Tag: science

Elect Scientists

Elect Scientists

This morning I got one of those political emails. Most I delete without even reading. They are usually all pretty similar in that this or that candidate needs my money. The subject line of this one caught my attention. It seemed this group was interested in electing scientists to political office.

So I googled the name of the organization and thought this group was interesting and worth supporting. I am a retired scientist (from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention or CDC) and know the importance of science to our complex society. Politically I am an Independent but have become more anti-Republican as that party has become increasingly anti-science and then authoritarian.
Continue reading “Elect Scientists”

President Trump ignores science, tells lies and people die

President Trump ignores science, tells lies and people die

President Trump continues to fail us in so many ways that it is hard to pick his greatest failure. A few days ago I mentioned his greatest failure could be his response to COVID-19. Americans, especially old Americans, are dying because of that failure.
Continue reading “President Trump ignores science, tells lies and people die”

Dominant Trait by Michael Abramson

Dominant Trait by Michael Abramson

A very good book and unexpectedly so. I thank Netgalley and BooksGoSocial for the privilege of reading Dominant Trait: A Story of Social and Genetic Inequality by Michael Abramson. The book is now available as both Kindle and paperback editions.
Continue reading “Dominant Trait by Michael Abramson”

A Brief History of Everyone Who Ever Lived by Adam Rutherford

A Brief History of Everyone Who Ever Lived by Adam Rutherford

The full title is “A Brief History of Everyone Who Ever Lived: The Human Story Retold Through Our Genes “ .  Adam Rutherford is hardly a household name at least here in the US. But I hope it will be a name that people looking for good science writing will remember.
Continue reading “A Brief History of Everyone Who Ever Lived by Adam Rutherford”

Reality Based Opinions, Again

Reality Based Opinions, Again

I started this blog as Reality Based Opinions then went to RetiredGuy. I explain my reasoning for this move in the post Reality Based Opinions.

But now I decided to go back. If you like this move, you might want to thank President Trump since he and the Trump adminstration are an important factor in my reasoning.

I started this blog in mid-2009. I suppose at least part of the reason I chose that name was a reaction to the George W. Bush adminstration’s referral to “reality-based community”. Continue reading “Reality Based Opinions, Again”

The Death of Expertise: …and Why it Matters

The Death of Expertise: …and Why it Matters

I liked The Death of Expertise but I was a bit concerned. The full title is The Death of Expertise: The Campaign Against Established Knowledge and Why it Matters and it is by Thomas M. Nichols, a professor at the U.S. Naval War College .
Continue reading “The Death of Expertise: …and Why it Matters”

Human activities and climate change (aka global warning)

Human activities and climate change (aka global warning)

The climate change deniers are at it again. Some deny climate change (aka global warning) is happening at all. Other just deny that human activities are a factor or maybe that human activities are a factor but a much smaller factor than volcanoes.

This year it is Mt. Etna that erupted and released millions of tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, supposedly dwafing the contribution of humans to the atmospheric carbon dioxide. But similar claims have been made for various volcanoes in recent years.
Continue reading “Human activities and climate change (aka global warning)”

Save science, Canadian-style

Save science, Canadian-style

The Trump administration seems intent on muzzling science, at least in federal agencies. How can we save science in our government? There are those of us who believe health, environmental, and other rules should be based on the best science possible.

But the Trump administration and many Republicans seem to believe otherwise. Why should rules be based on science? Why even consider reality? Why not base rules on wishful thinking, political theories, works of fiction, etc. How can we save science in this “party of ignorance” environment?

The answer may be a simple as looking north. The Canadian federal scientists faces a similar situation not too many years ago. So this could be a good model to examine.

A Canadian scientist has published a short article giving some of the specifics. When Canadian Scientists Were Muzzled by Their Government is well worth reading if you are a scientist or merely an interested party, such as those who may drink water or breathe the air.

War on Science

War on Science

There seems to be a war on science. I am a scientist so my bias is to believe something is probable when most reputable scientists in the relevant field say it is true.

Sure, science gets is wrong once every now and then but not very often. Science is a self-correcting process and mistakes are normally discovered pretty quickly. I suppose a betting man would lose a lot of money by betting against something that most scientists agree with. Continue reading “War on Science”

Secret Science

Secret Science

Let me start by saying that as a scientist I am against the idea of secret science. Science should be an open process and certainly not secret.

But sometimes, it isn’t.   And there is nothing sinister about that.  And certainly no need  to be reformed. However, that is not what this bill is about. If science needed to be reformed and it doesn’t, Congress is the last place I would think of. Continue reading “Secret Science”

Climate Peril by John J. Berger

Climate Peril by John J. Berger

The full title, Climate Peril: The Intelligent Reader’s Guide to Understanding the Climate Crisis, gives you a better idea of what this book is about and who it is aimed at.

The author is John J. Berger, a Ph.D. with expertise in ecology and and climate science. He has written this book not for other experts but for intelligent readers who wish to understand the current debate about climate change and the likely consequences.

I am in the process of reading this book but there is much to it and I suspect this is going to take awhile. So this is both a progress report and a review of the book as far as I have read and what I see coming based on on chapter titles.

By the way, if you look at the Amazon site you will see many favorable reviews. In fact when I looked all who reviewed the book gave it 5 starts (the highest rating). You may also notice the Kindle version is considerably less than either the hardback or paperback editions.

Dr. Berger starts us a brief picture of what will likely happen as a result of climate change in the next 90 years or so. That is, the life time of those being born now and in the very near future. It is an alarming picture and it could be worse if greenhouse emissions continue to increase.

The next chapter reviews the evidence that climate changes are already occurring. But climate does change naturally. The next 2 chapters explain the normal climate alteration process and then the unnatural process which is occurring now.

This is where I am now. So far, I am very impressed. Dr. Berger does a great job in explaining the complex issues in normal climate fluctuations (why we have ice ages and warming periods) and why most scientists believe we are now abnormally warming the climate.

Of course, weather varies. We have hot days and cold days. But based on yearly averages, 2014 was the hottest year on record. And the past few years have been pretty warm too. See Bloomberg for a great animated graph.

But back to the book. So far I think it does exactly what it set out to do. That is, it is an explanation of climate change and climate peril for the intelligent reader. And so far, the book looks very good at it. I look forward to reading the rest which looks like it lays out various climate perils in greater detail.

Climate Change: Scientists think it is real but politicians doubt

Climate Change: Scientists think it is real but politicians doubt

The scientific evidence for climate change is pretty strong – we often hear that 97% of scientists agree that climate change is happening and human activities are at least partly the cause. A page at NASA shows this consensus.

The latest report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) shows increasing confidence that this change is happening, using words such as “unequivocal” and “unprecedented“. Continue reading “Climate Change: Scientists think it is real but politicians doubt”

Intelligently Designed: How Creationists Built the Campaign against Evolution

Intelligently Designed: How Creationists Built the Campaign against Evolution

I enjoyed Intelligently Designed: How Creationists Built the Campaign against Evolution by Edward Caudill but did not finish it.

I liked this book and believe that evolution is by far the superior theory but that creationists are often winning the argument in the United States. At least winning much more often than the evidence would support. I am a scientist so I find it shocking Continue reading “Intelligently Designed: How Creationists Built the Campaign against Evolution”

The Fact/Faith Debate: Why Science Hasn’t Killed Religion by Jack Gage

The Fact/Faith Debate: Why Science Hasn’t Killed Religion by Jack Gage

The Fact/Faith Debate: Why Science Hasn’t Killed Religion by Jack Gage is an interesting and thought-provoking book.


The author did a great job in the Introduction telling us a bit about himself. And knowing a bit about him is important to understanding the book and why he wrote it.

Then Jack Gage goes into why there is a Fact/Faith debate in his first chapter. In this chapter he introduces the most unusual and an interesting aspect of this book. Rather than basing the book on just his beliefs, a panel of 6 jurors of various faiths or lack of faith get to vote on questions related to the issues presented in each chapter. This small group is somewhat like a jury in a legal trial.

Of course, 6 is a very small sample but it is a start in addressing the question of how intelligent and often highly educated people can examine the same set of “facts” (or scientific evidence) and come to very different conclusions, especially when these facts conflict with their faith-based beliefs.

I wish the sample size was larger and various jurors were able to discuss why they believe what they believe often in conflict with the evidence but that would be another book or maybe several books.

The middle (and much) of the book is a presentation of scientific evidence on various issues and then the faith-based view followed by a jury vote. I thought this was interesting at first but after 15 or so of these I just got a bit tired of it.

In many of these middle chapters the faith-based view was represented by fairly extreme positions such as Creationism or groups that interpret the Bible literally. But the beginning and end of the book discuss a variety of religious faiths so I do not think the book focuses too much on fundamentalist Christianity.

It also seems appropriate to examine these views since many Americans share many of these beliefs to some extent. For a relatively extreme example, here is a quote from Georgia Republican Representative Paul Broun of the US House of Representatives Science, Space, and Technology Committee.

God’s word is true. I’ve come to understand that, All that stuff I was taught about evolution, embryology, Big Bang Theory, all that is lies straight from the pit of hell. It’s lies to try to keep me and all the folks who are taught that from understanding that they need a savior. There’s a lot of scientific data that I found out as a scientist that actually show that this is really a young Earth. I believe that the Earth is about 9,000 years old. I believe that it was created in six days as we know them. That’s what the Bible says.

I thought the last few chapters were very good in reaching some conclusions on how and why people reconcile their religious faith with the scientific evidence.

It was a good book and I’m glad I read it.

A Little History of Science by William Bynum

A Little History of Science by William Bynum

A Little History of Science by William Bynum is hard book to review. But that is mostly because it is exactly what the title promises.


Science is a very big area. It would be impossible to cover it all in a very large set of books and certainly very hard to summarize in a large book but William Bynum attempts it in small book (about 270 pages). And succeeds!

I found myself fascinated by some parts and merely interested in others. But I think this is to be expected as the subject matter varies so greatly.

So I guess the reader is doomed to find parts that are of great interest which a reader would wish were covered in more detail. But that is the nature of short histories. This work gives us an overview of many areas of science. And if the reader is interested in any or several, he or she can explore those in more detail in other books.

I liked the book but am a bit unsure about a target audience. I am a retired scientist (human genetics) so I was already familiar with large parts of what was covered but this book did fill in some significant gaps. So I would say it is suitable for the adult reader who wants a quick view of areas of science they are not familiar with. This would range from someone with science knowledge (since there are not many who know it all) to someone who knows nothing of science but is curious. I think it would also be suitable for a teen interested in a quick overview of science.