Comments for Griffin’s Gadgets

Comment on Lenski and 50,000 generations of E. coli by Internet Art – The Art of O » Blog Archive » Microsoft And CompTIA IT Study In Detail

Wed, 17 Mar 2010 08:30:57 +0000

[...] Lenski and 50,000 generations of E. coli | Griffin’s Gadgets [...]

Comment on Lenski and 50,000 generations of E. coli by Aimee Whitcroft

Aimee Whitcroft — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 21:18:37 +0000

The famous ‘Lenski dialogue can be found here:
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Lenski_dialog

I’ve heard it referred to as one of the best scientific smackdowns of all time, and it really is a thing of beauty to read (the dialogue takes place between Lenski and Andrew Schlafly, owner of Conservapedia).

Comment on Dawkins and Aldrin down, Rees to come by Grant Jacobs

Grant Jacobs — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 03:12:55 +0000

I was at Krauss’ talk last night (I posted the advert. material earlier). I’d have written it up myself already, but for me I’d seen too much of the material before from other sources, which made it harder to me to judge what others thought of it. (I couldn’t follow the sound on the videos he played which didn’t help; not his fault.) He’s a good speaker though and I admire the amount of time he made for those that approached him after the talk.

Comment on Dawkins and Aldrin down, Rees to come by Peter Griffin

Peter Griffin — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 01:16:06 +0000

PS – Ken, yep, good point, we could easily replicate this calendar from the SMC on Sciblogs – http://www.sciencemediacentre.co.nz/events/ and beef it up a bit… will look into rolling that out.

Comment on Dawkins and Aldrin down, Rees to come by Peter Griffin

Peter Griffin — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 01:14:51 +0000

Brent – fair enough :) Should also point out the interesting feature on Lord Rees in the Listener this week (not online for free). David, looking forward to the Krauss write-up – not seeing any media on his talk yet.

Comment on Dawkins and Aldrin down, Rees to come by Ken Perrott

Ken Perrott — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 00:33:01 +0000

Thanks for the info on Krauss, David. He is someone I would like to see.

Mind you, I have had a good run. Went to Melbourne and saw Richard Dawkins, Peter Singer, PZ Myers, AC Grayling, and a lot of other interesting people.

It would be good if there were a calender of NZ science events somnewhere. We seem to be hearing about these without much notice.

Perhaps a job for sciblogs?

Comment on Dawkins and Aldrin down, Rees to come by brent

brent — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 23:39:32 +0000

I don’t think Wgn & Chc quite cut it as “around the country”.

Comment on Dawkins and Aldrin down, Rees to come by David Winter

David Winter — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 22:37:34 +0000

...and then there's Lawrence Krauss who gave a rousing talk in Dunedin last night (which I'll write up when I get a chance) and has another here today followed by onein Auckland next week

Comment on Monbiot: All out war on science by drmike

drmike — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 23:56:26 +0000

I think one of the problems with the climate change debate is that it is not being treated as a scientific debate (i.e. seeking the truth), but rather as a debate in the style of politics or courtrooms – an adversarial approach where opponents want to win and they will use methods inappropriate to a scientific debate – rhetoric, manipulation etc.
For example, I find it extremely frustrating when opponents of AGW use the “carbon dioxide isn’t toxic argument”. This is especially aggravating when it comes from those who should know better (those with PhD and who are self proclaimed climate change consultants.
Even those who believe in AGW can make poor scientific arguments e.g. polar bears dying out etc
If we could just get back to the verifiable science and leave all the other crap behind we would be much better off.

Comment on The evolution of gratitude by Brendan Moyle

Brendan Moyle — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 21:50:50 +0000

I like the ‘just plain grateful’ argument.

And Penny is definitely worth a mention. But it also makes one appreciate the work of early biologists who without DNA technology, worked largely off a much less complete fossil record and morphological similarities to deduce phylogenetic trees.