Topic: Podcast Interview suggestions

[believeitornot]

1up for Naomi Oreskes and/or Erik M. Conway, authors of "Merchants of Doubt".

[lukebourassa]

I wanted to suggest interviewing Michael A. Nielsen, author of "Reinventing Discovery: The New Era of Networked Science."

I heard him on Science Friday. He's written a book about science being performed "more in public," so knowledge in science is much more like Wikipedia. On one hand, I think that's a great idea, since it seems to me that journal articles are too difficult to get for the lay person and that the infrastructure of science knowledge seems fairly antiquated and clunky. On the other hand, knowing that science is often politicized and that there are numerous individuals who would willfully wish to spread dis- and misinformation about certain scientific concepts and discoveries, I would wonder how this "more open" science would work.

Most people take for granted that Wikipedia should be viewed with a dose of skepticism, despite being constantly checked by the "hive." But a Science Wikipedia has potentially much more on the line than an article about Jim Carey, G.I. Joe toys, or the history of Baltimore.

[seaotter]

The preparing for armaggedan thing sounded interesting. Lots of cool crazy talk! No thanks

[cedric86]

I wanted to suggest interviewing Michael A. Nielsen, author of "Reinventing Discovery: The New Era of Networked Science."

I heard him on Science Friday. He's written a book about science being performed "more in public," so knowledge in science is much more like Wikipedia. On one hand, I think that's a great idea, since it seems to me that journal articles are too difficult to get for the lay person and that the infrastructure of science knowledge seems fairly antiquated and clunky. On the other hand, knowing that science is often politicized and that there are numerous individuals who would willfully wish to spread dis- and misinformation about certain scientific concepts and discoveries, I would wonder how this "more open" science would work.

Most people take for granted that Wikipedia should be viewed with a dose of skepticism, despite being constantly checked by the "hive." But a Science Wikipedia has potentially much more on the line than an article about Jim Carey, G.I. Joe toys, or the history of Baltimore.

Sounds like a very interesting guest, I'm downloading the Science Friday episode now. I think open science is a good idea, but I think there will always be a place for highly technical journal articles.

[seaotter]

The preparing for armaggedan thing sounded interesting. Lots of cool crazy talk! No thanks

Wow. More drunk posting evidence. Wrong thread.

[Mr. Pedantic]

I'd really like to hear some more interviews with professional science journalists. I really liked the interviews with John Rennie, Steve Mirsky, and the other people at SciAm, and it seems they have a lot of stories to tell and wisdom to impart.

Just my two cents.

[Lyk]

My favorite interviews are with people that have an unusual or surprising angle to the skeptical movement. I'd also like to see an interview about the global warming issue.

I'd therefore recommend to interview Admiral David Titley, chief oceanographer of the U.S. Navy. He is the head of a task force dealing with the implications of climate change to the DoD, both in terms of international security as well as in terms of more mundane consequences such as adapting naval infrastructure. There are a bunch of indie-interviews with him on youtube, so it might be worth trying to get him on the show.

Rear Admiral David Titley, US Navy, discusses climate change at COP17

TEDxPentagon - Rear Admiral David Titley, USN - Climate Change and National Security

For some reason he also reminds me of Steven Novella, but that's not the point.

[ST]

I known it has been said already, but Richard Dawkins! IMO the most inspiring science writer today. He has a rare ability to create enthusiasm for his subject.

Some other suggestions:

Daniel Dennett: Could be interesting due to conciousness and philosophy of science.

Nick Sagan: A son of Carl Sagan who somewhat goes in his father's footsteps.

Ann Druyan: For obvious reasons.

Larry Page and/or Sergey Brin: Yes, I'm serious. They have a background in (computer) science (and are stinking rich!) and Google has started to host an annual science fair in cooperation with Scientific American and National Geographic.

Barack Obama: If Jimmy Carter was possible, then why not? Obama has said he wants to restore science to its rightful place among other things. It could be worth asking him more closely exactly what that place is, in his view.

[OneBrownMouse]

I second Naomi Oreskes and/or Erik M. Conway, authors of "Merchants of Doubt".  Really good look into people misusing the term skeptic to drive a political agenda.

[Shadow Of A Doubt]

I saw a talk by Naomi Oreskes online a few years ago on global warming and it was really good. So consider her thirded.

[ufo]

Dr. Lawrence M. Krauss   -- rumor has it he has a new book out 

[cedric86]

Vincent Racaniello (website), host of This Week in Virology and a couple other excellent podcasts. I believe I've suggested him before, but it would be great to hear him summarize the recent issues surrounding the publication of the controversial H5N1 ("bird flu") research. He could also talk about the (false) XMRV/chronic fatigue connection, which is older news but I think would be of interest to SGU listeners. Or he could talk about vaccines, although that's sort of been done to death.

[xxi_centuryboy]

It would be interesting to hear Richard Dawkins interviewed for a variety of reasons. I am sure you have asked him on in the past, but he is such a controversial figure both respected and reviled by the skeptic community. It would be nice to hear him questioned on his science award going to Bill Maher, his comments on Rebecca's blog, and his theories of the Selfish gene in comparison to other theories of evolution. I am not so interested in his opinions on religion, that is tangential to science imho. Getting into the nitty gritty of the differences in modern evolutionary science would be a nice step forward since most of the podcasts cover fights over teaching evolution versus creationism, but I would rather hear about an in depth analysis of what evolution is and where modern evolutionary theory is going. Also Thomas Cathcart and Daniel Klein, the authors of the Philosophy series on Philogagging "Plato and a Platypus walk into a Bar" etc, would be fun as they seem to be philosophically experts on logic and reasoning.

[ST]

It would be interesting to hear Richard Dawkins interviewed for a variety of reasons. I am sure you have asked him on in the past, but he is such a controversial figure both respected and reviled by the skeptic community. It would be nice to hear him questioned on his science award going to Bill Maher, his comments on Rebecca's blog, and his theories of the Selfish gene in comparison to other theories of evolution. I am not so interested in his opinions on religion, that is tangential to science imho. Getting into the nitty gritty of the differences in modern evolutionary science would be a nice step forward since most of the podcasts cover fights over teaching evolution versus creationism, but I would rather hear about an in depth analysis of what evolution is and where modern evolutionary theory is going. Also Thomas Cathcart and Daniel Klein, the authors of the Philosophy series on Philogagging "Plato and a Platypus walk into a Bar" etc, would be fun as they seem to be philosophically experts on logic and reasoning.

Dawkins would certainly disagree with the bolded part, as he views the existence of God as a scientific hypothesis, and his understanding of evolution leads him to atheism. I think Dawkins in a hypothetical interview should be asked why he rejects NOMA, which I think all SGU rouges (except possibly Rebecca) endorse (but far from all scientists).

For the rest, I agree that all those questions you listed are of interest in a potential Dawkins interview.

[Had Matter]

I suggest you interview Eliezer Yudkowsky, rationalist, founder of Less Wrong and soon to be up and running Center for Modern Rationality.  He's also the author of the epic and amazingly entertaining fanfic Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality.

Thanks!