[Coral-List] coral starvation and new ideas
Gene Shinn
eshinn at marine.usf.edu
Thu Jun 8 09:10:54 EDT 2006
Like Alina Szmant I too enjoyed the coral
feeding/starvation discussion and also remember
the controversy from the 1960s when I thought Tom
Goreau Sr. had answered the question. I hope this
discussion helped Wade Lehmann who recently
asked, "where is current research focused" I
wanted to respond at the time but was tied up in
other things. Wade asked "Where does the field
need to be focused in the next 5-10 years in
order to progress." That is a very good question
(see little story at the end) but I would hope
that Wade answers that question and decides to do
what he thinks is important. That's the way
science advances. What really got my attention
was his question, "Is there a mechanism by which
the public can browse current NSF/NOAA/etc grant
funding to see where current funding has been
directed?" (again enjoy little story at the end).
For me this is a bothersome question. I can
appreciate a young scientist wanting to be funded
but it could be a mistake to go where the funding
is. I worry that too many researchers are
following well-worn paths and going where
management thinks we should go. This approach is
now pervasive in most all fields of science
today, especially in government. The key word
today is accountability which usually translates
into more paperwork, multiple forms, quarterly
reports, permit applications, and many paper
chores that have little to do with doing the
research. Of course we all want to be relevant
but accountability is the double-edged sword. I
worry about relevancy because what is thought to
be relevant is usually determined by a committee
or several layers of committees. New ideas that
advance science seldom come from committees. The
comments and work described by Ester Peters on
the coral-list sounds like original research that
I suspect was not decided upon by a committee, at
least not a government committee. So, in
conclusion I would hope Wade and others makes
these decisions based on their own ideas. I think
everyone will enjoy the little story I have
repeated below. It is an amusing yet sad story
written in 1948 by Leo Szilard, the man who
convinced Einstein to write the letter that
caused FDR to start the Manhattan project. I fear
too much of this story has come to past. Gene
Back to the Future
In the April 8, 2002 Chemistry and Engineering
News (vol. 80, No. 4) page 42 there is a story
titled, Politics, Culture, and Science: The
Golden Age Revisited, by Allen J. Bard. The story
is his acceptance speech for receiving the
Priestley Medal for chemistry. As the title
suggests, he devotes a lot of the article to
how-it-used-to-be, when kids could have Gilbert
Chemistry sets and other toys now banned for
being considered unsafe. Further in his
acceptance speech he says, and I quote,
"The situation is approaching that envisioned by
Leo Szilard in 1948 in his amusing story, The
Mark Gable Foundation, where the hero, sometime
in the future, is asked by a wealthy
entrepreneur, who believes that science has
progressed too quickly, what he should do to
retard this progress. The hero answers:
"You could set up a foundation, with an
annual endowment of thirty million dollars.
Researchers in need of funds could apply for
grants, if they could make a convincing case.
Have ten committees, each composed of twelve
scientists, appointed to pass on these
applications. Take the most active scientists out
of the laboratory and make them members of these
committees. First of all, the best scientists
would be removed from their laboratories and kept
busy on committees passing on applications for
funds. Secondly the scientific worker in need of
funds would concentrate on problems which were
considered promising and were pretty certain to
lead to publishable results By going after the
obvious, pretty soon science would dry out.
Science would become something like a parlor
game There would be fashions. Those who followed
the fashions would get grants. Those who wouldn't
would not."
That was 1948! If only Szilard could have
really predicted the future. He could have
envisioned lengthy conference calls and how
e-mail and the web would keep scientists out of
the lab while recycling old information and
filling out forms.
--
No Rocks, No Water, No Ecosystem (EAS)
------------------------------------ -----------------------------------
E. A. Shinn, Courtesy Professor
University of South Florida
Marine Science Center (room 204)
140 Seventh Avenue South
St. Petersburg, FL 33701
<eshinn at marine.usf.edu>
Tel 727
553-1158----------------------------------
-----------------------------------
More information about the Coral-List
mailing list