Wiltshire! The mystical land that my husband hails from. It’s a rural English county that is mostly made of green velvet and gently glowing scenery. The natives decorate the rolling hills with white horses (see above) and sprinkle them with sheep.
Actually, pretty much all of the landscape looks like promotional posters for some a rural propaganda campaign:
COME TO THE COUNTRYSIDE. LOOK HOW HAPPY THE SHEEP ARE.
Wiltshire is the kindly West. It’s basically the Shire.
With abandoned tanks in it.
TANKS FOR STOPPING BY!
Which is kind of a contradiction, and one that interests me.
What did you do this weekend, Elodie?
Nothing much. Met the Awkward Army, put the world to rights. Learned a bit of materials science and inadvertently created a new kind of polystyrene plastic in my kitchen.
Made a rainbow.
In the aftermath of the unicorn dissection…
The richly glowing skein in Figure One is a sumptuous, hand-painted rainbow yarn that I dyed myself. With food coloring. And SCIENCE. You won’t find colors like that in a store…
And at the risk of becoming a craft blog (SCIENCE CRAFTS!) I’m going to tell you how to do it.
Let’s lighten the mood in here with another Illustrated Compendium! All of these search terms are 100% genuine reasons why various people found my blog. What were they looking for? Did they ever find it? What do they want? Who are they? The following illustrations are my attempts to solve these mysteries. (For the interested and confused, partake of Elodie’s Illustrated Compendium of Search Terms Part One)
“A wild animal shouting is also tired”
wild animals get cranky!
- Cover of “Heart Matters,” Jan Feb 2013, vol 47. A woman must be an angel in the kitchen…
Disclaimer: This is a personal blog that is not affiliated with any research institution, funding body or charity. The British Heart Foundation is a very nice charity that does amazing things – donate your used goods to them today! This piece has not been endorsed by Professor B. Casadei or any member of her research group, and should not reflect upon her or her opinions in any way. As someone who writes frequently about sexism in science culture, I believe that criticizing the following article from a gender-egalitarian perspective will move the field forward, reduce the levels of sexism in science, and possibly improve reporting quality in the future.
The British Heart Foundation is a popular and beloved charity in Britain, funding over half of the cardiovascular research performed in the British Isles. Non-academic readers may be surprised to learn that charitable funding is how a lot of scientists pay the rent.
For me, this is one reason why consistent, trustworthy, high-quality science communication is so important. The public pays our wages, whether by charity or by tax dollars. Public interest and public trust is vital if we want to cure cancer, heal hearts, save the environment, fight off meteors, survive climate change and understand the meaning of life. None of this can happen without you guys. Thank you so much for your help and support.
So when I see really terrible, sexist science reporting occurring in the pages of the British Heart Foundation’s magazine, well … it breaks my little heart. (Which is ironic.) I believe that science communication at every level is charged with moving the field forward, and I believe that it should be held responsible when it breaks that trust.
A young pair of friends. One of these kids grew up to be a weather wizard, and the other grew up to be a mad scientist.
Hello my darlings, and Happy Darwin Day! If you have a moment, spare a thought for the beardy father of evolutionary biology and maybe stop by this post to enjoy his timeless charm.
Today we’re launcing a Girls in Science series of blog posts! If you haven’t been paying attention, I am a Woman in Science. During the day I work as research assistant in molecular biology, although I am a more broadly trained biological researcher. I am a gender egalitarian and a feminist. A passionate science communicator, I am an award-winning science writer who has been shortlisted for exciting prizes, and I’m working on an even cooler project that I hope to share with you all soon. I am really passionate about this stuff, you guys. Science & ladies. Hit me up anytime.
And these subjects have been appearing in the news a lot lately. For some reason, the media has suddenly noticed the fact that There Aren’t Enough Girls In Science (Yay!) and it’s tying itself in knots trying to figure out ways to fix this without actually addressing any problems or providing any solutions (Aww.) This requires some remarkable contortions of thinking. So I’m going to talk about some solid, real plans and propositions to REALLY get little girls interested in science, right?
Frankly, I think it would be disingenuous and hypocritical of me to do so.
And I’m going to tell you why. Welcome to Part One of Girls in Science: Kids Don’t Rule the World (Even if They’re Sexy.)
The Guardian’s alt-text here was “girls science math.”
“Wow! We’re science and mathing! We’re science and mathing SO HARD!”
A few people have asked me to weigh in on the Guardian’s recent foray into SCEINCE JOURNLISM, “Girls and science: why the gender gap exists and what to do about it.” With its discussion of nature, culture, science and female gender roles, it is scandalously encroaching on my turf. There’s nothing I love more than a rousing discussion of How To Get More Girls Into Science! And yet, the article seems calculated to enrage pretty much any female scientist who reads it, with suggestions for getting girls interested in science that include “use lots of bright toys and colors!” and “have her cook!”
The author, one Emma G Keller, uses the word “domestic” four times. She asserts that the gender gap in the STEM fields can be closed by getting girls to bake more cookies.
Lady-science should always be performed in pairs, because females are better at socializing and giggling than males are.
Click to read more, but pour yourself a 1950′s drink first.
Below is a selection of titles for an online form that Dr Glass was filling out. Have a look.
Excuse me, but where is the option for REVEREND Doctor?
Oh, just had to scroll down.
BRITAIN! Possibly the only place in the world where Right Reverend Monsignors can be correctly addressed by their proper titles in their student loan correspondence.
- Now, if you’re interested in Facebook at all, there’s a Facebook page for ElodieUnderGlass, which will be primarily be used for screaming at the news and pictures of animals in sweaters. Your input is warmly encouraged.
- There is a new Contact Form for complaints and suggestions.
- You look super hot today.
Coming up next, the Guardian is once again encroaching on my turf:
- Pictured here are two young females struggling to load an agarose gel using a simple pipette in preparation for electrophoresis. According to recent findings in the Guardian, young females find science easier to cope with if it contains lots of bright colors and shiny moving objects.
Garner, Kathryn. Fluorescent Fibroblasts (2012). Fluorescent microscopy.
Friend-of-Blog Kathryn is a molecular biologist and fine artist, and she’s kindly sharing this beautiful image of cardiac fibroblasts with us. (Thank you, Kathryn!)
Not sure what we’re looking at? Well, each of those structures is a highly magnified cell. The black circles at the center are the nuclei of the cells. The fluorescent green dye illuminates the strand-like structures which give these cells their name. Fibroblasts: fibrous cells. They form connective tissue, patching wounds and holding other cells together.
The image is scientifically, aesthetically and metaphysically appealing. Scientifically, it’s a really nice image that shows that the cells present are largely fibroblasts, and it demonstrates their characteristic stringy nature – what scientists call “morphology.” Aesthetically, it is pleasing, with the drifting cells resembling jellyfish or nebulas or -
O HOLY MOTHER OF DARWIN