I was watching this video of a presentation by ScienceBlogling Matt Nisbet, and he related this factoid about the NIH and scientific illiteracy:
Only nine percent of Americans could identify what the NIH was.
(on the video, it's at the 27:00 mark)
Given the public's staggering ignorance, it's a miracle any science gets done. How can people not know that the NIH stands for the National Institute of Holiness?
Kidding.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
Readers of FRAMING SCIENCE who work in downtown DC or on Capitol Hill may want to take an extended lunch break tomorrow to check out this American Meteorological Society briefing in the Dirksen Senate Office Building, Rm. 106, featuring one of your favorite bloggers. ;-)
The Divide between…
Mooney and Nisbet take their case for framing science from Science, to the Washington Post's Op-Ed page. PZ Myers is not happy. I agree with him that the title sucks, but I'd lay odds that it was the work of some copy editor. On the other hand, I agree with Mooney and Nisbet when they say that…
I don't like getting involved in internecine warfare, least of all amongst my SciBlings. But a recent OpEd in WaPo by two fellow bloggers I admire, Matt Nisbet of Framing Science and Chris Mooney of The Intersection prompts me to set fingers to keyboard. It is Richard Dawkins that provoked it. Good…
In my last post, I looked at a set of ethical principles Matt Nisbet asserts should be guiding the framing of science. In this post, I consider the examples Matt provides as the "DO" and "DON'T" pictures for the application of these guiding ethical principles.
First, Matt examines an example of…
well I've been able to barf up the acronym's components in order since I was a kid, I still need to go look at their website to discuss anything deeper.