I was listen to the radio as we were coming to the lab this morning, and one of the things that caught my ear was a quick mention of collective nouns. Now these are instances where there is a special and specific term that is coined for a group of things. Wiki describes it as follows:
In linguistics, a collective noun is a word used to define a group of objects, where "objects" can be people, animals, emotions, inanimate things, concepts, or other things. For example, in the phrase "a pride of lions," pride is a collective noun.
Then it kind of struck me that this sort of thing is most commonly seen when referring to things related to biodiversity, and I guess I got curious as to why that was.
Since playing around with twitter for the last couple of days, I think I'm starting to a hit this threshold that's feeling a little like "twitter fatique." So, of course, this makes me curious as to whether such a thing has been studied. You know, in terms of behavioural sciences, but with the hope that someone has looked at it with some full-on neuroscience thrown in.
So, what does one do if one is keen to track this stuff down? Well, for starters, you can go to PUBMED, and search for the keyword "twitter."
And lo and behold, you do find a few papers. Most of them about scientific collaboration and how twitter can factor in, but most intriguing is that you also get papers like this:
I work in the engineering school here at U.Va. My office faces a lobby-type area just outside the main computer lab for undergrads. That space has blank walls. We recently commandeered it and opened up an art gallery. The painting above is one of four currently hanging in this first installment. I make note of the exhibit here, at The World's Fair, because it seems entirely in keeping with the ethos of this blog, where in our best days we cross the so-called boundaries between scientific, artistic, and political worlds.
I recently attended the TEDxVancouver event, which was wonderfully done and also useful for being able to network with a lot of interesting people. There was, however, one thing that irked me - nothing to do with the conference logistics but rather a statement or two issued by one of the speakers, Patrick Moore.
Just a little background on Patrick: he's one of the founders of Greenpeace, with a major role in the evolution of the organization in its earlier days. However, currently, he's a little more well known for his climate change skepticism views, and particularly his advocacy for nuclear power.
Anyway, at the beginning of his talk, he essentially outlined a few points to suggest that anthropogenic climate change is all a ruse, a sentiment he backed up with what can be summarized (and since I just signed up for twitter the other day) in the following <140 character phrase.
"Earth has not actually been getting any warmer in the last 10 years. Oh yeah, the ice in the Antarctica doesn't even seem to be melting."
It's a compelling statement and certainly easy to digest, but I thought I'd take a minute or two to weigh in a little here. I'd like to explain why I think that kind of statement (which happens to be classic climate change denialist prose) is a great example of spinning things to meet your own particular agenda.
Or as Jane Austen might say, "Badly done... Badly done..."
... because I have tuesday afternoon cleared for updating the science scout site a bit. Plus, although I'm a bit apprehensive jumping into this media (more from a time suck perspective), I am keen to see if it has any utility in general for some of the programs I run.
Berry will be giving a public reading at 5:30 PM on Thursday, December 3rd in the Small/Harrison Special Collections Library on campus. I'm told a reception will follow. Here is a map. The library is #19 on it.
I actually mentioned this video earlier, but you know, I don't think I did the pitch justice.
So...
Basically a TEDx talk by Jennifer Gardy, who outlines just how freaking fast that H1N1 information has been obtained. And all because of the open source and open access nature of the research work.
For example, when SARS hit the fan in 2003, it took 19 days for its genome to be sequenced. This year with the H1N1 swine flu, in that same 19 day timeframe, over 100 viral genomes had been sequenced, analysis had been done (and published) that worked out the origin and timeframe of the virus, and already a vaccine seed strain had been worked out. And all because of things like data sharing on wikis.
Carl is currently in Vancouver, and he was gracious enough to come out for drinks with us last night. This was after a great talk he gave on the how scientists have been following the evolutionary tracks of the H1N1 flu, so that folks can get a sense of (1) what it is, (2) how it's been moving, and (3) where exactly it may have come from in the first place.
The talk was apparently filmed, so I'll try and remember to pass on the link when it's up, but I thought it was worth reshowing a great little video from NPR that he highlighted.
So I'm based in Vancouver, Canada, and will be heading off to London, UK in July 2010, and I'm curious to hear any advice on how to best increase your chances for that low maintenance sabbatical house swap.
I've done the sabbaticalhome.com thing (link), posted on craigslist, will put stuff up on websites I have access to, have found a notice board at my own institution, but I have to admit it still all seems very much like a "shot in the dark" thing.
So, I'm wondering if the comment thread can be used to highlight any other tricks of the trade, or general advice about figuring out that whole sabbatical accommodation thing.
Plus - gratuitous plug warning - any of you from London and interested in a 6 month jaunt in beautiful Vancouver (consistently in the top 4 "best places to live" lists)? O.K. I'll stop now...
