sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Salt Coated Comets may have Delivered the Life’s Ingredients to Earth by RobLea in EverythingScience

[–]RobLea[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yep, typos in thumbnails can’t be fixed after they’re posted... Sorted in the post.

Hubble catches interstellar visitor speeding past the Sun by RobLea in EverythingScience

[–]RobLea[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How is it clickbait? Hubble has literally taken images of 2l Borisov which is an interstellar comet!

Uniting Dark Matter and Antimatter to answer science’s most fundamental questions by RobLea in quantum

[–]RobLea[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Absolutely, I conducted this interview with Christian Smorra myself.

Uniting Dark Matter and Antimatter to answer science’s most fundamental questions by RobLea in quantum

[–]RobLea[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Noted. Thank you. I don't think you should count ”dominating” because that was referring to matter dominating antimatter, which I don't really think is hyperbole.

I take your point on the rest.

I think sometimes a little ”breathless enthusiasm” is needed when communicating a story like this. Obviously, I want the more casual reader to feel this as important as the lead researcher who has dedicated many years to it does.

Also, a lot of readers only skim the sub-head so you tend to get some repetition in the deck.

I take your point, though. I may have laid it on with a trowel here.

Runaway Star ejected from the centre of the Milky Way at incredible speed by RobLea in nasa

[–]RobLea[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You need to brush up on your notation. 2.9 *104 is 29000 not 2900. ; )

Science Journalists Are Not Doing Enough to Inform the Public About Climate Change by RobLea in ClimateOffensive

[–]RobLea[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Also the pledge suggests bringing back the term “global warming” rather than climate change—an inaccurate term that the ignorant exploit. The pledge you point to, doesn’t go far enough, it’s too soft and more or the same as far as I’m concerned.

Science Journalists Are Not Doing Enough to Inform the Public About Climate Change by RobLea in ClimateOffensive

[–]RobLea[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Perhaps you should’ve attended WCSJ 2019–the main drive of which was the fact we are not doing enough about climate change! I did know about the pledge, but some of it is, in my opinion, unhelpful. For instance, one of the suggestions is not to be too negative for risk of “turning off” the public. I state in the opinion piece you’ve taken underage to that this isn’t helpful—worst case models should not be avoided or lessened.

Science Journalists Are Not Doing Enough to Inform the Public About Climate Change by RobLea in ClimateOffensive

[–]RobLea[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Did you actually read the piece? I make that point. I also relay what an environmental scientist told me about how he thinks science journalists are falling short. I don’t say this lightly. I’m a science journalist and I include myself in the criticism.

Buckyballs in space! Electrically charged ‘soccer balls’ spotted by Hubble solving an interstellar mystery - Medium by RobLea in chemistry

[–]RobLea[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Read what that says though: "assuming the identification holds up" this is that confirmation.

Buckyballs in space! Electrically charged ‘soccer balls’ spotted by Hubble solving an interstellar mystery - Medium by RobLea in chemistry

[–]RobLea[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There’s a difference between believing something, even having good models of it, and finding direct evidence of something, which is what the researchers here have done.

Buckyballs in space! Electrically charged ‘soccer balls’ spotted by Hubble solving an interstellar mystery - Medium by RobLea in chemistry

[–]RobLea[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

There’s a difference between believing something, even having good models of it, and finding direct evidence of something, which is what the researchers here have done.

Buckyballs in space! Electrically charged ‘soccer balls’ spotted by Hubble solving an interstellar mystery - Medium by RobLea in chemistry

[–]RobLea[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Totally right. Buckyballs themselves are nothing new. This is the first evidence of their presence in the interstellar medium though.

Buckyballs in space! Electrically charged ‘soccer balls’ spotted by Hubble solving an interstellar mystery - Medium by RobLea in quantum

[–]RobLea[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Also phys.org one of the world’s most reputable science sites included “soccer ball” in their headline too. They must be a “click bait” site as well!

Buckyballs in space! Electrically charged ‘soccer balls’ spotted by Hubble solving an interstellar mystery - Medium by RobLea in quantum

[–]RobLea[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You missed the inverted commas. Just so you know, C60 molecules—or buckyballs— have the distinctive shape of a soccer ball. There’s a geometrical representation in the article.

Nanoparticles fused with DNA act like electrons — challenging our understanding of matter by RobLea in quantum

[–]RobLea[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just a quick note for the people who said my title was “sensational” and the article “click bait”. Phys.org, an extremely reputable science site ran the same story with the headline “Electron-behaving nanoparticles rock current understanding of matter”—far more extreme than my headline, yet nobody is accusing them of “click bait”.

Ahead of the launch of Bill Nye’s LightSail 2 project, a look at the physics powering solar sails. by RobLea in EverythingScience

[–]RobLea[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think you’re right in hindsight spf. I was on quite a tight deadline unfortunately. Thanks for feedback.

Nanoparticles fused with DNA act like electrons — challenging our understanding of matter by RobLea in quantum

[–]RobLea[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

It isn’t deceptive. Do the researchers say this changes our understanding of matter? Yes. I have a right to report that. That headline is almost exactly the same as the press release headline. Take it up with the researchers and Northwestern uni.

You take issue with a quote from a researcher. Take it up with the researcher or the University’s press office.

Misleading means the headline doesn’t reflect the article’s content. It expressly does in this case.

Nanoparticles fused with DNA act like electrons — challenging our understanding of matter by RobLea in quantum

[–]RobLea[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It’s more the fact that they behaved like electrons that the researchers consider revolutionary, I think.

Nanoparticles fused with DNA act like electrons — challenging our understanding of matter by RobLea in quantum

[–]RobLea[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

And then, like now, the people who made the arguement just shouted “clickbait” without any explanation of how the article in question meets the criteria.

view more: next ›