Category Archives: science

The Anthropologist’s Way

Art, science, social commentary, Uncategorized

Summer Night’s Dream
Acrylic on Canvas, 26” ato 32”, Gold Frame, $498

We are afloat in a world that has changed. The systems we grew up with in comfort are no longer applicable for a blended society that spans the globe.

The Anthroplogist’s Way

In college I majored in cultural anthropology, a pursuit my parents thought was one step up from useless. Since they assumed I would get married rather than travel the world to live among exotic tribes, they were not worried and never complained. They were right since I did get married at 18 and was a mother at 21. I never did go to the outreaches of Nigeria where I hoped find an unstudied people who would carry me to fame and fortune.

Looking back, I realize that I could not have made a better choice of major. Anthropology taught me a great deal and continues to guide my thoughts. It helped me understand how each person is culturally tied to the world from a unique vantage. And, though we reside within communities, our individual struggles make each of us the center of our own universe. We peer through tinted glasses shaded by family, community, economic conditions, and our own experiences.

Yet, with all of our differences, societies are similar in that they are organized around common systems. To understand the interrelationships between individuals, groups and institutions we studied beliefs and ways of organizing. The systems are identified as:

-religious
-political
-family
-economic
-social classes
-racial diversity
-gender roles
-ethical values
-distribution of wealth

These categories create an exchange of energy that defines the whole. Every society has them yet in each they differ.

Once I realized that societies have similar organizational needs, I reasoned that ego-centricity is the main cause of tension between cultures. The more I learned, the more difficult it became to define a particular system as good, better or best for it was created relative to the totality of everything in the environment.

I thought of how clothing can define a culture, yet they most likely were designed to accomadate a particular climate and habitat. For instance, those living in a Middle-Eastern desert would need to cover head, face, and body for protection from sandstorms and the burning sun. After realizing that these garments work well in harsh conditions, it is probable that the fashion was spread by nomads to nearby towns and cities. Since men and women’s bodies in Middle-Eastern countries are fully covered, their garments may also have contributed to ideas about morality and modesty. Of course, this is speculation on my part, but it makes some sense.

My high school history books talked about how ancient societies of hunters and gatherers slowly evolved to live a more agrarian existence. Further readings explained how pregnancies were welcome, for multiple births insured the group’s survival. Childhood diseases and accidents were rampant before antibiotics and deaths frequent. Hunting was dangerous and farming families needed many hands to till the land.

Today’s world has different challenges. Augmented farming methods give us the ability to feed more mouths with less need for labor. And though the birth rate has slowed in industrialized nations, population still increases in poor countries lacking resources. When a warming climate and war impacts those living in poor countries, families suddenly find that there is not enough safe, fertile land and drinkable water to survive. They are forced to migrate and come in conflict with strange organizational systems and beliefs.

Migrants as well as those in communities that accept them as immigrants become confused, don’t understand cultural differences, and have conflicting feelings about the ways “the others” view the world. The centers of their universes are now overlapped, causing tensions that can even lead to war. It happens quickly, with little time to accommodate.

Systems that previously worked well become suspect as migrants try to provide input even though most of their ideas are frowned upon by the dominant society. Few of us want to change. We hold on to our beliefs as though they are etched in stone forever more. We scream, fight, belittle, and say that we will not move away from what we have always known. We prefer to remain in a childhood comfort zone.

Time does not stand still and migrants do influence change. Societies constantly and painfully reorganize systems that mix cultural norms. The pushing and shoving, giving and taking that goes on around us is exacerbated by war, climate warming, population growth. Eventually a synergy results from this blending of cultures and people slowly adapt.

There are no absolutes. As mentioned earlier, we each see things from the center of our own universe. Einstein spent his waning years looking for a unified theory of the universe. His search for one unqualified, universal truth remains an unsolved challenge. We may never know absolute truth and for now, at least, have to deal with uncertainty and chaos.

What this means for most is that we must constantly question and realign systems as new input is received. It involves investigating beliefs and allowing that there are conflicting views that may be valid but we may never know for sure.

My parents would be surprised to discover that an anthropologist’s way of looking at systems might help different cultures coexist ccompassionately. By exploring common needs around food, water, land use and population perhaps rational decisions can be made to reorganize systems to benefit the majority.

Let’s also agree that it is OK to disagree when it comes to items of religious faith and embedded customs that do no harm to others. To live on this earth together, we have to bend a bit.
bend a bit.References:
1. Definition of Socio Cultural Anthropology, http://www.cod.edu/dept/anthro/cultural%20anthropology%20definition.htm
2. Noakes, Zoe, Why do the Poor Have Large Families? Compassion, January 2011, https://www.compassion.com.au/blog/why-do-the-poor-have-large-families
_______________________________

I look forward to your comments below.

Art is always for sale. Contact me at marilynne@eichingerfineart.com

Science vs Belief

Art, education, science

Rub a Dub Dub Five Men in a Tub

Acrylic painting on Canvas/ 42” by 54” / $ 790

Courageous explorers set out to sea and disproved the flat earth theory. What if they hadn’t? Galileo was punished for saying the earth travelled around the sun. What if he (and others) hadn’t? Salk wiped out polio with a vaccine? What if people had refused to give it to their children?

Science vs Belief

In 2015, Julie Beck wrote an article for The Atlantic saying Americans Believe in Science, Just Not its Findings. Though 79 percent of Americans do think life is much easier because of science and that investments in research are worthwhile, they question their findings. A recent Pew Research study shows that there is a large gap between what the public believes compared to the beliefs of scientists. I quote the following:

Genetically modified foods: 88 percent of scientists say they’re “generally safe” to eat; 37 percent of the public agrees.

Vaccines: 86 percent of scientists believe they should be required in childhood, compared to 68 percent of the public.

Climate change: 94 percent of scientists say it’s a “very serious” or “somewhat serious” problem; 65 percent of the public agrees. 87 percent of scientists blame humans; 50 percent of the public does too.

Evolution: 98 percent of scientists say they believe humans evolved over time, compared to 65 percent of the public.

There were also large disparities on issues like whether it’s safe to eat foods grown with pesticides (scientists: 68 percent; public: 28 percent), and
whether the world’s growing population will be a problem (scientists: 82 percent; public: 59 percent).

Instead of trusting facts, the public tunes into feelings. People are quick to go to pseudoscience when they want to refute a claim they dislike, for most any reason. Strangely, though they trust and respect scientists, they don’t believe in their evidence-heavy research. Dan Kahan, professor at Yale Law Schools says there is a “creeping anti-science sensibility” overtaking the country and it is gradually getting worse. I wanted to know why?

Pew research scientists say that the fault is with the media because of they don’t know how to present complex information in a concise manner that can be easily digested by the public. Scientific information does not lend itself to be communicated through sound bites and reporters don’t know how to capture people’s attention for a long enough period of time to present all of the facts and nuances. Most people have stopped reading newspapers altogether and they avoid cumbersome science stories.

However, there are other factors to consider besides the media. Religion, jobs, and past experience with faulty science causes people to reject studies they don’t like. Preferring childhood indoctrinations and the faulty conclusions they surmised from personal experiences, they use them as a guide to evaluate valid research findings. In other words, they stay committed to their own beliefs which may or may not be based on tested results. It may be why so many people believe that ghosts are real, that holding your laptop on your lap will make you sterile, that talking on your cell phone will give you cancer, or that sugar makes your kids craz. They also commonly spout that hair and nails continue to grow after you die, that crossing your legs gives you varicose veins, and that brown eggs are better for you than white.(they are both the same)

The 2015 international student assessment test (PISA), given to 15 year olds, showed that out of 71 countries the United States placed 38th in math and 24th in science. Though math scores steadily increased since the early 1990s, in 2009 they once again started to dip. Science scores showed only a slight improvement. The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) blames our country’s overall weak scores on poor STEM education in the schools.

The numbers are worse when evaluating adults, for over 70 percent of Americans are not able to read and understand the science section of the New York Times. Only 28 percent of the population qualifies as being scientifically literate.The small percentage of those who are interested in science and engineering and continue on for advanced degrees excel. “The United states has done more to advance science in the modern world than any other country on earth,” says physician/researcher Danielle Teller.

Our engineering schools are among the top in the world and even medical research still remains among the best. At the highest level of academic achievement we do well, but among the general public’s understanding we fall behind. One reason may be that science writers have not been able to connect researched facts to daily life in order for it to have meaning. Instead, information is presented in confusing bullets that claim one thing to be the truth and then shortly after we are told their are nuances to the study that need to be more carefully evaluated. It is difficult for the average person to know what to make of the information so they stop trying. Rather than show their ignorance, many simply say, “I don’t believe it and who says so?”

What do we do about the public’s lack of understanding of science? How do we communicate to those who are not interested in science and what is important for them to know? For over 50 years the National Science Foundation (NSF) had a science initiatives that funded programs like NOVA, encouraged the building of science centers, and supported innovations in teaching. The present administration, however, wants to reverse the trend by cutting research budgets for NSF and NIS (National Institute of Health) as well as funds targeted to increase science literacy. I suppose their reasoning is that if they are not going to accept the outcome of the research, why conduct studies? If they do not want any one to discuss the contribution of fossil fuels uto global warming, why give out research grants? Should we care?


Science literacy is not just about facts for it prescribes what to do with them. It is about being able to predict and explain natural phenomena like volcanoes, tornadoes, and tidal waves. It enables informed participation in civic, cultural, and economic affairs and defines ways to make judgements about the future. Scientific literacy is crucial in that it affects everyday decision making, but it is also personal in that it encompasses societal values. Since many value-laden beliefs get applied to critical issues, to find science useful you have to accept that it is much more than the latest study.

Science is a way of thinking—a process involving ideas, collecting data, developing a hypothesis (an educated guess), testing, and coming to a conclusion only to start the process over again. It is not focused on the absolute perfect answer but rather the outcome based on the best information available. at the time. It involves challenging preconceived notions, over and over again in a never ending cycle.

It is difficult to live in a world without absolutes but due to high speed communication we are forced to do so. It is important to understand research findings and resultant innovations in order to decide if they benefit society. There are decisions to made and they can’t be based on thin air. We know how to make robots and drones. The societal question involves how we want to use them? Should they deliver packages, pick up passengers, clean our homes and add to workplace unemployment? How do we deal with the problems they create for those who lose their jobs? Answering questions like, “Do all children need to be vaccinated? Is there such a thing as clean coal? What is an acceptable level of toxins to allow in drinking water?” require knowledgeable decision makers.

Scientific literacy also includes understanding how data is manipulated and purposefully misinterpreted for political and business reasons. Informed people need to ask how data is being collected, what biases are involved, and who is footing the bill for the study. They need to be able to interpret statistical information in order to not be fooled. It also behooves us to look for mental laziness on the part of the investigator and to make sure that comfort results that reinforce cherished beliefs are not being sought. .

Facts can be used to reenforce long held beliefs or they can be used to shed light on the universe. They can serve as answers to curious inquiries and a platform for the next great discovery or as fodder for industrial moguls who want to negate findings. Whether science is used for good or for evil depends on our values and motivations. Since we are traveling speedily through the universe, clinging to the land by means of earth’s gravity, it behooves us to understand as much about it as possible in order to protect and sanely develop our spaceship.

References:

Beck, Julie, The Atlantic, 2015 , Americans Believe in Science, Just not its findings, In https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2015/01/americans-believe-in-science-just-not-its-findings/384937/

Desilver, Drew, Pew Research Center, 2017, U.S. Students’ academic achievement still lags that of their peers in many other countrieshttp://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/02/15/u-s-students-internationally-math-science/

Lombrozo, Tania, 2015, NPR, Scientific Literacy: It’s Not Just about the facts,
http://www.npr.org/sections/13.7/2015/09/14/440213603/scientific-literacy-it-s-not-just-about-the-facts

Teller, Danielle Quartz MEdia LLC, 2016,There’s a good reason Americans are horrible at science,https://qz.com/588126/theres-a-good-reason-americans-are-horrible-at-science/

Art is always for sale. Contact me at
marilynne@eichingerfineart.com

Please share your thoughts below.

____________________________________________
CELEBRATE! and learn about hands-on learning and the growth of art and science museums by naive but passionate directors from throughout the country.  Laugh and cry with them as you read their stories of trying to navigate the quagmire of running a non-profit organization.  
 
Lives of Museum Junkies — Upcoming Book Talks

Old Boys Club – Tigard –  April 28, 2017

Museum of Natural and Cultural History, University of Oregon,
Eugene – May 23, 2017
 
Lake Oswego Library  – June 20, 2017
 
High Desert Museum, Bend – October 5, 2017
 
Available for $19.95 Powells Books, Amazon, Barnes and Noble, Broadway Books, MAC Emporium, Also on Kindle for signed copy contact the author.

Violent Storms a’ Comin’

Art, science, social commentary

Surf’s Up
Acrylic on Canvas, gold frame, 48” by 36” / $ 699

Violent Storms a’ Comin’

A few days ago a friend of mine went to a Buddhist induction ceremony where Initiates were given a bowl and robe and told that from then on these objects would be their only possessions. Letting go of attachment, being mindful and focused, having kindness and compassion, reducing suffering and increasing happiness they are all that matter. Property ownership is meaningless.

His story made me wonder what it would be like to give up everything I own? I realize that you can’t take objects with you when you die but to possess and create beautify art has always made me feel good. As a visual person, the natural and human-made environments are important to me. Just as I appreciate observing birds in the wild I enjoy putting my hands around a lovely piece of pottery I own to feel ripples in the clay that the potter made when crafting a bowl.

While acknowledging that I was attached to my possessions, I switched the television on to the weather channel where they were reshowing images of the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy. I had never paid a great deal of attention to the trauma that beset the New Jersey Coast but when I heard the newscaster say Barnegat Bay, he grabbed my attention. My family had once owned a summer home on Long Beach Island. Located between the Bay and Ocean, the narrow strip of land bore the brunt of the hurricane’s force. It struck me that no longer can I bury my head and say that losing everything is not a possibility.

During the past two years, several trees landed on my property due to erratic weather conditions and rain saturated land. One smashed through the roof of my house and the second demolished a car in the driveway. In both cases, members of our family were inches away from being killed. Are these violent storms going the be the norm in the future? I decided to explore more deeply why a warming climate produces violent storms that include icy cold winters.

As early as 2007, NASA predicted that increased levels of carbon dioxide would make continents warm more quickly than oceans, resulting in storms becoming more vigorous. On the west coast, an increased amount of rain and snow may solve problems of summer drought as long as there are ways to capture water from saturated grounds that are prone to flooding. Overall, though, the west coast will increase lightning strikes which are prone to start wildfires. Central and eastern states will have their own set of problems. They will be especially vulnerable to more numerous severe storms and thunderstorms like Sandy, Katrina, Andrew and Ike. Social, economic, physical and psychological scars will be left behind.

Doyle Rice, writing for USA Today, reported on proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. They also say that thunderstorms and violent tornadoes will have “ a robust increase across parts of the U.S in upcoming decades because of climate change.” They predict that between the Rockies and the Atlantic severe storms could increase as much as 40 percent.

“Two primary ingredients are needed to produce severe thunderstorms: The first is the fuel needed for these monster storms to develop — what scientists call “convective available potential energy” (CAPE). CAPE is created as the air in the lower atmosphere warms. The warm air rises, carrying with it moisture to higher altitudes. The second is vertical wind shear, a strong current of wind that helps spin up energy and moisture in the atmosphere.”

The Union of Concerned Scientists continues, “ As ocean temperatures rise, there is also less cold, subsurface ocean water to serve as a braking mechanism for hurricanes. When strong storm winds churn up cold subsurface water, the cooler waters can serve to weaken the storm. But if deeper waters become too warm, this natural braking mechanism weakens. Hurricane Katrina, for example, intensified significantly when it hit deep pools of warm water in the Gulf of Mexico.”

The Nature Conservatory predicts that rising temperatures will cause one-quarter of earth’s species to become extinct by 2050. Ocean acidification, heat waves, droughts, and floods are already endangering species. Poverty, hunger, and disease are among the reasons so many people migrate from their homes in Africa and the middle-east. Warlords in the area fight fiercely to control both oil and water. Without water for crops and animals and when homes are bombed, survival is at stake. What can a family do but seek shelter elsewhere? Though there have always been disasters, an increasing number of people worldwide are a displaced due to war and global warming.

Friends, climate change is not a theory. 97 percent of scientists agree that it is happening and that it is human-induced. Why would anyone but greedy people ignore this information? How come scientists are being forbidden to share the results of Surf’s Up

References:

Global displacement statistics from 1989 to Present from the Internal Displacement Monitoring Center: http://internal-displacement.org/global-figures

NASA predicts severe storms, 2007, https://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/news/topstory/2007/moist_convection.html
Rice, D, 2013, USA Today, Study: Climate change pumps up the risk of Severe Storms.

Nature Conservancy on Climate change: http://www.nature.org/ourinitiatives/urgentissues/global-warming-climate-change/threats-solutions/index.htm

Union of Concerned Scientists: Hurricanes and Climate Change: http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/impacts/hurricanes-and-climate-change.html#references

Works of art are always for sale. Surf’s Up / Acrylic on Canvas, gold frame, 48” by 36” / $ 699Contact me at marilynne@eichingerfineart.com

I look forward to hearing your comments. Please respond below.

Creating an Interactive Museum

education, For Parents, Psychology, science

Building BlocksBuilding Blocks

Creating a science museum is like playing with building blocks. It takes imagination, perseverance, and innovation to build a monument to experiential learning. The following excerpt is from the first page of Lives of Museum Junkies. Unusual consequences often occur from obscure beginnings and it is a pleasure to share them with you.

Creating an Interactive Museum: Naïve Beginnings

“Stop running and making so much noise!” I shouted to five rambunctious children playing hide-and-seek in closets throughout the house. It was a cold day and my friend Dee Pumplin was visiting with her son. She and I were having a difficult time hearing each other as we chatted animatedly in the kitchen. It was during this conversation that my homemaker days started to end, when over coffee in my suburban house we brewed up the idea of a hands-on museum that emphasized science. Children are not always polite, studious little creatures set on this planet to impress and please their parents.

Children are not always polite, studious little creatures set on this planet to impress and please their parents. Instead they are balls of energy who love to run, scream and create bedlam. In short they can drive a parent crazy, especially on a rainy day. As Dee and I talked, her one and my four children shouted and squealed, ignoring the storm roaring outside. The increasing noise level was like a drum roll announcing a new idea. We started imagining what it would be like to take our kids to an indoor playground. “Wouldn’t it be magnificent to have a great big barn,” we fantasized, “and fill it floor to ceiling with ramps, poles, and climbing apparatus? What fun it would be for the children and their friends. They would get rid of their energy away from home and our houses would be preserved.” Dee and I started to wonder where we could find a barn and even took the next step of contacting a realtor.

As we learned more, the vision for an indoor play structure grew. The immense dimensions of a working barn inspired our ideas to expand to include interactive learning activities inserted into climbing areas. We imagined children swooping down a sliding board and finding a light table, colored filters, and projectors to use for experimentation. The colored light could be projected on the next child speeding down the slide. We embraced the idea of physical play being integrated with academic challenges in a never-ending cycle of learning.

After months of talk and concept development, we finally located a barn, but it wasn’t long before we faced a dose of reality. The cost to acquire the property was more than we anticipated and building the inside play structure seemed monumental. The barn needed to be heated, insulated, electrified, bathroomed and water sprinkled and once it was upgraded, ongoing utilities would be astronomical. The permitting process was overwhelming to two inexperienced women who began to wonder if the city would even allow this type of play-barn to exist. Insurance was bound to be phenomenal, not only because we were dealing with a wooden structure but because we were planning to let children run throughout. We especially liked the idea of fire poles descending from one level to the next. Sound safe? Costs mounted, reaching an enormous number before we even considered the price of exhibits and staffing. . . . .

Lives of Museum Junkies is available through AMAZON, Barnes and Noble, Powells Books, Inkwater Press, and The-M-porium.

For a signed copy you can purchase from me for $ 19.95 plus $ 4 shipping. Contact me at eichingerbooks@gmail.com.

Artwork is always for sale: Building Blocks is a 24” by 28” acrylic painting on canvas in a gold frame. Cost is $450. Contact me at marilynne@eichingerfineart.com for further information.

perf6.000x9.000.indd

New Release: Former OMSI President Reveals the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly History Behind the Hands-On Education Movement

“…will help you see science museums in a new light.” – David Ucko, Museums+More llc
In this lively, behind-the-scenes look at the evolution of interactive science museums, discover:

How the Brooklyn Museum of Art was saved from closure by Mayor Rudolph Guiliani for showing a painting by Chris

How the Brooklyn Museum of Art was saved from closure by Mayor Rudolph Guiliani for showing a painting by Chris Ofili of the Virgin Mary that contained elephant dong.

Why an autistic child spoke for the first time on a science center visit.

Who kept NOVA from being canceled when congress did not agree with their investigative reporting style that explored sensitive subjects like nuclear energy.

What inspired a poor Appalachian orphan to go from rags to riches to become a museum president who later rented an entire cruise ship to see a global eclipse on the Amazon.

Why executives at the top are subject to sexual abuse and find it nearly impossible to manage.

The outcry caused by the Playboy Bunnies playing basketball with business executives to raise funds for a museum.

“recommended for those who care about museums, libraries and society today.”
– Ginnie Cooper, Directed Washington D.C., Brooklyn, and Portland library systems .