So here's the bad news: This picture of Matt is probably the only reasonably good one from our latest talk, at the American Institute of Biological Sciences annual meeting yesterday.
But here's the good news: The entire talk was recorded and should be available soon enough on YouTube. We're looking forward to it coming online, and will let you know forthwith when it does so.
In the audience this time were a number of AAAS fellows (won't embarrass them by naming names), climate science whistleblower Rick Piltz (ClimateScienceWatch.org author), and fellow ScienceBlogger Jason Rosenhouse. As he's criticized the "framing science" thesis, I for one really appreciated that Jason took the time to hear us develop our arguments in a more extended form than we've been able to do in print. His blog post on the event is here.
There are a few more pictures below the fold, but first, an announcement: the Mooney-Nisbet (or Nisbet-Mooney) talk is carbon neutral, at least with respect to airline flights. We just picked up a TerraPass equivalent to 15,000 pounds of carbon dioxide, or (they say) roughly 40,000 airline miles. 20,000 of those are for my Storm World speaking tour in July (they should be more than enough); the other 20,000 are for Matt and I. If and when we line up more talks, we may require another TerraPass, but for now, I'd say we're comfortably covered.
And now the pics:
Mooney gets fiery and slams his hand against the podium....Not.
That's why we call it a "conversation" about new directions in science communication: audience members stay behind to chat after the talk.
sounds a little highfalutin for a blog post...
"for Matt and I"
What's a TerraPass?
so you maintain it should be "for Matt and myself"?
I'm an English major and, obviously, a journalist, but for blogging grammar I tend to follow instinct rather than rules...but perhaps there's a rule here I ought to learn.
Follow the link to learn more about TerraPass.
you would say "for me," so therefore, you'd say "for matt and me." "for matt and myself" would probably also be correct, but sounds a little highfalutin for a blog post...
here's the test: in this case, if you were talking about just yourself, you would say "for me," (not "for i"), so therefore, you'd say "for matt and me." "for matt and myself" would probably also be correct, but sounds a little highfalutin for a blog post...
The other comments are correct. The rule is "object vs subject". Would you say "for 'we'" or "for 'us'"? "we" is the subject form, "us" is the object form. Would you say "'We' are doing something, or 'Us' are doing something? Following a preposition one uses the object form. As the comments above all said - would you say "for 'me'" or "for 'I'"? Therefore "for Matt and me" - "for US".
so therefore, you'd say "for matt and me." "for matt and myself" would probably also be correct, but sounds a little highfalutin for a blog post...