Views: 6375 |
Comments: 136 Last by Isabel on Nov 26, 2010, 3:02pm
With the launch of this year’s “
Rock Stars of Science” campaign, there’s been a lot of talk about how to best promote science. I’m no marketing guru, but I am a scientist. This latest campaign is better than last years', only because it’s more diverse, but I think it really misses the boat. Is the public really going to be inspired by a couple of pictures in GQ of scientists looking uncomfortable and over dressed in the presence of Rock Stars? The most appalling aspect of this campaign is that there is no highlight of the researchers or their science. There truly are some science all stars in this group, many of which are well spoken.
However, the Rock Stars of science pages in GQ only list the scientist’s name and title, while the “Rock stars” get a one or two sentence summary of how awesome they are for standing in on these pictures. What’s the real focus of this campaign? To promote Bret Michaels’ latest reality TV dreck? If a reader wants to actually understand why these scientists were chosen and what they’re doing to cure disease, they have to visit the
website. I find it hard to believ . . .
More
It's ~1ug total DNA per lane . . .Read More
I would like to ask the amount of sonicated DNA (in mg or ng) that you loaded in this gel. Thanks. . . .Read More
@David Sanders, just because 40 mM arsenate shouldn't be limiting, that doesn't mean that some other requirement wasn't limiting. Do you expect the growth curve to go exponentially upward fore. . .Read More
Brian, I think you have made the mistake of thinking Arsenic Life was ever alive. It was stillborn. There was no evidence provided in the Science paper of incorporation of arseni. . .Read More
Alex Merzsaid: A complete manuscript with full data and a reasonably complete description of the experime. . .Read More