#SciLogs Weekly Roundup: Arctic Warming, Embargoes, Killer Dishwasher, Collaborative Writing

Every weekend, I publish a roundup of the week’s SciLogs.com blog posts along with some reactions from the comment feeds and social media.

To keep in touch with SciLogs.com, you can like us on Facebook, follow us on Twitter, circle us on Google+ or subscribe to the network’s RSS feed.



Blog to watch this week: The Frontier Scientists blog has a really great #longread which comprehensively looks at the relationship between the Arctic ecosystem, and its glaciers, and climate change. It's an ideal blog post to get a grasp of the devastating effects of climate change on the Arctic... and Earth itself.

Quote of the week: "Glacial ice, com­posed of many many years of accu­mu­lat­ed snow­fall, can lit­er­al­ly show us his­to­ry." - Laura Nielsen.

More weekend reading: Malcolm Campbell curates the past week’s best science stories.


Kerstin Hoppenhaus: Ancient hominids, get your DNA cleaned up here!

Matt Shipman: Embargoes as Self-Defense, Or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Live with Embargoes

Mike Spear:

You cited one example of an embargo but I live with a strange definition when it comes to research funding [...] It is considered 'embargoed' and not to have happened until the media release goes out even though the science community is well aware of it, EOIs may have gone out already, and in one bizarre case the funding was awarded and the researchers set to do their Q1 report while the information was still considered embargoed by some of funders. I appreciate how you've come to terms with some instances, but my experience with many embargoes is that it is an internal construction that has little to do with the media or the public and more to do with politics of one kind or another.

Lowell Goldsmith: Research Techniques Made Simple: North, South or East? Blotting Techniques

Stephanie Swift: Vaccine delivers a double whammy to fight tuberculosis

Paige Brown: What Does One Do with a PhD in Mass Communication (of Science)?

Beatrice Lugger: Join the Lindau Nobel Online Community #lnlm13

Malcolm Campbell: Happy birthday Greg Kinnear!

GrrlScientist: Snowball the dancing cockatoo by Sy Montgomery | Book Review

Kausik Datta: It’s anytime-o’clock. Do you know what is growing in your dishwasher?

John Ireland on SciLogs.com’s Google+ page:

Well at least the author points out not to overreact at the end of the article.  As I tell my microbiology students, you can either realize you have survived this long just fine or go all Howard Hughes and grow out those fingernails.

Laura Nielsen: Ice restrains the floodgates

Tania Browne: Ask a Silly Question...

Sam Askin:

Having dealt with scicomm a lot recently, it raises an interesting point... GP's have some of the most intense and important relationships with audiences that may know nothing of their conditions (my mother is even a GP, so I can attest to this!); what is being done to ensure that THEY have their communication skills in order? Who is teaching the GP's about different audiences, how to engage them, gain their trust, get on their level, communicate effectively the science and medicine of their conditions with them?

Kerstin Hoppenhaus: Bonobo radio: In the field

Tom Webb: The Clunky Mechanics of Collaborative Writing

David Lovell:

Thanks for this thoughtful article Tom. I reckon there are often two main writing phases which you could call "structural" and "stylistic" ... at least for a lot of academic writing. The "structural" bit is about the points that need to be made; the "stylistic" is about putting those points across in writing. Each demands a different approach and mindset. In a collaborative setting, one can easily descend into change-tracking hell if these two phases are comingled [...] That structure should give the authors a sense of what needs to be said and where so that (ideally) the magnum opus can be divided and conquered. (With a sprinkle of change tracking at the end - ideally deletions - to ensure that the text is undiluted by extraneous words and turns of phrase.)

Tom Webb, in response:

Thanks David! The distinction between 'structural' and 'stylistic' phases is a really useful one. One of the things Scrivener does well is to enable you to separate these out, so you can edit the structure independent of the content. Great for individuals writing their magnum opus, but not really designed for collaboration. But for a big, collaborative doc I agree: get the structure down first, then at least everyone is pulling in the same direction!

Alex Brown: The not-so-universal language of mathematics


In Dutch, surprisingly, mathematics is called Wiskunde which according to Wikipedia (https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiskunde#Algemeen) is due to the fact that in the 17th century somebody defined Mathematics as 'the art of exactness or certainty'. Quite romantic in itself to define mathematics as an artform. So, there is no such debate in Dutch because the art can only be singular.”

Kerstin Hoppenhaus: Primates, figuring things out

Annelie Wendeberg: Of Bees Bombs and Biblical Plagues

Marc Kuchner: Caregiver or Hero—Which One Are You? The Archetypal Roles of Women in Science and Academia

Lowell Goldsmith: Editors’ Picks from Experimental Dermatology (June issue)

Kerstin Hoppenhaus: Spot the sabertooth

Paige Brown: Photo of the Week: Backyard Amphibian

Malcolm Campbell: Work-life balance

Matt Shipman: Sexual Assault, Crowdfunding and Science Communication

Malcolm Campbell: Morsels for the mind – 21/6/2013

Pete Etchells: Sorry, it’s not the happiest day of the year

Tom Webb: Midsummer Indulgence

Leave a Reply

two + = 5