One Astronomer's Noise

So I was having fun on Google Reader earlier today, before getting down to business (the thesis proposal writing business, of course), and I need to comment on some cool things I saw on my favorite blogs.

First, the Bad Astronomer has a video (go watch it!) where Brian Cox defends the need for basic science, such as the Large Hadron Collider, against an inquiring reporter, who probably speaks for many people with the same question, and Sir David King, president of the British Association for the Advancement of Science. Basic research leads us to practical advancements that we may not have even dreamed of when the research began. Take, for example, (and I think I’m stealing this example from Sagan) radios. Did Maxwell know that his theoretical explorations into the mysteries of electromagnetism would lead to such a powerful communication tool? Would it have made any sense if a funding agency had first said to him first, “build a communications device that works through the air over hundreds of miles”? Of course not. But his “impractical” research led to further explorations of the likes of Tesla that led to this technology. The LHC, and any basic research, may do something similar. You need both directed research and basic research in order to have a healthy science program.

Next, the ever so Splendid Elles writes about a recent talk by PZ Myers on science education. And she points out:

Education needs to be about freethought. It needs to be about teaching kids skepticism and not telling them “apply this to everything! But not your religion.” We can’t make conclusions for them, but we can give them the freedom and the tools to get to their own conclusions… if they choose to use them.

I can’t agree more. That goes for adults, as well.