#genetic engineering gcse | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

aryacollegeofengineering · 3 months

Text

How to Become a Biotechnology Engineer?

It is a field of study that combines knowledge from two streams: Biology and Technology Biotech engineers are people who study biological processes and the functioning of various living things like microorganisms, plants, and animals and use them for various industrial purposes, and Biotechnology is the study of living organisms, which is further used for making chemicals that can be utilized in different industries. Biotechnology engineering is all around you also Everyday products like the plastic used for food packaging, cosmetics, fabrics like polyester, washing detergents, etc have been derived from Biotech engineering.

Biotechnology, Biomedical Engineering, And Pharmaceuticals

Biotechnology is all about using biological processes, organisms, and cells to develop new technologies and products, So it is used to develop vaccines and life-saving treatments, it is also used in minimizing greenhouse emissions or identifying unknown microbes like bacteria, viruses, etc. To other people, It is an umbrella term for many applied fields like genetic engineering, microbiology, epidemiology, Immunology, environmental health, safety, etc.

Biomedical engineering is about using principles of engineering in the field of medicine and healthcare and a biomedical engineer works towards studying the science behind cancer or designing artificial organs for the human body, developing technology and machines that help doctors diagnose medical issues and perform surgeries, etc.

The Pharmaceutical Industry is very similar to Biotech Engineering, in the sense that both produce medicine also While Biotech engineering uses the processes of living organisms to come up with new medicines or products, Pharmaceutical companies use artificial sources or chemicals to produce the medicines.

Some important facts:

One of the wonders of the world of Biotech, Zolgensma, is the most expensive drug in the history of the world. It has a price tag of $2.125 million. It cures spinal muscular atrophy.

With advancements in Biotechnology like DNA sequencing and cloning, it could be possible to bring back some extinct species like the woolly mammoth, So no claims regarding dinosaurs are being made yet though.

The story of insulin tells us what role animals played in its discovery. Earlier, the insulin to treat diabetes patients was extracted from pigs and cows and With Biotechnology, genetically modified bacteria were grown to do the same. To date, this is how Insulin is produced worldwide.

Heat and power can be produced from algae as a Biofuel, reducing our dependency on depleting fossil fuels for our energy needs.

Bioplastics are used in plastic food packaging, mobile phone cases, sunglasses, pens, and personal care packaging for products such as shampoos and conditioners.

How To Become A Biotechnology Engineer?

Biotechnology is one of the most rapidly developing sectors within the life science industry also Through the use of organisms and other biological systems, biotech engineers work to research, develop & manufacture important, so it is life-changing drugs and medicinal products.

1. Start Early

If you're currently studying in high school for your GCSEs, or you will be soon, it's important to get into the science subject stream as early as possible and you must ensure that you choose science-based subjects related to biotechnology So becoming a biotech engineer, your GCSEs and A-Levels should include a mixture of:

Biology

Physics

Chemistry

Core English (GCSE)

Core Maths (GCSE)

Any volunteering or work experience you can get during this period of your education will be incredibly beneficial, also whilst qualifications are great to show your skills, experience equally shows your ability to work well in a professional setting.

2. Study in Further Education

Once you have achieved your GCSEs and A-Levels in subjects related to biotechnology, the next step is to study for an undergraduate BSc degree in Biotechnology Undergraduate courses will provide you with the basic knowledge you require to develop your skills, and eventually become an experienced biotechnologist.

Biotechnology undergraduate courses will allow you to find your specialty subject through a variety of optional modules that focus on biology, ecology, genetics, microbiology, neuroscience, and much more also to achieve a well-paying job as a biotechnologist, you will need to achieve a 2:1 or higher to be eligible for varied career opportunities.

3. Get a Master's Degree

Once you've got a Bsc in Biotechnology, you can progress to a master's degree in your chosen Biotechnology specialty, and this will allow you to progress into your niche in more detail Usually, you will enroll in a Biotechnology master's course that specializes in one of the modules you studied in your undergraduate degree.

4. Go a Step Further

To show your dedication to the life science and biotechnology industry, you could join an organization like the Science Council. According to the UK Government's national careers service, the Science Council will allow you to gain professional recognition, find training opportunities and make industry contacts.

5. Find Your Dream Biotechnology Job

As per HR, we are constantly recruiting for jobs within the biotechnology industry, so no matter where your interests lie, we are sure to have something for you!

The soft critical skills required for success in this career may include:

Excellent writing and communication

Problem-solving skills

Critical thinking

Creativity

Research skills

Working in a team or group setting

Leadership skills

Some difficult skills or specific capabilities, including:

First get expertise in conceptual design using CAD design software

Laboratory skills like Mechanical Testing, Failure Analysis, and Component Inspection

Understanding relevant biomedical FDA regulations

Techniques like molding, casting, machining, or extrusion

Experience programming or coding

Higher level of mathematical knowledge

Technical skills requirements may vary by employer and industry, and the hard skills most in demand for biotech engineers are acquired through job training with a bachelor’s degree in engineering or an advanced biotech engineering degree program also The rigorous skill used by employers for biotech and biomedical engineers is not the only skill also you often have responsibilities such as working in a team, working alone, or communicating with clients.

Career Path For A Biotech Engineer

Many possible careers in biomedical engineering are:-

Bioprocess Engineer

Biomedical Engineer

Bio

Materials scientist

CQV (Commissioning, Qualification, and Validation) Engineer

Scientific research in the pharma industry.

Biotechnology Engineer Workspace Environment:

Most biotechnology engineers work in lab surroundings, So the real lab might also range depending on the industry, also a few within the enterprise are painted in academia They train college-level technological know-how guides. Many are employed by way of pharmaceutical businesses and Others may match on their own as independent researchers.

Conclusion

Biotech engineering is a large subset of the life sciences industries, So there are hundreds of colleges listed for this course but The best engineering college in Rajasthan is Arya College of Engineering & I.T. make Biotech engineers can work in medical device manufacturing, pharmaceutical manufacturing, research and development, education, and many other fields that require their scientific knowledge and they give knowledge and courses in the relevant field with good environment and faculty.

Source: Click Here

#best btech college in jaipur #top engineering college in jaipur #best engineering college in jaipur #best engineering college in rajasthan #best private engineering college in jaipur #best btech college in rajasthan

0 notes

educationtech · 10 months

Text

What Is Biotechnology Engineering? How you can become? - ACEIT

Biotechnology, Biomedical Engineering, And Pharmaceuticals

Some important facts:

One of the wonders of the world of Biotech, Zolgensma, is the most expensive drug in the history of the world. It has a price tag of $2.125 million. It cures spinal muscular atrophy.

Heat and power can be produced from algae as a Biofuel, reducing our dependency on depleting fossil fuels for our energy needs.

Bioplastics are used in plastic food packaging, mobile phone cases, sunglasses, pens, and personal care packaging for products such as shampoos and conditioners.

How To Become A Biotechnology Engineer?

1. Start Early If you're currently studying in high school for your GCSEs, or you will be soon, it's important to get into the science subject stream as early as possible and you must ensure that you choose science-based subjects related to biotechnology So becoming a biotech engineer, your GCSEs and A-Levels should include a mixture of:

Biology

Physics

Chemistry

Core English (GCSE)

Core Maths (GCSE)

2. Study in Further Education Once you have achieved your GCSEs and A-Levels in subjects related to biotechnology, the next step is to study for an undergraduate BSc degree in Biotechnology Undergraduate courses will provide you with the basic knowledge you require to develop your skills, and eventually become an experienced biotechnologist.

3. Get a Master's Degree Once you've got a Bsc in Biotechnology, you can progress to a master's degree in your chosen Biotechnology specialty, and this will allow you to progress into your niche in more detail Usually, you will enroll in a Biotechnology master's course that specializes in one of the modules you studied in your undergraduate degree.

4. Go a Step Further To show your dedication to the life science and biotechnology industry, you could join an organization like the Science Council. According to the UK Government's national careers service, the Science Council will allow you to gain professional recognition, find training opportunities and make industry contacts.

5. Find Your Dream Biotechnology Job As per HR, we are constantly recruiting for jobs within the biotechnology industry, so no matter where your interests lie, we are sure to have something for you!

The soft critical skills required for success in this career may include:

Excellent writing and communication

Problem-solving skills

Critical thinking

Creativity

Research skills

Working in a team or group setting

Leadership skills

Some difficult skills or specific capabilities, including:

First get expertise in conceptual design using CAD design software

Laboratory skills like Mechanical Testing, Failure Analysis, and Component Inspection

Understanding relevant biomedical FDA regulations

Techniques like molding, casting, machining, or extrusion

Experience programming or coding

Higher level of mathematical knowledge

Career Path For A Biotech Engineer

Many possible careers in biomedical engineering are:-

Bioprocess Engineer

Biomedical Engineer

Bio

Materials scientist

CQV (Commissioning, Qualification, and Validation) Engineer

Scientific research in the pharma industry.

Biotechnology Engineer Workspace Environment:

Conclusion

0 notes

ken-research-market-research · 5 years

Photo

Rising Focus On Innovation In Gene Therapy, Followed By Growing Application Of Genomics To Drive The Genetic Engineering Market Globally : Ken Research According to study, “Global Genetic Engineering Market Size study, by Devices (PCR, Gene Gun, Gel Assemblies, Others), by Techniques (Artificial Selection, Gene Splicing, Cloning, Others), by End-User (Research Institutes, Academic Institutes, Pharmaceutical Industries, Others), by Application (Agriculture, Medical Industry, Forensic Science, Others) and Regional Forecasts 2018-2025…

0 notes

gcsecomputerscience · 6 years

Text

A way to Get Into the sphere Of pc technological know-how

pc science is the combination of theories, applications and concepts which brings about the get entry to to statistics. This technology entails analyzing the mechanization, expression of algorithms and structure, that are systematic procedures for solving problems. Computing however, does no longer constantly entail computers. actually, those types of issues have been present lengthy earlier than computer systems did, and are available nowadays issues may even be solved through manually as opposed to with a laptop. The information which pc scientists discovered, process, save, and convey is regularly programmed right into a computer memory in both bytes or bits. Bits assist inside the transmitting of documents between machines, whereas bytes are the most fundamental devices used to measure records and storage. era discovers the transmitting of facts.

Engineering science started becoming a quick growing discipline in the Forties as the technological age develops. Scientists suppose computer systems are an important a part of the world and a time will come whilst all of us will have computer systems. it is a extra complicated discipline than simply writing packages or constructing computer systems. laptop scientists look at troubles to find out if they can be calculated, examine algorithms to decide the high-quality answer, design and create computer structures to carry out specs from research, create encoding languages to deliver these algorithms, and apply algorithms to application domain names, or sets of software program structures which percentage layout functions.

men of technology can work inside any enterprise or area because computer skills are easily transferred into many areas. Scientists, mathematicians and engineers all use pc science, however people who paintings within the humanities, medication, training and regulation often hire the ideas of this technological know-how also. Computing technological know-how is used also to explain scientific concepts like ideas which include predicting earthquake patterns, information theories just like the massive Bang and genetics. pc science is regarding fixing problems at its essential stage. Scientists want to be first-rate analytical thinkers. He/she desires to also have the dedication to retain with something until a unique answer is located. generation calls for using cause to evaluate solutions and revise plans to get the right answer. As finding answers calls for a lot of time, scientists want to have numerous persistence.

Having a primary in computing can also cause careers in software program engineering, gadget management, laboratory development and studies and plenty more. guys of science ordinary tasks include growing new person for computer systems, designing and enforcing software, planning and handling technological infrastructures, and growing GCSE Computer Science answers to computer problems. A laptop scientist potential to regulate to new technologies is vital.

when considering a degree in engineering there are dour matters to think about: private degree of commitment, training degree, requirements for admission, and specialized programs. A degree in laptop science is basically supplied via the school of technology, and may be a part of a college or larger university, or an independent faculty. The pinnacle engineering technology stages are usually available from faculties that have a graduate diploma program. schools like these are able to attracting c faculty and incorporate devoted property to this faculty. There are types of programs available whilst in search of a laptop technology degree: university and investigative university. university programs normally closing for 2 - 4 years and are focused on a sensible abilties. however, there are numerous theoretical guides, however the huge majority of the program is focused on attaining the practical competencies needed to succeed in this profession. The college programs are normally for 4 - 5 years. the primary recognition is at the theoretical know-how and data required to improve within the computing subject. at the same time as sensible abilities are taught, the primary attention is to provide a holistic view of pc science as a career, and the ability to transport in that discipline.

1 note · View note

renegaderoots · 6 years

Photo

BASIC INFORMATION

☠┋FULL NAME: Avery J. Williams ☠┋PRONUNCIATION: A-vree ☠┋NICKNAME(S): Avy, Av, AJ ☠┋TITLE: The Sleepwalker ☠┋OCCUPATION: Drug dealer ( see also: fortune teller, singer, waiter) ☠┋~AGE: 18-28. Plot dependent. ☠┋DATE OF BIRTH: 23rd October ☠┋GENDER: Cisgender ☠┋PRONOUNS: He/Him/His ☠┋ORIENTATION: Homoromantic Homosexual ☠┋NATIONALITY: English ☠┋RELIGION: Christian ☠┋SPECIES: Human ☠┋THREAT LEVEL: Moderate (not malicious, sometimes violent, defensive and aggressive)

PHYSICAL APPEARANCE

☠┋FACE CLAIM: Andy Biersack / Ash Stymest ☠┋EYE COLOUR: Light-blue ☠┋HAIR COLOUR: Naturally ginger but dyes it black ☠┋DOMINANT HAND: Right ☠┋HEIGHT: 5’4 or 162 centimeters ☠┋WEIGHT: 48 kg. ☠┋TATTOOS: He is literally a tattoo landscape, so describing his ink collection would take an entire century, but the roses on his hands are most notable along with a quote from Hermann Hesse’s Steppenwolf circling around his collarbone. ☠┋SCARS: The most notable ones along with a constellation of burns are on his upper back, though there are other scarred areas as well. Most were souvenirs from an accident whereas others were self-inflicted. ☠┋PIERCINGS: one lip piercing, one nose ring ( usually wears studs), several ear piercings (Industrial, conch, auricle, upper lobe, helix, tragus, graduate lobe, smiley – honestly just ask me what part of his body isn’t pierced and we can all go home sooner) ☠┋GLASSES: Avery doesn’t need glasses.

PSYCHOLOGY INFORMATION

☠┋JUNG TYPE: INFJ ☠┋SUBTYPE: Intuitive Subtype ☠┋ENNEATYPE: 6w5 SX/SP ☠┋MORAL ALIGNMENT: Chaotic Neutral ☠┋TEMPERAMENT: Melancholic/Choleric ☠┋SCHEMA: (NP) Negativity/Pessimism, (MA) Mistrust/Abuse, (EP) Emotional Deprivation (form C)

☠ ┋INTELLIGENCE TYPE: Visual/Spatial Intelligence

☠┋~IQ: 110 ☠┋NEUROTYPE: Definitely not neurotypical. ☠┋AT RISK? Possibly, although I can’t say for sure at this conjuncture. Likely depression, insomnia and Biploar Disorder II, as there’s a genetic predisposition on the maternal side of his family (his great-grandma had it, along with his mother.)

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

☠┋HOMETOWN: Dartford, England, though he was born in Boston. ☠┋CURRENT: Visual-Spatial Intelligence, Intrapersonal Intelligence, Bodily-Kinesthetic Intelligence ☠┋LANGUAGE(S): English ( native language), German ☠┋SOCIAL CLASS: working class ☠┋EDUCATIONAL LEVEL: GCSE ☠┋PARENT #1: John Williams ☠┋PARENT #2: Allison (Alisa) Williams neé Little (Klein) ☠┋SIBLING(S): Samantha Williams, 24, alive, estranged

☠┋MAIN SHIP: I ship Avery with stability and getting his shit together. ☠┋RELATIONSHIP STATUS: Single ☠┋CHILDREN: None

☠┋PET(S): Pet rats called Muffin, Sugar and Berry. ☠┋ADOPTED? No. ☠┋RAP SHEET? Surprisingly not, no. ☠┋PRISON TIME? No.

VICES / HABITS

☠┋SMOKES? Yes. He’s a chain smoker, in fact. ☠┋DRINKS? Yes, excessively. Might’ve developed an addiction, though it’s unsure to know for certain as this conjuncture. ☠┋DOES DRUGS? Only soft drugs. ☠┋IS VIOLENT? Yes, he is. Avery’s type of violence is most often just on one level, namely the physical one. Unafraid to mess up somebody’s face twice his size, he’ll do so if and when he feels threatened – or, alternatively, when he really doesn’t like you. It’s not necessarily that he’s pone to violence, nor is he quick to hit and punch without first weighing the consequences, but it does happen. Only on rare occasions such as intimate settings is he emotionally violent if fearing abandonment.

☠┋HAS AN ADDICTION? Possibly. Alcoholism. ☠┋IS SELF-DESTRUCTIVE? Yes. Self-harm (among which multiple suicide attempts number. Most frequently, these patterns are implemented through cutting, burning or scratching), habitual lying and high-risk reckless behavior along with excessive promiscuity. ☠┋HABITS: swearing, smoking, cracking knuckles, a sweet tooth that’ll probably rot his teeth down to nothing one day, picking at nail polish, habitual lying, procrastination to the highest level imaginable, forgetting names of people (mostly because he doesn’t bother to remember them in the first place), purposefully argumentative, double-checks everything more often than Nolan (which is an accomplishment in and of itself bordering on obsessive), bites fingernails, snarls for no, grunts for yes and shrugs his shoulders for maybe (not the most communicative sort, obviously), drinks energy drinks and sugary stuff like water to stay away because he’s close to mortified by sleeping or the process of falling asleep (three to four hours of light sleep tops), leave him alone for a while and chances are he’ll have been playing with whatever object is in front of him for many minutes already, will use movie references to retro movies nobody knows (except maybe movie nerds themselves) when around somebody he can tolerate

☠┋HOBBIES: customizing his own clothing, drawing, sleeping in late, organizing everything to a T, cleaning, woodwork, collecting used up pencil stumps, skateboarding, street painting, collecting bibles without any attention to read through them, reading psychology books ☠┋TICS: none

☠┋OBSESSION(S): Avery is downright obsessed with establishing a thoroughly organized system and often can’t resist eliminating any and all ounce of disorder either in his flat or at the shop. He also has a great aversion towards unclean people and therefore spends a lot of time in the bathroom washing his hands. ☠┋COMPULSION(S): hoarding

MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION

☠┋HOUSE: Slytherin ☠┋VICE: Wrath ☠┋VIRTUE: Kindness ☠┋ELEMENT: Air

☠┋ANGEL: Gabriel

☠┋MYTHOLOGICAL CREATURE: Sirens

☠┋ANIMAL: Scorpion

☠┋MUTATION: Invisibility, Air manipulation ☠┋WOULD SURVIVE POST-APOC? Yes.

STATUS INFORMATION

☠┋DEVELOPMENT: Developed ☠┋SHIPPING: Multiship ☠┋VERSE: Multiverse ☠┋VERSE TYPE: realism, magical realism, crime

☠┋CANON: His tattoo shop verse. ☠┋PLOTTING: Open ☠┋CREATION DATE: May 2014

CHARACTER SUMMARY

If you think you’ll encounter an angel because you’ve judged him by his looks alone, you will be deeply disappointed. In lieu of sweet tunes, you’ll get an earful of pirate-like swearing, profanity, and absolutely no filters. For better or worse, Avery is honest - sometimes brutally so - and doesn’t know the first thing about propriety. His morals are his pillars despite the dysfunctional mess that is his past; however, his own integrity is merciless and predominantly black or white. Regardless, you shouldn’t mistake him for level-headed or even cerebral; Avery is a complicated, contradictory clusterfuck of a person --- all white-knuckled protests aside, he is a very emotional lad, prone to anger issues, and an even poorer developed impulse control.

As somebody who became homeless when still a minor, Avery is no stranger to the ends to which some had to go in order to survive. He might not be gallant, buoyant or even very talkative, but he is humble, charitable and noticeably protective over those who have no means of defense. Nowadays, Avery stays afloat working odd jobs, the most notably one being his position as a drug dealer for the Morrison family. Beyond that, his ability to ascertain how full of shit people are has proved rather lucrative, too. In the end, he has been through too much, has seen too much and heard too much to be fazed by humanity’s depravity anymore, and thereby doesn’t dare reach for the stars. He still lives in an abusive home mentally sitting at disconcertingly silent dinner tables, and making tired excuses for angry welts under layers for him to have any motivation other than to simply sleepwalk through life.

APPEARANCE DESCRIPTION

Swinging calloused fists, throwing uncouth threats left and right…at the imposing height of 5’4. Although Avery will still feed you your teeth if you reckon it’s cute to call him pipsqueak or any other derogatory remark as to his height, he has come to think of his lanky, tiny, and largely androgynous appearance as an advantage. Looks can deceive, his in particular, because if there’s anything he’s not, it’s helpless. Be that as it may, there are self-image issues along with a deeply-seated insecurity at play regarding his physique, and overall gentle aura, which he contrasts with a collection of tattoos. For attentive listeners, you will hear a mostly Bostoner accent mixed with a faint German undertone while his voice is deep, masculine, and has a raspy current to it. It is not a shock, though, that Avery’s demeanour doesn’t exactly inspire pedestrians to chat him up at a park. As for clothes: just be on the lookout for a scowling, tiny lad in black from head to toe.

PERSONALITY DESCRIPTION

Contrary to his cantankerous tunes, Avery knows when words of thanks are in order, and he is not at all too prideful to express his gratitude. Anything you give him freely, whether time, trust, or tears is valuable to him. Generally speaking, however, he is best described as being of a melancholic-choleric temperament, a man of few words but decidedly strong convictions who won’t hesitate to play devil’s advocate in order to call you out on your own hypocrisy. What he isn’t, though is deceiving because honesty is an integral part of his belief system; the engine without which the machine would come to a complete standstill. What’s most important to note about his general disposition, additionally, is how much of a duality Avery can be. Endearing at times, and then downright base. This boils down to his anxiety frequently expressed through rage, and insecurity. Ambivalent doesn’t even begin to cover how his personality oscillates between aggressive and dependent absolutes. As enigmatic as he is towards others and himself, though, there’s nothing uncertain about the fact that he is secretly an idealist in a misanthropic realist’s clothing. He wants to believe only the best in people, but also knows when there’s nothing to be done other than to turn some away. In the same vein, Avery struggles with emotional expression – full stop. Due to trauma, genetic factors, and environmental influences, trust is nearly an impossible feat for him; that goes both ways: towards others and himself, thus, while fiercely instinctive, it requires a game guide to unlock personal dialogue, resulting in suspicion and rebellious behaviour to cover up the fear of abandonment.

SKILLS / COMPETENCES

By general standards, Avery’s academic gap in his CV doesn’t speak well for his skills or competences, as one would be quick to presume he’s got none at all, which isn’t true. Regardless of having only done the utmost necessary before dropping out of school, he’s not a monolingual. Since his mother has German roots, their household was bilingual, with English being the primary language in their earlier developmental stages, and German introduced at around six to eight years old respectively. His level of proficiency is high in both languages, making him bilingual despite no linguistic talent or inclination to broaden his horizon. There’s also something to note about his dexterity, for his hands aren’t only his most important tools in his career. Indeed, most of his hobbies revolve around crafting or creating something – woodwork being one example. He is also, perforce, an amazing cook and is known to hand out free food to friends who are, unfortunately, still homeless. What’s more, he has been blessed with an impeccable singing voice --- hard, soft, raspy currents like ripples in a river. Up until middle school, too, Avery used to participate in competitive running marathons, along with a penchant for precarious hobbies like skateboarding and parkour, the latter of which he gave up after too many unsuccessful attempts and stays in the hospital. Lastly, and this is vital, he has a natural gift for reading others; he is not easily deceived.

INTERPERSONAL MANNER

How Avery approaches you or comes across is entirely dependent on you – because when he smells bullshit or feels in any way lied to, threatened or manipulated, you’ll encounter his belligerent, patronizing and stubbornly righteous side. If you’re straightforward with your intentions, Avery is more likely to warm and loosen up around you. All in all, he is easy to like, but hardly few really know him. Since his family is a subject best not breached and linked to survivor’s guilt, Avery, for now, is on his own, excluding Lin, Trish, and Síle. Sometimes, even, the lad refers to his own room as a coffin. Unsurprisingly, his sexual relations are strictly physical, and any romantic interest is generally suppressed. If he were actively searching, however, Avery would best respond to unabashedly frank men who are assertive or creative – physically, he likes his men tall, muscular, preferably inked, and not afraid to straight up ask him to fuck. Moreover, given his demons, Avery works very hard to keep the shreds of stability he has in his life, which is why you will not hear him argue unless it’s something he categorizes as fundamentally wrong; he absolutely detests screaming or raised voices.

Additional notes:

His voice claim is the same, i.e. Andy. Is anyone surprised?

Frequently lewd and downright tactless towards men, which is not reminiscent of his bad flirting skills but rather an indicator to please leave him the fuck alone.

Sugary sweets as bribery? 100% effective

Drinks an unhealthy amount of energy drinks to doze rather to deeply fall asleep because the feeling of falling asleep makes him incredibly anxious - night terrors are common.

Listens to bad German punk band and dub step. Definitely don’t allow him to play his music should he ever be in your car lest you’ll suffer profusely.

Has the almost compulsive need to play with items directly in front of him.

His younger sister detests him for walking out on her and leaving her with an alcoholic, abusive dad. Years prior, their mother left one day and never returned. She hopes he’s dead in a ditch.

His relationship with religion is...complicated, to make use of a gross understatement as his family were zealots who only accepted their truth as the way to live. Consequently, Avery also has self-image issues and low self-esteem.

He feels more comfortable and considerably safer around women as far as platonic relationships go, and has an easier time opening up to them.

Natural ginger. Heat and Avery? Not a good mix.

Smells faintly of turpentine oil and citrus-scented utensils for cleaning because he is a neat freak.

Do not allow him anywhere near paper because he will doodle on anything.

Utilizes his art as a means to express himself emotionally.

#profile;Avery #abuse mention tw #my son is finally home i am CRYING

3 notes · View notes

preserving-ferretbrain · 5 years

Text

by Dan H

Saturday, 22 May 2010

Dan learns that SCIENTISTS HAVE CREATED ARTIFICIAL LIFE!~

So the big news in Science at the moment is that Scientists have created artificial life!.

First of all. Dear newspapers, news websites, news programs and other news media. Please for the love of all that is holy stop attributing things to “scientists”. “Scientist” isn’t a job description, it is at best a way of describing a broad category of people with vaguely similar qualifications. Opening a story about the recent implantation of synthetic DNA into a bacterium with the headline “Scientists Create Artificial Life” is about as helpful as me opening this article with the headline “Arts Graduates Talk Shit About Microbiology”.

So anyway, it appears that a geneticist by the name of Craig Venter (who was one of the big names behind the human genome project, although I confess that I’d never heard of the guy before) along with the rest of his team (a team which, digging a bit deeper, he may not actually have been the head of – some sources seem to credit the initial announcement to one Daniel Gibson, although that may just be because Gibson’s name is alphabetically first) have successfully implanted a synthetic genome into a bacterium, causing it to behave like a different bacterium.

Now to give the press their due here, part of the reason that so many newspapers are running with the “artificial life” byline is that Venter (who is, by all accounts, a bit of a showman) is keen to claim that this is exactly what they’ve created. Venter and his team make a wide variety of incredible claims for this technology – that it will allow us to reverse climate change, produce limitless cheap fuel, and cure whatever diseases are big at the moment. And of course on the other side of the fence there are folks saying that this will lead to the end of the world and genetically engineered super-bacteria invading Kensington. And if I had a penny for every time I’d seen the words “playing God” I’d be able to get an extra cup of coffee out the vending machine.

What’s staggering about this story, from my point of view at least, is how utterly ignorant most people seem to be about how all of this stuff actually works.

Here are some choice quotes from the BBC “have your say” section:

You can't control evolution. It only takes one of these bacteria to mate with another and you have serious and posibly extinction problems. Not a good idea.

Ah yes. Bacteria. Well known for mating with each other.

For those who have an imaginary friend and think we are playing god, yes we probably are, and we are getting very good at it. It's no longer just nature that can create new life. People can do it too, although we are just part of nature ourselves really, aren't we!

Ka-ching! That’ll be a penny, thanks. So… do you actually have anything to say other than “this sounds awesome but I have no idea what any of it actually means”?

Also. The “god = imaginary friend” line? Are you fucking twelve?

Before this study continues we need to be sure that the "bacteria" doesn't mutate like all other organisms in this world do. We all know computers have flaws. This scientist is just in way over his head and he needs to slow down. This could do more harm than good. This could be a step toward ending global warming or it could be a step towards mind control. Watch out it is 1984 all over again.

Umm … okay. So you know that all organisms in the world mutate. But you seem to think that if this organism was to mutate, for some reason that would be unconscionably terrible? And where exactly is the mind control thing coming from.

Of course it’s not just the ignorant plebs that post to the BBC main page that spout this mindless dogshit. Michael Hanlon, Science Editor for the Daily Mail writes:

It is possible to imagine a synthetic microbe going on the rampage, perhaps wiping out all the world’s crop plants or even humanity itself.

Well yes. It is indeed possible to imagine that. It is possible to imagine anything you damned well want. I could imagine an army of killer penguins going on the rampage and wiping out all the world’s crop plants or perhaps even humanity itself. It doesn’t mean it’s remotely plausible.

Aside from a few echoing voices of sanity, the discussion of this story is just a desperate, mortifying condemnation of how little basic understanding of biology people have.

DNA For Dummies

DNA or “deoxyribose nucleic acid” as it is known to its friends and drinking buddies, is a sequence of “base pairs” which in layman's terms form a set of instructions which tell our cells how to develop and how to behave.

Just as Venter observes, DNA “code” is effectively made from four chemicals, Adenine, Cytosine, Guanine and Thymine. This is what he was talking about when he said that his “artificial life” had been made from “four bottles of chemicals”. Although DNA is extremely complex overall, the chemicals it is made from are very basic, and reasonably well understood. “Scientists” have, in fact, been producing artificial DNA for years, and have been swapping the DNA of bacteria around for so long that it's taught at A-Level.

Chris Ventner's analogy is that DNA is like the “software” to the cell's computer, and this analogy is more or less correct. But it's exactly this analogy that makes the whole “Artificial Life” thing sound so stupid. If you took a computer, scrubbed the hard drive, and then installed a new operating system which you had copied from another computer, you wouldn't claim to have created that computer yourself. You certainly wouldn't expect to get your face on the cover of Wired with headlines saying “SCIENTISTS CREATE ARTIFICIAL COMPUTER IN LABORATORY”.

As one of the (depressingly rare) sane commentators on the BBC article pointed out, it's not actually artificial DNA that's the challenge here, but artificial everything else. DNA is complex, but it's ultimately one chemical. Building a whole artificial cell would be vastly more difficult. Others pointed out that since the DNA implanted was effectively an artificial copy of the DNA of an existing bacterium, they didn't really “create” anything that didn't exist already, and again when it comes to DNA the hard part is working out what a particular bit of code actually does, not reproducing it.

Indeed it's all a bit Ship of Theseus. This “artificial life” consists of DNA copied from one living organism, implanted into the cells of another living organism, which carried on living. Were it not for the quasi-mystical significance which popular consciousness attaches to that strange stuff called “DNA” nobody would claim for a second that these guys had successfully “created life” any more than we say that people with pacemakers are cyborgs.

That's Life?

A big part of the problem with the “artificial life” claim is that when you get right down to it, “life” just isn't a well defined technical term. Yes there's the definition we all learn at GCSE (something is alive if it Moves, Respires, is Sensitive to its surroundings, Grows, Reproduces , Excretes and consumes Nutrition – the “Mrs Gren” definition) but that's a bad definition all around – if nothing else it applies to a great many things which you wouldn't describe as living, like fire.

Life, when you get right down to it, is a self-sustaining chemical reaction with an arbitrary level of complexity. You can say that a cow is alive and bag of nails isn't, but once you get into the freaky world of micro-organisms it gets far harder to draw the line (a lot of biologists draw it at viruses).

I said earlier that both sides of this whole stupid affair were as bad as each other. While the anti-science crowd are crying about “Playing God”, the pro-science crowd (who thanks to Dan Brown I will now forever think of as “Galileo's Illuminati”) are crowing about the fact that “Science” has created “life” and that this proves that religion is obsolete (seriously, a depressing number of people really do talk like they're in Angels and Demons).

The problem with the “Science Creates Life” soundbyte is that for it to have any meaning, you have to buy into the superstitious, quasi-mystical notion of “life-essence”. That there is somehow a tangible, observable, creatable force called “life” which has been hitherto beyond the reach of scientists.

“Life”, like “energy”, is lodged in the popular consciousness as being a kind of invisible liquid which flows to and from objects, rather like the Force. Heck, there's even a tendency to treat them as the same thing. Rather like the Force. In reality these sorts of ideas went out with the Victorians, but because they're easy to imagine, they've stuck around to this day. Anybody who hails this new “discovery” as a triumph of science over superstition has actually failed to understand what the scientific consensus on “life” has been for the past hundred years.

Nature and Artifice

The biggest source of stupidity in this whole non-story seems to be the persistent notion that it matters whether or not something is “natural”. This is pure superstition. It's like the old myths about microwaved water being bad for you because its “chemical structure” is somehow changed by the “radiation”.

The idea that “artificial” DNA can function just as well as “real” DNA should be utterly unsurprising to anybody with a basic understanding of the way science works. The fact that artificial DNA can be created is interesting, but only from an engineering perspective, it doesn't raise deep philosophical questions about the nature of life, because those questions have, in the mind of pretty much anybody who keeps up with the science, already been answered.

And in a sense, the same goes for the potential applications of this technology. There's been a whole lot of talk about how these “custom bacteria” will either save the world or destroy it (which, again, is exactly what Dan Brown says about antimatter at the start of Angels and Demons). This is nonsense.

We can already engineer “custom bacteria” using DNA from existing sources – as I learned during my sodding GCSEs, we already use it to produce insulin, and have been for over a decade. Whether the DNA we make these custom bacteria with is cut wholesale from other cells, or whether we make it ourselves from “bottles of chemicals” is irrelevant. We don't understand anywhere near enough about how DNA actually works to invent wholly new organisms, all we can do is copy bits and pieces of things that already exist and do more or less what we want. And we're not going to break any existing scientific laws. There's some talk of these bacteria being able to make fuel out of Carbon Dioxide, and to be fair they could (so can, y'know, plants) but they'd need an energy source to do it, so all it would really be is a complicated solar power plant.

Similarly, worrying about these “custom bacteria” mutating and destroying the world is rank idiocy. Bacteria exist. They mutate. There is no special quality in “natural” bacteria which prevents them from evolving into a world-destroying superplague. Michael Hanlon, in the Mail observes that there's “no guarantee” that these engineered bacteria will “follow the rules”. Where he thinks these “rules” come from, or why he thinks natural bacteria obey them, he does not explain. Perhaps he believes that there's some kind of long standing union agreement.

The same magical thinking arises time and again when a new technology allows us to do artificially something which has been happening naturally for centuries. Somehow we imagine that heating water with microwaves can turn it into a deadly poison, when heating it with infra red radiation doesn't, or that particle collisions in the LHC will create a black hole that destroys the solar system, when the billions of similar particle collisions that happen all the time all around us have no such effect.

“Scientists” have not “created life”. They've created some synthetic DNA, and implanted it into a bacterium, both of which are things we knew they could do already. It's technologically moderately interesting but it doesn't challenge our perception of what life is, it hasn't let the any genies out of any bottles, and it isn't going to make us all live forever.

None of those make good headlines though.

Arthur B

at 22:54 on 2010-05-22

Michael Hanlon, in the Mail observes that there's “no guarantee” that these engineered bacteria will “follow the rules”. Where he thinks these “rules” come from, or why he thinks natural bacteria obey them, he does not explain.

Yeah, at most you can say that all the natural bacteria and micro-organisms out there follow the "rules" of natural selection.

Which means that a synthetic bacterium brewed in a lab for some completely artificial purpose like producing human insulin is going to be far less likely to thrive in the wild than a "natural" bacterium which has been subject to all the dangers that threaten a wee microbe out in the big wide world. It's like expecting a family of chihuahuas to take down a wolf pack on the pack's home turf.

permalink

go to top

Andy G

at 23:57 on 2010-05-22Interesting stuff!

Actually I have been writing an essay about a recent book that talks about life and energy in just those terms! But he is talking more about the way the world is experienced in consciousness (to try and describe the way in which the world appears "dead" to many people with schizophrenia). I think the problem with lots of Victorian thought was that it treated lots of concepts as if they were a matter of empirical reality (like the Creationists taking the Bible literally). And that's clearly lingered on Have Your Say.

permalink

go to top

Rami

at 00:42 on 2010-05-23I'm probably wrong, but as I'd understood it, the more interesting work was in developing synthetic RNA to engineer already-understood bacteria into a wider range of useful applications?

Anyway, to regurgitate a tired old meme: I, for one, welcome our bacterial overlords...

permalink

go to top

Viorica

at 02:05 on 2010-05-23. . . I'm sorry, you lost me at "DNA"

permalink

go to top

Dan H

at 12:45 on 2010-05-23

I think the problem with lots of Victorian thought was that it treated lots of concepts as if they were a matter of empirical reality

To be fair, the "invisible fluid" models for things like life and energy were actually perfectly good physical theories for quite a long time, so for that matter was ether theory.

permalink

go to top

Dan H

at 12:47 on 2010-05-23

I'm probably wrong, but as I'd understood it, the more interesting work was in developing synthetic RNA to engineer already-understood bacteria into a wider range of useful applications?

Yeah, something like that (although I believe that's far older technology). But funnily enough SCIENTISTS DEVELOP SYNTHETIC RNA is much less punchy than SCIENTISTS CREATE LIFE!

permalink

go to top

Frank

at 15:46 on 2010-05-23

None of those make good headlines though.

Or excite investors.

permalink

go to top

Jamie Johnston

at 16:17 on 2010-05-23I've got to the sub-heading 'DNA for dummies' and at this point I'm going to stop reading for a moment to summarize what I've understood of this story from my sole source of scientific news, namely BBC Radio 4. Then I'll read the rest of the article and see how accurately Radio 4 has informed me. It's like an experiment!

So my impression is that Venter's team (or whoever) has analyzed the DNA of some bacterium or other, put together molecules in the same combinations as that original DNA so as to make some new DNA that's functionally identical to the original DNA, and then put that DNA into a different 'empty' bacterium. The bacterium then happily wandered around being a bacterium, in every important way the same as if it had been 'born' naturally by, er, whatever the normal way for a bacterium to come into existence is (cell-division or something?). It also reproduced in the usual way (see earlier vagueness) to create new bacteria just as a 'natural' bacterium would do. In short, they've taken stuff that was previously not a living creature and made it into a living creature. It isn't a 'new organism' in the sense of being a new species. (Do bacteria have species? You know what I mean, though.) It's just a new individual. The whole business is exciting in as much as if you can make new DNA then you can (1) theoretically do cloning and stuff without having to take DNA from existing organisms, and (2) very very theoretically make DNA in new combinations and thus ultimately new types of organism.

Things I'm not clear about: I don't know on quite what level the new DNA was created, e.g., whether they took protein molecules they already had lying around and stuck them together, or whether they made the new molecules out of atoms and stuff, or what. I suspect it doesn't matter much. Also I have a mental image of the new DNA being somehow physically squirted into a microscopic empty cell-membrane bag, but I've no idea whether that's literally how it works. Nor do I know how they got the empty bacterium in the first place.

Now I'll read the rest of the article and see how wrong all that is.

permalink

go to top

Dan H

at 16:27 on 2010-05-23I think the bit you're missing is that the "empty" bacterium was in fact a perfectly ordinary bacterium from which the DNA had been removed, so the other bacterium had, in fact, been "born" in the normal way, it's just that they had taken its DNA out and replaced it. So they took something that was actually totally a living creature, and made it into a slightly different living creature.

It's sort of like giving somebody a heart transplant and claiming that you'd created a living human on an operating table. It's technically true that neither the person receiving the transplant, nor the transplanted organ can survive independently of each other, but claiming that you have therefore "created" a whole new person would be farcical.

permalink

go to top

Frank

at 16:32 on 2010-05-23re: 'Scientists'

On the latest edition of NPR's Science Friday, one of the segments discussed the origin of the word 'scientist'. The person who coined the word dismissed other possibilities to describe/define a 'cultivator of science'. The coiner (Well?) chose 'scientist' because it may remind readers/listeners of the word 'artist' who were apparently held in higher regard, but he was also concerned that 'scientist' might suggest less esteemed people of the time with '-ist' endings specifically 'economist' and 'atheist'.

It is funny that some people in the writing/dancing/sculpting/painting/drawing/etcing communities would love to be thought of as the generic term 'artist' while those working in the fields of genetics/biology/chemistry/geology/thermodynamics/etcics cringe at the label 'scientist'.

permalink

go to top

Jamie Johnston

at 16:56 on 2010-05-23Although there's also a fun sort of tongue-in-cheek 'reclaiming' (and simultaneously 'pointing out how unhelpfully broad a term it is') thing going on, at least among internetty science-fans if not among professional science-doers, saying things like 'Let's do Science on this!'

Which in turn tempts me to start saying things like 'Stand back: I'm going to do Arts!'

permalink

go to top

http://roisindubh211.livejournal.com/

at 03:46 on 2010-05-24This line makes me crack up:

Watch out it is 1984 all over again.

Has this person actually read 1984? I wonder where he/she gets the fascism-biology connection? Is Big Brother supposed to be created in a lab?

Seriously- you're spoilt for choice for science gone OUT OF CONTROL in literature, from Frankenstein to Jurassic Park, for goodness sakes, and they pick 1984?

permalink

go to top

http://mmoa.livejournal.com/

at 12:57 on 2010-05-24I actually find it a little ironic that one of the more reasonable responses to this has come from the Vatican itself who have officially declared this advance as 'interesting':

http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/05/22/vatican.synthetic.cell/index.html?hpt=T3

permalink

go to top

Arthur B

at 13:03 on 2010-05-24I think after the whole geocentrism/heliocentrism thing the Vatican

really

doesn't want to get caught out again when it comes to making statements about science.

Except where it comes to

condoms

, in which case they'll endorse any pseudoscientific bollocks which supports their position.

permalink

go to top

Andrew Currall

at 18:26 on 2010-05-24I don't think I share your dislike for "scientist". Yes, it has rather a broad scope, and yes, it is often used to create an air of authority that it shouldn't actually create (anyone can claim to be one, many with some legitimacy), but I don't see that it's any worse than "geneticist"- it's just a bit less specific. It does mean something, and is generally so far as I can see used more or less correctly. It's certainly no worse than "artist".

permalink

go to top

Jamie Johnston

at 18:49 on 2010-05-24Deleted my second comment because I seem to have written it without reading Dan's response to my first one, hence it made no sense. But anyway, @ Dan: yes, I hadn't gathered that. So in fact they haven't really created a new individual, they've just, er. Um. Made an individual different?

Also, @ Róisín (if you don't mind me using that as if it were your name, even though it probably isn't, simply because it's a name): Yes, and another ludicrous thing about that is that the phrase 'it is 1984 all over again' (rather than the more obvious 'it's like 1984') actually draws attention to the fact that

1984

never even happened the first time. In fact the problem with people ever invoking

1984

in a 'we're heading into totalitarian hell' way is that the main thing about

1984

is that the year 1984 came and went and there was no totalitarian hell.

permalink

go to top

Arthur B

at 19:11 on 2010-05-24

In fact the problem with people ever invoking 1984 in a 'we're heading into totalitarian hell' way is that the main thing about 1984 is that the year 1984 came and went and there was no totalitarian hell.

Can't agree here. The main thing about the title of 1984 is that it's completely arbitrary - Orwell had wanted to go with 1948 but his publishers considered that a bit too bleak even considering the subject matter.

The main thing about the

content

of 1984 is that it is actually timeless* and dismissing it because it didn't come about on some arbitrary schedule is rote repetition of

the

most annoying misconception about science fiction ever devised by man - namely, that it's a predictive genre and individual works become invalid if their predictions don't actually come to pass.

Jamie, I am disappoint.

* It is, in fact, literally timeless - there's no reason to assume that the year the novel takes place in is in fact 1984. The Party could have added in or blotted out centuries of history if it so chose, or indeed keep recycling the year 1984 over and over again for shits and giggles.)

permalink

go to top

Andy G

at 19:14 on 2010-05-24

Isn't that an urban myth? I thought the title was actually based on a rather bleak poem his wife wrote for a 1934 school competition imagining life in 50 years' time.

permalink

go to top

Arthur B

at 19:31 on 2010-05-24Anthony Burgess was fond of the 1948 idea. The usual explanation I've seen is that he just switched the last two digits of the publication year. According to the intro to the Modern Classics version he did consider several several years for the title. Not heard the poem explanation before.

Either way, the point is that Orwell wasn't predicting an inevitable slippery slope to utter totalitarianism by 1984, he was suggesting a constant threat of totalitarianism that

any

generation could succumb to. There's no vaccine against dictatorship and no society immune to degeneration, we can't pat ourselves on the back and say we've saved ourselves from it just because we got past one particularly overhyped year.

permalink

go to top

Andy G

at 19:42 on 2010-05-24@ Arthur B:

His former wife Eileen O'Shaughnessy wrote a poem called "End of the Century, 1984" (which only came to light after Burgess had come up with his theory). I can't actually find it online but it's meant to be fairly bleak and dystopian. It seems to me a more plausible influence, as it seems a bit arbitrary to just swap numbers.

permalink

go to top

Arthur B

at 20:48 on 2010-05-24Thanks!

(The working title, apparently, was

The Last Man In Europe

...)

permalink

go to top

Jamie Johnston

at 21:58 on 2010-05-24@ Arthur: Fair point, I am mostly wrong. In related news, I am not entirely wrong because I also partly meant something else, namely that people who say 'it's just like

1984

' are often using it precisely as a predictive exercise, their implied reasoning being, for example, 'people in positions of authority are using euphemisms, this is a bit like newspeak, therefore totalitarian hell is imminent'. In other words they treat

1984

like a less cryptic and more secular version of Revelations.

Also I haven't heard people having that misconception about science fiction before, so I deny that I have had a derivative fail and insist that I be given full credit for an original work of fail. :)

permalink

go to top

Arthur B

at 22:22 on 2010-05-24

In other words they treat 1984 like a less cryptic and more secular version of Revelations.

This is very true, though to be fair I wonder whether Orwell didn't at least partially intend it to be like that, or at very least a spotter's guide to general symptoms of totalitarianism - between Winston Smith's diary, Goldstein's book, and O'Brien's speeches in room 101, you've pretty much got an easily-grasped analysis of the sort of traits you can expect a totalitarian society (or one heading in said direction) to exhibit.

I think it is sometimes correct to say that a situation is "just like 1984", but only if it shows the actual signs Orwell wants us to watch out for. So, widespread censorship, pervasive surveillance, a culture of informants, brazen propaganda, that sort of thing, especially when several signs are seen in combination with the others. It gets ludicrous when one of the more minor elements (like Newspeak), occurring in isolation, is used to argue that the entire package is unfolding in real life.

It's kind of like Godwin's Law - it's not actually bad to say someone is acting like a Nazi if they are in fact an antisemite and a fascist. Likewise, it's not actually bad to say "It's just like 1984" when, for example, you're protesting against people being spirited away in the middle of the night to secret prisons in far-flung parts of the world to be tortured for information on enemies of the state.

Applying it to biochemical advances is pathetic, though. Haven't they ever heard of

Brave New World

? ;)

permalink

go to top

Andy G

at 23:16 on 2010-05-24I think I'd quibble a bit with the idea that Newspeak is a minor element!

On the other hand, I do remember a Telegraph article that mentioned how Big Brother imposed metric units (one of the guys in the pub grumbles about it at some point) ... that's what I call distorting a minor element!

permalink

go to top

Arthur B

at 23:35 on 2010-05-24I think Newspeak is significant in the novel, but I don't think it's actually so useful in analysing IRL social trends to see whether things are drifting towards authoritarianism - in particular, I think Newspeak as depicted in the novel is the sort of thing which you could only really successfully accomplish if you'd already established utter totalitarian control over a society (which is why in the novel it was only in its emergent stages, and normal English was only just beginning to be phased out).

permalink

go to top

Dan H

at 13:49 on 2010-05-25

It does mean something, and is generally so far as I can see used more or less correctly. It's certainly no worse than "artist".

The point being, though, that you don't say "ARTISTS DO X" every time somebody with an arts degree does something.

"Artist's thriller trilogy becomes posthumous bestseller"

"Economic downturn may continue, say artists"

"Viking settlement lasted into 17th century, artists discover"

It's just completely stupid.

permalink

go to top

Dan H

at 13:50 on 2010-05-25

@ Dan: yes, I hadn't gathered that. So in fact they haven't really created a new individual, they've just, er. Um. Made an individual different?

Yes, pretty much.

permalink

go to top

Andy G

at 01:33 on 2010-05-26

@ Dan: yes, I hadn't gathered that. So in fact they haven't really created a new individual, they've just, er. Um. Made an individual different?

It's nano-augmentation! Deus Ex here we come!

permalink

go to top

Rami

at 03:54 on 2010-05-26

The point being, though, that you don't say "ARTISTS DO X" every time somebody with an arts degree does something.

Of course, bearing in mind that the separation between "science" degrees and "arts" degrees is not AFAIK seen in the same light (or referred to in the same terms) in North America, the word "scientist" is used much more for someone whose profession is in scientific research. Which makes it rather less ridiculous. Just like the headline "Artists launch new show at museum" wouldn't be completely ridiculous even if it did conflate painters, sculptors, filmmakers and performing poets.

permalink

go to top

Andrew Currall

at 12:50 on 2010-05-26"Artist" doesn't mean "someone with an art degree" any more than "scientist" means "someone with a science degree". It refers to one's profession (or possibly hobby), not training. Historians/archaeologists are not artists (not are they usually scientists); neither are economists. Authors are, and I admit use of "artist" in place of "author" is unlikely. But it isn't wrong, nor do I see any problem with it.

permalink

go to top

Dan H

at 13:07 on 2010-05-26

"Artist" doesn't mean "someone with an art degree" any more than "scientist" means "someone with a science degree".

That's sort of my point, that's *exactly* what "scientist" means - it's the only possible meaning. It *isn't* a legitimate job description.

Rami's right that it's used *colloquially* (both in the UK and in the US) to mean "people who work in scientific research" but this is simply incorrect - just as it would be incorrect to refer to people who do research in Arts subjects as "artists".

permalink

go to top

Rami

at 17:47 on 2010-05-26

It refers to one's profession (or possibly hobby), not training.

I can't get to

OED Online

but according to

Merriam-Webster's definition

training is exactly what it refers to.

Possibly some of the confusion here is that "artist" and "scientist" are not used (or defined) similarly: an artist is “

someone who professes and practises a creative art

”, not just someone trained in it. Neither colloquial nor formal usage, AFAIK, refers to arts graduates (or, in USian, liberal arts majors) as "artists".

permalink

go to top

Dan H

at 18:44 on 2010-05-26

Possibly some of the confusion here is that "artist" and "scientist" are not used (or defined) similarly

I think you're right - artist was a bad example.

Basically the term "scientist" describes a broad, heterogenous group of people, but the media like to invoke "Scientists" (a subtly distinct, and wholly fictional class of person) to lend legitimacy to otherwise implausible claims, which is why it bugs me.

permalink

go to top

Andy G

at 03:30 on 2010-05-27OED says a scientist is someone who is studying or has expert knowledge of a scientific field. It would still sound a little odd to me though to call someone a scientist purely on the basis that they happen to know science. It may not be a job description, but it surely implies something about what that person *does*.

permalink

go to top

Guy

at 06:25 on 2010-05-27Surely the now agreed-upon definition of "scientist" is "someone who lies about how magnets work."?

permalink

go to top

Arthur B

at 15:37 on 2010-05-27@Guy: Sounds like these geneticists have been listening to the Insane

Clone

Posse!!!!!!!

Geddit?

permalink

go to top

Guy

at 08:54 on 2010-05-28@Arthur - if someone wanted to create a cover band for them (which itself would probably require some kind of Miracle, or possibly a life-form artificially created to have inhuman levels of bad taste) that would be a great name for it. :)

permalink

go to top

Jamie Johnston

at 23:08 on 2010-05-28Aha! Allow me to shoe-horn in the totally irrelevant fact that the best tribute-band name ever is:

aRe wE theM?

And, to return to the subject, although we bid a sad farewell to the exciting idea of synthetic life-forms taking over the world, there are glimmers of a slightly more plausible but still entertaining thriller plot in which it's actually not the media but Venter himself who is exaggerating the implications of his work in order to justify

an application

to patent every conceivable technology that could arise from making DNA and squirting it into cells. I hear Dan Brown uncapping his pen.

permalink

go to top

Robinson L

at 20:30 on 2010-12-18

And if I had a penny for every time I’d seen the words “playing God” I’d be able to get an extra cup of coffee out the vending machine.

The Omnians have a saying, “Don't play God, He [sic] always wins.”

#Ferretbrain #Dan H #Science #Topical

0 notes