1. What is Science?
BIO 100

2. The nature of science Science: Science is essential:
A systematic process for learning about the world and testing our understanding of it
The accumulated body of knowledge that results from a dynamic process of observation, testing, and discovery
Science is essential:
To sort fact from fiction
Develop solutions to the problems we face

3. Six Criteria of Science
Consistent
Observable
Natural
Predictable
Testable
Tentative
Steven Dickhaus (1989)

4. Pseudoscience Appears scientific, but….
Uses scientific sounding jargon
Appears to conduct research
Usually more rhetoric than data: questions
Fails to follow scientific methods
Often faults “established scientific community” or claims a conspiracy against revealing “the truth.” What are we hiding?

5. Pseudoscience Extraordinary claims Claims usually lack substance
Pseudoscience is not necessarily fraud; just bad science.
Extraordinary claims
Claims usually lack substance
Practices bias confirmation
Often pushes particular agenda
Ignores contrary data
Value of data often exaggerated

6. Vaccines cause autism Fact or Fiction?
Jenny McCarthy
The MMR vaccine controversy was a case of scientific misconduct which triggered an unwarranted health scare. It followed the publication in 1998 of a paper in the medical journal The Lancet which falsely[1] presented apparent evidence that autism spectrum disorders could be caused by the MMR vaccine, an immunization against measles, mumps and rubella.[2] The role of the media was heavily criticised, particularly in the way they gave undeserved credibility to Wakefield.
Investigations by Sunday Times journalist Brian Deer revealed that the lead author of the article, Andrew Wakefield, had multiple undeclared conflicts of interest,[3][4] had manipulated evidence,[1] and had broken other ethical codes. The Lancet paper was partially retracted in 2004 and fully retracted in 2010, and Wakefield was found guilty by the General Medical Council of serious professional misconduct in May 2010 and was struck off the Medical Register, meaning he could no longer practice as a doctor.[5] In 2011, Deer provided further information on Wakefield's improper research practices to the BMJ, which in a signed editorial described the original paper as fraudulent.[6][7] The scientific consensus is that no evidence links the vaccine to the development of autism, and that the vaccine's benefits greatly outweigh its risks.
Following the initial claims in 1998, multiple large epidemiological studies were undertaken. Reviews of the evidence by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,[8] the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Institute of Medicine of the US National Academy of Sciences,[9] the UK National Health Service,[10] and the Cochrane Library[11] all found no link between the vaccine and autism. While the Cochrane review expressed a need for improved design and reporting of safety outcomes in MMR vaccine studies, it concluded that the evidence of the safety and effectiveness of MMR in the prevention of diseases that still carry a heavy burden of morbidity and mortality justifies its global use, and that the lack of confidence in the vaccine has damaged public health.[11] A special court convened in the United States to review claims under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program rejected compensation claims from parents of autistic children.[12][13]
The claims in Wakefield's 1998 The Lancet article were widely reported;[14] vaccination rates in the UK and Ireland dropped sharply,[15] which was followed by significantly increased incidence of measles and mumps, resulting in deaths and severe and permanent injuries.[16] Physicians, medical journals, and editors[17][18][19][20][21] have described Wakefield's actions as fraudulent and tied them to epidemics and deaths,[22][23] and a 2011 journal article described the vaccine-autism connection as "the most damaging medical hoax of the last 100 years".[24]
Twenty-five percent of parents believe vaccines could cause developmental problems
Fact or Fiction?

7. Shark Cartilage Cures Cancer

8. Global Warming
Fact or Fiction?

9. Hypothesis-driven or experimental science.
Scientists test ideas
Two Primary Approaches to Science
Hypothesis-driven or experimental science.
Discovery or observational science.

10. Hypothesis-Driven Studies

11. Discovery/Observational Studies

12. Discovery/Observational Studies
Some Scientific Questions Can’t Be Answered By Experimentation
One current view of hominid evolution.
Discovery or observational science is still science; falsifiable hypotheses based on natural phenomenon are proposed to best account for observations.

13. Science as a Way of Knowing
Pure Science- pursuit of knowledge
Applied Science- search for practical uses of scientific knowledge
Pain relief in terminal cancer patients
tetradoxin

14. Characteristics of Scientific Explanations
Science is empirical. It relies on observation and experience.
The phenomenon studied must be measurable.
Phenomenon that cannot be measured:
Is this painting beautiful?
Does God exist?
It must be consistent with known natural laws and well-established, well-documented existing theories.
It must be derived objectively from independently confirmable observations.
All scientific knowledge must be regarded as tentative.

15. Scientific statements must be testable and reproducible (i. e
Scientific statements must be testable and reproducible (i.e., valid & reliable).
Hypothesis:
Cigarette smoking causes lung cancer.
Infants who are breast fed are smarter than infants who are given formula.
Shark cartilage inhibits blood vessel formation to tumors.
Exercise makes people happy.

16. What Kind of People Are Scientists?
The Textbook Case
Scientists are dispassionate and always reasoned in their approaches to their discipline and the world around them.
Reality:
Scientists can be egocentric, emotional nutcakes at least as well as anyone.

17. One Human Side of Science

18. What Does Biology Offer Society?
Lot’s in terms of medicine, agriculture, maintaining a healthy environment, and basic understanding of ourselves and our world.
One of many recent examples of “good” biology.

19. How Does Society Understand Biology and Biologists?
Science and scientists of all kinds are poorly understood by the public and scientists tend to poorly understand the public

20. The Scope and Limitations of Science
Science acquires knowledge through examination of falsifiable hypotheses based on natural phenomena.
This sets a limit on science; science cannot speak directly to such issues as morality or religion.
The domain and limit of science are often misunderstood.

21. The Scope and Limitations of Science Are More Than An Academic Issue

22. The Scope and Limitations of Science Are More Than An Academic Issue

23. The Scope and Limitations of Science Are More Than An Academic Issue
Summary points of the December 20, Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District ruling:
Is this the final word on evolution and alternatives in the classroom?
Hardly.

24. The scientific method Observations Question Formulate Hypothesis
A technique for testing ideas
Observations
Question
Formulate Hypothesis
Conduct Experiment
Analyze Results
Conclusions
Discussion

25. Observation:
The car won’t start when I turn the ignition.
Question:
Hypothesis:
Test hypothesis:
Analyze Results:
Draw Conclusion:
New hypothesis:

26. Scientific Method Observations Question Hypothesis
Suggest questions to investigate
Question
Why does something happen
Hypothesis
An educated guess
A testable explanation for an observation

27. Scientific Method Conduct Experiment Control vs Experimental Group
Process of testing a hypothesis or prediction by gathering data under controlled conditions
Control vs Experimental Group
Control group: a group that has not been exposed to some factor (variable)
Experimental group: a group that has been exposed to the factor (variable)
Independent variable (IV): the variable you manipulate that you believe will affect the DV
Dependent variable (DV): the outcome variable, i.e., variable you measure

28. Collect, organize, analyze data
Scientific Method
Collect, organize, analyze data
Determine whether data is reliable
Determine whether data supports or does not support the hypothesis or prediction
May use statistics
Compare data from other studies
Determine relationships
Determine experimental error

29. Theories Scientific Method
Unifying explanations for a broad range of observations
Based on testing a collection of related hypotheses
The solid foundation of science
Can be revised given new evidence

30. Scientific Method Drawing Conclusions
To understand something not previously understood
To produce a model
Construct a representation of an object, a system, or a process to help show relationships given the data
A model is an explanation supported by data
Use the model to generate new hypotheses or predictions

31. When scientists publish they never say "results prove
When scientists publish they never say "results prove...“ but rather "results suggest..."    or    "results provide support for..."

32. Experimental Design
Confounding factors: factors that were not accounted for in the design that may affect the IV
Biased sampling: A sampling technique that does not give you a representative sample.
Method for Reducing Bias:
Randomization in sample selection
Randomization: Ensures that each subject in a population or each site used for sampling has an equal opportunity of being selected.
Replication:This is necessary to estimate the degree of chance variation among samples.

33. Experimental Design
Sample Size: The larger the sample size, the better. A larger sample size tends to give you a closer estimate of the true population mean.
Normal Curve
Population size (n)

34. Observation
Question
Form Hypothesis
Test Hypothesis
Results
Discussion

35. In the previous experiment:
Which is the independent variable and which is the dependant variable?
Any sampling biases?
Any confounding factors?
Is sample size sufficient?

36. What is difference between hypothesis, theory & law?
Hypothesis - “an educated guess”; a tentative explanation of phenomena.
Theory - a widely accepted explanation of natural phenomena; has stood up to thorough & continual testing.
Law - a statement of what always occurs under certain conditions.

37. Theories
Cell Theory
Evolution

38. Laws
Physics, Chemistry, Math- Lots!!!!
Biology: Mendelian Inheritance

39. Hawaiian Science Knowledge
Hawaii state motto: Ua Mau ke Ea o ka ʻĀina i ka Pono or "The life of the land is perpetuated in righteousness”

40. The Kāhuna
The kāhuna were doctors, architects, scientists,educators, and agriculturists of their time.
Their kuleana (responsibility) was conserving the resources and advancing their knowledge.
In ancient Hawai‘i, the kāhuna were far more than priests, a common
misconception now.

41. Ahupua’a
The land and people flourished greatly. After the first 300 years or so, the population of all islands
grew immensely. This affected the guidance of the ‘Aha in each moku, of
course. So, all the ‘Aha gathered together again in
Moloka‘i to devise a plan to better provide for the people. They decided that each moku should
be divided into ahupua‘a, each having its own ‘Aha of practitioners who lived in that ahupua‘a.
In this way, total control of each ahupua‘a was decided upon by
the people living there. The only time moku ‘Aha were called upon
was when a decision affected all the ahupua'a in that moku.

42. Hawaiian Science Fish Ponds & Fishing Practices
Ancient Hawaiians understood the lunar rhythms and seasonal patterns of important resources species and created moon calendars to inform the wise management of those resources. These moon calendars were used to predict seasonal, monthly, and daily ecological cycles of harvested species. This information was used to dictate proper harvest seasons and strategies and identify “kapu” or no-take periods on harvest during critical periods of development and reproduction.
Communities throughout Hawaii are strengthening local influence and accountability for the health and sustainability of their resources. Through collaborations between local communities and scientists, moon calendars based on traditional resource management were created for several communities throughout Hawaii.
The development of these local Moon Calendars has been successful in not only strengthening traditional culture and education, but they also proved to be successful resource management tools.  The goal of these Calendars is to develop a community based reef fish assessment and monitoring program based on traditional ecological knowledge of the area. Volunteer monitors will work to develop a spawning calendar for harvested fish species and raise awareness on resource use and consumption.
Traditional knowledge tells us that seasons are unique to each island region. While there is information on spawning seasons for some near shore fish species, the seasonal information is very general. Fish spawning seasons still need to be determined for each bay or region to fully understand local resources and critical reproductive seasons.
Loko I’a O He’eia
Conservation Science

43. The Blind Men and the Elephant

44. The Blind Men and the Elephant (Saxe; 1816-1887)
It was six men of Indostan
To learn much inclined,
Who went to see the elephant
(Though all of them were blind),
That each by observation
Might satisfy their mind.
II.
The First approached the elephant,
And happened to fall
Against his broad sturdy side,
At once began to bawl:
“Bless me!—but the Elephant is very like a wall!”

45. The Second, feeling of the tusk , Cried, “Ho!—what have we here
III.
The Second, feeling of the tusk ,
Cried, “Ho!—what have we here
So very round and smooth and sharp?
To me ‘t is mighty clear
This wonder of an Elephant
Is very like a spear!”
IV.
The Third approached the animal,
And happening to take
The squirming trunk within his hands,
Thus boldly up and spake:
“I see,” quoth he, “the Elephant
Is very like a snake!”

46. The Fourth reached out his eager hand, And felt about the knee. V.
The Fourth reached out his eager hand,
And felt about the knee.
“What most this wondrous beast is like
Is might plain’” quoth he;
“‘T is clear enough the Elephant
Is very like a tree!”
VI.
The Fifth, who chanced to touch the ear,
Said, “E’en the blindest man
Can tell what this resembles most;
Deny the fact who can,
This marvel of an Elephant
Is very like a fan!”

47. The Sixth no sooner had begun About the beast to grope,
VII.
The Sixth no sooner had begun
About the beast to grope,
Than seizing on the swinging tail
That fell within his scope,
“I see,” quoth he, “the Elephant
Is very like a rope!”
VIII.
And so these men of Indostan
Disputed loud and long,
Each with his own opinion
Exceeding stiff and strong,
Though each was partly in the right,
And all were in the wrong!

48. So, oft in these theological wars The disputants, I ween,
Moral.
So, oft in these theological wars
The disputants, I ween,
Rail on in utter ignorance
Of what each other mean,
And prate about an elephant
Not one of them has seen!

49. The Blind Men and the Elephant, Part 2,
They talked, those men from Indostan
While standing at the door,
Of elephants and how they looked
(This talk was such a bore!),
At last they agreed that the knowledge gained
Required something more.
II.
Perhaps each one in his own way,
Did learn a bit
Of the beast’s elusive mystery,
But just a part of it
With work, they thought, that they might see
The puzzle pieces fit.

50. ‘Twas obvious to all of them For learning to progress,
III.
‘Twas obvious to all of them
For learning to progress,
That they must share in what they found—
Jointly sort out the mess.
And seek to fully understand
Elephants, more or less.
IV.
Some worked alone and some in teams,
In both the field and lab.
Models were made: some soft, some hard
Some good, some pretty bad.
But when they pooled the useful work,
And truth they made a grab.

51. They checked each other’s methods out, Some kept, some put asunder. V.
They checked each other’s methods out,
Some kept, some put asunder.
To use the ones which passed the test
Reduced the chance of blunder.
Then they’d trust what they had learned
Of elephants’ fine wonders.
VI.
They made great strides in what they knew
Of the nature of the beast.
Of what and where and how and why
They knew much more at least.
For blind men learned how best to learn
And vision soon increased!

52. Inquiry What is the difference between a hypothesis, theory and law?
Can a theory ever be proven?
In a comparison study: what does the experimental group receive? what does the control group receive?
What is an independent variable and dependant variable?

53. QUESTION: Review Which is the correct order of the scientific method?
Observation, hypothesis, discussion, testing, results
Hypothesis, observation, testing, question, results
Observation, question, hypothesis, testing, results, discussion
Testing, hypothesis, observation, results, discussion
Answer:a 53

54. QUESTION: Interpreting Graphs and Data
What happens if test results reject a hypothesis?
The scientist formulates a new hypothesis.
It shows the test failed.
The scientist should be fired.
The scientist used faulty data .
Answer: a 54