This content is protected against AI scraping.
I’ve been seeing some posts that are basically “fuck Bill Nye he only has a Bachelor’s degree and isn’t a REAL scientist” and like… guys. That’s not what being a science communicator is about. I’m not just talking about Nye here.
Science communication is a whole field of its own. You can be the most brilliant, qualified research scientist on the planet and have no teaching skills whatsoever. The ability to synthesize complex information and then explain it in simple, accessible language is not easy, and the more you know about a subject, the more difficult it is. Making scientific concepts available to the general public is really important work – work that active researchers are rarely able to undertake.
Say what you will about individuals, but please don’t dismiss the entire field of science communication and start parroting conservatives with the “um you should have a Ph.D before you should be allowed to talk about science”. Accuracy is key, obviously, but don’t throw educators under the bus, jfc.
I’d also just like to point out that you don’t actually need a PhD to be a scientist. You ARE a scientist with a bachelor’s in science. Especially if you work or have worked as a scientist. You know, doing research, development, writing papers, studying things, employing the scientific method. You can in fact be a scientist without a degree at all, although in a discipline where people do sometimes wave their educational credentials like passports, that can be rough going.
This is an addendum, not a disagreement, because OP is also 100% right.
from Tumblr http://ift.tt/2qHLrDM