Nature of Science knowledge handouts and notes

Grade 8 Vocabulary List (Nature of Science)

science
theory
law (science)
system
physical science
technology
society
hypothesis
infer
variable
constant
model
critical
data
discovery
deduction
thought experiment
correlational study
rig (verb, science)
rational
irrational
economics
tentative
subjective
creative

** Need to write for each word:
1. Definition
2. Your own sentence

Your title
page for
Thought
Experiment
section

The Nature of Science- Section 1

Why do Scientists do Thought
Experiments?

Thought experiments are important for
showing things where it is impossible to
find evidence. For example, Einstein
used thought experiments to talk about
the speed of light. As he could not travel
or even measure how fast light travels.
When we use a thought experiment to
find out / guess new information, we call
this a constructive thought experiment.
But we can also, use thought
experiments to prove something is wrong
or false. These are destructive thought
experiments.

Your title
page for
Scientific
Investigation
section

______________________________?
The word science a complicated word. It can represent various elements and process of the
natural world and also can overlap with many other happenings and aspects of other subjects
and fields.

Your textbook defines__________________ as: a way of learning more about the natural world.
Also, a scientist is defined here as a person who studies and normally has expert knowledge on
some area(s) within science.

However, you may also find some different opinions on what science actually is or involves in
this particular unit and in other future areas of study. So it is important to be critical.

Despite the complex and the debate on understanding the nature of science, there are still a
number of elements that are considered by most if not all to be fundamental parts of science.
They are described as follows:

A. ______________________ – in general, scientists and citizens of science engage in (at
least) two types of actions.

1. They _______________________ about things in the natural world.
2. They try to explain answers to their questions. And when they explain, they often try
to establish patterns and rules.

In some cases, they develop theories. A ________________ is an attempt to explain
a pattern that keeps happening in the real world. For example, they explain why
gravity exists.

As well, they also establish laws. A ________________ (in science) is a rule
scientists make to explain something in nature. For example, they make the rule that if
you throw something up it will fall back down because of gravity.

B. ___________________________ – it is also common for scientists to group similar
things together to help everyone understand them better. This grouping or collection of
similar structures, cycles and processes is called a system. For example, scientists have
created the digestive system to group together all the “things” involved in eating and
breaking down food in your body.

It is also important to understand that many things in science are related to each other and/or
other things. Things in one system interact with each other. All systems can make up other
systems too.

C. _________________________ – People have also tried to group all the systems in
science into 3 main areas :

1. ____________________- is the study of living systems and the ways they interact
2. ______________________ – is the study of Earth and space systems
3. ____________________ – is the study of systems related to matter and energy.

D. ______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________

Last, you should realize that science does not happen in isolation. Scientists do not work
alone. Science is –very- connected to other parts of the world and society. For example,
the textbooks describes the belief that science is done to create technology. Others can
argue that sometimes technology is made to help understand science. There are also
relationships between science and social elements. For example, social issues are often
the reason why people do science. This interaction is a ____________________ one
and often debated by many.

Again, although the above elements are very helpful in understanding what science is, the
picture is complex. There are actually a variety of ways that science can be done or define as
despite what you may think. This is the goal of Topic 2: helping you to understand the
__________________________________

_____________________________________
According to your textbook, there is a general pattern that most scientific investigations follow.
They steps are outlined briefly as follows:

1. __________________________________ – Scientists usually see or have seen
something. Then, they ask a question about it.

2. _______________________________– Scientists than state a possible
explanation for what they have seen. Again according to the textbook, the hypothesis is a
reasonable and educated statement that explains something you know and/or have
observed.

3. _____________________________- Scientists than do various things. They might
make more observations to collect more information. They might build a
__________________ They might make a ______________________ and then test out
their hypothesis and prediction by experimenting.

One common way to experiment is through a controlled experiment. Here, scientists
identify _____________________ which are factors they can change in their experiments.
They often change one variable which is called the ________________________. Then,
they usually observe how another variable gets affected (gets changed by changes in the
first variable). This variable is called the _______________________. It is also important
to keep other variables fixed. They are called _______________________________.

And when experimenting , they often organize their findings by making a chart of their
observations.

4. __________________________– Next, they compare their results with their earlier
observations and hypothesis.

5. ________________________________ – Then, they tell what they learned from
their investigation. We can also say, they try to infer something. When they do this, they
also often go back and retest their hypothesis to make sure they inferred correctly.
However, sometimes, they fund out that what they thought before is not correct. Then,
they go back and gather new information, make new hypothesis and repeat everything
again.

6. ______________________________– Scientists publish what they have learned
to others including the results of their investigations and the methods used. They often
publish things in the form of journals , books and Internet sites.

Other Notes-
Another important aspect of the scientific method is ______________________. You will learn
about this throughout your topic 2 and all other topics whenever some activity or experiments is
potentially dangerous or harmful to you and/or others.

Comparing and Being Critical of the Scientific Process

In today’s activity, you should try to achieve the following two goals:

1. Understand the similarities and differences between the Scientific Process and the
Inquiry process that you learned before
2. Begin to be critical of the Scientific Process given by the textbook

Part 1 – Labels

--> Use your textbook (see page 12 ) to write the correct labels for the Scientific Process on the
left side.
--> Use your knowledge of the Inquiry Process to write the correct labels for the Inquiry Process
on the right side

The Scientific Process (in your textbook) The Inquiry Process (from Topic 1)

Questioning
and Observing

Part 2 – Questions

1. How are the two processes similar?

____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

2. Is there anything different about the two processes? Explain well.

____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

3. Is one process better than the other? If yes, how? Explain well. If no, explain also why
well.

____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

Models for Science
A model is a representation of some object or event in order to understand the natural world.
They are often used to help people to understand things that are difficult to see or hard to
comprehend. For example, a model could show something that is too small to see with your
eye.

Types of Models-

There are 3 types of models-

A. Physical Models-

Any model that allows you to see and touch things is called a physical model. This kind of model
then shows how different parts of something relate to each other. It can also show how things
look when you change their positions or when they experience some force. A world globe is one
example.

B. Computer Models-

These models are created on a computer using some software. You can only view them.
Computer models are good for events that take a long time see normal or to show motions and
positions that would usually take a long time to calculate. So they speed things up. They can
also be used to make predictions. A weather computer model is an example.

C. Idea Models-

An idea model is simply an idea or a concept to describe what you think of the natural world. So
an idea model cannot be built in a physical sense. A model for Einstein’s theory of relativity
(E=mc2) is an example.

Making and Using Models-
Making a model is very similar to making an art sketch. You simply take descriptions from other
sources and try to make something based on them. (Just like an artist takes a description of
something from other sources to draw a picture). Usually, the more detail you can get, the more
accurate your model will be.

Models can be used in various ways once created including:

1. For communication – models can help people to make observations and ideas and then
communicate them to other people. You don’t just talk about something. You talk while
showing a model of the something. This makes it easier for others to understand.

2. For testing predictions – after making a prediction, you can sometimes test it out by
making a model. For example, engineers make wind tunnels to test predictions for
airplanes and cars.

3. For Saving Time, Money and Lives – models are often cheaper, take less time to run
and can done under safe conditions. For example, astronauts might ride in a model
shuttle for practice. This I much safer and cheaper than riding a real rocket up into space.

Limitations of Models-
Models are never perfect as they are built only on information that may even not be always
complete. For instance, some models are built on things that we can only imagine and not see
entirely. As a result, the model may be wrong or at least contain some wrong parts. People
could also have wrong ideas when designing a model. For example, some people used to think
that the Earth was in the centre of the universe because they did not have enough information
about space and they cannot see everything in space.

But even if models are not completely accurate or complete, at least they often give people
ideas to build better models later and build upon their understandings. In time, knowledge can
be developed.

Let’s Learn Something More about Sources of (Scientific) Knowledge
- In today’s activity you will learn something more about the nature of science.
- In particular, you will be able to complete the blank for the following sentence.

Scientific Knowledge is not always
________________________________. (answer at the end of class)

Instructions-
1. As instructed, complete each part. (using book or computer)
2. Complete all steps and boxes for each part as described below.
3. At the end, fill in the blank to the statement above.

Part 1 – Google
Step 1 – Choose two people in your group to read the short dialogue below.
A: Hey, _______________. What do you think of Google?
B: I like using google. It is an easy and powerful way to get information from the Internet.
A: I agree. I can almost find out anything I want to research for my science class.
B: Yes. I don’t have to go to the library as much and I don’t have to carry as many heavy
books around.
A and B: Yes. Google we love you. Let’s do some research using google right now! Let’s
learn about…. eggs!

Step 2 – i) On the computer, go to google.com
ii) Type eggs ovaprima site (ovaprima is the name of site for scientific information)
iii) Click News and see if you can find a passage, “Astounding Discovery in Sri Lanka”
iv) Read the article and write a few ideas about it in the box below:

Step 3 – i) On Internet, go to http://21cif.com/resources/materials/survey/four/evalexamples.htm
ii) Go to line 7 and read the paragraph titled “What is the author’s expertise on the topic?”
iii) Go to line 33 and read the first sentence of the paragraph titled, “Do other reliable (or
unreliable) pages provide links to the author's page?)
iv) Write few ideas about what you just read in the box below:

Step 4 – Compare your ideas from your boxes. What conclusions can you make?
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

Part 2 – Wikipedia


A: Hey, _______________. What do you think of Wikipedia?
B: I love Wikepedia. It is always the first site I visit when I need to get some good ideas for a
topic at school..
A: Yes. Everyone visits. It looks to be the most visited site in the world for information. You
can tell by the number of hits.
B: Yeah. There is usually so much information I can use. And I can always find other links to
other
sites if I need even more information.
A and B: Yes. Wikpedia you are the best. Let’s learn more withWikipedia right now! Let’s
learn about _______________. (you choose)

Step 2 – i) On the computer, go to Wikipedia.org
ii) On search line, type a word(s) for what to you want to know about
iv) Read some of the information given and write a few ideas about it in the box below:

Step 3 – i) On the Internet, go to: http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=XPC-
bNX9O_E#t=178
ii) Watch the video
iv) Write few ideas about what you just listened to in the box below:

____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

Part 3 – Books

A: Hey, _______________. What do you think of books?
B: They are good. I always use them to study. If I read carefully, I can understand the
content well.
A: That is good. And of course we can study from textbooks to learn. Everyone does that!
B: Yeah. I just finished making a summary on our science textbook’s last chapter. I learned a
lot about science models.
A and B: Yes. Books are so precious! Let’s learn more with our science textbook right now!

Step 2 – i) Open your science textbook and turn to page 30.
ii) Look at Figure 28 in the top left corner. Read the text in the figure as best you can.
iii) Write a few ideas about what you read in the figure below:

Step 3 – i) Now read the first paragraph of pg 30 that is titled, “Evaluating Promotional Materials”
ii) Write few ideas about what you just listened to in the box below:

____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

Critical Thinking

What is it?

Critical thinking is self-guided technique
where you attempt to reason at the
highest level of quality in a fair-minded
way. People who think critically
consistently attempt to live rationally,
reasonably, empathically. They are
keenly aware that human thinking is not
always correct when left unchecked.
They strive to decrease wrongful or
selfish thinking.

They use the intellectual tools such as
 criticizing  relating  evaluating
 reflecting  wondering

They work to improve the world of
wrongful and especially harmful ideas

and even supposed facts to contribute to
a more rational, civilized society.
How do we do it?

1. Examine a piece of knowledge,
thought or data
2. Consider or pose a question.
3. Attempt to answer the question with
good detail in a critical way. (ie.
when answering, criticize the piece,
reflect on the piece, judge the piece,
etc.)
4. Two types of ideas must be included:
1. content from the piece
2. ideas from outside of the piece
(ex. our brains, our experiences,
another person, another book etc.)

Why do we need think critically?

1. We can understand pieces of
knowledge and thought better
2. We and others can live better lives

Critical Thinking
Assignment

1. Read the following two
writing pieces and answer
one question that follows for
each piece.

For each question:

1. Write ½ page MINIMUM.
2. Included content from the
writing piece.
3. Include ideas from outside
the writing piece.

The Discovery of DNA
(From People and Discoveries site. To be used for viewing only)

In the late nineteenth century, a German biochemist found the nucleic acids, long-chain
polymers of nucleotides, were made up of sugar, phosphoric acid, and several nitrogen-
containing bases. Later it was found that the sugar in nucleic acid can be ribose or deoxyribose,
giving two forms: RNA and DNA. In 1943, American Oswald Avery proved that DNA carries
genetic information. He even suggested DNA might actually be the gene. Most people at the
time thought the gene would be protein, not nucleic acid, but by the late 1940s, DNA was largely
accepted as the genetic molecule. Scientists still needed to figure out this molecule's structure
to be sure, and to understand how it worked.
In 1948, Linus Pauling discovered that many proteins take the shape of an alpha helix,
spiraled like a spring coil. In 1950, biochemist Erwin Chargaff found that the arrangement of
nitrogen bases in DNA varied widely, but the amount of certain bases always occurred in a one-
to-one ratio. These discoveries were an important foundation for the later description of DNA.
In the early 1950s, the race to discover DNA was on. At Cambridge University, graduate student
Francis Crick and research fellow James Watson (b. 1928) had become interested, impressed
especially by Pauling's work. Meanwhile at King's College in London, Maurice Wilkins (b. 1916)
and Rosalind Franklin were also studying DNA. The Cambridge team's approach was to make
physical models to narrow down the possibilities and eventually create an accurate picture of
the molecule. The King's team took an experimental approach, looking particularly at x-ray
diffraction images of DNA.
In 1951, Watson attended a lecture by Franklin on her work to date. She had found that
DNA can exist in two forms, depending on the relative humidity in the surrounding air. This had
helped her deduce that the phosphate part of the molecule was on the outside. Watson returned
to Cambridge with a rather muddy recollection of the facts Franklin had presented, though
clearly critical of her lecture style and personal appearance. Based on this information, Watson
and Crick made a failed model. It caused the head of their unit to tell them to stop DNA research.
But the subject just kept coming up.
Franklin, working mostly alone, found that her x-ray diffractions showed that the "wet"
form of DNA (in the higher humidity) had all the characteristics of a helix. She suspected that all
DNA was helical but did not want to announce this finding until she had sufficient evidence on
the other form as well. Wilkins was frustrated. In January, 1953, he showed Franklin's results to
Watson, apparently without her knowledge or consent. Crick later admitted, "I'm afraid we
always used to adopt -- let's say, a patronizing attitude towards her."
Watson and Crick took a crucial conceptual step, suggesting the molecule was made of
two chains of nucleotides, each in a helix as Franklin had found, but one going up and the other
going down. Crick had just learned of Chargaff's findings about base pairs in the summer of
1952. He added that to the model, so that matching base pairs interlocked in the middle of the
double helix to keep the distance between the chains constant.
Watson and Crick showed that each strand of the DNA molecule was a template for the other.
During cell division the two strands separate and on each strand a new "other half" is built, just
like the one before. This way DNA can reproduce itself without changing its structure -- except
for occasional errors, or mutations.
The structure so perfectly fit the experimental data that it was almost immediately
accepted. DNA's discovery has been called the most important biological work of the last 100
years, and the field it opened may be the scientific frontier for the next 100. By 1962, when
Watson, Crick, and Wilkins won the Nobel Prize for physiology/medicine, Franklin had died. The
Nobel Prize only goes to living recipients, and can only be shared among three winners.

Questions-

1. Had Franklin been still alive in 1962, should she have been included in the prize?
2. Who discovered DNA in your opinion?
3. In 1953, Wilkins shared data with Watson. Is it okay to for scientists to share data like
Wilkins?

The Theory of Evolution
Darwin became famous for his theory of evolution. It is the widely held notion that all
forms of life (from bacteria to birds to fish to human etc.) are related. Moreover, every living
thing comes from the same ancestor: the birds and the bananas, the fishes and the flowers are
all related. Darwin's general theory presumes the development of life from non-life and stresses
a purely naturalistic (undirected) "descent with change". This means, more complex creatures
evolve from more simplistic ancestors naturally over time. Bascially over a long period of time,
many random genetic mutations occur within one earlier organism's genetic code. Sometimes,
the mutations were beneficial and the slightly different offspring did not only survive but was
able live more easily. In the process, the altered living thing became the dominant life form and
the earlier living thing eventually died off. Such a process where beneficial mutations are
preserved because they aid survival is known as "natural selection." These beneficial mutations
get passed on to the next generation. Over more and more time, the beneficial mutations
accumulate enough such that an entirely different organism (not just a variation of the original,
but an entirely different creature) is formed. And this process can happen repeatedly to result in
many different creatures being formed over time.

Questions –

1. Should evolution be fact and not theory?
2. Is it really possible for one life form to change into another life form over time because of
mutations in the DNA?
3. What is wrong with evolution?

Your title
page for
Uncertainty
section


The Uncertainty of Science

Scientific knowledge is fundamentally
uncertain. We must further understand
the following:

1. Science is uncertain because it is a
human activity.

2. Science explanations seem less
certain when they are based on
indirect information

3. Scientific uncertainty can be
reduced through collaboration with
others.

Why is Science Uncertain?

Information can be obtained that is non-
sensory (ex. non-visual) because we
cannot always sense (see, hear. Etc)
everything that we would like to

As a result, scientists can at best make
only theories. (Review) A theory is an
overarching explanation that has been
well substantiated. Good examples of
theories include evolution and cell theory
(ie. all living things are composed of cells)

An Important Consequence -

Because science can be uncertain, it is
important to understand the following:

Any theory or other scientific knowledge
can be refined or even replaced by an

alternative theory in light of new and
compelling evidence.

Real Examples of Uncertainty -

1. Making a map of Yosemite National
Park
2. Making a map of the Earth's interior
3. Exploring the surface of the Moon.
4. Exploring the surface of Venus.
5. Studying a cancer cell.
6. Learning the structure of an atom.
7. Finding out how DNA works.
8. Learning what causes a new disease.
9. How do we remember things?

The Uncertainty of Science
NOTE 2

As stated before, scientific knowledge
can be uncertain because we do not
always have all the information available
to understand something.

But there is another reason too:

As humans, we sometimes fail to sense
what really is. We make misconceptions.

- We do not always see what we really
should see (eg. optical illusions)
- We do not always infer what is really
true (eg. infer the correct idea from a
reading)
- We may be blinded by traditions,
customs or even pride (ex. Rice is better

than bread, humans are the most
powerful living thing in the universe)

Thus, it is important in science, to be
critical of people’s senses, beliefs and
assumptions.

Again, use the critical thinking strategy to
examine for misconceptions in science.

Understanding Uncertainty in Science – Exercise on Common
Misconceptions
Directions –
1. Read the statement given for each question below.
2. Write your opinion for each statement. (ex. Do you agree? Do you disagree? Do you
have some other opinion). Be sure to write a few sentences to explain your opinion.
3. After you have given your opinion for ALL questions, complete the research parts. Using
the link provided (or another trustworthy source) find out what misconception people have
/ have had. Find out what is the accepted truth (for many but not all) at present for the
statements.

1. The earth is closer to the sun in the summer. That is why it is hotter in the summer.

My Opinion -
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

Research- --> Go to http://newyorkscienceteacher.com/sci/pages/miscon/astr.php (write #9)
--> Go to http://pwg.gsfc.nasa.gov/istp/outreach/sunearthmiscons.html (see 1st paragraph)
Common Misconception of the Past / Present -
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

Current Accept Belief as of Now (By Many) -
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

2. A rainbow is made of some material(s).

My Opinion -
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

Research- --> Go to http://www.atmosphere.mpg.de/enid/tj.html (read all)

____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
The continents of the world are fixed. (always in the same spot)

My Opinion -
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

Research- -->Go to http://www.hokeg.dyndns.org/AITruth.htm(Read “The Most Ridiculous Thing)
--> Go to
http://www.enchantedlearning.com/subjects/astronomy/planets/earth/Continents.shtml (read all)
____________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

4. The speed of light is instantaneous.

My Opinion -
________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

Research- --> Go to
http://thebrain.mcgill.ca/flash/d/d_02/d_02_cr/d_02_cr_vis/d_02_cr_vis.html(read paragraph 4)
--> Go to http://library.thinkquest.org/25607/anatomyParts.php3 (read pupil paragraph)

____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

5. ___________________________________________________________ (Do your own!)

My Opinion -
________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

Research- --> Go to

____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

The Uncertainty of Science – Day 3 Activity
Instructions-
--> Today, you will learn more about how science can be uncertain and also –why- it is
important to be critical of science.

1. With your group you will visit three stations when instructed by your teacher.
2. At each station, one of your classmates will demonstrate something or just show you
something.
3. Listen carefully, as your classmate tells you something. He/she will also do science to
show you something amazing!
4. After, answer the two questions below for each station.
5. Last, answer the final question at the bottom.

Station # __________________

Answer the 2 questions –AFTER- your classmate has finished his/her show.

Question 1 – What did you observe your classmate just do? Explain well.

____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

Question 2 – How do you feel about what you saw or heard? Write down your reaction below.
Again, try to explain well.

____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

Station # _____________



____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________


____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

Station # ___________



____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________


____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

Final Question-

--> Did you know or expect this? Not every station classmate told you the truth! At least one of
your classmates was lying! Which one was lying? Or were maybe two of them lying OR all
three?! Write your opinion below. Again explain well!
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

The Uncertainty of Science – Note 3
____________________________________

There is another reason why you should be skeptical of (not trust) science. Some people
intentionally lie and commit other acts of fraud so that what they communicate is not always true
and can be even harmful. . We can refer to this element of science as
________________________________________.

There are also various ways scientists cheat and create science falsehoods such as incorrect
data or false methods. Some of them could be harmful to others and society.

_________________________________- fabrication in general means publishing or
reporting misleading facts that are connected to your inquiry or other form of study. It includes
falsifying data, falsifying evidence, falsifying data, falsifying evidence. It could also involve
conjuring where you purposely use lab materials wrongfully to get the desired result. A good
example is Dr. Woo Suk Hwang who forged false results to claim he made some achievements
in human cloning when he had not.

________________________- plagiarism is the copying of others’ work and using it as
your own. On scientist might steal the results of another scientist to help aid him/here in his/her
own inquiry that needs good results but he/she was unable to get on his/her own easily. A
number of researchers have also been found to steal the work and results of their own students.
Especially nowadays with the advancement of technology it is getting easier to steal ideas by
hacking, computer cameras and illegal downloading.

________________________ – rigging means tweaking the situation or environment so
that more optimal (better) results occur. When you rig, you are not directly changing the result or
method but your intentionally do the experiment only at the best time, or using the best materials
or using the best machine etc. By doing so, your results will be better than normal on the
average. Examples- science teachers might purposely choose to NOT to do a static electricity
on a humid day but always do in the winter on a very dry day because the experiment will work
better (but they do not tell the students about this). Drug designers choose the strongest
patients instead of a wider population to test some new medicine.

______________________ – sometimes professors or scientific team leaders give all the
research work to their technicians and other assistants. Yet when they publish things, they may
not acknowledge the work of their team and they take all the credit for themselves unfairly.

_________________________ – some scientists and citizen of scientists intentionally talk
their way out of bad results. Ie. They make their results look correct or supportive of their
conclusions by talking nonsense. Yet many believe their nonsense because they are good at
using hard concepts or procedures that may be difficult for others to understand and the others
just trust them when should not.

Cheating in Science, Part I: The Tragic
Story of a Young Man’s Suicide
A story of ambition, suspected scientific fraud, and suicide.
Published on October 5, 2010 by Peter Gray in Freedom to Learn
I begin with a true and tragic story. Many years ago I was a graduate
student conducting research in one of the top biopsychology laboratories
in the country. The lab chief was one of a handful of the world's most
prominent research psychologists at that time, and many in the lab
believed he was headed for a Nobel Prize.

As is often the case, this lab head was not doing hands-on research
himself. He was busy writing articles and grant proposals and traveling around giving speeches.
A fleet of graduate students and postdoctoral fellows conducted the research. He would put his
name on reports of research that he had helped to design but that others had conducted. He
didn't even understand fully the equipment that was used in those experiments.

A certain postdoctoral fellow in the lab--I'll call him Henry--was getting most of the fabulous
results. At about the same time that I received my Ph.D. and took an assistant professorship at
a more humble institution, Henry accepted an offer to become full professor at one of the most
prestigious psychology departments in the country. The task of continuing the line of research
he had been doing was then turned over to an excellent, conscientious graduate student in the
lab he had left. That graduate student could not replicate any of Henry's famous findings. This
led to repeated calls to Henry to come back and demonstrate how he got those fabulous results,
to which there was no satisfactory response. With continued failures to replicate, and with
continued defensiveness and evasiveness on the part of Henry, the suspicion grew, usually
unstated, that Henry may have made up those findings. And then the tragedy happened. Henry
committed suicide.

What a shock that was to me. I can't say that I really liked Henry; his ambition was such that he
rubbed those who were beneath him, including me, the wrong way. But I knew him and felt I
understood him. He was a real flesh and blood person to me, and when I heard of his suicide I
cried. I could see him as a frail person--despite his burly physique and blustering style--caught
up in a drive toward self-advancement, in a lab that was rewarding the "right" findings and had
little interest in the "wrong" ones. He was not, in truth, a scientist at all. He wasn't interested in
the questions he was supposedly pursuing in the lab. When the foundation for his self-
advancement was pulled out from under him he toppled; he could no longer see any purpose in
living.

I've been thinking lately about the whole question of cheating in science. It has been brought to
mind, of course, by the recent media coverage of the Marc Hauser case at Harvard. Hauser is
accused of fabricating data in at least some of his celebrated experiments on the cognitive
abilities of monkeys. The Hauser case is reminiscent of another case of scientific fraud that also
occurred in the Harvard Psychology Department. In the late-1990s, fast-rising Harvard
psychologist Karen Ruggiero was found guilty of fabricating five experiments, which had been
published in two articles, and of altering the data that appeared in a third article. Her career was
destroyed.

How common is scientific fraud? Nobody really knows. Defenders of science's purity often argue
that such fraud is very rare, the product of a tiny number of "bad apples." But I doubt that. My
suspicion is that the cases of fraud that are exposed are just the tip of the iceberg.

I've heard people argue that it would be against anyone's self-interest to cheat in science
because cheating will be caught when someone tries to replicate the experiment and fails. But,
in truth, replication is rare in most areas of science. Most scientists want to do something new,
and funding agencies rarely provide grants to repeat already published experiments. Even when
replications are conducted and fail, there are almost always ways to explain the discrepancies
without suggesting fraud. No experiment can possibly be an exact replication of a previous one.
This is especially true in the behavioral sciences. The subjects are different (different people, or
rats, or ant colonies), the time in history is different, the ambient conditions (temperature,
barometric pressure, color of the walls) are different, and so on. Failure to replicate may well be
taken to indicate that the original findings are not as "robust" as previously believed, but it is
almost never taken as evidence of fraud.
Even in the case of Henry, where every attempt was made to keep conditions exactly the same
as those in the original experiments, the researchers continued to "explain" the failure, at least
publicly, in terms of hypothetical changed conditions. They suggested in one article, for example,
that the company from which they obtained the rats may have been breeding the animals in a
way that had altered their behavioral reactions. My guess is that if Henry had remained alive
and had been formally accused of fraud, nobody would have been able to prove it.

Proof of fraud in science rarely if ever comes from failure to replicate. It comes, most often,
when the perpetrator of the fraud becomes so brazen that he or she fabricates or alters data in
ways that make the fraud obvious to others. Hauser was caught, apparently, because he began
to pressure his graduate students to get the results he wanted, which led them to become
whistleblowers, which, in turn, led to an investigation revealing that his recorded data did not
match that in his published papers. A graduate student complaint also triggered the
investigation that led to Karen Ruggiero's downfall. The student had asked Ruggiero for a copy
of the original data for a certain experiment, and Ruggiero had refused. This led the student to
suspect that the data might not exist, which led to the investigation. If Ruggiero had taken the
trouble to produce a false paper record to "support" her falsified experiments, the investigation
would not have happened.

Some other scientists have been caught cheating because their fabricated data, quite literally,
was too good to be true. There is always a certain degree of random variability in real data, and
repeated data sets that have no or almost no variability are powerful evidence of fabrication.
You have to be either very brazen or very stupid to get caught at cheating in science.

Over the years a number of surveys have been conducted in which scientists were asked to
report, on an anonymous questionnaire, on their own fraudulent behavior. A recent meta-
analysis of those surveys reveals that, on average, about 2% of scientists admitted to fabricating
or falsifying data, and 14% said that they had personal evidence of such behavior in one or
more of their colleagues. The percentage admitting to fraud was highest among scientists doing
pharmaceutical, clinical, and other medical research, which either means that researchers in
those fields fabricate lab data more often or lie less often on questionnaires than do researchers
in other fields.
As the author of the meta-analysis, Daniele Fanelli, points out, the 2% figure is the lowest
possible estimate of the percentage of scientists who have deliberately falsified data. No
respondents would say that they had behaved fraudulently if they hadn't, but many, even on an

anonymous questionnaire, might be expected to lie in the opposite direction. The meta-analysis
also revealed that a full third of the respondents to the surveys admitted to more subtle forms of
scientific cheating, such as failing to report data that contradicted their theories or dropping data
points from analyses because of a "gut feeling" that they were inaccurate.

The purpose of science is to discover truths. Cheating completely defeats the purpose. Why,
then, do scientists cheat? In my next post I'm going to delve more deeply into this question and
suggest that many so-called scientists are not, in their heads, really scientists. Instead, they are
still students, going through one hoop after another to reach the next level. To them, cheating in
science is just like cheating in school, and "Who doesn't do that?"

Critical Thinking Questions-
1. Can you be understanding of Henry’s action in committing suicide? (ie. Was his suicide a
reasonable act considering what had happened to him?)

2. Can you compare Henry’s suicide to anyone else? Do you know of anyone else who has
committed suicide for a similar reason?

3. Daniel Fanelli states that at least 14 % of scientists have admitted to cheating or
observing cheating and the actual number is probably higher. Why do you think scientists
cheat? Is it okay?

4. Consider the last sentence, To them, cheating in science is just like cheating in school,
and "Who doesn't do that?" Do you agree with these statements? Why or why not?

5. Another big problem in science and other school subjects is plagiarism. Write your
opinion on plagiarism in science or other school subjects.

Your title
page for
Science in
the Larger
Field
section

The Kayapo Indians’ Struggle in Brazil

By Ava Y. Goodale

The Kayapó get settled at a rally against a dam on the Xingu River, Brazil. Photo: International
Rivers.

The author’s visit among the Kayapo Indians left a lasting impression.

Summer 2003 with the Kayapo Indians of Brazil, a personal account: I was decorated, head to
toe, in paint. The city dust tried to fade the colors but I still remembered. I remembered
spending hours in the shade of Baycocaco’s house in a frozen stance as she moved her fingers
steadily, constantly, down my back. The coolness of the paint traced my body, exaggerated the
whiteness of my skin. I practiced a few Kayapo words in between strokes: ‘Mex Kumrex’
(beautiful/ good/ thank you), ‘Akatemae’ (good morning), ‘Wea-wea’ (butterfly). She smiled, revealing her aged set of teeth. We
laughed at my attempts but she encouraged me with a hand on my upper chest, a common Kayapo gesture of appreciation. She
painted vertical stripes with dots on my legs, turned my arms into the scaled pattern of a fish, and highlighted my cheekbones
with crosshatchings. She painted me Kayapo. Painted Kayapo on my belly. Painted Kayapo on my heart. The paint dried. My
skin pulled it down, fastened it, let it seep to the place where I hold it now — deep in my chest.

Who are the Kayapo Indians?
The tribe lives along the Xingu River in Brazil.

The Kayapo Indians are an indigenous tribe inhabiting land on both sides of the Xingu River in the state of Pará, Brazil on the
Central Brazilian Plateau. Nine Kayapo villages are scattered throughout the territory, creating a 28.4 million acre home for
more than 5,000 people.1 The dominant ecosystems are tropical rainforest and grassland in which the Kayapo hunt, fish, and
practice swidden agriculture (slash and burn). The Kayapo wear intricate beadwork and headdresses in ceremonies and
decorate their bodies with dye coming from the plants genipapo and urucu. The Kayapo refer to themselves as Mebêngokrê,
which means ‘the men from the water place.’

How is Kayapo culture at risk?
Their livelihood is threatened by pollution, land grabs, and dams.

 Pollution: Outside the boundaries of the territory, acres of soybean and cattle characterize Brazil’s landscape. The
ecological stress from these practices is negatively affecting life for the Kayapo and others. Pollution is traveling from
the headwaters of the Xingu downriver to the reserve, contaminating water supplies and food resources.
 Land Invasion: Parts of the east bank of the Middle Xingu called Kapôtnhinore are being illegally invaded and sold.
Over the last two years ranchers and others have sought out the land. Hostile relationships have formed, creating a
dangerous and volatile environment and also blocking river travel.
 Hydroelectric Dams: The Brazilian government has revived a set of plans that will establish dams along the Xingu
River. The proposed project would displace Kayapo from their homes, cause a loss of sustenance for those living
downstream, disturb fish populations, and damage terrestrial ecosystems.

The history
The river tribes took action against damming in 1989.

In 1989 these issues reached a climax. The original plans for damming were exposed, revealing the damages that would occur
if such a project were to ensue. The proposals would

 harm about 3,000 people who live along the Xingu
 flood more than 1,600 square kilometers, 85% of which would be indigenous land

 create the world’s largest manmade lake2

The government terminated its plans due to indigenous action.

The Kayapo did not passively watch the scene unfold. They took action that would reverberate globally. In the town of
Altamira an intertribal, international, and integrated coalition, called The Peoples of the Xingu, was formed to demonstrate
against the dams. For five days the town was transformed into a traditional Kayapo village — homes filled with men, women,
and children, adorned in ceremonial dress for the New Corn Ceremony, performing their daily tasks. Over 600 Kayapo, 40
other indigenous Amazonian tribes, world media members, and non-government organizations (NGOs) representatives shook
the streets until the government pledged to listen. In addition to the demonstration, the Kayapo met with government officials
and sent chiefs to tour North America, Europe, and Japan. 3

Through effective leadership and organization the Kayapo presented their culture to the world, showing their vigor and vitality.
The global community returned with a voice of support and respect, loud enough to urge the termination of the project. The
unprecedented victory gave hope and empowerment to the region and world.

Today’s challenge
Now the government has revived its plans.

14 years later the government has reopened the book on the Xingu. A second round of proposals are being reviewed and the
Kayapo plan a second round of defense.

Displaced Indians will not be compensated.

 Electronorte, an electrical utilities company owned by the state, is spearheading this initiative to create the world’s
third largest dam.4 The first dam, the Belo Monte, will not be able to operate during the four-month long dry season,
making the system inefficient and dependent on the construction of additional dams.
 A canal system has also been proposed that would be the largest canal project since the Panama Canal.
 Funding for the proposal comes from Electronorte and private vendors like the Brazilian National Developmental
Bank.
 There will be no compensation to the people who would be displaced or harmed. 5

Tribes are again organizing to fight.

November 2003 in Piaraçu, Brazil, 100 delegates from some 28 tribes met to reorganize a plan to halt the abuse of their land.6
The purpose of this meeting was to form a united front of opposition to the harmful developments that will affect all the people
who depend on the Xingu. This meeting was the precursor to a meeting that is planned for summer 2004 in Altamira, where
again the Kayapo and their friends will raise their voices.

As I walked through the streets of Redençao, the out-post city six hours outside the village, I considered my role in the Kayapo’s
struggle. Some of my paint was covered with Kayapo style cloths and jewelry. Some Brazilians in this area hate the Kayapo
and admire Americans. Every corner I turned, another confused look settled upon me. My superficially bronzed skin and
touring eyes revealed my home. I was a young American woman stitched in Kayapo. Every patch of my body sent a clear
message I was proud to post wide.

Conclusion: The Xingu River tribes need the support of people everywhere.

I now continue with this message: Kayapo Indian culture holds beauty that our world cannot afford to live without. Just as in
Redençao, I recognize the privileges I have and with that comes the responsibility to know where and how to apply that energy.

The Kayapo need help. The Brazilian government wants to dam the Xingu River that they depend on. Pollution and ranchers
encroach; logging and mining chip away. These are some of the challenges faced by the Kayapo Indians as modernity slowly
tries to sew itself into their fabric. The Kayapo are strong in leadership, creativity, spirit, and love but without global support
they may be overcome by the development’s impetus. Before we left the village, the Chief and his son came up to us and asked
for our help. Please hear their words.

Questions-

1. What is the main idea of this reading? What are the supporting ideas? Write a few
sentences (1-2) for the main idea AND for EACH supporting idea.

2. How does this article related to Science? Try to identify as many ways as you can. Write
a few sentences for each way as follows:

One way this article relates to science is ________________________.
--> Then Explain more. (tell how or why, give examples or other details, etc.)

A second way this article relates to science is ________________________.

A third way this article relates to science is ________________________.

ETC.

* After you finish, be ready to share your answers with one partner.
** Then, be read to share with your group or class.
** Continue to add ideas to you question 2 as follows:

One way my classmate, ________’s article relates to science is
________________________.

ETC.

HW- Make a special web diagram as follows:
1. Write the word “Science is..” in a circle in the centre of a A4 paper.
2. Add rectangles around your circle from a distance.
3. Write some words from each blank in your question 2 list in your rectangles.
4. Explain underneat each rectangle using some of the explanations you added after
your words in the blanks in question 2. You may also include other ideas or details.

** See teacher’s diagram for a helpful illustration to do your HW.

Light Pollution and Ecosystems
By Travis Longcore and Catherine Rich

Life on Earth has evolved for eons with predictable daily, monthly, and annual patterns of light and dark.
The physiology and ecology of species, the interactions between species, and functioning of ecosystems is
governed in part by light. In modern times, humans have developed and deployed extensive outdoor and
indoor electrical lighting. The outline of these lights is now visible from space.1 By disrupting natural
patterns of darkness, artificial light acts as a pollutant, with significant and adverse impacts to ecosystems.

Figure: Earth at Night

A composite image of the Earth at night in 1994-95. This image is actually a composite of hundreds of
pictures acquired by three of the four DMSP satellites, which operate in low-altitude polar orbits and have
the unique capability to detect low levels of visible-near infrared (VNIR) radiance at night. Image:
NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center,  Scientific Visualization Studio.

Is light pollution a modern problem?

Humans have long known that lights can be used to influence the behavior of other species. For example:

Birds can collide with tall lighted structures.

 Early humans used the light of fire to keep predators at bay.
2
 The philosopher Aristotle (384 BC-322 BC) observed that moths were attracted to a flame.
 In modern times, lighthouses and light-ships confused birds during their nocturnal migration,
sometimes resulting in collision and demise. As early as the 1880s, scientists remarked, “the
destruction of birds by light-houses on the coast of the United States must amount to many
3
thousands annually.”
 Many observations have been made of birds killed in lighted areas, including the first street
6
lights, tall lighted structures, ceilometers (vertical lights used to measure the altitude of clouds at
7
airports), and television and radio towers (see review in Gauthreaux et al. ).
 Mortality of sea turtle hatchlings disoriented by lights has been recorded at least since the mid-
4,5
1900s and has motivated research and mitigation as well.

The constellation Orion, imaged at left from dark skies, and at right from the metropolis of Orem, UT,
with a population of about half a million people. Photos taken 8 January 2009 by Jeremy Stanley.

Types of light pollution

Light pollution is often not aesthetically pleasing.

 Ecological light pollution has been identified as “artificial light that alters the natural patterns of
8
light and dark in ecosystems.”
 Astronomical light pollution, which is not the same as ecological light pollution, is light that
interferes with the view of the night sky.
 The general term “light pollution” can also refer to light that is aesthetically disruptive.

This time exposure photo of New York City at night, with the Empire State Building at center, shows sky
glow, one form of light pollution. Photo taken in October 2004 by Charliebrown7034.

Light polluters

 Light pollution includes sky glow, the reflected light in the sky from artificial lights.
 Direct glare is a light that is directly visible to an observer at night.

Light measurement

 Illumination is the amount of light energy incident on a particular area.
 Luminance is the brightness of a light source against its surroundings.
 Spectrum comprises the different wavelengths in any particular light.

How does light pollution affect wildlife?

Loggerhead turtle hatchlings in Broward County, Florida making it to the ocean just after sunrise.
Artificial lighting on nesting beaches disrupts the ability of marine turtle hatchlings to find the sea, an
effect termed “hatchling disorientation.” Photo: Mary Wozny, Broward County Sea Turtle Conservation
Program; Sea Turtle Image Library.

Some marine animals, such as sea turtles, and insects are disoriented by night lights.

Orientation
Light is necessary for some species to become familiar with their environments. It can also serve to
extend the activity period of species that are mainly active in the daytime. Known as the “night light
niche,”9 the increased activity time may benefit these species, but it comes at the expense of other species
with which they compete, or on which they prey. Unfortunately, light can also cause disorientation or act
as an unnatural stimulus. Sea turtle hatchlings are disoriented by lights along the beaches where females
lay their eggs4,5 (see review in Salmon10). The attraction of insects to lights is another example of this
phenomenon, which results in the deaths of billions of insects each summer in Germany alone.11

Reproduction
Many reproductive activities are synchronized by light, or they require specific lighting conditions.
Fireflies use lights to attract mates—a communication that artificial lights make less visible.12 The
spawning of corals is highly synchronized with lunar cycles,13 which is a method of “predator swamping”
that maximizes the survival of the larvae. Other species, such as some insects and frogs, only mate in the
darkest part of the night, presumably to minimize the risk of predation.14

Animals, including humans, have an internal clock.

Circadian rhythms and physiology (functions)
Animals set their internal clocks based on light cues and light pollution can have weighty consequences.
Alterations of the natural pattern of light disrupts “circadian” cycles—a roughly twenty-four-hour cycle in
the biochemical, physiological, or behavioral processes of organisms. In many species, exposure to light
at night suppresses the production of the hormone melatonin. Light in the shorter wavelengths (e.g., blue)
is biologically active, and it is most effective at triggering such physiological changes in animals.15 In
humans, decreased concentration of melatonin is associated with increased risk of breast and prostate
cancer.16,17 For species that are normally active at night, such as salamanders,18 sugar gliders,19 and flying
squirrels,20 encountering light can cause them to delay their nightly activities such as foraging. Light at
night can also influence the timing of physiological changes associated with migration.21

Competition
Interactions between species are affected by lighting conditions. For example, some lizards are successful
in establishing themselves in non-native environments because they have the ability to exploit artificial
night lighting successfully.22 Experimental research has shown the decline of one native gecko species in

Hawaii when it was out-competed by another species in the presence of clustered insect distributions
caused by lights.23 Species can show strong preferences for activity during different light conditions. We
now know that changing the lighting could increase or decrease competition between species.

Some prey species function best at night.

Predation
As a general rule, additional light allows predators to find their prey. Some prey species, therefore,
evolved to be active only during the dark of night to avoid predators. This pattern is seen across many
groups of organisms, including seals that capture juvenile salmon under artificial lights,24 nocturnal
rodents that are exposed to predators in various environments,25 and snakes that reduce activity during the
full moon when they would be vulnerable to predation from owls.26 The exceptions to this rule are species
that seek safety from predators in numbers, such as flocks of birds27 or schools of fish.28 In these instances,
additional light may benefit the prey species because it heightens their communal awareness of their
environment.

How can light pollution be addressed?
Light pollution requires changing human behavior.

Light pollution is simultaneously extremely simple and extremely difficult to remediate. It is simple
because once a light is switched off or redirected, the pollutant is gone from the system with no expensive
clean-up effort. Because remediation requires changing the behavior of billions of people and overcoming
their various prejudices and attitudes about darkness and artificial lighting at night, it is extraordinarily
difficult to control. Local and regional ordinances can educate the public, and such regulations have been
shown to address this challenge effectively.10 Efforts to mitigate the effects of light pollution on species
and habitats should consider five elements of lighting:

1. Need Is the light needed? The choice not to light may be appropriate in many circumstances—
especially in parks or wilderness areas where visitors are prepared for the darkness. In addition, under
many circumstances, removing existing lights is an option because they were not needed.

All light should only illuminate what’s necessary.

2. Direction All light should be directed where it is needed, and any light escaping in other directions
should be eliminated. To reduce sky glow this means using lights that are “full cut-off,” which is defined
as a light that emits virtually no light upward and very little light in the 10° angle below the horizon.
Depending on where the light is located, additional shielding may be necessary to keep light from spilling
into sensitive habitats such as a wetland or forest. Even lights that are directed downward may still cause
adverse effects for ecosystems.

3. Intensity Users should only install lights as bright as needed for a particular situation because the
influence of a light correlates with its intensity. If an existing light is shielded properly, often less light is
just as effective because it is all going where it is desired. For natural areas, intensity should be kept low
so that the contrasts between lit and unlit areas are minimized. This increases overall visibility by
allowing the human eye to keep some of its adaptation to the dark. When lights are very bright, the eye
adapts to this brightness and all else appears as dark shadows. When illumination is closer to ambient
conditions, the eye is actually able to see more that is not directly illuminated by the light.29

Not all lights should shine from dusk to dawn.

4. Duration Not every light needs to be on from dusk to dawn. Lighting can be minimized by setting the
fixture to turn off after a certain hour (the Dutch government does this with some of its street lights,30), or
by putting the light on a motion sensor so that it is only on when needed. Good practices such as turning
lights out when they are not needed could go a long way to minimizing light pollution on private property,
not to mention the benefits of reducing pollution from energy production and saving money.

5. Spectrum Although all light has some effects on wildlife and habitats, certain spectra are more
damaging. Full spectrum light, which has blue and ultraviolet wavelengths, should not be used. Even
though such lights allow people to see color at night, the presence of the blue light sends an
environmental signal that it is daytime. Ultraviolet light is highly attractive to insects and it should be
avoided as well. Longer wavelengths such as yellow and red appear to have fewer impacts in general,
although even longer wavelengths were shown to disrupt foraging of beach mice18 and the orientation of
some salamanders.31 In the laboratory, some migratory birds were unable to orient under red lights. The
research suggested that green should be used on offshore oil platforms to make it safer to migrate.32

Questions-





ETC.


________________________.
ETC.



Searching for Nature's Medicines
By Mark J. Plotkin

Why is biodiversity important to an ethnobotanist?
We have no right to destroy species for profit.

Plotkin: In the field of ethnobotany, biodiversity is incredibly important for utilitarian purposes, the utility and the potential
utility of these species — both plants and animals. We are talking about usefulness not only to the local peoples that we are
working with and studying but potentially to ourselves as well, in other words, to global culture. But we should take a step
back from that and say that it is important to protect species and biodiversity not just for utilitarian purposes. Conservation
really should be a spiritual exercise first and foremost, a moral exercise. In other words, we don’t have the right to extinguish
species because of our own stupidity, greed, or ignorance. But when you are talking with hard-pressed development planners,
in the third world in particular, and this happens in Washington as well, dollar values can sometimes carry the day.

What medicines can be derived from nature?
Nature offers medicines, such as painkillers, that can be derived naturally or in combination with chemical synthetics.

Plotkin: Well, my new book, Medicine Quest, focuses on the medicines of the future that will be derived from natural products
being investigated today. I think the best way to predict the future, no matter what field you are in, is to look at the past and
present and try and define where we are going. The mistake that a lot of people make, particularly the general public, is that
they think, “well, we have got all this cool technology, who needs Mother Nature?” Put more crudely: in the age of the Internet
who needs fungi? But the fact of the matter is that, despite the fact that we have the most successful system of science,
medicine, and healing ever seen anywhere, there are certain things that western medicine cannot do. So, I think the drugs of the
future that come from nature are going to be for the treatment of pain first. Some very exciting things are in the pipeline and I
go into some detail in my book particularly about painkillers from cone snails, snake venom, and frog skin poison. We’re
looking at new treatments for cancer, from marine organisms in particular, and new antibiotics from natural sources. Antibiotics
are incredibly important. I’m increasingly convinced that the major threat to our species is from drug-resistant bacteria. The
source of almost all classes of antibiotics has been natural sources. I spoke recently with the head of microbiology at Harvard
Medical School and he pointed out that new technologies allow us to access 98% of the soil diversity. This was not accessible
using the old method of throwing something on a petri dish to see if it will grow. I predict that many of the new antibiotics of
the future will come from soil fungi, as was the case in the past. It’s important to note that this does not deny the importance of
synthetics or potential synthetics. The two hottest new leads for drug- resistant bacteria that hit the market in the last two years
are ones that come from Argentine soil fungi and the other from a synthetic chemical laboratory. So it’s not one or the other. It’s
natural products, synthetic chemistry, and semi-synthetic products as well.

What are governments and organizations doing to preserve naturally-derived medical
resources?
Companies that bioprospect for natural products should compensate the local people who have used them in their culture.

Plotkin: I think that the whole concept of intellectual property rights boils down to a question of good manners. If you’re going
to compensate local or indigenous people, you want to do so in a culturally sensitive way. But you cannot say, “okay — we’ll
be back in twelve years and, if we have the cure for AIDS, you’ll be in the money.” These people have real needs now. And
those needs need to be addressed, whether its education or access to Western medicine or access to lawyers to gain title to their
traditional lands. This model is increasingly accepted but the problem is that there’s been so much noise about this that, I think,
it frightens some companies off that might be, and I emphasize might be, willing to do things the right way. You have a lot
more emphasis on bioprospecting for natural products that are not used by indigenous or local cultures because, frankly,
corporations don’t want the headaches of dealing with them.

Which issues are important to your organization, The Amazon Conservation Team?
The protection of indigenous knowledge will ensure that we learn about nature’s benefits.

Plotkin: As I point out in my new book, the urgent need is to protect biodiversity and I would say, even more importantly, to
protect cultural diversity because it’s at that nexus where shaministic knowledge and western science interface. If you look at
the country of Suriname in Northeastern South America, where I have done much of my work, there are no indigenous people
living in 75% of the national parks. Most of them went extinct from these areas long before these parks were set up. Even if
there are species in the area that might help us treat or cure something like diabetes, how do we know what they are, what part
of the plants to use, what phase of the moon to harvest them in, and what is the dosage? That’s the loss we face when these
cultures disappear. Our concern is not the commercialization of natural products - we are a not-for-profit and do not do
bioprospecting. Our focus is to ensure that the traditional knowledge is passed from one generation to the next within the tribe.
We are interested in protecting biological and cultural diversity, not in commercial development. Our work entails everything
from sponsoring shaman’s apprentice programs to helping our tribal colleagues map their lands.

Does genetic engineering threaten the remaining natural resources?
We must approach genetic engineering cautiously since we have no idea of its impacts on the environment and our health.

Plotkin: Well, genetic engineering is like western medicine. The potential is great but the potential to harm has to be
recognized. I don’t think that genetic engineering is going to solve the world’s problems any more than I know that
ethnobotany is going to save the rain forests or that the next presidential election will solve all of our economic and poverty
problems in this country. The future may be great for genetic engineering but I want to make sure that it’s safe and effective
and I don’t want these crops tested on me, or my kids, or my grandkids. I want to make sure they don’t have ancillary
downstream negative effects on the environment before they’re out there. In some cases, it seems that the cart has been put
before the horse; we’re being told that these things are safe and the next thing you know the butterflies are dying off. No, I
want more conclusive scientific proof that this stuff is indeed harmless. The upside is very obvious but the downside is
becoming more evident and needs to be addressed before we start eating the stuff.

In addition, the jungle is a pretty robust place. I don’t really see anything taking over in the heart of the jungle and
outcompeting the jungle. I haven’t in 20 years. That is not to say I am Pollyannish about it. I just don’t think you could have
some Frankenstein or “frankenfood” that can get in there and make a mess of things. I’m more concerned about places like
Iowa or places with large plantations growing this stuff rather than places where it hasn’t really penetrated, for example, into
the rogue corners where I work.

Are there places in the world other than the Amazon, for example, the desert, where
nature’s medicines can be found?
Rain forests and coral reefs have incredible potential for natural medicines.

Plotkin: The hottest regions, in terms of immediate potential, would be rain forests and coral reefs. As I pointed out in my first
book [Tales of a Shaman’s Apprentice: An Ethnobotanist Searches for New Medicines in the Amazon Rain Forest], the
rainforest is one for obvious reasons. My new book shows that coral reefs are drawing even more attention than the rainforest.
Now it’s interesting that you mention the desert because the organization that I run is the Amazon Conservation Team but one
of our major programs is in the Sonoran desert. It is headed by my good friend and colleague Gary Nabham. Although this is
one of the most difficult and challenging environments on the planet, local and indigenous people have figured out how to
ecolive from it. One of the ways they’ve been able to do that is by understanding the resources and managing them wisely.
Now if you were a plant and want to survive in the desert, you have to be tough and be able to protect yourself. These people’s
lives depend on knowing this ecosystem. Why not look to them to not only understand it but also to protect and even use it?

Can we find an organism in nature that will alleviate the threat of antibiotic resistance?
We desperately need to solve the antibiotic resistance crisis and nature may hold the key.

Plotkin: I really do believe we’re at a crisis point. There is a bug called Staph aureus that you may have heard of and there is a
bug that you may or may not have heard of called Vancomycin-resistant enterococcus (VRE). If VRE transfers its Vancomycin
resistance to Staph aureus, we are toast. It is going to melt the human species like a wax museum on fire. Doctors have gone
from concerned to worried to verging on frightened in some cases. These are quotes now; I’m not making this up. We
desperately need new drugs for drug-resistant Staph, drug resistant enterococcus, and all these other drug-resistant bacteria that
are out there, gram negative and gram positive.

It’s interesting that you mention the word “organism” to treat this. We tend to think of antibiotics as things that come from
microbes. There is an even more exciting, or at least as exciting, development and that is the use of tiny tiny tiny viruses called
bacteriophages. Bacteriophages eat bacteria. They were developed in France and in Soviet Georgia in the 30’s and, guess what,
the Russians and Georgians have never stopped using this stuff. There is, in fact, evidence that Russian troops in Chechnya are
still using bacteriophages. Certainly the Soviet soldiers carried them into World War II so it is clear that these things can be
effective. There are several startup companies now in the U.S. and in parts of Europe investigating bacteriophages as a source
of new treatments for drug-resistant bacteria. They are claiming phenomenal rates of success. So it’s that mixture of nature and
science, which promises so much for the future.

Does nature have many more secrets for us to unravel?
Conclusion: Biodiversity education is very important since there is still much to discover in nature.

Plotkin: Yes and that is there’s so much to be learned from biodiversity. I run into kids that feel, “Oh well, the world is already
explored and there’s nothing left to do. Maybe we have to go to other planets to do this stuff.” They need to know that new
technologies make it possible to explore realms of our world, whether it’s deep-sea vents or soil fungi, in ways never before
possible. We need to get kids excited about science and biodiversity because, if they’re not, they will go into fields like the
computer sciences, thinking that’s where the action or money is. Bringing this knowledge not only to schoolchildren but also to
people who have an even shorter attention span, like Congress, is extremely important.

Questions-




--> Then Explain more. (tell how or why, give examples or other details, etc.) ETC.


________________________.
--> Then Explain more. (tell how or why, give examples or other details, etc.) ETC.



A Case Study: Nanotechnology
It’s a Small World Indeed
Written by Kelli Hazzard
Overview

And you thought the Jetson’s and Star Trek were science fiction! Imagine being able to
rearrange the atoms from your trash to make a steak or being able to turn coal into a diamond!
Although these things may seem far-fetched they really point to the current and future frontiers
of science. You may ask how such things are possible and the answer is Nanoscience and
Nanotechnology (NT). As the prefix implies, ‘nano’ refers to science and technology on a scale
that is very, very small – less than 100
nanometers (to put it in perspective, a human hair measures about 80,000 nanometers in
diameter!). More specifically, nanoscience is the study of phenomena and their effects on the
properties of material at atomic, molecular and macromolecular levels, where properties differ
significantly from those at a larger scale. Nanotechnologies (also referred to as molecular
manufacturing) refers to the design, characterization, production and application of structures,
devices and systems that exploit the effects by controlling shape and size and properties.

Nanoscience and nanotechnology encompass a range of techniques rather than a single
discipline, and stretch across the whole spectrum of science, touching medicine, physics,
engineering and chemistry. “The dream of nanotechnology is to build things the
way nature does, atom by atom and molecule by molecule (Bow, 2005).” The technology
involves developing tiny electromechanical devices in order to manipulate material at the atomic
level. The general idea is that everything is made up of atoms whose properties are based on
how these atoms are arranged. For example, the air we breathe is composed primarily of
oxygen, carbon dioxide, and nitrogen and these elements can be found in countless physical
products. Conceivably, nanoscience could determine the properties that would result from
particular arrangements of atoms and then
nanotechnology will take these fundamental atomic building blocks and physically rearrange
them into different products, materials, and technologies. Nanocomputers (no bigger than
bacteria) and nanomachines (nanites) could become molecular assemblers and dis-assemblers
that build, repair, or tear down any physical or biological objects.“Nanotechnology is the way of
ingeniously controlling the building of small and large structures, with intricate properties; it is
the way of the future, a way of precise, controlled building, with incidentally, environmental
benignness built in by design.”
(Ronald Hoffmann Cornell University, Chemistry Nobel Prize Winner). Working on the nano
scale is not a new concept. In 1959, physicist Richard Fenman, imagined an individual could
write the whole of Encyclopedia Britannica on the head of a pin. Feynman is credited as the first
individual to imagine and write about the possibility of manipulating material at the scale of
individual atoms and molecules. "The principles of physics, as far as I can see, do not speak
against the possibility of maneuvering things
atom by atom (Feynman, 1959)." However, the ability to achieve this ‘maneuvering’ wasn’t
realized until more recently because of advances in microscopy such as the scanning tunneling
microscope (STM) developed in 1981, optical tweezers, and electron beam techniques.

There are two significant factors that make nano-materials so appealing and potentially powerful.
One factor is that the smaller the object, the higher its surface-tovolume ratio (the reason why
we have so many cells in our body!) and this makes nanoparticles more reactive, more powerful
as catalysts, and more sensitive to sensors.

In addition, as the size of matter is reduced, quantum effects become important and can
significantly change a material’s optical, magnetic, or electrical properties. Nanotechnology is
about having the tools to work on the molecular level in the same way we have tools to work at
the macro-world level.

Sounds Cool But, What Really is the Big Deal?

Advances in nanotechnology could have applications in materials, electronics,
information/communication technology, and medicine. Some individuals close to the technology
believe this field is almost limitless in its potential and espouse it could reform society as we
know it by:

Meeting global energy needs with clean energy solutions – ability to create
‘indestructible’ solar cells that could be painted on surfaces and production of fuel without
pollution
Healing the environment – nanorobots could sweep the oceans, disassembling pollutants and
decontaminating water, while other could scrub the air in a similar fashion and still others could
restore forests and species

Increasing the health and longevity of human life – ability to develop nanorobots that can
repair the body at the cellular level – AIDS, cancer, wrinkles, arthritis and even genetic diseases
could be a thing of the past, drug development

Introduction of new materials and manufacturing - virtually anything allowed by the laws of
nature could be manufactured without labor or polluting factories. “Smart materials” that are
strong, light and with the ability to assemble and repair and restore themselves. Eric Drexler
provides the image of a rocket engine that not only repairs itself but changes shape like muscle
tissue as different requirements of thrust, force, and aerodynamics come into play.
Disassemblers would include natural
tools like enzymes, ions and free radicals

Maximizing the productivity of agriculture – food could be grown to feed the world that doesn’t
require as much space or inputs (fertilizers, insecticides)

Making powerful information/communication technology available everywhere – size would be
small and there would be no need for infrastructure therefore extremely small and powerful
computers will be cheap and abundant, available to even the poorest people.

Enabling the development of space – because of the size, nanotechnology would be very
cheap to send into space. Conceivably, advanced nano-devices could quickly prepare planets
for human occupation by building structures, changing the composition of the atmosphere or
performing other critical tasks; while nanomedicine could customize the human body for space
travel and perhaps even for tolerating other atmospheres.

Nanotechnology Today

Although it will still be some time before nanotechnology revolutionizes a variety of
applications and as predicted, our way of life, there have already been some significant
advances:

Nature of Science knowledge handouts and notes

Nature of Science knowledge handouts and notes

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Ähnlich wie Nature of Science knowledge handouts and notes

Ähnlich wie Nature of Science knowledge handouts and notes (20)

Mehr von Ghaundar

Mehr von Ghaundar (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Nature of Science knowledge handouts and notes