Go through any scientific paper and you’ll find it littered with uncertainty. Scientists qualify parameters, give standard errors, make way for random processes even when experiments have been planned to the finest detail. Even when we get the answers we want, we provide alternative explanations that fly in the face of the assumptions we’re trying to test. Honestly, sometimes it seems like we don’t really ‘know’ anything.
I’ve written about our reluctance to declare that we know things in science before, but here I want to try and answer a couple of questions. Why is uncertainty such a crucial part of science? How does this affect the non-scientific public’s perception of science? And does this relationship with knowledge need to change in the future?
As I’ve written on here before, scientific communication can be a tricky business. Finding novel ways to communicate research, or scientific ideas to the public is a process that takes creativity and focus. So with that in mind, along with fellow Ecology for the Masses author Adam Hasik and friend and veterinarian Dave, I’ve started the cinema/ecology/physiology themed podcast Cinematica Animalia.