Further to “Would the 500 major pre-1970 discoveries be vetoed today?”, some people don’t have a problem with the way things are today. On Thursday, a cell biologist responded in the same newspaper (The Guardian):
Finally, I’d say that the notion of a lone maverick is a little bit of an outdated concept. Science progresses by small increments, fed by many tiny cogs in a vast knowledge machine. We are all of us in the research community standing on the shoulders of midgets, putting together little pieces into an intricately beautiful puzzle. In my current research I’ve been riffing off obscure old papers that no one gave any credence to at the time, and that took decades to click into place with the shifting context of knowledge. There will always be a place for eureka moments and individuals of extraordinary insight and talent – but although they are not as sexy and celebrated as Richard Feynman, the rank and file are just as important.
The piece puts one in mind of Tom Bethell’s aren’t-I-good? girls, but that may be an unfair assessment:
A few days ago, YouTube posted an interesting video called “Let’s Talk About Evolution.” It lasts for six minutes and I recommend it, although for reasons that its sponsors may not like. I’m guessing that Eugenie Scott of National Center for Science Education put this show together, but maybe I’m maligning her.
It shows sixteen female academics or science writers, mostly young, whose enthusiasm for evolution is so overwrought that they turn themselves into propagandists.
Eager to show how well they have been trained, they are like show mares who trot around the paddock jumping over each gate in turn. All the while they give the camera a look that says: “Aren’t I good?” More.
= I’m not frustrated by what frustrates creative people, I don’t wonder about what thoughtful skeptics wonder about.
Thoughts?
Follow UD News at Twitter!
Hat tip: Stephanie West Allen at Brains on Purpose