Your new post is loading...
The New York Times is quietly changing the practice of science journalism. The Tuesday April 21, 2015 article: Ebola Lying in Wait, reports on "A growing body of scientific clues - some ambiguous, other substantive" that the Ebola virus may have lain dormant in West African rain forest for years before igniting last year's outbreak. In the 6th paragraph of the on-line edition mention is made of "a detailed prediction of other likely Ebola dangers zones" made by a team of scientists. The words "detailed prediction" are innocuously provided with the hyper-link above. What I think is extraordinary is that this link points to the scientific paper: Mapping the zoonotic niche of Ebola virus disease in Africa by David M Piggot et al. published on the open science publishing platform eLife. This is the real science including the measured language of a scientific paper, the lengthly descriptions of the data sets, the innumerable references and even the reviewers comments and the authors' responses. I don't think that there is a better way to cultivate a scientific outlook than to make relevant, science open and accessible.
