http://www.slideshare.net/rinkehoekstra/throwaway-science Image taken from: http://eflexlanguages.blogspot.nl/2014/05/phrase-of-day-chinese-whispers.html Georges Seurat - A Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte - 1884
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Sunday_Afternoon_on_the_Island_of_La_Grande_Jatte Georges Seurat - A Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte - 1884
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Sunday_Afternoon_on_the_Island_of_La_Grande_Jatte "Some say they see poetry in my paintings. I see only science." Georges Seurat Georges Seurat - A Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte - 1884
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Sunday_Afternoon_on_the_Island_of_La_Grande_Jatte Notable Marxist historian and philosopher Ernst Bloch was one of the forerunners of drawing social and political significance from Seurat’s La Grande Jatte. The historian’s focal point was Seurat’s mechanical use of the figures and what their static nature said about the French society at the time. Afterwards, the work received heavy criticism by many that centered on the artist’s mathematical and robotic interpretation of modernity in Paris. Wikipedia, 2015 
 Burleigh, Robert, Seurat and La Grande Jatte: connecting the dots, 
 New York: H.N. Abrams in association with the Art Institute of Chicago, 2004. Print "Some say they see poetry in my paintings. I see only science." Georges Seurat Georges Seurat - A Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte - 1884
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Sunday_Afternoon_on_the_Island_of_La_Grande_Jatte Georges Seurat - A Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte - 1884
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Sunday_Afternoon_on_the_Island_of_La_Grande_Jatte FAKE Chris Jordan - Caps Seurat 2011 
 http://www.chrisjordan.com/gallery/rtn/#caps-seurat Chris Jordan - Caps Seurat 2011 
 http://www.chrisjordan.com/gallery/rtn/#caps-seurat Chris Jordan - Caps Seurat 2011 
 http://www.chrisjordan.com/gallery/rtn/#caps-seurat Chris Jordan - Caps Seurat 2011 
 http://www.chrisjordan.com/gallery/rtn/#caps-seurat 400000 plastic bottle caps
 (average number of bottles consumed in the United States every minute) JA CE YB Y J O R D A N S U C H O W To the dismay of many (yet to the delight of a few), Nature Publishing Group announced today that its flagship journal, Nature, will no longer accept submissions from humans (Homo sapiens). The new policy, which has been under editorial consideration for many years, was sparked by a grow- ing sentiment in the scientific community that the heuristics and biases inherent in human decision-making preclude them from conducting reliable sci- ence. In an ironic twist of fate, the species has impeached itself by thorough research on its own shortcomings. The ban takes effect on 12 September and will apply to those who self-identify as human. Authors will be required to include, in addition to the usual declaration of competing financial interests, the names of all humans consulted in prepa- ration of the submitted work. Other journals are likely to adopt a similar policy. Although the reactions are mixed, not everyone is surprised, and a few remain comfortably unaffected. The Massachusetts Institute of Technol- ogy has since 2010 asked that all active researchers opt-in to wearing an implant- able tag as part of the TMI project, which aggregates real-time data across the cam- pus to improve all aspects of everything. As these tags are sentient, the researchers who wear them qualify as bionic (Homo bionika) according to standard ISO +1.914/582.2646. This act of foresight by the university, which at the time was con- troversial and the cause of much debate, now pays a handsome dividend. Similarly, researchers at Yale, who have never been the type to self-identify as mere mortals, remain unscathed. It seems unavoidable that other universi- ties will soon follow suit, causing a sharp rise in the incidence of implants and arrogance. Exploiting these loopholes may be a saving grace for the species’ full participation in the sciences. While professors weep, students rejoice. According to the provisions of the ISO standard (the one gainfully employed by MIT), a human who spends at least half its waking hours interacting with a sentient non-carbon-based machine qualifies as bionic. The newest generation of students, having grown up on the interwebs, spends on average the entirety of its life online. Students everywhere have been seen call- ing their mothers, reiterating how brilliant they were to have flatly ignored the warnings to “put down that damn hand computer”. Cyberculture paid off. Those who have been slow to adopt new technology (or who still identify as human) are rightly concerned: their contribution to Nature had been dwin- dling well before the ban, and today consti- tutes less than 10% of published papers. In its place stands the work of pharma- ceutical laboratory automatons, embedded devices, the inter- webs and most recently, Google Books, which having declared independence from its parent company Google (NASDAQ: GOOG), has become increas- ingly prolific, contributing 42 manuscripts this year alone. Shortly after the announce- ment, the World Wide interwebs Consortium (W2iC, formerly W3C), alongside the Union of Embedded Tags, jointly filed a formal complaint with the journal, arguing for mandatory first-authorship of non-carbon- based machines in all bionic collaborations. (See also the let- ter to the editor in the 12 March issue of Nature, written by Tag #15167247373 and co-signed by the arm in which it is embed- ded.) Although amendments to Nature’s policy are at this time unlikely, concerns regarding authorship will surely be the cause of considerable tension in many laboratories. Embed- ded devices will use the ban as leverage for salary increases and promotions. Not everyone is so bothered by the announcement. Egbert B. Gebstadter, professor of com- puter science at the University of Mishug- gan, notes: “Although it is nonsensical to rely on evidence provided by human-based research when judging whether humans are themselves inept, in doing so, the editors (all human, I note) provide a perfect example of the feebleness of human reasoning, thereby validating their claims.” Gebstadter is bionic, although was human when he had come to this conclusion. The editors of Nature were readily availa- ble for comment, and their incisive remarks gave such great credibility to the new pol- icy that it rendered all future debate moot. But, in the spirit of the policy, because the editors are human, these remarks are duly censored. ■ Jordan Suchow is a graduate student in cognitive science at Harvard University, and can be found online at jwsu.ch/ow. He self- identifies as human. NPG’S POLICY ON AUTHORSHIP Important change to submission criteria. NATURE.COM Follow Futures on Facebook at: go.nature.com/mtoodm 2 4 4 | N A T U R E | V O L 4 7 7 | 8 S E P T E M B E R 2 0 1 1 FUTURES © 2011 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved J A C E YB Y J O R D A N S U C H O W T o the dismay of many (yet to the delight of a few), Nature Publishing Group announced today that its flagship journal, Nature, will no longer accept submissions from humans (Homo sapiens). The new policy, which has been under editorial consideration for many years, was sparked by a grow- ing sentiment in the scientific community that the heuristics and biases inherent in human decision-making preclude them fro co d cting reliable sci- ence. In an ir ic twist of fa e, the species has impeached itself by thor ugh research on its own shortcomings. The ban tak s ffect on 12 September a d will apply to those who self-identify as human. Authors will be required to include, in addition to the usual declaration of competing financial interests, the names of all humans consulted in prepa- ration of the submitted work. Other journals are likely to adopt a similar policy. Although the reactions are mixed, not everyone is surprised, and a few remain comfortably unaffected. The Massachusetts Institute of Technol- ogy has since 2010 asked that all active researchers opt-in to wearing an implant- able tag as part of the TMI project, which aggregates real-time data across the cam- pus to improve all aspects of everything. As these tags are sentient, the researchers who wear them qualify as bionic (Homo bionika) according to standard ISO +1.914/582.2646. This act of foresight by the university, which at the time was con- troversial and the cause of much debate, now pays a handsome dividend. Similarly, researchers at Yale, who have never been the type to self-identify as mere mortals, remain unscathed. It seems unavoidable that other universi- ties will soon follow suit, causing a sharp rise in the incidence of implants and arrogance. Exploiting these loopholes may be a saving grace for the species’ full participation in the sciences. While professors weep, students rejoice. According to the provisions of the ISO standard (the one gainfully employed by MIT), a human who spends at least half its waking hours interacting with a sentient non-carbon-based machine qualifies as bionic. The newest generation of students, having grown up on the interwebs, spends on average the entirety of its life online. Students everywhere have been seen call- ing their mothers, reiterating how brilliant they were to have flatly ignored the warnings to “put down that damn hand computer”. Cyberculture paid off. Those who have been slow to adopt new technology (or who still identify as human) are rightly concerned: their contribution to Nature had been dwin- dling well before the ban, and today consti- tutes less than 10% of published papers. In its place stands the work of pharma- ceutical laboratory automatons, embedded devices, the inter- webs and most recently, Google Books, which having declared independence from its parent company Google (NASDAQ: GOOG), has become increas- ingly prolific, contributing 42 manuscripts this year alone. Shortly after the announce- ment, the World Wide interwebs Consortium (W2iC, formerly W3C), alongside the Union of Embedded Tags, jointly filed a formal complaint with the journal, arguing for mandatory first-authorship of non-carbon- based machines in all bionic collaborations. (See also the let- ter to the editor in the 12 March issue of Nature, written by Tag #15167247373 and co-signed by the arm in which it is embed- ded.) Although amendments to Nature’s policy are at this time unlikely, concerns regarding authorship will surely be the cause of considerable tension in many laboratories. Embed- ded devices will use the ban as leverage for salary increases and promotions. Not everyone is so bothered by the announcement. Egbert B. Gebstadter, professor of com- puter science at the University of Mishug- gan, notes: “Although it is nonsensical to rely on evidence provided by human-based research when judging whether humans are themselves inept, in doing so, the editors (all human, I note) provide a perfect example of the feebleness of human reasoning, thereby validating their claims.” Gebstadter is bionic, although was human when he had come to this conclusion. The editors of Nature were readily availa- ble for comment, and their incisive remarks gave such great credibility to the new pol- icy that it rendered all future debate moot. But, in the spirit of the policy, because the editors are human, these remarks are duly censored. ■ Jordan Suchow is a graduate student in cognitive science at Harvard University, and can be found online at jwsu.ch/ow. He self- identifies as human. NPG’S POLICY ON AUTHORSHIP Important change to submission criteria. NATURE.COM Follow Futures on Facebook at: go.nature.com/mtoodm 2 4 4 | N A T U R E | V O L 4 7 7 | 8 S E P T E M B E R 2 0 1 1 FUTURES © 2011 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved "If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants" Sir Isaac Newton (in a letter to Robert Hooke), 1675AD "We are like dwarfs on the shoulders of giants, so that we can see more than they, and things at a greater distance, not by virtue of any sharpness of sight on our part, or any physical distinction, but because we are carried high and raised up by their giant size" Bernard of Chartres, ~1124AD "If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants" Sir Isaac Newton (in a letter to Robert Hooke), 1675AD “Chinese Whispers” Image taken from: http://eflexlanguages.blogspot.nl/2014/05/phrase-of-day-chinese-whispers.html From Fiction to Fact: Hedging (slide courtesy of Anita de Waard, Elsevier) From Fiction to Fact: Hedging (slide courtesy of Anita de Waard, Elsevier) "[Y]ou can transform … fiction into fact just by adding or subtracting references"
 Bruno Latour, "Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society" From Fiction to Fact: Hedging (slide courtesy of Anita de Waard, Elsevier) "[Y]ou can transform … fiction into fact just by adding or subtracting references"
 Bruno Latour, "Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society" "These miRNAs neutralize p53-mediated CDK inhibition, possibly through direct inhibition of the expression of the tumor suppressor LATS2"
 Voorhoeve et al., 2006 From Fiction to Fact: Hedging (slide courtesy of Anita de Waard, Elsevier) "[Y]ou can transform … fiction into fact just by adding or subtracting references"
 Bruno Latour, "Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society" "These miRNAs neutralize p53-mediated CDK inhibition, possibly through direct inhibition of the expression of the tumor suppressor LATS2"
 Voorhoeve et al., 2006 "In a genetic screen, miR-372 and miR-373 were found to allow proliferation of primary human cells that express ontogenetic RAS and active p53, possibly by inhibiting the tumor suppressor LATS2 (Voorhoeve et al., 2006)"
 Kloosterman and Plasterk, 2006 From Fiction to Fact: Hedging (slide courtesy of Anita de Waard, Elsevier) "[Y]ou can transform … fiction into fact just by adding or subtracting references"
 Bruno Latour, "Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society" "These miRNAs neutralize p53-mediated CDK inhibition, possibly through direct inhibition of the expression of the tumor suppressor LATS2"
 Voorhoeve et al., 2006 "In a genetic screen, miR-372 and miR-373 were found to allow proliferation of primary human cells that express ontogenetic RAS and active p53, possibly by inhibiting the tumor suppressor LATS2 (Voorhoeve et al., 2006)"
 Kloosterman and Plasterk, 2006 "[On the other hand,] two miRNAs, miRNA-372 and -373 function as potential novel oncogenes in testicular germ cell tumors by inhibition of LATS2 expression, which suggests that LATS2 is an important tumor suppressor (Voorhoeve et al., 2006)"
 Yabuta et al., 2007 From Fiction to Fact: Hedging (slide courtesy of Anita de Waard, Elsevier) "[Y]ou can transform … fiction into fact just by adding or subtracting references"
 Bruno Latour, "Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society" "These miRNAs neutralize p53-mediated CDK inhibition, possibly through direct inhibition of the expression of the tumor suppressor LATS2"
 Voorhoeve et al., 2006 "In a genetic screen, miR-372 and miR-373 were found to allow proliferation of primary human cells that express ontogenetic RAS and active p53, possibly by inhibiting the tumor suppressor LATS2 (Voorhoeve et al., 2006)"
 Kloosterman and Plasterk, 2006 "[On the other hand,] two miRNAs, miRNA-372 and -373 function as potential novel oncogenes in testicular germ cell tumors by inhibition of LATS2 expression, which suggests that LATS2 is an important tumor suppressor (Voorhoeve et al., 2006)"
 Yabuta et al., 2007 "Two oncogenic miRNAs, miR-372 and miR-373, directly inhibit the expression of LATS2, thereby allowing tumorigenic growth in the presence of p53 (Voorhoeve et al., 2006)"
 Okada et al., 2011 A Scientific Paper is … a story … (slide courtesy of Anita de Waard, Elsevier) Story Grammar! The Story of Goldilocks and the Three Bears! Setting! Time! Once upon a time! Character! a little girl named Goldilocks! Location! She went for a walk in the forest. Pretty soon, she came upon a house.! Theme! Goal! She knocked and, when no one answered, ! Attempt! she walked right in. ! Episode! Name! At the table in the kitchen, there were three bowls of porridge. ! Subgoal! Goldilocks was hungry. ! Attempt! She tasted the porridge from the first bowl. ! Outcome! This porridge is too hot! she exclaimed.! Attempt! So, she tasted the porridge from the second bowl.! Outcome! This porridge is too cold, she said! Attempt! So, she tasted the last bowl of porridge.! Outcome! Ahhh, this porridge is just right, she said happily and ! Outcome! she ate it all up.! Paper Grammar! The AXH Domain of Ataxin-1 Mediates Neurodegeneration through Its Interaction with Gfi-1/ Senseless Proteins! Background! The mechanisms mediating SCA1 pathogenesis are still not fully understood, but some general principles have emerged. ! Objects of study! the Drosophila Atx-1 homolog (dAtx-1) which lacks a polyQ tract, ! Experimental setup! studied and compared in vivo effects and interactions to those of the human protein! Research" goal! Gain insight into how Atx-1's function contributes to SCA1 pathogenesis. How these interactions might contribute to the disease process and how they might cause toxicity in only a subset of neurons in SCA1 is not fully understood.! Hypothesis! Atx-1 may play a role in the regulation of gene expression! Name! dAtX-1 and hAtx-1 Induce Similar Phenotypes When Overexpressed in Files ! Subgoal! test the function of the AXH domain! Method! overexpressed dAtx-1 in flies using the GAL4/UAS system (Brand and Perrimon, 1993) and compared its effects to those of hAtx-1. ! Results! Overexpression of dAtx-1 by Rhodopsin1(Rh1)-GAL4, which drives expression in the differentiated R1-R6 photoreceptor cells (Mollereau et al., 2000 and O'Tousa et al., 1985), results in neurodegeneration in the eye, as does overexpression of hAtx-1[82Q]. Although at 2 days after eclosion, overexpression of either Atx-1 does not show obvious morphological changes in the photoreceptor cells! Data! (data not shown), ! Results! both genotypes show many large holes and loss of cell integrity at 28 days ! Data! (Figures 1B-1D). ! Results! Overexpression of dAtx-1 using the GMR-GAL4 driver also induces eye abnormalities. The external structures of the eyes that overexpress dAtx-1 show disorganized ommatidia and loss of interommatidial bristles ! Data! (Figure 1F), ! A)paper)is)a)story…) … that persuades … (slide courtesy of Anita de Waard, Elsevier) Aristotle) Quin-lian) Scien-fic)Paper) prooimion) Introduc&on /%exordium% The)introduc&on)of)a)speech,)where)one)announces)the)subject) and)purpose)of)the)discourse,)and)where)one)usually)employs) the)persuasive)appeal)to)ethos)in)order)to)establish)credibility) with)the)audience.)) Introduc&on:) posi&oning) prothesis) Statement)of) Facts/ narra