[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ITpDrdtGAmo[/youtube]
The always enjoyable Richard Feynman explains fire. His enthusiasm and facility for explaining things in simple terms always amazes me.
I guess the clip is from an old BBC TV series called “Fun to Imagine.” Apparently BBC has some of the episodes available in higher quality on their website, but unfortunately the streaming video isn’t accessible from the US. But Youtube has several other Feynman videos.
I came across a link to this video in a blog post talking about how science journalists needed to not just explain science to people but also convey why it’s exciting. Sadly I can’t seem to find the blog again. Unlike Feynman, few scientists are adept at both explaining science clearly and conveying their enthusiasm for it (or at least, not at the same time…), so science journalists do have a role to play in getting people excited about science.
There are of course journalists who complain that science writers are often just cheerleaders, and are too uncritical when reporting any science news. So there needs to be a balance. There’s always a part of me that just wants to convey why I think science is cool, but I agree that it helps to be critical–it’s frustrating when people are told that some scientific finding is a major advance when it really isn’t that big a deal (not to mention all the cases where the studies themselves have major flaws). Now if only press offices and tabloids would refrain from hyping bad or just not-that-interesting science…I guess it’s up to the individual writers to be responsible.