"Andalucia": Isn't that region of Spain spelled "Andalusia"? Or, maybe I should just wait for the answer!

Andalucía is correct in Español, but George managed to mangle the pronunciation. The stress is on the accented í. AndaluCEEa. He did better with Sevilla and Granada, however. I lived in Sanlúcar de Barrameda for a year, which is about an hour's drive from Sevilla. Andalucía is my favorite region of Spain, but you really can't go wrong. It's a beautiful country.

(Paused partway through) For the record, Georg Cantor did not commit suicide. John was correct to say that he suffered mental health problems, and spent several intervals in sanatoriums as a consequence. (The Wikipedia article says the new thinking is that he had bipolar disorder, in contradiction to earlier beliefs that attacks on his work were the sole cause of his problems.) George: Don't mean to rub it in, but I'm surprised you didn't know to call your credit card company before going to Europe. This has been a Good Thing to do for at least a decade now. This part, at least, predates the current economic situation. Also, my parents, who went to Europe dozens of times, would tell you that it's worth getting an American Express card for traveling in Europe -- apparently, their customer service over there is localized (plenty of offices), and head and shoulders above Visa and MC. Next time. Or maybe, tips for someone else. In any case, its always good to hear mention of transfinite numbers. This was probably the single most mind-blowing thing I ever learned in History of Mathematics. (After watching the rest) Pretty funny to see George being the

Quoting Wonderment: Andalucía is correct in Español, but George managed to mangle the pronunciation. The stress is on the accented í. AndaluCEEa.

Would the people who live there actually say something more like AndaluTHEEa? Or is that lisp-like aspect not nationwide? (I had a friend who always pronounced his hometown Barthelona.)

John: Does this:

During our conversation at Stevens, Sacks ...

mean there's some hope that the rest of us will be able to see some video (or hear some audio) someday soon? Hope so!

Great to hear about the rhythm and music theory relating to the brain; thank you John and George. I'd love to hear more!

Another poor segment, GEORGE JOHNSON is the worst.

Wow, haven't listened yet, but does this mean the BH overlords might have heard my suggestion?

I feel personally vindicated by George!

Or is that lisp-like aspect not nationwide? (I had a friend who always pronounced his hometown Barthelona.)

The lisp thing is almost national in Spain and entirely absent in the rest of the Spanish-speaking world. Thus, the C spelling matters in Spain, as it is a different phoneme (like our TH in thing). The interesting exception in Spain is the Sevilla region where they DON"T "lisp" (known as 'cecear" in Spanish). The pretty well substantiated theory is that Spanish sailors (Sevilla was the ship-building and economic center of the Conquista) exported their "unusual" pronuniciation of Z's and C's, and it caught on the New World big time.

George: Don't mean to rub it in, but I'm surprised you didn't know to call your credit card company before going to Europe. This has been a Good Thing to do for at least a decade now.

True, but still extremely annoying. My Visa company has turned off my card even when ordering from a foreign company over the Internet (I order films and books from Israel). My spouse went to China last year, told them in advance, and they still turned off the card with the first use. The big mistake for John was taking only one credit card with him. Also, agree with John that it is infuriating when they tell you it's all for your protection and treat you as if you authorized some improper use of the card. My advice: ALWAYS insist on the supervisor or the supervisor's supervisor whenever you talk to a customer service rep. Entry-level personnel are invariably clueless.

I hope talking George and Abby into participating in a grudge-match diavlog won't be as difficult as getting Mickey to directly interact with Ezra Klein has been. I'd give long odds that if they could be convinced to do it, it'd be worth watching.

Quoting AemJeff: I hope talking George and Abby into participating in a grudge-match diavlog won't be as difficult as getting Mickey to directly interact with Ezra Klein has been. I'd give long odds that if they could be convinced to do it, it'd be worth watching.

Even apart from the voyeuristic aspects, this is a good idea. I thought during both of Abby's appearances that it would be fun to hear her interviewed.

Quoting Wonderment: The lisp thing is almost national in Spain and entirely absent in the rest of the Spanish-speaking world. Thus, the C spelling matters in Spain, as it is a different phoneme (like our TH in thing).

The interesting exception in Spain is the Sevilla region where they DON"T "lisp" (known as 'cecear" in Spanish). The pretty well substantiated theory is that Spanish sailors (Sevilla was the ship-building and economic center of the Conquista) exported their "unusual" pronuniciation of Z's and C's, and it caught on the New World big time.

Thanks, Wonderment. I should have added that I was once told by my mother (a word maven, but not 100% right all the time -- e.g., she bought into the nova myth) that this cecear pronunciation convention likely stemmed from a King who lisped and spread by people imitating him. (Whether out of adulation or mockery, my mom did not say.) Ever heard this story? It strikes me as dubious in the days before mass communications, but I suppose it's possible. And if it is true, I wonder what it says about Sevilla being more of an independent-minded region.

Quoting Wonderment: The big mistake for John was taking only one credit card with him.

George, actually, but yeah. This is another good travel tip. It's also worth keeping the second card in a separate place, when possible.

Quoting Silver~Guy: Great to hear about the rhythm and music theory relating to the brain; thank you John and George. I'd love to hear more!

This was interesting, wasn't it? The theory certainly fits in with the observation that it's much easier to learn and remember things phrased as poems/songs/jingles, doesn't it?

I got a fever, and the only R/X..is more cowbell. Wonderful stuff and I do hope the guys get back to Sacks's rhythm theory etc. soon

Nobody has mentioned the presence of the moors for 800 years and the influence in architecture and ancient science...

Quoting AemJeff: I hope talking George and Abby into participating in a grudge-match diavlog won't be as difficult as getting Mickey to directly interact with Ezra Klein has been. I'd give long odds that if they could be convinced to do it, it'd be worth watching.

Miss Smith does not have any serious views to discuss, and certainly no views with wide influence. Please find something else to put on.

I should have added that I was once told by my mother (a word maven, but not 100% right all the time -- e.g., she bought into the nova myth) that this cecear pronunciation convention likely stemmed from a King who lisped and spread by people imitating him. (Whether out of adulation or mockery, my mom did not say.) Ever heard this story?

Yes, complete urban legend/nonsense. We have the same sound in English and don't blame it on the royalty. The legend probably arose among independence-minded Latin Americans in the 18th and early 19th century (left-wing propaganda, you might say) Actually, English has two th sounds -- thin and three (unvoiced) and this and those (voiced). In "this" you vibrate your vocal chords, in three you do not. You will even often hear a TH in Latin American Spanish in words like verdad which sounds like berdath, but it's a very soft and subtle th. A lot of linguists in Spain study "ceceando" because of the interesting dialectical variations. There's one where the speakers don't distinguish at all among z, s, c. They "ceceate" everything, including words like España and sopa. It's a low prestige sociolect and probably highly regional as well.

George, actually, but yeah.

Oops. George did such a good curmudgeon imitation of John that I got them mixed up.

We need to give her a break, she is a graduate student concentrating in the sterile field of virology. Occasionally, there may be a virology topic with broad appeal and she can contribute. Other contributors have a broader life experience and probably different cultural/educational backgrounds and can generate interesting conversations regardless of the topic. As was suggested previously, in 10-20 years she may be a better Diavlogger.

Quoting Wonderment: Oops. George did such a good curmudgeon imitation of John that I got them mixed up.

LOL! Yes.

Quoting bjkeefe: Even apart from the voyeuristic aspects, this is a good idea. I thought during both of Abby's appearances that it would be fun to hear her interviewed.

Abby is a fascinating personality. I think it can't be easy to seem both earnest and ironic simultaneously, and yet she seems to manage that balance nicely. She's also whip-smart, opinionated, and seems relatively unfiltered. That combination of traits set against George's wide ranging perspective and relative subtlety would be likely to make for an interesting match-up in any case - all the more so now, I think.

Quoting Wonderment: Yes, complete urban legend/nonsense. We have the same sound in English and don't blame it on the royalty.

Well, yes, but we don't use the TH sound in place of S sounds. I would also say that we as a population have adopted a number of speech tics thanks to "royalty" in the US, where the presidents fill that role. Normalcy was considered not-a-word by many until Warren Harding said it, for example. The Current Occupant's contributions could fill a small book. Who doesn't say the Google or the Internets these days? Or misunderestimate or strategery? Some of these words are used ironically, to be sure, but not all, and I wouldn't be surprised if some (maybe not these exact ones) came to be accepted. We could probably also point to any number of usage trends, or at least fads, spawned by celebrities. But until someone can document otherwise, I'm willing to accept that the lisping king is an urban legend.

You will even often hear a TH in Latin American Spanish in words like verdad which sounds like berdath, but it's a very soft and subtle th.

Yes, the V sounding like a B is something I noticed in my same friend. I wondered about the

Quoting AemJeff: Abby is a fascinating personality. I think it can't be easy to seem both earnest and ironic simultaneously, and yet she seems to manage that balance nicely. She's also whip-smart, opinionated, and seems relatively unfiltered. That combination of traits set against George's wide ranging perspective and relative subtlety would be likely to make for an interesting match-up in any case - all the more so now, I think.

Completely agree. Also, judging by some of the hostile reactions elsewhere, old love-a-fight Bob Wright should be doubly attracted to this pairing.

Quoting SkepticDoc: Nobody has mentioned the presence of the moors for 800 years and the influence in architecture and ancient science...

I only care about the Moors if they can be blamed for the lisping. ;^)

http://www.upf.tv/upf06/Films/Cities...8/Default.aspx It aired on PBS...

Yes, the V sounding like a B is something I noticed in my same friend. I wondered about the city of "Bigo" for a while until I caught on.

There is no 'v' sound as in "voice" or "naval" in Spanish. The English 'v', you may notice, is just a voiced (vibrating chords) version of an 'f'. Compare 'fast' and 'vast," for example, and you'll see that your lips and tongue are in the same place for both. Spanish just entirely lacked a voiced 'f'. Native speakers of Spanish will often misspell words like Habana/Havana and voy/boy, since you can't tell how the word is spelled from hearing it spoken. In other words, the written 'v' in Spanish is just a spelling convention, imported from other Romance languages. Spanish, left to its own devices, would spell the names Bictoria, Bicente with the same letter used for Bárbara. They go with Victoria and Vicente, however, because other languages (like English and French) have a "real" 'v'.

Quoting Wonderment: There is no 'v' sound as in "voice" or "naval" in Spanish. The English 'v', you may notice, is just a voiced (vibrating chords) version of an 'f'. Compare 'fast' and 'vast," for example, and you'll see that your lips and tongue are in the same place for both. Spanish just entirely lacked a voiced 'f'.

Native speakers of Spanish will often misspell words like Habana/Havana and voy/boy, since you can't tell how the word is spelled from hearing it spoken.

In other words, the written 'v' in Spanish is just a spelling convention, imported from other Romance languages.

Spanish, left to its own devices, would spell the names Bictoria, Bicente with the same letter used for Bárbara. They go with Victoria and Vicente, however, because other languages (like English and French) have a "real" 'v'.

Hmmm. You would know better than I, but when I hear Vaya con Dios, the V always sounds pretty clear. Or is this American movie Spanglish I'm thinking of?

Quoting Wonderment: A lot of linguists in Spain study "ceceando" because of the interesting dialectical variations. There's one where the speakers don't distinguish at all among z, s, c. They "ceceate" everything, including words like España and sopa. It's a low prestige sociolect and probably highly regional as well.

Hi Wonderment, I'm very impressed by your detailed explanation. I knew two "TH" sounds in English. But, I wouldn't be able to come up with more variations. In terms of z, s, c in Spanish, I'm very familiar with your description, although I wonder how you go about the "prestige" part of your statement. I think that languages should become purely phonetic. Eliminate all the silent letters, make letters and corresponding sounds more consistent, etc. It would be easier for everybody. Of course, many people would resist that idea. The v and b sounds are still very difficult for me, except for the most common words. When I visited Spain, the most striking difference in language that I found between the Northern and the Southern regions was the speed of speech. People in the south talk very fast. Any comments about that?

http://www.islamicspain.tv/Andalusi-...The-Cities.htm Al-Andalus?

http://thesciencenetwork.org/program...ramachandran-1 Most people have not heard of Rama, Sacks has fame but no substance: http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=...=1&sa=N&tab=ws I would encourage additional searches on the work of V.S. Ramachandran, his work has more clinical relevance. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl...an&btnG=Search Do you see the difference?

It's always a pleasure to listen to John and George, even when one disagrees with something they say or simply one has no idea about the topic. They are just two nice and knowledgeable people. George had pretty bad luck in his trip. There are times like that when everything seems to go wrong. There is a saying in Spanish: "No hay mal que dure cien años, ni cuerpo que lo aguante." Its approximate translation is: "There is no ailment that will last a hundred years, nor body that will survive it!" There is always an end to a current event, good or bad. Lots of interesting topics! I hope there will be a follow up on some of those in the near future. The fMRI study of the visual cortex seems very interesting. I wonder how they are doing these studies nowadays. I think that at least some years ago, fMRI was based on the difference in metabolism between the active and the inactive parts of the brain. I don't know how scientists can possibly measure rapid changes like the ones involved in visual processing. I'll try to check this out as soon as I can. Thank

Quoting bjkeefe: Yes, the V sounding like a B is something I noticed in my same friend. I wondered about the city of "Bigo" for a while until I caught on.

Vigo. Galicia. The entire North of Spain is really beautiful. I would recommend George, or anyone else planning to visit Spain, to make time to visit the mountainous North. If I remember correctly, most of the 'independentists' are in the Northern region: Catalans, Basques, Asturians and Gallegos. And each of those regions has its own language. Cool!

When I visited Spain, the most striking difference in language that I found between the Northern and the Southern regions was the speed of speech. People in the south talk very fast. Any comments about that?

The first time we got to Sevilla, we took the bus to the town we would live in for a year. There were a bunch of teenagers on the bus, and we wondered what language they were speaking because we could barely understand a word of it. Turns out it was Spanish! Our friends told us not to worry, however, since people from Madrid always made the same complaint -- that they couldn't understand anything either. A hardcore Andalucian accent will drop lots of consonants, as in Flamenco music: (Yo te he amao, pero tú me has decepcionao.) For "Cádiz," for example, educated and trained TV speakers would say Cadi, but in the street it was usually the incomprehensible Cae, losing all but the initial consonant. There was a popular t-shirt that read "Joe, qué calo." At first, I had no idea who or what "Joe" was. Can you guess? Scroll down for answer.* "Andalú" used to be considered "bad" Spanish in the same way that Cockney or Black American English was

Quoting Wonderment: "Andalú" used to be considered "bad" Spanish in the same way that Cockney or Black American English was considered "bad," but nowadays there is less prejudice (post-Franco).

There is no doubt that Spain had a huge change after Franco. There were so many years of repression that Spain had to catch up with the rest of Europe rather quickly. Not an easy transition as far as I know. Different regions in Spain are integrating in the same way European countries do. At some point the similarities start to become more important than the differences. I do hope that some of the differences remain since they give variety and color to those cultures.

I love Galicia too. We also did a bus tour starting in Lisboa and going up through Santiago de Compostela, Vigo and lots of little fishing villages. Way cool.

There are many beautiful places there, both natural (like the 'rías' and mountains) and man-made (cities and villages). My grandmother was born in Vigo and my grandfather in El Ferrol. Perhaps that's where my preference for this region originates. But, I love Santander, especially Santillana del Mar, and I have no family ties there. It's just a picturesque

And he said something about one with Pinker. I'd like to see that.

I hope you're right about Wright! I think it would be interesting and expect George would bring it down a notch (do you ever remember him so worked up over anything)? Abigail is pretty hot for a scientist, and I love her passion for her work, but George was pretty much on target - if a little too personally insulted needlessly.

I agree wholeheartedly. While I can see some of the reasons for George's disagreements with Abby's views, he seemed a little more perturbed than he should be. And i thought the indignant reaction by him and John (maybe I'll check out her blog, probably not etc.) really went against the nature of the way these guys usually operate. John had the balls to write a book about the potential end of science, yet neither one wants to seriously address the question of whether in the changing environment and with the changing technology, science writers might be going extinct as well (and whether it's a bad thing or not.) I understand the subject-matter holds big personal connections for both of them, and especially given the tenuous situation of print media, but to just write her off out of hand seemed sloppy to me, and not very encouraging for the standard practice of welcoming new ideas and discussions. I thought George's points of rebuttal regarding the bias of scientists and their agendas etc., were good and I would love to hear Abby respond to them. It all sounds eerily familiar to the

George! George! The dumpster -- too much! The dumpster was the line.

I disagree with George's assertions at about 54:40 that science can only develop effective interventions through a nomothetic, reductionist approach, especially as applies to my field clinical psychology and other clinical disciplines. To the contrary, the view of science held by B.F. Skinner and ensuing generations of behavior analysts is that rather than adopt a "correspondence" criterion of truth like the one implied by George, we might adopt an "effective action" truth criterion, especially as applies to working with individual patients. Effective action means that truth is what works to allow us to predict and control behavior (i.e. understanding controlling environmental variables), rather than that which best corresponds to a hypothetical objective reality. More concretely, although certain reductive methods (e.g. randomized controlled studies with large sample sizes) are useful to help inform our normative expectations about what causes patients' problems, ultimately we have to use that normative data to make decisions about individuals who of course don't fit the rigorously controlled inclusion criteria of the studies from which we want to generalize!! That this discussion arises in the context of neurology is especially interesting, because in the clinic a physician, neurologist, psychologist, or other "clinical

George is way too sensitive. Instead of raising ad hominem attacks, maybe he should respond directly to Abby’s criticisms. In fact as a scientist studying cell biology, I would have to say that I mostly agree with her post and her diavlog. Reading/hearing most science journalists writing/talking about molecular or cell biology is like eavesdropping on vegetarians describing the taste of bacon to religious Jews or Muslims. Sure they can speculate all they want, but to my ears it sounds like uninformed nonsense, most of it hinging on empty debates such as the meaning of “genes”, “epigenetics” or “junk DNA”. That Seed article makes a mountain out of a molehill. Science journalists should not be stenographers either, but this idea (common not only to science journalists, but also mathematicians and physicists) that biology is easy is nonsense. And when I read what they write I get the impression that the journalists are as ignorant as the lay person that they are writing for. To be able to understand the deeper meaning behind all the great research going on currently, science writers have to really immerse themselves in the latest ideas coming out

Quoting apalazzo: In fact you missed the most elegant experiment of them all, but since you don’t even know what histones are, I doubt that you would even care.

What would that be?

Good grief, they're not happy bunnies, are they? But honestly, taking out the straw-man interpretations and ad hominem attacks, there's remarkably little in the way of substantive arguments that I can actually respond to. I stand accused of suggesting that science writers should be about acting as stenographers or publicists, which I don't recall ever insinuating and which certainly doesn't gel with my own view of science writing. I apparently said that "you're not allowed to be critical", which again seems like the opinion of someone else. Maybe there was someone sitting behind me? Even the bit where I talk about the need for scientists to sell their message, which is pretty standard media-training stuff (more here), seems to have been interpreted as a cynical tactic for federal funding. So I really can't help feeling that my opinions have been misinterpreted and my conclusions have been twisted. Which, given that we're considering the weaknesses of modern science journalism, I can't help but find deeply ironic. And yes, I too can name many, many good science journalists - Carl Zimmer, Ben Goldacre, Mark Henderson etc. I aspire to have similar careers and to be able to write with similar skill and flair. And I hope that

Ed, my take was that they were more critical of some of things Abby said. But I would love to hear you and George or John discuss the future of science journalism and balancing the different points of view (scientists vs. journalists vs public.) My feeling has always been that science journalism is largely necesarry because most scientists aren't good at conveying their ideas to the public in a way that lay people can understand. And thankfully guys like Carl and John & George fill in the gaps wonderfully. But if scientists were better at expressing their ideas, it would be great to have their words to consider as well as the interpretation by a journalist. You know sortof like having the art critic's review as well as the original piece of art. Unfornately, because of the afore-mentioned communicative deficiencies of many scientists we have been forced to live with just the art critic side with no (intelligible) access to the original art. Anyways, hopefully you or Abby will get a chance to has these things out with the old curmudgeons ;-) and I say that as

Quoting uncle ebeneezer: My feeling has always been that science journalism is largely necesarry because most scientists aren't good at conveying their ideas to the public in a way that lay people can understand. And thankfully guys like Carl and John & George fill in the gaps wonderfully. But if scientists were better at expressing their ideas, it would be great to have their words to consider as well as the interpretation by a journalist.

I have learned to appreciate science writers more and more. Scientists are very immersed in their own area of study and they often lack the wider perspective that a science writer may have. Of course, there are great scientists for whom this doesn't apply, but they are the exception. A science writer is able to look for different sources and perspectives more objectively. In addition they can write in a way that is both appealing and accessible to the lay person. We should encourage more collaborations between scientists and writers instead of creating an unnecessary adversarial interaction.

My interpretation of Ed and Abby's discussion (although I was only sorta listening while doing some cleaning) was that they were more arguing that it would be better for science (and scientists) as a whole if scientists took a greater interest in better expressing their viewpoints (which could include your collaberation idea, that I agree with, btw). Which made George's attitude even more strange, IMO.

Oh, these four will kiss and make up. It's a "dispute" based on no real disagreement. George can plead temporary insanity for his rant: PTSD from the harrowing Visa experience. If you interviewed me after one of my many chats with Capital One or Verizon customer service, I'd be advocating nuclear strikes on my own grandmother (may she rest in peace). John was just commiserating. He hadn't even heard the original Ed/Abby talk. Much ado about grumpiness.

Quoting uncle ebeneezer: My interpretation of Ed and Abby's discussion (although I was only sorta listening while doing some cleaning) was that they were more arguing that it would be better for science (and scientists) as a whole if scientists took a greater interest in better expressing their viewpoints (which could include your collaberation idea, that I agree with, btw). Which made George's attitude even more strange, IMO.

Thank you for the clarification. I don't know what George was responding to. My post reveals an old concern I've had for years now. While scientists are coming up with more 'discoveries' (either big or small), it becomes more difficult to disseminate that knowledge adequately for a variety of reasons. The number of new studies may be too great. Or the studies are published in less accessible journals. Or scientists have to choose between writing, continuing their research and/or take care of other responsibilities. There is also a need to put all the pieces together, but the researchers may not have a wide enough view to do it. Anyway, that was the angle I was trying to address. I thought it was linked to the role of science writers since they

Quoting apalazzo: Reading/hearing most science journalists writing/talking about molecular or cell biology is like eavesdropping on vegetarians describing the taste of bacon to religious Jews or Muslims.

That's a great line, and it captures how I felt listening to those remarks about science journalism. It's true, however, that I overreacted, and I'm sorry I called Abigail Smith's laboratory a rathole. I should know better than to venture out in public when my brain is still smeared across seven time zones. Down-in-the-trench laboratory blogs are a valuable source of raw material for journalists. But for an outsider trying to understand science, they can be like music from the perspective of a phonograph needle. A scientist complaining about a writer's attempt to explain a slippery concept like epigenetics has to offer a better alternative than this: "Histone and DNA modifications that alter chromatin structure--> gene expression. Some people also include siRNA." If you're interested in communicating with the outside world, you need to pop up a couple of levels of abstraction and use language instead of terminology. Mostly my crankiness was a cumulative reaction to the low level to which public discourse has been dragged by so

Quoting George Johnson: That's a great line, and it captures how I felt listening to those remarks about science journalism. It's true, however, that I overreacted, and I'm sorry I called Abigail Smith's laboratory a rathole. I should know better than to venture out in public when my brain is still smeared across seven time zones.

Down-in-the-trench laboratory blogs are a valuable source of raw material for journalists. But for an outsider trying to understand science, they can be like music from the perspective of a phonograph needle. A scientist complaining about a writer's attempt to explain a slippery concept like epigenetics has to offer a better alternative than this:

"Histone and DNA modifications that alter chromatin structure--> gene expression. Some people also include siRNA."

If you're interested in communicating with the outside world, you need to pop up a couple of levels of abstraction and use language instead of terminology.

Mostly my crankiness was a cumulative reaction to the low level to which public discourse has been dragged by so much blogging. Of course I was contributing to the problem with my fulminations.

George Johnson
http://talaya.net

It's all good advice that one should try to remember. Thank you.

Quoting George Johnson: Down-in-the-trench laboratory blogs are a valuable source of raw material for journalists. But for an outsider trying to understand science, they can be like music from the perspective of a phonograph needle.

Nice line yourself, George.

Quoting George Johnson: If you're interested in communicating with the outside world, you need to pop up a couple of levels of abstraction and use language instead of terminology.

True, but this doesn't mean every blog post has to be this way. A blog can be a notebook or scratch pad of sorts as well a way to communicate with the outside world. Keeping things at the level shown in the snippets you have quoted may also provide a way for some people to move a step closer to understanding what the scientist is doing. Consider the interest shown by some people for browsing through the jottings of, say, Newton and Tesla. Most people would not consider this rewarding, and would prefer to read the end products and/or commentaries on the work of these scientists. But some like to get into the raw data, if you will. So, just to reiterate what I said above: I don't think writing about

On a little tangent: I only recall George uttering f**k twice on this diavlog, could there be a correlation between the number of times f**k is pronounced and the degree of frustration or stress/PTSD on the speaker?

Quoting George Johnson: That's a great line, and it captures how I felt listening to those remarks about science journalism. It's true, however, that I overreacted, and I'm sorry I called Abigail Smith's laboratory a rathole. I should know better than to venture out in public when my brain is still smeared across seven time zones.

No prob. Like I said, I attacked your profession, and you took it personally. I dont blame you at all. However, unless you are a shitty journalist writing throw-away articles about how 'WE CURED TEH AIDZ!' or 'CANCER BE GON NAU!', my comments were not directed at you.

Quoting George Johnson: Down-in-the-trench laboratory blogs are a valuable source of raw material for journalists. But for an outsider trying to understand science, they can be like music from the perspective of a phonograph needle. A scientist complaining about a writer's attempt to explain a slippery concept like epigenetics has to offer a better alternative than this:

"Histone and DNA modifications that alter chromatin structure--> gene expression. Some people also include siRNA."

If you're interested in communicating with the outside world, you need to pop up a couple of levels of abstraction and use language instead of terminology.

That post was contrasting a lab-standard definition of 'epigenetics' with the meaningless definition put forth

Quoting Flaw: Another poor segment, GEORGE JOHNSON is the worst.

Shut your mouth; George is tha' bomb. You gotta admit the way he smacked down that erv blog girl was priceless.

Quoting ERV: [...]

Good of you to check in, Abby. Since you were too polite to point it out, I'll link to your longer post on this same theme.

Quoting bjkeefe: Good of you to check in, Abby. Since you were too polite to point it out, I'll link to your longer post on this same theme.

"Et tu Brute?"

What would that be?

Meselson-Stahl's demonstration of the semi-conservative replication of DNA is considered by many, the most beatiful experiment in molecular biology.
Anyone with any knowledge of the history of molecular biology would have known what I was talking about.

More of my thoughts on this whole episode.

Quoting apalazzo: More of my thoughts on this whole episode.

Good effort, and thanks for all the links. From the proofreading department: If you haven't seen my note in your Comments section, your link labeled "Ed Yong responds" points to an ERV post.

Quoting SkepticDoc: "Et tu Brute?"

I interpret your choice of idiom to suggest that I'm being a traitor. If so, how? Because I think George was wrong about something? And if so, all I can say about your reaction is, wow, spare me your kneejerk tribalism. If not, please explain what you did mean.

Quoting apalazzo: Meselson-Stahl's demonstration of the semi-conservative replication of DNA is considered by many, the most beatiful experiment in molecular biology.
Anyone with any knowledge of the history of molecular biology would have known what I was talking about.

Well, excuuse me!!! I don't worship the double helix... Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, the elegance of some experiments is certainly a subjective judgment. The utility for mankind and improvement of public health can be demonstrated with facts. What benefit to mankind has come from your "most beautiful" experiment? Jenner's cowpox inoculations and the statistical analysis of dysentery in London are more important discoveries in my opinion, to give a concrete example... Talk to me when you know how to silence oncogenes...

Quoting bjkeefe: I interpret your choice of idiom to suggest that I'm being a traitor. If so, how? Because I think George was wrong about something? And if so, all I can say about your reaction is, wow, spare me your kneejerk tribalism.

If not, please explain what you did mean.

Be careful what you wish for... I look forward to Saturdays to listen to George and John, I cannot say the same about our "petite femme scientifique" (would German be more appropriate?)... A photograph of the "lab" would demonstrate whether it is a "rathole" or not, my recollection of biology labs is not a very pleasant memory, I tend to recall many "rats", not to mention odors! A virology lab would be a very sterile, aseptic environment, there may or not be rats in it, but I doubt it would be a "nice" place to spend time in... Maybe George was a little "grouchy" after a stressful trip to Spain, but he is a honorable man that has a lot to contribute still.

Quoting SkepticDoc: Be careful what you wish for...

Again, I don't know what you're talking about. Are you referring to my desire to see George and Abby do a diavlog? If so, I hardly think that's something I need to be careful about.

Maybe George was a little "grouchy" after a stressful trip to Spain, but he is a honorable man that has a lot to contribute still.

Yes, of course. I like him and respect him, and I understand being jet-lagged and burned out. Still, it's okay to disagree with something he says without being a traitor, isn't it? I felt he both mischaracterized Abby and has the wrong attitude about scientists' views of science journalists. I believe that he does not recognize how unusually good he and John are, and I think he's wrong to look at scientists blogging as a movement to do away with his profession.

It's just karma from all the string theory discussions. Looking forward to the next segment.

Sophists are like slime, when you stomp them, they just squish under the boot and smear the surroundings. It is best to avoid them both...

Quoting SkepticDoc: Sophists are like slime, when you stomp them, they just squish under the boot and smear the surroundings. It is best to avoid them both...

I'll be back when you've turned your Random Banalities Generator off. Till then, penguin.

Quoting SkepticDoc: Well, excuuse me!!!

I don't worship the double helix...

Yes, figuring out the nuts and bolts of life is not important, excuse me. And BTW I do not study cancer but rather how proteins are secreted. My colleagues in the lab are working on biological processes that have relevance to muscular dystrophy, diabetes and the role of Warfarin in developmental abnormalities. Our work would not be possible without a basic understanding of how genetic information is copied and utilized in cells. Do you think that I can take you seriously when you throw around your assumptions and stupidity (squashing slime???).

It is easy to be seduced and deluded by technology. Public Health and community well-being are served more efficiently with low tech interventions like adequate sanitation, housing and nutrition.

Quoting SkepticDoc: Public Health and community well-being are served more efficiently served with low tech interventions like adequate sanitation, housing and nutrition.

I totally agree. But that doesn't mean that we should pooh-pooh all the work that has gone into figuring out the nuts and bolts of life and the perspective that this knowledge gave us. Certainly those types of insights, and the elegant experiments that produced them, are what George was writing about in his book.

Well, in George's defense, after reading some of Abby's blog I can detect a bit of the young, know-it-all attitude that might could be taken poorly by older writers like George and John. And that's not to blame Abby. I admire her effort to brave new ground by writing in a science blog less-conventional manner and challenging the norm, but I can also see why more traditional writers might write it off as simply a really smart person who is too lazy to write properly. Ironically, i'm sure there were no small amount of people who made similiar issues out of David Foster Wallace's unorthodox approach to reporting/fiction! Anyways, i look forward to the Abby/George diavlog. Merry Christmas all! Oh yeah Bob, please bring back David Albert! -- Uncle Eb

Quoting uncle ebeneezer: Well, in George's defense, after reading some of Abby's blog I can detect a bit of the young, know-it-all attitude that might could be taken poorly by older writers like George and John. And that's not to blame Abby. I admire her effort to brave new ground by writing in a science blog less-conventional manner and challenging the norm, but I can also see why more traditional writers might write it off as simply a really smart person who is too lazy to write properly. Ironically, i'm sure there were no small amount of people who made similiar issues out of David Foster Wallace's unorthodox approach to reporting/fiction! Anyways, i look forward to the Abby/George diavlog.

Merry Christmas all!

Oh yeah Bob, please bring back David Albert! -- Uncle Eb

I mostly agree with the first paragraph and heartily second the next two.

And since George/John mentioned him, here's a pretty interesting interview with DFW (starts around 23:00.) Warning: The sound is off synch by a couple seconds: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPWh9yQbU4E