Slashdot Mirror


Mars & The Teachable Moment

Gallenod writes "In this article at space.com, Edna DeVore, Director of Education and Public Outreach for SETI, states that people are being continually exposed to pseudo-science from watching television and reading tabloids. Her examples include the "face" on Mars (which she discusses in detail in the article), alien autopsies, Area 51 in the Nevada desert as alien storage quarters, the "non-landings" on the Moon, UFO's, and alien kidnappings. DeVore describes the current Mars missions as a "teachable moment," an opportunity to teach factual science and astronomy in the context of sensationalistic psuedo-science and the legion of money-grubbing opportunists who make their living churning it out."

10 of 483 comments (clear)

  1. As weird as it sounds... by yndrd · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...it was actually pseudo-science that got me interested in the real thing. Books from the elementary school library about UFOs, Bigfoot, and ghosts scared the hell out of my teachers, I'm sure, but they got me interested in peeking into life's mysteries on my own.

    I'm not sure what flipped the switch from credulity to skepticism, but those early things got me interested. Maybe it was like the old myths of our ancient ancestors: wrong, but they still showed some drive towards explanation and understanding, however over-simplified.

    I'm not saying we should have classes on UFOs, but I wouldn't be too alarmed to see my kid reading about them.

    Unless he started growing strange mushrooms in the basement or wearing a tin-foil hat...

  2. Sadly... by No+Such+Agency · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think pseudoscience meshes better with many people's worldview than actual science does. It's hard for laypeople to understand the terminology and goals of real science, and the language is often couched in ambiguity and qualification (because scientists don't want to make unsupported statements). "Pseudoscientists" on the other hand, can say whatever they want, because their only concern is attracting eyeballs and therefore either religious converts (in the case of "Creation Science") or people's dollars (in many other cases). And there are a huge number of people out there who are PROFOUNDLY uneducated about science, and either distrust REAL scientists because they can't understand them, or because they've been taught that nonsense feel-good alternative theories etc. are being "suppressed" by the scientific community.

    The scientific community shares some blame as well - "popularizing" science is seen as a vulgar activity by many, when in fact it should be seen as essential as long as the truth is not distorted along the way.

    --
    Freedom: "I won't!"
  3. Re:The sad truth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'd be pleased if the US news put more people to sleep rather than into paranoid frenzies resulting in invasions and panicy removal of civil rights.

  4. critical thinking by cats-paw · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is certainy not an issue limited to pseudo-science.

    It seems to me that schools don't do a very good job of teaching critical thinking.

    Does what I am reading/seeing make sense ?
    How do I verify that what I'm someone is telling me is reasonably true and accurate ?

    I think the author does a very nice job of pointing out that something like the face on mars is a great way to teach those skills with very specific examples.

    It certainly should not be limited to science.

    The ability to reason and think critically is also being severely hurt by the increasingly abusive marketing aimed at children, IMNSHO.

    I'll even go out on a limb and say that this is in large part the cause of the political polarization in the US. Critical thinking includes taking in opposing views and trying to understand if they are valid or not.

    --
    Absolute statements are never true
  5. Re:Hmmm... by TedCheshireAcad · · Score: 5, Insightful
    As computer people, we see this kind of crap all too often. Let's have a look at what we have learned about our field from modern entertainment:

    Laptop computers, over a modem connection, have the capability to do full 1024x768 resolution video conferencing with sound. (sometimes you don't even need the modem...)

    You can get by password security by simply typing "OVERRIDE SECURITY"

    If the system you're using doesn't support the "OVERRIDE SECURITY" feature, you can either A) defeat the cryptography in less than a minute or B) guess the password in less than a minute.

    Computer viruses and worms are so fast-spreading and technically advanced that they can turn machines against their owners, such as making the robots in a factory will begin ripping the factory workers to pieces.

    Every program ever written runs on any computer regardless of architecture or operating system.

    Desktop workstations and laptops have the 3D rendering capabilities of an SGI Origin cluster.

    The list goes on...so many things are done for dramatic effect, and so that Joe Blow can follow the "high-tech" plot line. Sigh. Well, back I go to explaining to my mother that the computer is running slow because it's bogged down with spyware, not because the government has taken control of it and is reading all her documents.

  6. Teach Critical Thinking... by Dana+P'Simer · · Score: 5, Insightful
    ... not just facts and figures. The thing that people need are active BS detectors. This article hits that point right on the head.

    The trouble with psuedo-science is that it sounds good to the untrained mind. But the thing I love the most is when a purveyor of psuedo science says the me something like, "You need to be more open minded to understand this". I have a relative that was trying to sell me a "Ozone Generator" and air purifier ( filter ) for my home. I had one of these units in my home as a trial ( I paid no money ). I checked out the supposed "science" behind the device and found that there was ample evidence that high concentrations of ozone are actually dangerous to people especially asthmatics. Since my wife has had asthma in the past, I became very concerned. I called my relative and told him I would be returning the device and that he should think twice about making outrageous unsubstatiated claims of scientific evidence where none existed. He had the gall to tell me I would understand the "science" if I were more "open minded".

    It is muddy headed thinking like that that results in most of the worlds troubles.

  7. Teaching Critical Thinking by WombatControl · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The problem is that our educational system doesn't teach basic critical thinking skills - those aren't developed until college (if then). The problem is that our educational system is a garbage-in, garbage-out system with a watered-down politically correct curriculum that warps context and is rife with inaccuracies and some outright lies. They're designed to increase "self-esteem" for some, at the expense of actually being able to be a productive and informed citizen.

    There is an excellent article that was online a while back called Sesame Street, Epistemology, and Freedom that gives a good background into some of the problems, causes, and solutions in terms of our educational system's woeful lack of critical thinking skill-building. Thankfully the Internet Archive still has a copy since I've not been able to find it online. A sample:

    It is simply assumed, pedagogically, in both public and private schools, that after about the grade 5 level, the student's abilities to abstract, and then to think about the abstractions, will take care of themselves, as some collateral result of all the other teaching and learning that goes on in math, language, social studies, science, and so on. Attention is never paid to abstraction as such, even though it wouldn't have been put on a toddler's educational TV show (as in this game), if it were not understood to be a foundation skill.
    In other words, "philosophy" (i.e., "thinking about thinking"), which is to say, the most abstract, complex and comprehensive task any human being has to learn, is not expressly taught at all in the, let us say, rather significant educational interval between Grover on Sesame Street, and Graduate Study Seminar. From my point of view as an educational professional, I find this, to put it mildly, to be mind-boggling, in several senses of that expression.

    If we can't teach children to think abstractly and learning how to quantify and qualify the streams of information that blast them every day, we can't expect to maintain an informed and reasonable democracy. Unfortunately we have an education system build by people like Horace Mann that were designed for the Industrial Age and are wholly inadequate for the intellectual demands of the Information Age.

  8. more than just dramatic effect by GunFodder · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Have you ever seen a phone conversation in a movie devolve into a fifteen minute discussion on a coworker's hair? Or seen a lead in a movie take a ten minute dump? Movies don't include the mundane details because they are boring and don't move the plot along.

    Waiting for a PC to boot up, or seeing the real quality of video conferencing, or even watching people use the relatively user-unfriendly interfaces of real software would be boring.

    1. Re:more than just dramatic effect by Otto · · Score: 5, Insightful

      or seeing the real quality of video conferencing

      Oh, I dunno... Austin powers used it to extremely funny effect, if you were paying attention.

      The 60's video phone in his car was crystal clear. The 90's video conferencing on his laptop was horrible. A bit of a subtle joke that most people didn't see, I think.

      --
      - Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set him on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
  9. Re:And don't forget by Golias · · Score: 5, Insightful
    The reason for the strange Hollywood computer rules is obvious enough: The language of film-making evolved around other technology.

    If you are writing a script for a spy thriller, hacking into a computer system becomes identical to a safe-cracking: A specialist does arcane tech stuff while the hero brandishes a gun and stands guard. This should never take more than a minute or so, unless you have a "B" story to cut away to, in which case it can take hours.

    Crucial data must exist on only one copy of portable media, which can't be duplicated (more than maybe once), erased, or even remain on the computer it came from. Otherwise, the file in question fails to work as a "McGuffin", and lazy writers can't make use of it.

    People who understand computers are like good mechanics. If a grease monkey can make a working airplane out of two broken ones of completely different designs, then a good hacker can log onto the alien computer systems with his Powerbook.

    Film directors tend to be old guys who don't really understand how computers work, so they frame them in contexts which they grok. This is also why sci-fi directors almost never get deep-space physics right. Ships on Star Trek move like naval vessels because directors know how to do that. When there's no "up," no gravity, no friction to slow your inertia, and no objects close enough for your movement to be observed by the naked eye, the typical director is utterly lost. Hense, when Kirk outwits Khan's "two-dimensional" thinking patterns, he does so by moving the Enterprise "down" while retaining the same Y axis. It's essentially a submarine attack, rather than a battle between free-moving objects with no fixed reference apart from the nebula they are drifting through. Film directors get submarines. They don't get the void of space.

    --

    Information wants to be anthropomorphized.