Are people loosing interest in scientific news? I found this downright frightning.

I think for the most part if people have already identified various News Feeds as trustworthy, they are more likely to not search for alternative feeds.

For instance Twitter feeds can be used to output current news and with many Science News sites this is done (in fact some of them are subscribed to on the sciforums twitter) [which doesn't have many feeds from the Sciforums moderators or team currently], then there are specific bloggers that might piece together things that they find interesting either as a Hobbiest or again paid for by various media groups, finally you have various online magazines and components to national news outlets, for instance some might go directly to companies like Reuters, BBC, CNN.

Just remember Google != Internet (It just Cache's most of it)

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I think the opposite...I see a surge of interest in science...
I'm not much of a tv watcher but the other day, I was surfing through the cable menu and a number of interesting shows were on the roster dealing with science. The shows were tackling some complex ideas relating to the solar system. Shows as in plural. I was pleased.

This is not the sole barometer to judge this but scientific interest isn't dead.

It gave me some renewed hope in mankind.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I know that I am less likely to search for science news since much of it these days is pseudo scientific cr@p.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Personally, I do not use Google as a Search Engine. Regardless of their notoriety as the king of data miming, the results seem to be more commercial (as in SELLING) or as just another source of mainstream media.
Most of the scientifically inquisitive people I know personally, use alternative search engines.
As an aside, it seriously bothers me how many posters on this site cite Wiki-pedia as a knowledge base. (...site cite...not sure I have ever typed that combination of words before !!)
More to the point of the OP's post - "sheople" seem more inclined to "repeat" than to "research" - hence Google or Wiki-pedia enables them to repeat what all the other "sheople" have already accepted.
In today's American culture, the person "who marches to a different drummer" or actually "chooses to think for themselves" is more often than not, ostracized or referred to as a "know it all", "loony", "conspiracy theorist" or any number of terms to marginalize their existence.
That being said, "knowledge" seems to be something that "sheople" are allergic to.
In the 1960's I heard something along the lines of; "...if you do not program your own mind, the world will program it for you...", these days, all the "sheople" will tell you how hard it is to learn "programming", yet those same "sheople" are so easily programmed!!
But hey, these are only the incoherent ramblings of some "kook" who chooses to call himself the "dumbest man on earth" - the really knowledgeable "sheople" will kick back, take another big pull off of the "Kool-Aid" teat, and Google Kardashian or check Wiki for "facts" on the Royal baby.
'nuf sed.

 

Which alternative search engines do you think are best for scientific research? And why?

 

As a general search engine (all around daily use), I prefer http://www.dogpile.com/ . When something really piques my interest, I usually log onto University libraries I guess you would call them - University of Michigan seems to be a good starting point, more often than not.
Have had a few associates refer me to http://www.scirus.com/srsapp/, and it seems to return decent results, although a lot of those results end up being a little over my head. I am nearly 60 years old and have not been in the mainstream of Academics for more than two decades.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/ used to have quite a bit of their Archives on-line - but I must confess that some of the more interesting stuff (to me anyways) seems to have been removed to make "server space" for newer stuff over the last 5 or 6 years. Prices go up as subscriptions go down - as the InterWeb marches on.
Encyclopedia Britannica ( http://www.britannica.com/ } is a capable jumping off point for the most part.
What I was trying to say was that Google seems to refer me to sites that I can "purchase" what ever I type into the search box.
But, remember now, these are only my personal opinions and your own individual "mileage may vary".

As an aside, without claiming anything to assist in my teleportation to the fantastic government sponsored permanent vacation paradise south of Key West, whispers have been heard referencing something called Underweb or Deepweb. But hey, the aforementioned "loonies" or "conspiracy theorists" have to have something to entice them to come out of mom and dad's basement and irritate/harass TPTB, right. If you listen to that sort of less than human organism, you could be led to believe that "true knowledge" is tightly controlled and seldom disseminated.

Me personally, my favorite flavor of Kool-Aid is Grape, though sometimes, I like to get a really wild and will guzzle Lime. **** I only included the previous paragraph because this is, after all http://www.sciforums.com/. ****
Later, dmoe

 

Despite the apparent anti-google tilt here, have you tried Google Scholar?

 

"Despite the apparent anti-google tilt..."
I was trying not to express an "apparent anti-google tilt" - I actually wanted to express an overt, intense Google dislike! I have a deep dislike for the consumer driven "Corpocracy" that this country has become.
Whenever I had used Google for searches - I detected an "apparent tilt" by google that anything typed into the search box was something that I wanted to purchase. As a younger man, using the index at the library never referred me to a sales brochure.
As I stated earlier, as an all around search engine, I personally preferred Dogpile. Even Dogpile produces consumer responses to queries - but good information links can usually be found within the first dozen links. I found myself clicking through 2 or 3 pages full of links with google and more often than not having to rephrase my search query, sometimes multiple times, just to find the information I was seeking.
As far as Google Scholar, I have never tried it. If at some future point, the methods I currently use fail, I will give it a shot, possibly.
If you use Google or Google Scholar and are pleased with those search engines performance - please continue to be happy with that. If something works great for you there is no reason to change it. As I stated earlier, my processes seem to satisfy me at this juncture - and any individual's "mileage may vary" with any search technique.
The OP broached a subject (science) that has always been dear to me. 6 to 7 years ago, my browsing history would have contained science query searches to Google, no longer. Could very well be that other people also found their "science" queries on Google producing unsatisfactory results and found alternate routes to get that information.
I had a Physics professor tell me years ago; " You can lead a Horse to water - but you can't make it drink. Also you can lead a Man to knowledge- but you can't make him think." . That professor is probably in his mid to late 80's now, would be interesting to know if he prefers Google.
Later,dmoe

 

Are people loosing interest in scientific news? I found this downright frightning.:
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


What's that old saying about familiarity breeding contempt?
People also lost interest after the first Apollo Moon landing...It took a near tragedy in Apollo 13 [just the third attempt] to revive some interest.
People take the running of the Universe, our galaxy, the solar system, and the Sun/Earth/Moon system for granted.
It needs some spectacular occurrence, like a near catastrophe, or other unusual happening like an eclipse nudge the media into publishing the episode.
Walk the streets and ask random people if they know how many operational rovers are at present on Mars.........
Ask them if they are aware of Cassini or the "New Horizons"probe on its way to Pluto.
Yes, it is rather sad..........

 

Fraggle Rocker, first off, excellent post! (Post #31) I saw no need to "Reply With Quote".
I must confess that I am not sure that I am, indeed, of your generation. (b. 1956) I am, by reading you Post(s), sure that you actually think before stating (writing/typing) your views. So, hopefully, we can enjoy a camaraderie in, at the very least, that respect.
The "sheople" I speak of in today's United States are, in my view, are not the average or ordinary person. These "sheople" are the persons who consider themselves above the ordinary or average person because they consider themselves "knowledgeable, well informed, critical thinkers" - and are quick to point this out to anyone they encounter.
The distinction I make between true knowledgeable, well informed critical thinkers and "sheople", is that these "sheople" have actually, in my view, opted or chosen or through ignorance, let other people do the actual critical thinking for them.
Intellectual progress is, not only nice, but preferred.You stated that 200 years ago about 99% of the population were illiterate farmers. Have you happened upon any of the Late 18th Early 19th century, Eighth grade Tests that are available on the Internet?
They would seem to indicate A "dumbing down", or "stagnation" of the intellectual progress of the average or ordinary United States citizen. Also, our status in all the academics, relative to the rest of the world, has seemed to be steadily declining since the 50's and 60's.
I also agree that peace and civil rights are of paramount importance, but I am not sure that our elected (or selected!) representatives in our government feel the same way, even as they claim that is what they are striving for. As is par for the course though, a politicians words rarely match their actions.
The Electronic Revolution has, indeed, quickly changed the world. Not, in all respects, necessarily, for the better. The Internet, while allowing instantaneous communication and establishing virtual "friends" from around the world, has also made for the easier and quicker dissemination of misinformation, disinformation, lies and propaganda throughout the world.
It also seems to me that libraries (for at least decades, if not centuries, the repository and source of FREE knowledge and information) are shutting down, and being replaced by "virtual facsimiles". Of course we can no longer walk or ride our mules to these "virtual libraries". we must now pay, at the very least, for an Internet connection, if not a monthly or yearly subscription fee for access to this knowledge or information. Ah, the wonders of a Consumer Driven Economy!
I must also confess to being in utterly full and complete agreement with your final statement. :
"Sure it would be nice if people knew more about science, but it's even more important that they know more about each other. That's the path to peace."
But, to me at least, it does not appear to be the path our Government (and the "sheople"they are herding!) has chosen to take!
Later, dmoe

p.s. Real Rock and Roll is, indeed, "the bee's knees" and what us true "hep cats" will always thoroughly enjoy!!

 

I don't try to learn anything too significant from WP without following it's references anymore. I used to find myself surfing it for hours and would eventually end up reading about things that were about 15 times removed from the original topic of interest, but I don't do that quite so often anymore. Instead I find myself reading the articles that the entries are based on, and hunting them down when I encounter broken links (which I typically fix of course). What I have discovered from doing this is not so much that Wikipedia is often wrong, but that the cited material doesn't always make a strong case for it's factual accuracy. I mean I often see references used that are of a caliber that I would consider inadequate even for a good old casual forum debate, although they might nonetheless technically meet some minimum standard.

But none of this really diminishes the usefulness of WP for me since even if references were the only thing I read, where else would I have such easy access to so many of them?

 

Fraggle Rocker, again no need to RWQ.
!. - Okay, "War Baby" / "Baby Boomer" - then again there has always been something about being a"Boomer" that I find irksome.
2. - Think then speak - should be a universal law!!
3. - sheeple/sheople - the people who just went where everyone else went and did what everyone else did and thought what everyone else thought. - my same basic definition, but the "sheople" I describe think that doing that makes them "special" or "better". Advertising has led most "sheople" to perceive themselves as people who "march to their own drum". People who truly, actually do "march to their own drum" can never be "sheople".
4. - 8th grade tests - You should check them out and look at what is actually being taught in todays schools. I've met young college graduates who act like they have been asked to figure the cube root of Jello when faced with trying to figure out what 15% of $2.00 is.
5. - average citizens - They could figure how much seed they needed for how many acres with pencil and paper. Today people can not figure out how many square feet of carpet they need to cover a 12' by 16' room, with a calculator.
6. - academic status - Possibly, but we are lagging behind not only the Developed Nations, but also Third World ones.
7. - peace/civil rights - FEAR - CORRECT - CORRECT - CORRECT!!! Believe me, you do not want to get me started on that!
8. - new technology - Not the skepticism part. The over selling. The over-reliance. The direct to neural advertising tricks used to sell so much more than unneeded consumer goods. Whole scale subliminal programming.
9. - burning books - Let us pray that Ray Bradbury's "Fahrenheit 451" never becomes a reality! Agree with all else - but also quicker, easier access to mis/dis information.
10. - Consumer Driven Economy - Do I have to mention shrinking/disappearing warranties or planned obsolescence?
11. - World Governments - Walk Away - Not as easy as it used to be only a few decades ago. Immigration/Emigration laws are changing quickly.Not to mention the cost of actually moving, as George Carlin put it, "Stuff".
12. - Paradigm Shift - The cost of living is moving us from a 40 hour workweek with benefits to....?!! More part-time, less pay, less/higher employee cost/no benefits. Obama-Care ?!!!

The rest, I will leave for another time - (lost children/lost generation!!!)
I do, however, continue to have faith and maintain what few principles I am still allowed to exercise!

I will leave with a link in reference to #1. : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEEjeoRmmAA

Later, dmoe

p.s. as a writer, did the spelling of "frightning" catch your attention - I thought "frightening", but then I am an "Ohiobilly", as my friends on The Upper Peninsula, call me.

 

Maybe the answer is to encourage magazine articles in high school programs

I've had subscriptions to Popular Mechanics , Omni ( remember the start of the science mag. ) , Discovery , Equinox etc. They gave a wide variety of topics

Perhaps the first year of high school should have a " Science " class , with magazines as the basis for exposure TO science and then encourage original thinking

 

I thought it was fascinating to see that the most searches for science news were between July - September.

 

I think were all right and wrong...were looking for one "answer" in a endless infinite of infinite answers. Like comparing science and religion...why is it one or the other? why not the possibility of both and everything inbetween and beyond? if the science weve "created" exist then the "gods" we've created must also exist. That also means every idea ever spawned in my/your "imagination" would also have to exist but yet at the same time it doesnt.