The worst written science article I've ever seen a journalist produce

In summary, three physicists have reexamined the math surrounding the creation of microscopic black holes, and determined that they won't simply evaporate in a millisecond as had previously been predicted. Rather, mini black holes could exist for much longer- perhaps even more than a second. This news is old, but it's still relevant to the discussion of the Large Hadron Collider. Even if the LHC does create individual black holes, they will be so minute as to have relatively little effect.
  • #1
Lyuokdea
154
0
The worst written science "article" I've ever seen a journalist produce

I'm just appalled, I don't even know what to say...I don't think this is even in a blog, it appears to actually be an article by fox news (and it came up on their main page)

I guess a second issue is...what do you do against such blatantly horrible journalism, and how do you respond to it?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,483477,00.html

Still worried that the Large Hadron Collider will create a black hole that will destroy the Earth when it's finally switched on this summer?

Um, well, you may have a point.

Three physicists have reexamined the math surrounding the creation of microscopic black holes in the Switzerland-based LHC, the world's largest particle collider, and determined that they won't simply evaporate in a millisecond as had previously been predicted.

Rather, Roberto Casadio of the University of Bologna in Italy and Sergio Fabi and Benjamin Harms of the University of Alabama say mini black holes could exist for much longer — perhaps even more than a second, a relative eternity in particle colliders, where most objects decay much faster.
~Lyuokdea
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2


Lyuokdea said:
If the worst comes to pass, and there's now a slightly greater chance that it might, at least it might explain why we've never heard from extraterrestrial civilizations: Maybe they built Large Hadron Colliders of their own.

~Lyuokdea
And destroyed the universe?... Wait! we're still here for now (we'll have to keep checking, I guess).
 
  • #3


Please use the
tags.
 
  • #4


turbo-1 said:
And destroyed the universe?... Wait! we're still here for now (we'll have to keep checking, I guess).

A black hole would not destroy the universe, just their planet, and, depending on conditions, their solar system.
 
  • #5


I guess that is why they call it faux news!
 
  • #6


This is old news, the chances of it creating a black hole are small, and even if it does they will by so minute as to have relatively little effect (I made a joke there, did you see?) :wink:

Silly journalists. Same thing happened when they produced anti-hydrogen. :rolleyes:
 
  • #7


Fair & Balanced

Q.E.D
 
  • #8


Cyrus said:
Fair & Balanced
pronounced: "fairly imbalanced"
 
  • #9


The atom bomb supposedly would have had created a chain reaction, turning our planet into a inferno.
 
  • #10


Lyuokdea said:
I'm just appalled, I don't even know what to say...I don't think this is even in a blog, it appears to actually be an article by fox news (and it came up on their main page)

I guess a second issue is...what do you do against such blatantly horrible journalism, and how do you respond to it?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,483477,00.html
Still worried that the Large Hadron Collider will create a black hole that will destroy the Earth when it's finally switched on this summer?

Um, well, you may have a point.

Three physicists have reexamined the math surrounding the creation of microscopic black holes in the Switzerland-based LHC, the world's largest particle collider, and determined that they won't simply evaporate in a millisecond as had previously been predicted.

Rather, Roberto Casadio of the University of Bologna in Italy and Sergio Fabi and Benjamin Harms of the University of Alabama say mini black holes could exist for much longer — perhaps even more than a second, a relative eternity in particle colliders, where most objects decay much faster.
~Lyuokdea
I don't understand how this is the worst written "article" you've ever seen. It is a bit tongue-in-cheek, yes, but the article is likely reporting on a few research articles that came out this week regarding miscalculations in CERN's risk investigation.
http://arxiv.org/abs/0901.2948
http://arxiv.org/abs/0810.5515
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #11


Oh those scientists, never knowing what's right and what's wrong.

Faux News said:
We're also wondering how often the LHC might create individual black holes, since longer-lived ones have a greater chance of merging with each other, and, um, well, see ya.
 
  • #12


Until they have a binoculars to see people in real time, they will always confuse and get confused. :biggrin:
 

What makes a science article poorly written?

A poorly written science article typically lacks clear and accurate information, uses sensationalist language or clickbait titles, and does not provide a credible source for its claims.

How can I identify a poorly written science article?

Some red flags to look for in a poorly written science article include exaggerated or unsupported claims, lack of citations or references, and a lack of scientific terminology or explanations. Additionally, if the article is from a non-reputable source or is not peer-reviewed, it may be poorly written.

Why is it important to avoid poorly written science articles?

Poorly written science articles can spread misinformation and contribute to a lack of understanding about important scientific topics. They can also harm the credibility of the scientific community and undermine the public's trust in scientific research.

What should I do if I come across a poorly written science article?

If you encounter a poorly written science article, it is important to fact-check the information presented and look for credible sources to verify the claims. You can also report the article to the platform it was published on or share your concerns with others to help prevent the spread of misinformation.

How can journalists improve their science writing skills?

To improve their science writing skills, journalists can seek out training or workshops focused on science communication, consult with experts in the field, and carefully fact-check their information. Additionally, using clear and accurate language and avoiding sensationalist titles can greatly improve the quality of their articles.

Similar threads

  • Art, Music, History, and Linguistics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • MATLAB, Maple, Mathematica, LaTeX
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • MATLAB, Maple, Mathematica, LaTeX
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • MATLAB, Maple, Mathematica, LaTeX
Replies
7
Views
3K
Back
Top