This weekly Nautilus column highlights some of the online discussion at Nature Network in the preceding week that is of relevance to scientists as authors.
The Nature Network week column is archived here.
Eva Amsen calls for science fiction authors and science bloggers to opine online on the use of science fiction to communicate science. The organizers of a session at next year’s ScienceOnline conference are seeking views to help in the preparation of their presentation. For more information, and for Eva’s answers, see her Expression Patterns blog post.
Coming down to Earth, Paul Smaglik’s latest column in the science careers advice forum is the ‘new president’ edition. What might be the effects of the new US administration for science careers and prospects – and indeed, are university, never mind national, presidents overpaid?
What are the right numbers for JUPITER?, asks Martin Fenner. He analyses the reporting of a clinical trial at the recent American Heart Association conference, and how the results were presented at the meeting itself, in a press release, in journal articles and on blogs. (There is a related but independent Nature From the Blogosphere column about coordination of presentation at conferences with journal publication of results.)
“What’s the most inspirational short scientific video you’ve ever seen, which everybody should watch?”, asks Matt Brown. “Videos have a unique power to put across an important message in a memorable way, in a short timeframe. Are we using such videos to their full inspirational potential in classrooms and ‘public engagement’ events? I suspect not.” If you’ve seen any suitable candidates, please post a link at Matt’s Nature Network London blog.
“Science, if properly approached, is a business of setting very well-defined tests on tiny rockpools on the edge of that ocean of ignorance, whose answers can never be anything more than provisional and subject to revision. Science therefore demands a certain humility before the evidence”, writes Henry Gee on ‘the unknown’ of science in response to Richard Grant on ‘the beauty’ of science: what it’s all about for you.