tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post238285340687606465..comments2024-03-27T14:50:47.345-04:00Comments on <center>Sandwalk</center>: The Darwinius AffairLarry Moranhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05756598746605455848noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-47239465744964897672009-05-22T16:45:58.621-04:002009-05-22T16:45:58.621-04:00The biggest surprise to me was the revelation that...The biggest surprise to me was the revelation that its been hanging on someones wall as an art piece for the past two decades. Its a sad verdict on the scientific education of the general public that nobody until very recently seems to have realized the scientific value of it.<br />The hype of its discovery is being replaced by some equally overblown false outrage over the original publicity.Sigmundhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00262375488263086844noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-12600147844137720542009-05-22T09:59:42.672-04:002009-05-22T09:59:42.672-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.Alexhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02590604089043425452noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-66804289585090604782009-05-22T07:52:54.889-04:002009-05-22T07:52:54.889-04:00"And the attention serves our cause as biologists/..."And the attention serves our cause as biologists/biochemist trying to promote science over religion."<br /><br />Well, dunno about your cause, but my cause has something to do with old-fashioned stuff like a search for truth (not some sort of abstract final Truth, but as close as we poor humans can conscientiously get). Science will only succeed (and only deserves to), versus religion or any other philosophy or habit of thought, IMHO, to the extent it serves our halting progress toward the truth of things.<br /><br />Which is kind of a high-flown way of saying I want to **know**, and any sort of hype that stands in the way leaves me frustrated and dissatisfied.Judnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-83050777305808353292009-05-22T04:04:17.343-04:002009-05-22T04:04:17.343-04:00Why is this "serious breach of scientific ethics b...Why is this "serious breach of scientific ethics by exaggerating their claims about the fossil". Exaggerating claims has more or less become the norm, and does much more harm when applied to biomedical science (claims of cancer cures, eradication of infections like HIV, and such). This is a cool find and the PR-job was designed (to my knowledge by a PR-company)to reach wide and have the largest possible impact. That's a success isn't it ? And the attention serves our cause as biologists/biochemist trying to promote science over religion. I really do not see the problem here and I suspect jealousy over the attention may be at the root of all the criticism.SciPhu (Nils Reinton)http://biopinionated.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-30712572624068871692009-05-21T23:39:36.588-04:002009-05-21T23:39:36.588-04:00Check The Loom again....last 4 posts or so ;-)Check The Loom again....last 4 posts or so ;-)Bora Zivkovichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10763808287050592569noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-32064992535561709582009-05-21T18:31:52.136-04:002009-05-21T18:31:52.136-04:00Larry,
I think the photograph that goes with your...Larry,<br /><br />I think the photograph that goes with your post should have this caption: "Ida, the real victim....."<br /><br />.. because it really is a lovely fossil, and it is important and useful. My own writeup of it does not touch (except very briefly at the end) on any of the meta-stuff about how the publicity was handled. I just talk about the fossil. But so much of the coverage ended up being about the coverage that a) there was more coverage than usual even for a cool find but b) most of the coverage is just about the coverage.<br /><br />So, from a framing perspective, I suppose everything went pretty well....gregladenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13934749780421265510noreply@blogger.com