• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Need a Good Source for Basic General Science Information

Wowbagger

The Infinitely Prolonged
Wowbagger
Joined
Feb 2, 2006
Messages
15,660
Location
Westchester County, NY (when not in space)
...not for myself, but...

I have run into a few folks, every now and then, who were simply never taught very much about science in general. They don't even know the steps in the basic scientific method, what constitutes good quality experimentation and evidence, the scientific definitions of "theory" and "law", etc.

I try to tell them that science is abou building models, not finding The Truth. And, they either say "well, that's just your opinion" or "what good is that?!".

And, these are adults.

So, I need a good source to refer them to: Either a book or a web site, that can summarize, for them, all of this information about general science. And, I don't want to insult them, by giving them a children's book.

Not all of them are religious nuts. Some of them are not even very religious, they just don't know anything about this stuff. And, it is often not their fault. They may have simply had bad teachers, or something.

Where can they go?

Thanks!
 
Wowbagger, I think Carl Sagan's The Demon Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark might be just what you're looking for.
 
Last edited:
"A Short History of Nearly Everything" by Bill Bryson is long, but good. One can read just those chapters of interest.

Do you have a specific topic in mind?
 
JJM said:
"A Short History of Nearly Everything" by Bill Bryson is long, but good. One can read just those chapters of interest.
Click to expand...

I didn't particularly like that. Bill Bryson is a writer, not a scientist, and it shows. It's far from the worst popular science book around, but it had far too many little mistakes and inaccuracies for me to recommend it to anyone.

Personally, I'd recommend the Science of Discworld series. Co-written by Terry Pratchett with Ian Stewart and Jack Cohen, so it manages to have good science while still being well written and easily accessible. Importantly, it not only explains exactly why not everything it says is exactly correct, it even tries to point out when that is the case. I think most science books would benefit from being more honest about what is fact, what is simplification, what is still debated and what is simply opinion. The only real problem is that if you don't know the Discworld books, it might not be anywhere as near as good a read.
 
Mel Odious said:
Wowbagger, I think Carl Sagan's The Demon Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark might be just what you're looking for.
Click to expand...
That is a good idea. I remember it was written well.

Though, I don't remember if it really has such a comprehensive overview of the practice of science. I shall look at it, again.

JJM said:
Do you have a specific topic in mind?
Click to expand...
Not really. Just something like a "Practice of Science 101" course, that applies to all the more specific scientific topics.
 
Cuddles said:
Personally, I'd recommend the Science of Discworld series. Co-written by Terry Pratchett with Ian Stewart and Jack Cohen, so it manages to have good science while still being well written and easily accessible. Importantly, it not only explains exactly why not everything it says is exactly correct, it even tries to point out when that is the case. I think most science books would benefit from being more honest about what is fact, what is simplification, what is still debated and what is simply opinion. The only real problem is that if you don't know the Discworld books, it might not be anywhere as near as good a read.
Click to expand...


although I love Discworld and have read the Science of... series too many times.. I would not recommend these. First to enjoy the Wizards of Unseen University bits, you need to enjoy and know enough of the regular discworld novels... Some people just hate fantasy books.
Second the Science bit is most likely too difficult for the people wowbagger has in mind.

They are still excellent books,but I wouldn't recommend them to beginners
 
I specially know about a video on a Lecture about The Importance of Mathematics by Thimothy Gowers on 2000, although it talks on mathematics, some principles can also be applied in science and it nails really good why apparently foolish and useless research is very important. It may not really help you allot but it is the best I can d in a short notice.
 
Wowbagger said:
So, I need a good source to refer them to: Either a book or a web site, that can summarize, for them, all of this information about general science.
Click to expand...

Wowbagger,

I have some suggestions for you. I see that you live in the U.S., where many libraries use the Library of Congress classification system. You should have a good research library near you, so I recommend examining the Q 160's ("Science -- Popular Works"). I just did this and found several books that might be what you're looking for, but you know your audience much better than I do and might find something even better.

  • How the World Works, by Boyce Rensberger (1986) I read much of this a few months ago. It's written in a clear, accessible style, and is one of those reference-like books that you can just spend an afternoon jumping around in. Kind of like the Web on paper. The first chapter is an introduction to the scientific method. Next are brief synopses of the twenty-four most significant scientific advances. The rest is a mini-encyclopedia of many scientific matters.

I haven't read the next few books, but they might be the kind of thing you're looking for.

  • Science Matters, by Robert M. Hazen and James Trefil (1991) This looked interesting enough for me to check out of the library.

  • Asimov's New Guide to Science, by some guy named "Asimov" (1984) This appears to be the last of four editions. But this is an Asimov, so it's 884 pages :eek: (not counting the index and such). Your friends might find this intimidating, but it looks pretty comprehensive.

  • The Physical Universe, by Konrad B. Krauskopf and Arthur Beiser (8th edition, 1997) This appears to be a textbook, probably college undergraduate level or maybe for advanced high school seniors. The first chapter is about the scientific method, then subsequent chapters follow a continuum through physics, chemistry, geosciences, and cosmology. Lots of color illustrations.
Are any of your friends interested in astronomy? One other book I'd recommend is Astronomy: How Man Learned About the Universe, by Lou Williams Page (1969) This is rather out-of-date in some respects, but since it looks at the history of astronomy it's still functional. I enjoyed this book because it took a view of astronomical discoveries as processes. It shows that facts aren't just dropped into the heads of geniuses. Rather, it shows your Copernicus's and Einsteins encountering odd observations, and working through to the answers. It looks at how these people (and many other famous names) figured out how to figure things out.

While traipsing through the Q 160's, I also found some science popularizing books from the mid-nineteenth century. They are, of course, out of date, and perhaps for less advanced readers, but it's interesting how authors were creating "improving books" on technical matters that long ago.

  • Peterson's Familiar Science, or the Scientific Explanation of Common Things, ed. by R.E. Peterson (1857). This is an odd book. It's just a series of nearly two-thousand questions and their answers. There are later editions, but the one from 1857 is available at Google Books.

  • The Parlour Book, by William Martin. I couldn't find a year, but it looks early- to mid-19th C. It's for children. Nice illustrations, which the Google Books version does not do justice to.

  • On the Improvement of Society by the Diffusion of Knowledge, by Thomas Dick, LL.D. (1833) There were later editions, as well. Dick appears to have been a minister and a science teacher who tried to accommodate these fields to each other. For example, compare Sections I and VI of this book, via Google Books. Interesting.

Wowbagger said:
Can anyone suggest any good web sites?
Click to expand...

For online material, various Wikipedia Textbooks are under construction, at varying degrees of completion. I don't know if or how they check the information, so YMMV. http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Main_Page

Meanwhile, a more expert-driven alternative is Citizendium, which is still in beta. They do already have a lot of material up, though. http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Welcome_to_Citizendium

Anyway, there's more than you wanted to know. But maybe it will get you pointed in the right direction.
 
Some online sources for various topics

Medical: Mayo Clinic, CDC, Medscape
http://www.mayoclinic.com/
http://www.cdc.gov/http://www.pitt.edu/~super1/
http://www.medscape.com/home
http://www.choice.com.au/subCat.aspx?id=100328&p=1&catId=100232

How the body works:
http://health.howstuffworks.com/immune-system8.htm
http://www.cellsalive.com/


How anything works:
http://www.mysteryinvestigators.com/
http://www.howstuffworks.com/
http://www.pitt.edu/~super1/


Evolution Topics:
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/
http://www.scienceweek.com/2002/sw021122.htm
http://www.noanswersingenesis.org.au
http://www.aibs.org/evolution-initiatives/

Debunking:
http://www.rebuildyourback.com/chiropractic/school.php
http://www.ncahf.org/digest04/index.html
http://www.chirowatch.com/Chiro-anti-vax/News/sram2001opposition.htm
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2006/10/your_friday_dose_of_woo_these_boots_were_1.php
 
G-K-4 said:
You should have a good research library near you, so I recommend examining the Q 160's ("Science -- Popular Works").
(snip)
Click to expand...
Ah, yes, I shoud look into that section, one of these days! Thanks for the reminder!

Eos of the Eons said:
Some online sources for various topics
(snip)
Click to expand...
Thanks for the URLs, Eos! I knew most of those already, but the ones I didn't know of, I am sure will come in useful, when I confront medical claims. (possibly soon, too)

I think what would be most useful to me, would be a basic outline of science: The method, a list of most of the properties of good science, a list of fallacies to avoid, etc.

I started outlining material like that. Perhaps I should finish that up, and build my dream source of basic science info, myself!
 
"Cartoon Guides" by Larry Gonick, for specific topics. His books are entertaining, clearly-written, insightful and accurate. He usually (always? I have not read all his books) develops topics from a historical perspective; which is an excellent way for students to learn science. I have given his books to my teenage nieces and nephews; but I have read and appreciated them, myself.
 
Wowbagger said:
Ah, yes, I shoud look into that section, one of these days! Thanks for the reminder!
Click to expand...

You're quite welcome. It's never a bad idea to visit the library.


Wowbagger said:
I started outlining material like that. Perhaps I should finish that up, and build my dream source of basic science info, myself!
Click to expand...

If you do complete this, please share it with us. I'd be interested in it, too.
 
The first few chapters of Feynman's Lectures on Physics give a good overview of science in general, I think. They're also available separately, and less expensively, in the book Six Easy Pieces.
 
geni said:
For calibration what is the problem with wikipedia in this case?
Click to expand...
When you look up "Science" for instance, it goes right off the bat about the etymology of the word, and the history, before it gets to the method. All that stuff is no doubt fascinating, but will probably drown out the reason I would present its URL to folks.

I suppose the article about the Scientific Method is not so bad.

But, none of them deal with the concept of "provisional model building", the properties of good science, or the fallacies it tries to avoid.

Though, I could point them to the Fallact article separately. Everything seems too disparate.
 
Wowbagger said:
When you look up "Science" for instance, it goes right off the bat about the etymology of the word, and the history, before it gets to the method. All that stuff is no doubt fascinating, but will probably drown out the reason I would present its URL to folks.

I suppose the article about the Scientific Method is not so bad.

But, none of them deal with the concept of "provisional model building", the properties of good science, or the fallacies it tries to avoid.

Though, I could point them to the Fallact article separately. Everything seems too disparate.
Click to expand...

Right. So you want them to learn about the scientific method? You realise that they will just find out about Feyerabend and you will be back where you started?

You are not doing a very good job at describeing what you what to do. You appear to want to teach them that science is objective and follows the model of falsificationism. Which sounds good but isn't actualy true (scientific methods tend towards "Complete, Consistent, Non-trivial. Choose two").

A fairly effective aproach is to find an area they are interested in and expand from that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom