Gotcha. Well, the first part of my critique of Tidwell is now up:
http://www.desmogblog.com/the-mike-tidwell-dilemma-part-i
Also posted at DeSmogBlog:
If the object is to teach freshmen the importance of critical thinking and respect for the scientific process, wouldn't it be a good idea to use a book that makes a number of good points but oversteps the science?
I can imagine some absolutely wonderful classroom and dormitory debates that would result. Some of them might even read your book Storm World and compare its balanced, careful, and thorough approach to Tidwell's polemic.
(Click my name for my review of Storm World, which was published in several major metropolitan newspapers.)