Flock of Dodos

They showed us the movie Flock of Dodos at the Evolution Meeting. Randy Olson (the director) was also there to field questions. So was Eugenie Scott. Someone asked about scientists boycotting the Kansas Kangaroo Court. Olson thought it was a bad idea because it made it look like the scientists couldn't deal with the "criticisms of evolution". Scott defended the boycott by arguing that because the school board's decision was predecided, scientists would have only legitimized Connie Morris and her posse of ignorance. In case you care, I agree with Genie.

I think Flock of Dodos is a movie worth seeing (especially if you can swing a free screening). Olson's thesis is that the creationist movement is bad for the American education system, but biologists aren't doing a very good job dealing with it. He's really into catch phrases and framing, but it would be much nicer if we could educate the public to the point where it can move beyond advertising tactics. Until then, we need something equivalent to "Teach the Controversy" for our side. Any suggestions?

More like this

Last night I drove into New Haven, Connecticut, to catch an advanced screening of Flock of Dodos, a movie about evolution and intelligent design. Afterwards I took part in a panel discussion. It was an interesting evening, not only because the movie was quite good, but because it provoked a noisy…
Randy Olson visited the Loom a few months ago in connection with his movie about our national fun and games with evolution and intelligent design, Flock of Dodos. He provoked a lot of discussion with his main point, that biologists were doing a poor job of reaching out to the public. Some skeptics…
Randy Olson's movie A Flock of Dodos comes up again and again in the course of arguments about public communication of science, but I had never gotten around to seeing it. I finally put it on the Netflix queue, and ended up watching it last night. For those who have been living in caves and haven't…
Earlier this week, I had a chance to talk with Randy Olson about this business of communication good science to the public. I've had some disagreements with his strategies before; I think we resolved them a bit. What I had interpreted as a call to dumb down science to get it to the people is really…

He's really into catch phrases and framing, but it would be much nicer if we could educate the public to the point where it can move beyond advertising tactics.

Meh. Then you've lost the battle, already.

NEVER, NEVER think of it as "advertising tactics." You're not respecting your audience here. Humans always like things to be summarized concisely, even more so in modern society, with all the myriad things they have to pay attention to. If you're not willing to do that, and others are, you're going to lose.

Another one of Olson's points is that you can't talk down to people -- you always come across looking like the bad guy. I think I did just that in how I phrased that point. But there's a difference between explaining something clearly and using talking points.

In the end, this issue come down to honesty vs lies and good science vs bad science. We have the upper hand in both of those points, we just need to get the message out clearer.

Teach the truth?