Suggestion for Some Christian Newspaper??

Originally posted by Mindset
Science isn't prone to speculation and exaggeration?

No, it's not. There are example of both in science but it is not prone to either, certainly not in the way or to the level that the news is. The process of peer review weeds out the worst speculation (whereas news editors tend to remove things that don't exaggerate enough, which is one of the reasons scientists hate science journalism).

I don't mean to be such a downer, but science has lots of both speculation and exaggeration.

Sym is right, it is nowhere close to what a news program would have, but the only empirical part of a scientific paper comes in the methods and results section, the remainder of the paper is essentially a narrative where you sell your own speculation on what your results mean, and often exaggerate either the importance of one's own findings or how well previous literature supports your own speculation.

Main reason, scientists have to put food on the table too, and it is publish or perish.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
No, it's not. There are example of both in science but it is not prone to either, certainly not in the way or to the level that the news is. The process of peer review weeds out the worst speculation (whereas news editors tend to remove things that don't exaggerate enough, which is one of the reasons scientists hate science journalism).

Originally posted by Mindset
well, science journalism would fall under the umbrella of science.

how could that possibly be true?

I can't tell if you're serious or not.

I'll assume you are; they are using scientific studies, to write their science based articles, while talking about science in their science publications.

You could say science journalism is equivalent to tabloids, but they are still part of their respective categories: science and news.

So...a magazine that's about football....is football?

Originally posted by Bardock42
So...a magazine that's about football....is football?

Is a biology textbook science?

Originally posted by Mindset
I can't tell if you're serious or not.

I'll assume you are; they are using scientific studies, to write their science based articles, while talking about science in their science publications.

You could say science journalism is equivalent to tabloids, but they are still part of their respective categories: science and news.

science isn't a topic or genre, it is a method of investigation

Originally posted by Mindset
Your analogy doesn't fit.

Is a biology textbook science?

no

a good textbook will cite science, but for something to be science, it has to be testing things in a specific experimental method.

Originally posted by Mindset
Your analogy doesn't fit.

Is a biology textbook science?

Is a chemistry textbook chemistry?
Is a history textbook history?
Is a business administration textbook business administration?

I'm sorry, I think my analogies aren't doing their job. The answer is "no, no it is not".

Originally posted by inimalist
science isn't a topic or genre, it is a method of investigation

[b]no

a good textbook will cite science, but for something to be science, it has to be testing things in a specific experimental method. [/B]

Originally posted by Mindset
And if that method of investigation is chronicled in writing, that writing isn't science?

no, I would say not

so, when Kuhn or lakatos are writing about the scientific method, they aren't doing science

No, I mean when an experiment is done, and they chronicle what procedures they underwent and their findings, would that writing not be considered science?

no

EDIT: for instance, there is no IV or DV in the work reporting on science, whereas the science will have both of these

What would it be classified as?

science journalism?

Science journalism is not the same as the example I presented.

Maybe I'm not explaining myself well.

Take a science paper, remove everything except for the data, is that science journalism; that's not what I've seen displayed as science journalism.

are you talking about a researcher writing up the results of their own experiment then?

because that is science, as they have run an experiment and are reporting on it

what makes something science is the fact they are running an experiment of some kind, with certain parameters on how that experiment should be run

Originally posted by inimalist
are you talking about a researcher writing up the results of their own experiment then?

because that is science, as they have run an experiment and are reporting on it

what makes something science is the fact they are running an experiment of some kind, with certain parameters on how that experiment should be run

And if that writing were to be put into a magazine would it then cease to be science?

Yes opinion could and probably would be added to it, but that doesn't mean it's no longer science, imo, it's just "bad" science. Just like my example of a tabloid compared to news, it's still news, but it's bastardized.

it depends on how much you would consider a proper "peer-review" as part of science

I can run some subjects in my basement and publish that in a book, but imho, that hardly counts as science, because I'm not allowing my work to be scrutinized by other experts in the field. Depending on what type of editorial policy exists at the magazine, you might have just described the actual process that scientists undergo to get their work published

Originally posted by Mindset
science journalism would fall under the umbrella of science.

In my experience science journalism tends to be as close to real science as Star Trek is.

A scientific journal (where scientists announce their findings in a formal way) could be called science, but that's vastly different from a newspaper or network.