Chris and Matt just announced their tour as well as a scienceblogs.com page dedicated solely to Speaking Science 2.0. You can check out the original blogospheric responses here (there have been only a few comments since I quit updating that post - most of the debate was highjacked by the interesting, but unrelated, discussion of the fight between religion and reason).
- Log in to post comments
More like this
It is with great regret that I am writing this. Scienceblogs.com has been a big part of my life for four years now and it is hard to say good bye.
Everything that follows is my own personal thinking and may not apply to other people, including other bloggers on this platform. The new contact…
Via sekrit, in the Journal of Science Communication, comes a deeply flawed article, Science blogging: an exploratory study of motives, styles, and audience reactions by Merja Mahrt and Cornelius Puschmann. The flaw, you'll be unsurprised to learn, is that it doesn't mention "stoat". I'm not sure…
A few days ago, Nature launched its newest Web 2.0 baby, the Nature Precedings.
It is very interesting to see the initial responses, questions and possible misunderstandings of the new site, so browse through these posts and attached comments by Pedro Beltrao, Timo Hannay, Peter Suber (and again…
UPDATED:
Happy to announce that @Dnlee5 post is now back up: http://t.co/XVentvp35T #SciAmBlogs
— Bora Zivkovic (@BoraZ) October 14, 2013
This is a very interesting and important question, and it probably requires more context than I have the ability or time to give, but I think it is worth…