Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterEde
I'm all for them. Make for great movies  |
I see your point but perhaps Hollywood causes problems similar to the sensational reporting of most science such that the message taken away by casual viewers or readers is not the message science delivered.
I read the science news first then try and read the paper..if you find that there is no paper well remember a journalist may have cherry picked to get only exciting bits so his story becomes well read. Even as a layman I can get a grip on what the researchers have said which often is different from the journalists report.
Next I seek forums where the matter is being discussed by real scientists and get a feel for how they regard the research.
Take the recent news...black holes don't exist..well the research has not been peer reviewed, and the research did not say ...black holes don't exist...it seemed to say no more than..in certain situations Hawking radiation may act to prevent the formation of a black hole...
Then when I read the science forums you find out more...background on the physicist etc...well guess what I am able to conclude the original reporting was very misleading.
Years of research supported by peer reviewed papers is rarely..if ever..overturned by one journalist.