An argument for open science that we should bring climate change science to the public to appeal on science not consensus.

His terminology was down to earth, not complex.

The nature of science is quiet isolation; therefore, its memes are less capable of venturing into other minds.

Summaries of important points and comments made by the speakers and audience for this session:

Chris Mooney

·         How do we correct misinformation?

·         “How I Started Worrying and Learned to Doubt the Blog”

·         Internet is second only to TVF as source of information about Science and Technology

·         Brendan Nyhan – people did not change their minds when presented with corrections that challenge their ideological point of view

·         Cultural Cognition of Scientific Facts (Kahan et al): conservative libertarians were more likely to accept an article on reducing pollution when it included headline about nuclear power.

·         “What Happened on Delibaration Day” Case _____

·         Correcting George Will: “no global warming for more than a decade” bloggers tar and feathered him, Washington Post recognized the outrage and WMO wrote letter correcting him, but Will did not apologize or correct himself.

·         Message First, Facts Second

Joshua Rosenau

·         Blogs can’t correct Texas Textbooks.

·         School Board science standards  1998 review “strengths and weaknesses” but they only wanted to review weaknesses of evolution.

·         Texas Freedom Network, texasteachers.org, Teach them Science, NCSE

·         Reach people with documentaries about Kansas, and convince them to speak at meetings.

·         Audience Research: talk about medical advances from evolution, compatibility of faith and evolution

·         Start Online, Move Offline.

·         Make it hard to be dismissed: state why your opinion matters (member of the community, scientific background)

·         If you’re in a coalition and you’re comfortable, you know it’s not a big enough coalition. – Bernice Johnson Reagon

Val Jones

·         Science Based Medicine blog.

·         80% of Americans go online for health information, but only 20% consider the source.

·         Case Study of Two Patients going to two different online sources for health information.

·         True story: colon cancer survivor who found oncologist online, breast cancer who tried alternative medicines and died in six months

·         Getbetterhealth.com

Comments:

·         November 1963: Malcom X Black Revolution

·         Margaret Sangers: planned parenthood

·         Meam Goldman: talked about birth control when it was illegal

·         George Will is into Toaster oven science, not real science. (look up article where George Will says he loves science)

·         Van: academic centers need to set up social media centers. Shout down crazy people.

·         Create peer-to-peer references that people can link to in response to people being wrong in comments sections.

·         Van: Health Blogger Code of Ethics

·         Astrology News: Astrologers said It’s true, but it doesn’t change any of the results. There’s a reason it doesn’t change any of the results.

·         Mooney: quick heuristics to determine whether to engage someone, politely say, “I don’t want to have this conversation.”

eBooks and The Science Community

Carl Zimmer, Tom Levenson, David Dobbs, John Dupuis

Different perspectives. Author of ebook, someone writing an ebook, and librarian with books that don’t go up on shelves.

Carl Zimmer

·         wrote first book in 1998. eBooks were the future, but vanished with dot-com bust.

·         eBook graph is skyrocketing while publishing is used to slow gently declining graphs.

·         Smashwords: publish and distribute books.

·         Put together an ebook as just a book, text: OR put book together as an app.

·         David Eagleman – example of book with media

·         Marcus Chown – Solar System ebook

·         These super dynamic ebooks are not books, they aren’t linear, they are encyclopedias with articles.

Tom Levenson

·         “There’s nothing new under the sun.”

·         After Gutenberg invention there were millions of books, before there were only thousands.

·         Gutenberg Moment: explosion of data

·         Birth of book trade, birth of audience, new occupation of writers.

·         Becoming of the Books – recommended book on the growth of the book trade

·         Emergence of copyright law.

·         Half of books were religious, ten percent were law, and ten percent were science.

·         Each development in the media has unpredictable impacts on the genres and creative expression.

·         When you get cheap paper, you get newspapers and pulp novels.

·         What new genres will emerge from the ebook? ME: A hypertext document. Collection of quotes, links to authors and indexes.

·         Appbooks are a different medium. ME: But they are no different from websites.

·         Book isn’t dead. There are niche books. Cory Doctorow sells books in all different mediums.

·         We are at a Lumier Brother’s stage in app books, it’s enough to show simple tricks, but that won’t last, we need to go more substansive.

David Dobbs

·         Writing a regular book, but is also working on an app book version of it.

·         Slider to change gene varables to watch genes turn on and off.

·         Illustrations eliminate words. Books has words, which get eliminated in the app.

·         Different marketing versions of the book: basic ebook  $10, app book $15, cheaper modules $3

John Dupuis

·         Will spend $100,000 on ebooks this year, mostly computer science and engineering.

·         Authors and publishers are often suspicious of librarians because their job is to provide access to content to people who can’t afford it or won’t pay for it.

·         What is the ebook business model? It will go the same route as the music industry. People will still pay for books, but in an itunes model.

·         What’s the sharing model for apps? It works on your ipad now, but what will it work on 10 years from now. Will historians of writing be able to access the Elements a hundred years from now.

·         Apps allow monetizing every reading transaction, and that is evil.

Questions:

·         Nancy Schuler: writing ipad text for National Geographic, love you graphics designers

·         ME: Google Android version of books?

·         JA Konrath: making money with DIY publishing

·         Comment: I don’t want you wasting time working on apps if it detracts from your time spent crafting good writing.

·         

These are notes summarizing comments made by speakers and audience during this session:

• Are you a geek? When telling a story, how often do you elaborate on the details? Baseball stat geek, science detail geek, D&D geek, all about details.
• What actually constitutes a geek?
• Student: it’s good to be a geek, it means someone who is passionate about something.
• Student: Geek is starting to be glamorized. Big Bang Theory, Harry Potter movie.
• Radio Show Host: compares herself to scientists, and doesn’t think herself a geek, but the audience is geeks (Skeptically Speaking). Considers herself a translator. Geeks listen more closely to the show, and send emails. Geeks provide feedback.
• “You call it geekery, I call it passion.”
• Geeks distrust social niceties. Why aren't they just giving me the information straight? Tendency towards argumentation.
• What are Benefits and Pitfalls of a Geeky audience? Bonus is passion. Geeks get immersed in details, and have a self-generating energy and will keep working through things left to their own.
• Geeks don’t see correcting others as a slight.
• Accuracy VS Completeness: don’t ever say false things, but you don’t have to get totally immersed.
• Geeks are obsessive enough that they will voluntarily seek out details on their own.
• How to delineate between being too geeky and not geeky enough? Keep things entertaining as a means of keeping people with your content. If it’s entertaining, people will stick with you through the sciency parts.
• Make sure your headline and introduction are not for geeks, but you can geek out later in the story. Skeptchick uses humor to open all posts, post about Twilight.  Scicurious has posts that reach out to her audience, Friday posts about sex.
• Catchphrases and Inside Jokes create communities, but they also put up walls to communities.
• Surprise people with a story, ask a question to pique curiosity about how it will affect people personally,
• Whatstheharm.net – anecdotes. Turns on non-geeks, but turns off geeks because we want data. What’s the difference between whatstheharm.net and Rush Limbaugh using anecdotes to hurt science?
• Snark: a way of building a community, but causes pile-ons, turns off outsiders, PZMeyers’ fans attack whoever he points them too. Snark is the nature of the Internet. Radio difference: no snark rule.
• Use snark to empower the weak against the powerful. Use it against trolls against power.
• Try going with a private comment first before going public.
• Remember that it’s the internet, your tone doesn't communicate in the text.
• Don’t do threaded comments.
• You’re going to offend someone. Radio got called a Marxist for her show on gender. 

These are general notes summarizing comments from audience members and speakers for this session:

• Taking pdfs extracting text and semantically marking them up, hyperlinking reference lists to their source articles.
• Mendeley http://www.mendeley.com/
• http://www.mendeley.com/research-papers/computer-and-information-science/
• Citations have no meaning the way we use them now.
• Most papers aren’t cited, long tail graph (zitiny  ziphian curve graph?)
• Citation Graph, collaborative filtering,.
• Citations need context. How will that happen? Need to know why something was cited (ie. Disagreement).
• We don’t disagree with papers, we disagree with claims made in papers. Why can’t a citation point at a place in the article?
• Question: Is reference extraction beyond the scope of any non-commercial company? Mendeley is a company.
•                Answer: There’s no single source of open bibliographic data.
• Sage, SocialSciences,Crossref, webofscience, google scholar, etc – how useful are these sites. They provide metrics and recommendations, but not much more than going directly to the journal.
• Social Networking in article recommendations, connect content to people, conversations around papers, systems don’t encourage conversations, people don’t want to participate.
• Criticism of Mendeley: algorithms shoudl be open, academics should be able to define their own algorithms
• Mendeley's plan is to extract reference data and make it publicly available and machine readable.
• Criticism: academics need an open bibliographic data set.
• Need to explain type of citation: positive vs. negative citations, valence terms, sentiment analysis/machine vs. human curated
• Ontologies don't capture all reasons someone is citing something (ie. "Cited because I work for this journal." "Cited because Darwin will make you think I'm smart." "Cited because teacher required five citations.")
• References are separated into their own section, removing them from the text. Unlike links, which are immediate.
• Peer Review: example of a reviewer rejecting a paper because it didn't cite his own paper.
• People need to make use of the REL attribute in HREF tags.
• Citations can be used in a tribal sens, citing people in our camp and excluding others.
• Description of citations as "frozen footprints in the snow"
• Why do we need 1,000 citation styles?
• Librarian: Questions about citations styles from students are constant and frustrating.
• Orchid: cross-company effort to standardize citations.
• Let people write citations however they want, but add an identifying number.
• Mendeley is developing an open-source citation style editor.

Five types of science-art with links to the examples.

Summaries of comments made during the science art session by artists and audience members:

• Hawks – interested in reconstruction, detailed realism, Neanderthal terminator, there is a tradition in anthropology of illustrating, Neanderthal are reconstructed to look doomed and confused, like it when illustrators and artists bring humanity into them, humor, Kenise Brothers give smiles to them, pose them, which isn’t scientific because we don’t know these things, but also more scientific because it isn’t so clinical
• Orr – orogenic.blogspot.com geometric, abstract illustrations of birds
• Links ot other artists on the wiki page: Carl Buell, etc http://scio11.wikispaces.com/Science-Art
• Radiohead/Nine Inch Nails Model: put a lot free stuff online in hopes of eventually being hired to do something custom, people expect images for free
• Criticism of Mellow's Darwin painting: the steps were too linear, it should have been a bush growing out of his head
• Svpow.wordpress.com – fantasy images of brachiosaurs, not scientifically accurate, but memorable. Brian Ang.
• My Favorite Anthropology Sculpture of Homo Erectus at the Hall of Human Origins - post a link to this image in the wiki.
• The monkey rising to become man iconic image is really wrong and hurts evolution’s image outside of the field. Mitochondria is another example, in cells they are not blobs, but are networked.