Reliance on Terminology

Writing is an important life skill that no one can ever be perfect at. English classes abound follow two guiding rules: be precise, and be concise. In certain realms this is absolutely the case. Writing for a scientific audience is, in my opinion, the pinnacle of those frequently bellowed rules. When it comes to a more general audience though, this does not stand. Trying to explain complexities (such as evolutionary mechanisms or quantum mechanics) using scientific terminology, will only get the general public confused.


Unfortunately, the general public already has been preconditioned to using definitions that differ from scientific definitions. Evolution does not mean speciation, theory does not mean idea, and fittest does not mean strongest.

This is why scientists must be less concise in order to get the true meaning across. Even the textbook definition of evolution, "the change in allele frequencies within a population over time," carries baggage that a scientific audience does not see. What is an allele? What is meant by allele frequency? What is a population? This is a problem scientists need to stay aware of in order to correct those that misrepresent or misappropriate scientific terminology.

Efting Begins

I am not good at this.

I have already attempted to write a starting post 3 times. Each attempt I discard entirely, either  due to my gradually disapproval of the message or because it treads too much onto a topic I feel I should expand more fully on.

The eventual goal for this space won't be much special. Often, I will try to lay out an idea I have been working on, forcing me to expand and parse out details, or I will try to delve into some sort of controversy likely brought up by an over exaggerated Facebook post.I can't say everyone will be interested in this material, but I hope it at least gives you, the reader, something to think on.