#IStandWithDNLee

[Update 10/14/13: Scientific American has finally reinstated Dr. Lee's original blog post on this topic, Biology-Online issued her an apology in which they claim to have fired the offensive editor, and Dr. Lee's story has hit national news. Behold the power of the pen! Or, as in this case, many collective virtual pens. Congrats, Dr. Lee! I hope this starts a dialogue on racism and sexism in the sciences, as well as discussion about payment for writers. - Mama Joules]

Yesterday, I jumped on Twitter to find an online acquaintance of mine, DNLee, at the center of a firestorm. Dr. Danielle N. Lee writes a blog called The Urban Scientist, a friendly, accessible voice from a minority woman in a global scientific community that is still largely dominated by white men. Dr. Lee was recently approached, via email, by an online publication to write for them for free. When she politely declined, they hit back with "Are you an urban scientist or an urban $&#%^?"

Now, I don't know about you, but when someone calls me a $&#%^, my blood starts boiling. My friend was no different, and she fired back on her blog with an appropriately measured response. However, her post was pulled by the host of her blog, Scientific American. Many have called this decision into question, particularly since it appears that this rude online publication has a financial relationship with Scientific American.

Sexism and racism - and I believe both were in play here - have no place in science or anywhere else. Deleting evidence of such transgressions doesn't erase the issue. Sweeping this ridiculous and insulting behavior under the rug only ensures that it will continue.

So, I am adding my voice to the growing online community of science blogging support for Dr. Lee. No one deserves to be cyber-bullied and then silenced and shamed as if they were at fault. 

You can read more about this issue, including a complete reprint of Dr. Lee's deleted rebuttal, from other similarly outraged bloggers: Sean Carroll, Dr. Isis, David Wescott, Dana Hunter and many, many others.

Dr. Danielle N. Lee

"A hip hop maven [who] blogs on urban ecology, evolutionary biology & diversity in the sciences"

We are all scientists

In the US, today is Martin Luther King Jr. Day and I've been thinking about equality. I just arrived home from attending Science Online 2010, a science blogging and web communication conference, where I sat in on several talks about citizen science. In one, while discussing the lack of STEM (science, technology, engineering & math) funding for adult science literacy programs, a participant said,

"It's like we've given up on the adults."

This is tragic. Not everyone is going to work in a lab doing research, but everyone can be a scientist. We are all entitled to explore the world through science - it's our birthright. My husband, Itinerant Cryptographer, said it well:

"Everyone should have the opportunity to explore science as far as their interests and abilities can take them."

But in this country, many adults no longer participate in discussions about science. In turn, scientists feel like the general public isn't listening anymore. Both sides are growing more polarized, with the scientists amping up their insistence and the non-scientists becoming more resistant. As someone who has sat on both sides of the table -- as a working scientist and now a stay-at-home mom -- I can see why some people have completely opted out of this discussion.

On the plus side, practicing scientists are often generous with their time. They love to be asked about their work. Many share their knowledge freely with those who are interested. Frankly, I find most scientists to be nice folks when you get to know them. (And I love ecologists. I know I am biased here, but people who want to save the planet tend to be kind.)

But scientists can be an intimidating lot to the uninitiated. Some researchers are so steeped in their work that they can't imagine why someone would see things differently. They don't hesitate to tell you so -- this is their life's work and they know it well. But this passionate viewpoint can sound aggrandizing, or worse, insulting. The non-scientist (or non-practicing stay-at-home mom science blogger) might leave the conversation feeling frustrated, angry, and unheard. As John Morley once said, "You have not converted a man because you have silenced him."

Where does this leave us? It's terrible for the future of science. Scientists need to get the word out about their research. Non-scientists need to hear the message, but their concerns must be addressed by the scientific community. Nothing is going to improve if we don't all start listening to one another.

In order for this to happen, though, everyone needs to feel welcome at the table of science. Whether you are a four-year-old stargazer or a distinguished Nobel Laureate, your concerns and ideas matter. You are a part of this conversation.

If you felt unwelcome in scientific discussions before, let this be your ticket in. Please come back to the table of science. We need you here. All of our futures depend upon it.

"Faith is taking the first step, even when you don't see the whole staircase."
-- Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Photo credit: Linda Byers, National Park Service

Thinking about "improbable research"

Are you familiar with the Nobel Prize, that wonderful award which caps a great scientist's career? Well, how about the Ig® Nobel Prize?

Yesterday, Improbable Research awarded the 19th First Annual Ig® Nobel Prizes. How were the winners chosen? According to their website, "[i]mprobable research is research that makes people laugh and then think."

Improbable Research finds the most unusual studies in over 20,000 publications and summarizes those most worthy in the Annals of Improbable Research. The best part? Each magazine comes complete with this handy-dandy Teachers' Guide.

This year, one of the Ig® Nobel prize winners was a UK team that discovered named cows produce more milk than unnamed cows. I loved this researcher's response to finding out that her group was a recipient. As reported by the BBC, she said that she was a great fan of the prize. She then praised UK dairy farmers for their humane treatment of their animals. Finally, "Dr. [Catherine] Douglas dedicated the award to Purslane, Wendy and Tina - 'the nicest cows I have ever known'."

If you happen to be in Cambridge, MA this Saturday, head on over to MIT for free seating at the Ig® Informal Lectures and learn more about this year's prize winners.

Professor Stephen Hawking and his friend George

Recently, Kerm and I went to the library and checked out George’s Secret Key to the Universe, written by Lucy & Stephen Hawking (with Christophe Galfard). Stephen Hawking, the famous theoretical physicist, is known for expanding our knowledge of astronomy despite suffering from ALS (a neurologic disease).

Hawking is one of my favorite scientists. I am in awe of the fact that his mind soars among the heavens despite having extremely severe physical limitations. Hawking writes on his website that at one point, he communicated by "spell[ing] out words letter by letter, by raising [his] eyebrows when someone pointed to the right letter on a spelling card." Fortunately, personal computing came to his rescue and we are all richer for the experience.

Hawking has written several books for adults, including A Brief History of Time, which, according to the BBC, sold more than nine million copies. Lucy Hawking is Stephen's daughter so I was curious about the book. Since Kerm likes astronomy, I thought he would like it.

A few days later, after seeing George’s Secret Key to the Universe open on Kerm's bed, I asked him what the book was about.

“It’s about the universe and the world’s most amazing computer called Cosmos,” said Kerm. “Cosmos can make ‘portal doorways’ so his owner Eric can go through these doorways and go anywhere in outer space.” Portal doorways aren’t real, Kerm told me. “They aren’t the same as black holes. [Portal doorways] actually bring you from your house into outer space.”

What is a black hole? As defined by Lucy and Stephen Hawking in their book, “To make a black hole you need to squash a very large amount of matter into a very small space.” The resulting gravitational pull is so strong that nothing can escape, not even light. And the more matter and light that enter a black hole, the larger it gets.

Here’s what Kerm learned about black holes. “A black hole is a giant place in space where everything gets sucked inside. It [occurs when] an exploding star ... got too big and exploded into a big area in space [while the center of the star got pushed in]. Anything can be sucked [into a black hole], even light. And light [travels at] the fastest speed in the universe that we know.” Kerm also learned that scientists now believe “that it’s possible to get out of a black hole.”

It’s hard for me to imagine this, but the Hawkings wrote that, “Our own galaxy, the Milky Way, has at its center a black hole several million times the mass of our Sun.” Can you imagine that? It’s like there's an invisible gigantic vacuum cleaner slurping stuff up at the center of our universe.

Kids that are interested in science and science fiction would like this book, according to Kerm. “It is a very cool book ... My favorite character was George because he was the main character and he was a hero."

You can visit George's website to take a quiz about astronomy, check out these facts and photos about outer space, and enter this competition to win a hardback copy of the sequel, George's Cosmic Treasure Hunt!

Image Credit: X-ray: NASA/CXC/CfA/R.Kraft et al.;
Submillimeter: MPIfR/ESO/APEX/A.Weiss et al.; Optical: ESO/WFI

Grow a science garden

Over the week-end, I was reading about Michael Twitty and his involvement with African-American heritage gardens. I love the idea of growing plants with special meanings and sharing those meanings with others. Growing up Catholic, I've heard of Mary gardens planted in flowers (often blue and white) with symbolic ties to the Blessed Mother. So, I started thinking, what would a science garden look like?


A science garden would have to include peas. Gregor Mendel, the famous geneticist, cross-bred over 300 strains of peas. His discoveries of dominant and recessive traits are the foundation of modern-day genetics.

Apple trees would be another good choice. Isaac Newton is widely reported to have watched an apple fall while developing his theory of gravity.

Peanuts should also be included. George Washington Carver developed over 225 peanut products in his lifetime, including gasoline, shampoo, dry coffee, and, of course, peanut butter. (If you're allergic to peanuts, consider planting sweet potatoes. He found over 100 uses for them, too.)

Charles Darwin, famous for his theories of evolution and natural selection, is said to have favored orchids. Benjamin Franklin set up a plant exchange between French and American gardeners, bringing rhubarb, yellow willow, and the cabbage turnip to colonial America.

A science garden would probably have most plants grown in neat and orderly rows, perhaps with varying watering schedules and fertilization rates to see the effectiveness of different cropping techniques, à la Rothamsted (reportedly "the oldest agricultural research station in the world"). But any science garden should have at least one corner where all of the leftover seeds are thrown together for fun, just to see what happens.

Photo credit: Scott Bauer, ARS, USDA

The importance of perspective

I once watched a professor give an interview on writing. He recounted writing exercises that had helped his students to think creatively. One of his favorite assignments went something like this:

Imagine describing your school's cafeteria lunch. You might write about the gloppy goo served by surly workers, the boys flipping pats of butter so they stick to the ceiling (kids really did that at my high school!), or the limp and wilted salad bar. You've painted quite a picture, haven't you?

Now, imagine the same cafeteria scene with one change: You are desperately hungry. You haven't eaten a decent meal in weeks. How does this affect what you see?

Perspective plays an important role when studying scientific subjects, too. Here are two very different examples:

--Perspective & attitude

How many times have you heard someone say, "I'll never get that. I'm just not good at science." Or, maybe they've said that science is too hard or science is boring. Maybe you've said the same thing. Changing the way that you approach at the material can help you to enjoy science. Try to have a positive perspective with regard to new material. Tell yourself instead, "Yes, this is a challenging subject, but if I work hard I'll learn something new." Or even, "I'm good at science!" I think you'll be pleasantly surprised at what a difference it makes!

--Perspective & observational bias

Perspective also makes a difference when you are writing up observations during an experiment. I remember one time when I was looking at slides of stream water under a microscope. The light of the microscope was so hot that some of the teeny tiny critters would swim away from the center of the slide! If I was slow with my observations, I would have fewer creatures to describe in my field journal. The very act of studying the stream water affected what I saw. This effect is known as observational bias. Scientists work hard to reduce observational bias whenever possible.

Here's a picture of a tree taken from the trunk looking up. How different would this tree look if you changed perspective and looked at it from the leaves down?

Photo credit: Leon Brooks, BurningWell.org

Thoughts on George Washington Carver

"I love to think of nature as an unlimited broadcasting system, through which God speaks to us every hour, if we will only tune in."
--George Washington Carver (1864? - 1943)


Traditionally, February has been known as Black History Month. This got me thinking about my favorite African-American scientist, George Washington Carver, and his rise from slavery to esteemed professor and agricultural researcher.

I'm not sure why it influenced me so much to read a profile about Carver in the late 1970's. I'll be honest, back then I didn't think much about science outside of school. Maybe it was because President Carter was in office and their names were so similar and they both were peanut farmers.

But I remember thinking that it was really cool that Carver thought of so many different things to do with peanuts. In the truest definition of a scientist -- he saw the world in a different way. Dr. Carver seemed determined to squeeze every possible type of peanut product out of this simple crop. Along with numerous foodstuffs (like peanut butter!), he found the peanut could be used to make paper (from the skin and vines), wall boards (from the hulls), axle grease, laundry soap, laxatives, and hundreds of other products. In addition to his work with peanuts, Carver taught crop rotation and developed new uses for soybeans, pecans, and sweet potatoes. As a result, cotton farmers devastated by the boll weevil were able to find new crops to replace cotton in the American south.

I like that Carver patented very few of his inventions, instead making them available to help everyone. He could have become discouraged early in his career -- he faced discrimination while trying to pursue his education -- but he didn't. He kept on trying. Both humble and persistent, he was a man on a mission. Carver turned down jobs for higher pay so that he could continue his agricultural work and help the southern farmer.

In these bleak economic times, I thought this quote of his especially relevant:

"Learn to do common things uncommonly well; we must always keep in mind that anything that helps fill the dinner pail is valuable." George Washington Carver

P.S. You can print out a cool Coloring and Activity Book about Carver from the U.S. Department of Agriculture.