Doctors of Philosophy need to provide public service

For a long time, science has needed a publicist.  This has never been more evident than in the climate change debate, in a world where the competing argument of industry and politics has a calculated and expansive media presence, Science relies on the noneducational layman's translation of compromised media to reach the masses. 

It needs to be explained that in Australia, CSIRO does a fantastic job of having science deliver outcomes for industry. They provide relevant and critical research for the countries heart beat industries of agriculture, mining and information technology. As it should, a large portion of its funding comes from the government  and in tern, the public for which these industries serve.

The other area of major research is the university sector, and its high time that university presents a unified strategy with other research organisations in areas of national importance. Climate, Sustainability and Agriculture. Agriculture and its long term future is in crisis. While national conscious and debate centers around mining. Agriculture, responsible for $155 billion a year of the countries GDP is breaking down. drought, water security, bio-security  low soil fertility and global warming caused by climate change has to borrow a term reached critical mass. Australia without farming is an Australia without identity.

This possibility is very real, and very serious.

The main stream media seems focused debating the existence of climate change, and the involvement of mankind in relation, and the industrial sector is trying to earn as much out of finite minerals as native title will allow, yet the industry that has sustained our economy through the recession and depression and remains the lifeblood of rural Australia is falling into palliative care when a unified front from science could revive it as a whole.

University research success is currently measured in many ways by publication status. To simplify, they conduct research, and publish their findings, the more revered the journal the greater the status the university is held. The more impressive a university status the easier it is to obtain funding. This has a positive effect on our education system, don’t get me wrong, status helps gain international attention for our fine schools. But it creates a problem that is not addressed.

Currently, the process for research as it stands is a scientist has a hypothesis, applies for a grant, performs research to support their hypothesis, and publishes findings. Mainly in the university publishing domain, if the research appears to be on public interest, the media may pick up exerts and release those to the public. Here in lies the problem. Universities have a propensity to promote research that appeals to other educational institutions, Government funded research which lends itself to be industry and public focus is heavily moderated by the media by the time it gets to the general population. The net result is very little socially relevant research gets seen in its entirety by the general public. This is not to say you can go to Melbourne University Publishing tomorrow and discover the secrets of the universe and who killed Kennedy just by leafing through the library directory. It’s just what gets read by the average citizen is so cloudy that its natural that it flames the fires of scepticism and conspiracy or flagged as a tool of political skulduggery. Practical science appears to be operating to two very different levels. One of which research is buried under a mountain of rigidly stubborn academia, the other heavily watered down laymen twitter grab. 

My experience is certainly not science; I only have some insight through association. My wheel house is music, and in my experience a common instance in music is when great musicians fall into the trap of writing music that appeals only appeals to other musicians, forgetting that musicians only go watch performances if they are on a guest list, and listen to music given to them. Punters buy records and go see bands, and punters would not know a pentatonic from a mode. The other way it can go is song writers get so consumed with writing something that people want to hear, the end result gets in the way of the music’s originality.

What would be great to see happen, was a 3 step process. We need a scientific (not a government) inquiry into the 3 main areas of national importance. Climate, Sustainability and Agriculture and have the findings released to the public domain unimpeded.. So the Australian public is aware of the issues, and the severity without the specter of political agenda. If critical issues are identified, then recommendations of the steps that need to be taken to deliver outcomes, and then coverage on their delivery.

When I raise issues or concerns relevant to science in this country to people within science, I am very quickly shut down with "you don't understand the process" then its little wonder its very hard to get for average Australian to get the full picture. People want to have things explained to them. We want to know, and we will vote for people who will fund research if we do.

Invasion Day should bring cultural awakening

With Australia day on the horizon the inevitable complaints about portions of the countries Aboriginal and Aboriginal supporting population decision to re-brand Australia Day as "Invasion Day" should be the prefect opportunity for the population to reflect on our own cultural acceptance as we move closer to new immigration policy.... but it wont.

For those outside of Australia playing at home, January 26th, Australia Day marks the anniversary that commemorates the arrival of the First Fleet into Sydney Cove and the proclamation of British Sovereignty. Its modern Australia's national day and is celebrated with a nation wide public holiday. More recently it has been met with controversy as for the indigenous population it is seen as the day that marks the beginning of occupation of their native land. Attempts to have the date of the holiday moved have gained little public support.

Expect again this annual issue to find its way into the media, with the overall consensus being that Australia Day is there for all Australians to celebrate Australia, indigenous or otherwise. Your personal opinion on this issue bears little relevance to the opportunity the theme represents.

The countries main political parties currently keen to display their strength when it comes to border protection appears to have had the side effect of sparking a national multicultural ignorance. In particular, understanding towards the countries Muslim population, and people seeking asylum via illegal immigration. A national undercurrent of activism through social media regarding who 'we' as a country are allowing on 'our' shores, and the freedoms that 'we' feel obliged to provide. Facebook groups such as F#$k Off We're Full reached nearly 80,000 members before being removed. Race Riots are becoming an annual event that any one of middle eastern decent is a target.

More recently people are worried about the infiltration of political correctness coming into our schools that is denying Aussie kids the right to celebrate Christmas in the classroom at risk of offending their Muslim class mates. The overall theme being garnered is Immigrants, Not Australians, should adapt, and that these people should not be forcing their beliefs onto us.

On January 26th, 223 years ago, when Captain Arthur Phillip stepped ashore onto what was to become Botany Bay to set up Australia's first penal colony, he did so with less consideration for the countries existing culture than the vast majority of migrants do today.

In the 200 years that followed, descendants of this colony went onto, occupy, murder, steal, rape, displace and force their religion onto the countries original population with little regard for their existing way of life, in the name of building a nation, and later the White Australia Policy.

As a country we have come to (in some cases begrudgingly) recognise these heinous acts and sought to make amends with Sorry Day, now National Day of Healing, broadened to incorporate the ethos that its a good day to apologise for any wrong doing, we as a country, or as individuals have done.

On Australia day this year, as we don our flags as capes, put them out our car windows, and take to the streets to shout to to the world our national pride, and again focus on the way of life we want people migrating to our country to accept. Maybe we should be looking at the indigenous perspective first. Then start worrying about about who is forcing their beliefs on who.

Its all relative.

The common thread amongst people, no matter where they are from, or the course of events that unfold which leads to a meeting of minds, is that everyone will a theory on something. Be it life, music, media, politics, or the best club to use on a dog leg par 4, every person that you will ever meet will have an opinion on something.

They may never share it, some do all to freely, in earlier times its wasn't considered respectful to unless asked, now in the epicenter of the information revolution its absolutely possible to find someone with a theory on pretty much anything.

The key thing to remember is that even though it sometimes feels like the point of suffocation, and there is no way its possible someone in the world could be that mad, the flip side is, for every goose, there is a swan.

its up to you to decide which is which.

I'm Benadicht Paxton

These will be my theories.