Posted on 04/05/2025 7:00:24 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
Scientists primarily publish their work in academic journals, where writing is expected to be technical, objective and dispassionate -- making it unlikely to appeal to, or be easily understood by non-experts.
The researchers -- from the University of Exeter -- argue for science "translated into stories," with benefits both for science and wider society.
They suggest ways that scientists can tell powerful, passionate stories without compromising the objectivity of science.
"As environmental scientists ourselves, we feel frustration, a sense of loss, fear and sometimes helplessness at the lack of action to protect the planet," said Professor Karen Anderson, from the Environment and Sustainability Institute on Exeter's Penryn Campus in Cornwall.
"But researchers are expected to be rational -- not emotional -- for fear of being seen as less objective and trustworthy.
"This prevents scientists from using their knowledge, passion and creative skills to fully communicate the work."
"Humans are inspired by stories. By telling better stories, scientists can help inspire meaningful action to protect ourselves by protecting our environment and the planet."
Professor Anderson concluded: "There is plenty of other academic work that advocates for scientific storytelling.
"The problem is that these other pieces don't demonstrate how this can be done.
"Our piece tries to showcase different ways that scientists can experiment with more creative communication methods.
"We understand that it might feel strange to do this, but we hope that other scientists are willing to give this a try.
"It's the start of a different type of experiment -- an experiment with stories."
(Excerpt) Read more at sciencedaily.com ...
Paging Dr. Michael Mann! Your services are needed. Perhaps choose a different sport for your tales this time.
In general, I would think a lot of folks wouldn’t be able to comprehend what they’re looking at. Just a guess.
Scientists, as they are called, I doubt they are, can then convert every free nation into totalitarian states,confiscate farmers cows, and sterilize every human being they can. With a newly founded religion,they can seal the deal with a the now legitimized spectacle of a consecration offering of Greta Thunberg to an Icelandic volcano. The climate is always changing. And our weather is now nothing different. Our ancestors adapted and so must we.Or we perish.But these so called scientists think they can terra form earth? BUahahahahahaha! Idiots.
The experts are losing their messaging. That’s gotta suck.
No thanks. We already have too many “scientist” Chicken Littles and Boys Who Cried Wolf already.
Maybe get some USAID money to make a climate change
LBGTQ etc comic book. Too bad that slush fund is now gone.
Not to mention the HBM (Has Been Media).
Hockey stick data in computer simulations is an indicator that the algorithm may have gone unstable.
Science ‘storytelling’ urgently needed
so, science needs fiction ?
telling.
( with-out-knowlege )
oops
not greek , latin
nonscience
( not-knowing-something )
This woman should know she is grappling with an intractable problem. The higher levels of science itself are necessarily unemotional, detached, complex, and tedious for non-specialists. Truly understanding it, as opposed to superficially getting the concepts, requires high IQ and years of disciplined study.
The context around science can be made interesting and even exciting for those of reasonable intelligence. Richard Rhoads’ “The Making of the Atomic Bomb” is a great book about one of the biggest of scientific endeavors, treating with world war, domestic and geo-politics, famous and quirky people, human relationships and foibles, personal and grand-scale moral questions, and visible, world-changing results, etc., plus even enough well-explained science (maybe .0005% of the book) to convey critical concepts.
The point is that the “HISTORY of humans doing science” can make for very compelling storytelling. Though sad stories about threatened species or mendaciously hyped BS about radical, cataclysmic changes can generate some interest, the “science” of climate and biodiversity is driven by data collection and computer modeling. Dramatizing that ain’t easy.
“Science ‘storytelling’ urgently needed amid climate and biodiversity crisis”
Isn’t “telling stories” another word for lying?
Sooo..... Fables
I would posit this is the exact opposite of what is needed.
Most science and less fairy tales.
argue for science “translated into stories,”
Agreed
Story and Myth is what drives culture.
Good story telling is a real artform.
Making Science topics relatable in a well structured story is just as much a wonder. “A Brief History of Time”, “Innumeracy”. “Schoolhouse” on PBS was genius stuff.
But have to keep politics out of it, and that’s the hard part for many.
Don’t they call that propaganda?
Emotionally attractive lies.
Science writers DO exist!
All that verbiage when they’re simply begging for more science fiction. And today’s global warming propaganda is just that, science fiction.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.