Question for the Scientistshere...

[Riesstiu IV]

Ben, the question asked by op was meant for scientists, not for retards.

[Krill]

Mods: I'd request that all BK posts be deleted from this thread as they are spam.

but that would be hypocritical of me. So I'm just going to ask for them to be deleted because they are stopping me from gaining useful research for my essay.

[loinburger]

Look, it's the logical consequence of your argument.

Only if a. you believe that politics ought to be irrational (as in, scientists should not be allowed to weigh in on politically sensitive matters when their expertise would warrant doing so) and b. that you (as in you, Ben Kenobi) are in any way shape or form qualified to judge the merits of such projects as the large hadron collider.

[Ben Kenobi]

Only if a. you believe that politics ought to be irrational (as in, scientists should not be allowed to weigh in on politically sensitive matters when their expertise would warrant doing so)

Actually, I'm arguing:

a) Politics have no place in a physics lecture. This includes SUVs and Hummers are teh devil. Hurf durf. Bringing in SUVs and Hummers are teh devil means that ID can come in too.

b) The LHC should be evaluated based on it's contribution to physics. Currently it's value stands at 0, as it is not yet operational. The LHC can only be properly evaluated after, not before. Evaluating the merit of scientific projects based on their energy consumption is just as silly as evaluating the merits of a hummer based on the same.

[loinburger]

"Cyanide is poisonous. So, f'rinstance, you might not want to ingest cyanide."
"Keep your opinions out of my biology lecture!"

[Ben Kenobi]

How on earth is that statement political?

"Cyanide is poisonous if ingested in a quantity larger than X." Statement of fact.

"SUVs and Hummers have less fuel efficiency than smart cars." Statement of fact.

"People should not drive Hummers because they have less fuel efficiency than smart cars."

Politics.

[loinburger]

All you're doing is demonstrating your ignorance of the cyanide lobby.

[Elok]

How on earth is that statement political?

"Cyanide is poisonous if ingested in a quantity larger than X." Statement of fact.

"SUVs and Hummers have less fuel efficiency than smart cars." Statement of fact.

"People should not drive Hummers because they have less fuel efficiency than smart cars."

Politics.

...so, "you should not ingest cyanide because it is poisonous" is a political doctrine?

[Elok]

Oh, and Re:OP, I'm not a scientist, but the scientific method can be cool. Witness Mythbusters. Well, they're not super-rigorous, but they can at least teach kids to isolate variables, test and refine hypotheses, etc. Also, when I was a kid there weren't nearly enough sodium and water experiments in the classroom. In fact, I only got to see it on video, which is okay but not nearly as exciting.

[loinburger]

Ben, should scientists teachers etc. not be permitted to say that people should not smoke cigarettes?

[Solomwi]

Mods: I'd request that all BK posts be deleted from this thread as they are spam.

but that would be hypocritical of me. So I'm just going to ask for them to be deleted because they are stopping me from gaining useful research for my essay.

Not this one:

The hardon collector is a gigantic waste of time, money, and energy. Why isn't the physicist up in arms about that rather than telling people to stop doing things he doesn't like anyways?

Given the source, best typo I've seen in a long time.

[Ben Kenobi]

Ben, should scientists teachers etc. not be permitted to say that people should not smoke cigarettes?

I'm being very specific here in referring only to science teachers. You want politics go talk to the history teacher.

WRT to science teachers, I wouldn't have a problem with a teacher doing some biology and showing the effects of smoking on the lungs, as well as the chemical composition of cigarettes. That would be far more effective then simply lecturing and saying, cigarettes are the devil, mmkay?

That being said, why would the question come up in class? There are far more important topics and material to cover. Having a special 'anti-smoking class' strikes me as completely political. If a student were to ask me for my personal opinion, I don't have a problem telling the student, this is what I believe and moving on. I don't have a problem with any teacher who chooses to respond to a student's question in this manner.

[Ben Kenobi]

you should not ingest cyanide because it is poisonous" is a political doctrine?

I would say no, because I believe a teacher has a duty to protect their students. If for whatever reason Cyanide was being used in a chem experiment, I would have to take the appropriate precautions, which would include a warning against ingestion. If we were discussing chemical properties, either in a bio or chem class, it should be sufficient to say that it's poisonous.

That being said you raise another point which I was thinking about when I saw your post. Bias is omnipresent. How you teach a class, what you choose to teach is always going to be coloured by your own perspective and way of seeing the world. I think it's inevitable that this will have an impact on the students, so my personal philosophy is to stick to the facts as much as possible. It's my duty to make sure that these students leave with the best preparation I can give them, browbeating them about evil SUVs is not a good use of my time.

[Zkribbler]

Him: "How much longer?"
Me: "Well, we're 120 miles away, going 80 miles an hour. Knowing that, what would you do to figure out how much longer it will take?"

You're going 80 miles per hours!? With a kid in the car?!
Slow down!!!!

BTW: I was at the mall the other day and made a 980-piso purchase. I gave the salegirl a 1000-piso note. She pulled out a hand calculator in order to figure out the change.

[Elok]

When she couldn't figure it out, did she blame the piso-crap calculator?