<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_07_13_2154229</id>
	<title>Tomorrow's Science Heroes?</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1247493900000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"As a kid I was (and still am) heavily influenced by Carl Sagan, and a little later by Stephen Hawking. Now as I have started a family with two kids, currently age 5 and 2, I am wondering who out there is popularizing science. Currently, my wife and I can get the kids excited about the world around them, but I'd like to find someone inspiring from outside the family as they get older. Sure, we'll always have 'Cosmos,' but are there any contemporaries who are trying to bring science into the public view in such a fun and intriguing way? Someone the kids can look up to and be inspired by? Where is the next Science Hero?"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " As a kid I was ( and still am ) heavily influenced by Carl Sagan , and a little later by Stephen Hawking .
Now as I have started a family with two kids , currently age 5 and 2 , I am wondering who out there is popularizing science .
Currently , my wife and I can get the kids excited about the world around them , but I 'd like to find someone inspiring from outside the family as they get older .
Sure , we 'll always have 'Cosmos, ' but are there any contemporaries who are trying to bring science into the public view in such a fun and intriguing way ?
Someone the kids can look up to and be inspired by ?
Where is the next Science Hero ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "As a kid I was (and still am) heavily influenced by Carl Sagan, and a little later by Stephen Hawking.
Now as I have started a family with two kids, currently age 5 and 2, I am wondering who out there is popularizing science.
Currently, my wife and I can get the kids excited about the world around them, but I'd like to find someone inspiring from outside the family as they get older.
Sure, we'll always have 'Cosmos,' but are there any contemporaries who are trying to bring science into the public view in such a fun and intriguing way?
Someone the kids can look up to and be inspired by?
Where is the next Science Hero?
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28688693</id>
	<title>Kari?  Grant? SAS?  Shawn Carlson?</title>
	<author>vlm</author>
	<datestamp>1247573760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No one had the time to mention Kari or Grant from the Mythbusters, but they had time for a 200 post off topic flamewar about religion and science?  Yes not exactly post graduate education there, but the question was about "excited" and "heros".  Whats not to like about Kari and Grant?</p><p>No one mentioned Shawn Carlson and the SAS?</p><p><a href="http://www.sas.org/" title="sas.org">http://www.sas.org/</a> [sas.org]</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Society\_for\_Amateur\_Scientists" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Society\_for\_Amateur\_Scientists</a> [wikipedia.org]</p><p>At least Forrest Mims got like one comment, even if people shun him for his peculiar church beliefs (not exactly a very enlightened attitude).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No one had the time to mention Kari or Grant from the Mythbusters , but they had time for a 200 post off topic flamewar about religion and science ?
Yes not exactly post graduate education there , but the question was about " excited " and " heros " .
Whats not to like about Kari and Grant ? No one mentioned Shawn Carlson and the SAS ? http : //www.sas.org/ [ sas.org ] http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Society \ _for \ _Amateur \ _Scientists [ wikipedia.org ] At least Forrest Mims got like one comment , even if people shun him for his peculiar church beliefs ( not exactly a very enlightened attitude ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No one had the time to mention Kari or Grant from the Mythbusters, but they had time for a 200 post off topic flamewar about religion and science?
Yes not exactly post graduate education there, but the question was about "excited" and "heros".
Whats not to like about Kari and Grant?No one mentioned Shawn Carlson and the SAS?http://www.sas.org/ [sas.org]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Society\_for\_Amateur\_Scientists [wikipedia.org]At least Forrest Mims got like one comment, even if people shun him for his peculiar church beliefs (not exactly a very enlightened attitude).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28689923</id>
	<title>bill nye, neil de grassi</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247581320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>produces much less regurgitation than sitting through another dora episode</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>produces much less regurgitation than sitting through another dora episode</tokentext>
<sentencetext>produces much less regurgitation than sitting through another dora episode</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28689253</id>
	<title>Al Gore?</title>
	<author>DarrenBaker</author>
	<datestamp>1247578440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He said 'science', not 'science fiction'.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He said 'science ' , not 'science fiction' .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He said 'science', not 'science fiction'.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28688453</id>
	<title>Einstein!</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1247570940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When I was a kid, Einstein was long dead. But I did not care. My mom did a nice trick by calling me "her little Einstein".<br>This made me read everything and all about him, I could get my hands on. (At 9 years old).</p><p>Relativity theory? Quantum physics?<br>It's nice: If you do not care if you are supposed to be too young for that stuff, you will notice that you actually got the brains to understand it.<br>(Just don't expect grown-ups to take you serious, when you talk about things that go way over their head. ^^)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I was a kid , Einstein was long dead .
But I did not care .
My mom did a nice trick by calling me " her little Einstein " .This made me read everything and all about him , I could get my hands on .
( At 9 years old ) .Relativity theory ?
Quantum physics ? It 's nice : If you do not care if you are supposed to be too young for that stuff , you will notice that you actually got the brains to understand it .
( Just do n't expect grown-ups to take you serious , when you talk about things that go way over their head .
^ ^ )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I was a kid, Einstein was long dead.
But I did not care.
My mom did a nice trick by calling me "her little Einstein".This made me read everything and all about him, I could get my hands on.
(At 9 years old).Relativity theory?
Quantum physics?It's nice: If you do not care if you are supposed to be too young for that stuff, you will notice that you actually got the brains to understand it.
(Just don't expect grown-ups to take you serious, when you talk about things that go way over their head.
^^)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685677</id>
	<title>You guys don't read /. enough</title>
	<author>godrik</author>
	<datestamp>1247499660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>In a poll, Cowboy Neal is the only reasonnable answer.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In a poll , Cowboy Neal is the only reasonnable answer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In a poll, Cowboy Neal is the only reasonnable answer.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686223</id>
	<title>The excitement of science</title>
	<author>As\_I\_Please</author>
	<datestamp>1247503440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For physics and astronomy, nobody better demonstrates the excitement to be found in science than Neil deGrasse Tyson.</p><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Ai-VvboPnA" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Ai-VvboPnA</a> [youtube.com]</p><p>For brain science: V.S. Ramachandran.  He works with the weirdest neurological disorders.  Phantom limbs, split brains, and people who feel that they have one limb too many.</p><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rl2LwnaUA-k" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rl2LwnaUA-k</a> [youtube.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For physics and astronomy , nobody better demonstrates the excitement to be found in science than Neil deGrasse Tyson.http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = 0Ai-VvboPnA [ youtube.com ] For brain science : V.S .
Ramachandran. He works with the weirdest neurological disorders .
Phantom limbs , split brains , and people who feel that they have one limb too many.http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = Rl2LwnaUA-k [ youtube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For physics and astronomy, nobody better demonstrates the excitement to be found in science than Neil deGrasse Tyson.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Ai-VvboPnA [youtube.com]For brain science: V.S.
Ramachandran.  He works with the weirdest neurological disorders.
Phantom limbs, split brains, and people who feel that they have one limb too many.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rl2LwnaUA-k [youtube.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686235</id>
	<title>Something old, something new, something personal</title>
	<author>Flexagon</author>
	<datestamp>1247503620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Something old: Buy "Martin Gardner's Mathematical Games" on CD-ROM.  Not for them to read (yet) but for you to read and get ideas for things to do with them.</p><p>Something new: Since you're Anonymous, I don't know where you are.  But take them <a href="http://www.exploratorium.org/" title="exploratorium.org">here</a> [exploratorium.org].  There is so much amazing hands-on stuff here.  There may be similar places elsewhere, but this place is just outstanding.</p><p>Something personal: Find ways to bring in things Right Now, as they happen.  What you show interest and excitement in will be worth 2x the others, or boost their value.  On a suitable occasion (birthday, etc.) give them a small unopened geode.  Give them a hammer and safety glasses and let them break it open (well, not the 2-year old yet).  If someone sends you steaks kept frozen with dry ice, put the meat away.  Instead, get a bowl of warm water, gloves, the hammer and glasses again, and make sci-fi effects.  If you're ready to retire that old, dead VCR, then get out the screwdrivers and take it apart with them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Something old : Buy " Martin Gardner 's Mathematical Games " on CD-ROM .
Not for them to read ( yet ) but for you to read and get ideas for things to do with them.Something new : Since you 're Anonymous , I do n't know where you are .
But take them here [ exploratorium.org ] .
There is so much amazing hands-on stuff here .
There may be similar places elsewhere , but this place is just outstanding.Something personal : Find ways to bring in things Right Now , as they happen .
What you show interest and excitement in will be worth 2x the others , or boost their value .
On a suitable occasion ( birthday , etc .
) give them a small unopened geode .
Give them a hammer and safety glasses and let them break it open ( well , not the 2-year old yet ) .
If someone sends you steaks kept frozen with dry ice , put the meat away .
Instead , get a bowl of warm water , gloves , the hammer and glasses again , and make sci-fi effects .
If you 're ready to retire that old , dead VCR , then get out the screwdrivers and take it apart with them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Something old: Buy "Martin Gardner's Mathematical Games" on CD-ROM.
Not for them to read (yet) but for you to read and get ideas for things to do with them.Something new: Since you're Anonymous, I don't know where you are.
But take them here [exploratorium.org].
There is so much amazing hands-on stuff here.
There may be similar places elsewhere, but this place is just outstanding.Something personal: Find ways to bring in things Right Now, as they happen.
What you show interest and excitement in will be worth 2x the others, or boost their value.
On a suitable occasion (birthday, etc.
) give them a small unopened geode.
Give them a hammer and safety glasses and let them break it open (well, not the 2-year old yet).
If someone sends you steaks kept frozen with dry ice, put the meat away.
Instead, get a bowl of warm water, gloves, the hammer and glasses again, and make sci-fi effects.
If you're ready to retire that old, dead VCR, then get out the screwdrivers and take it apart with them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686301</id>
	<title>Alton Brown</title>
	<author>grasshoppa</author>
	<datestamp>1247504100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously.  His show good eats does a wonderful job of investigating the science behind the food. He does so in such a way that makes you want to know more, which renders his detractor's accuracy claims moot.  His show has helped me inspire my 5 year old daughter to question how things work the way they do.  What better hero could you ask for?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously .
His show good eats does a wonderful job of investigating the science behind the food .
He does so in such a way that makes you want to know more , which renders his detractor 's accuracy claims moot .
His show has helped me inspire my 5 year old daughter to question how things work the way they do .
What better hero could you ask for ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously.
His show good eats does a wonderful job of investigating the science behind the food.
He does so in such a way that makes you want to know more, which renders his detractor's accuracy claims moot.
His show has helped me inspire my 5 year old daughter to question how things work the way they do.
What better hero could you ask for?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28691745</id>
	<title>Re:Meteorologists</title>
	<author>Megane</author>
	<datestamp>1247589420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>By the way, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falco\_(musician)" title="wikipedia.org">Falco</a> [wikipedia.org] died 11 years ago, and apparently no one noticed.</htmltext>
<tokenext>By the way , Falco [ wikipedia.org ] died 11 years ago , and apparently no one noticed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>By the way, Falco [wikipedia.org] died 11 years ago, and apparently no one noticed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685523</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28688831</id>
	<title>Some from the UK...</title>
	<author>gborland</author>
	<datestamp>1247575320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian\_Cox\_(physicist)" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Brian Cox</a> [wikipedia.org] has presented loads of stuff on British TV.
<a href="http://richarddawkins.net/" title="richarddawkins.net" rel="nofollow">Richard Dawkins</a> [richarddawkins.net] needs no introduction.
<a href="http://www.simonsingh.net/" title="simonsingh.net" rel="nofollow">Simon Singh</a> [simonsingh.net] has written lots of books and presented many TV shows.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Brian Cox [ wikipedia.org ] has presented loads of stuff on British TV .
Richard Dawkins [ richarddawkins.net ] needs no introduction .
Simon Singh [ simonsingh.net ] has written lots of books and presented many TV shows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Brian Cox [wikipedia.org] has presented loads of stuff on British TV.
Richard Dawkins [richarddawkins.net] needs no introduction.
Simon Singh [simonsingh.net] has written lots of books and presented many TV shows.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28688541</id>
	<title>Re:5 and 2 years old?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247571900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You've got years before they give a rat's ass about Cosmos or David Attenborough wildlife documentaries. It's OK, they're little kids.</p></div><p>Nonsense. I watched Cosmos at age 5 and one of my first 'real' books was an astronomy book allegedly for 12 year olds. I'm even told I held a lecture to the other kids in my daycare centre about the temperature on the other planets. And as it turned out, I'm not even very smart.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You 've got years before they give a rat 's ass about Cosmos or David Attenborough wildlife documentaries .
It 's OK , they 're little kids.Nonsense .
I watched Cosmos at age 5 and one of my first 'real ' books was an astronomy book allegedly for 12 year olds .
I 'm even told I held a lecture to the other kids in my daycare centre about the temperature on the other planets .
And as it turned out , I 'm not even very smart .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You've got years before they give a rat's ass about Cosmos or David Attenborough wildlife documentaries.
It's OK, they're little kids.Nonsense.
I watched Cosmos at age 5 and one of my first 'real' books was an astronomy book allegedly for 12 year olds.
I'm even told I held a lecture to the other kids in my daycare centre about the temperature on the other planets.
And as it turned out, I'm not even very smart.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685589</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28691517</id>
	<title>Try changing it up</title>
	<author>WindBourne</author>
	<datestamp>1247588520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I also have a 5 and 2 y.o.  I put iron in primer paint and put a couple of coats on their bedroom wall. That allows me to stick magnets on the wall. In particular, I have grabbed a number of the felt cut-outs that are available. I simply put magnets for business cards on the back of these and pix. On my daughter's room, I have the planets and sun up top. Below that I have the alphabet, digits, more pix and felt layouts of spaces, and as well as pix of cells.
Both of my kids know the planets name, and my 5 y.o. is learning the parts of cells. Last night, I had them watch SpaceX's Falcon 1 launch, and they love to watch the SpaceX animation. There is a book that my 5 y.o. loves to read which is the "see inside science". Some of their puzzles are rockets, airplanes, trains, etc. <br> <br>
Right now, I am simply trying to get the kids INTERESTED in science. For a 2 and 5 y.o, that is your best bet. That is your best bet.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I also have a 5 and 2 y.o .
I put iron in primer paint and put a couple of coats on their bedroom wall .
That allows me to stick magnets on the wall .
In particular , I have grabbed a number of the felt cut-outs that are available .
I simply put magnets for business cards on the back of these and pix .
On my daughter 's room , I have the planets and sun up top .
Below that I have the alphabet , digits , more pix and felt layouts of spaces , and as well as pix of cells .
Both of my kids know the planets name , and my 5 y.o .
is learning the parts of cells .
Last night , I had them watch SpaceX 's Falcon 1 launch , and they love to watch the SpaceX animation .
There is a book that my 5 y.o .
loves to read which is the " see inside science " .
Some of their puzzles are rockets , airplanes , trains , etc .
Right now , I am simply trying to get the kids INTERESTED in science .
For a 2 and 5 y.o , that is your best bet .
That is your best bet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I also have a 5 and 2 y.o.
I put iron in primer paint and put a couple of coats on their bedroom wall.
That allows me to stick magnets on the wall.
In particular, I have grabbed a number of the felt cut-outs that are available.
I simply put magnets for business cards on the back of these and pix.
On my daughter's room, I have the planets and sun up top.
Below that I have the alphabet, digits, more pix and felt layouts of spaces, and as well as pix of cells.
Both of my kids know the planets name, and my 5 y.o.
is learning the parts of cells.
Last night, I had them watch SpaceX's Falcon 1 launch, and they love to watch the SpaceX animation.
There is a book that my 5 y.o.
loves to read which is the "see inside science".
Some of their puzzles are rockets, airplanes, trains, etc.
Right now, I am simply trying to get the kids INTERESTED in science.
For a 2 and 5 y.o, that is your best bet.
That is your best bet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685619</id>
	<title>Re:BILL BILL BILL</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247499300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is Bill Nye still doing shows? I haven't seen him in a long time.
<br> <br>
Grid knows we can use more "Mr. Science" types on TV. That is one reason that of all the cooking shows on the food channel, I like "Good Eats" the best, because they at least make an attempt to put some real history and science in their shows. I know it sounds like a strange combination, but it really is a good show.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is Bill Nye still doing shows ?
I have n't seen him in a long time .
Grid knows we can use more " Mr. Science " types on TV .
That is one reason that of all the cooking shows on the food channel , I like " Good Eats " the best , because they at least make an attempt to put some real history and science in their shows .
I know it sounds like a strange combination , but it really is a good show .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is Bill Nye still doing shows?
I haven't seen him in a long time.
Grid knows we can use more "Mr. Science" types on TV.
That is one reason that of all the cooking shows on the food channel, I like "Good Eats" the best, because they at least make an attempt to put some real history and science in their shows.
I know it sounds like a strange combination, but it really is a good show.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685455</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687713</id>
	<title>Videos and books</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247562540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In addition to names of the people themselves, can anybody recommend any good science documentaries/talks/books?  I'd recommend the following:</p><ul>
<li>David Attenborough<ul>
	<li>Life In... series (TV shows, 1979 - 2008)</li><li> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0795176/" title="imdb.com">Planet Earth</a> [imdb.com] (TV show, 2006)</li></ul></li><li>J. Bronowski<ul>
	<li> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0069733/" title="imdb.com">The Ascent of Man</a> [imdb.com] (TV show, 1973)</li></ul></li><li>Bill Bryson<ul>
	<li> <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/51900381&amp;referer=brief\_results" title="worldcat.org">A short History of Nearly Everything</a> [worldcat.org] (book and audiobook, 2003)</li></ul></li><li>Brian Cox<ul>
	<li> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2207118/" title="imdb.com">[Various documentaries]</a> [imdb.com] (TV shows, 2005 - present)</li></ul></li><li>Richard Dawkins<ul>
	<li> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0810718/" title="imdb.com">The Royal Institution Christmas Lectures: Growing Up in the Universe</a> [imdb.com] (TV show, 1991 - 1992)</li><li> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0774118/" title="imdb.com">Root of All Evil?</a> [imdb.com] (TV show, 2006)</li><li> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1092058/" title="imdb.com">The Enemies of Reason</a> [imdb.com] (TV show, 2007)</li><li> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1279086/" title="imdb.com">The Genius of Charles Darwin</a> [imdb.com] (TV show, 2008)</li></ul></li><li>Neil deGrasse Tyson<ul>
	<li> <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/70265574" title="worldcat.org">Death by Black Hole</a> [worldcat.org] (book and audiobook, 2007)</li></ul></li><li>Michio Kaku<ul>
	<li> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0977682/" title="imdb.com">Visions of the Future AKA 2057</a> [imdb.com] (TV show, 2007)</li></ul></li><li>Carl Sagan<ul>
	<li> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0081846/" title="imdb.com">Cosmos</a> [imdb.com] (TV show and book, 1980)</li><li> <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/30736355&amp;referer=brief\_results" title="worldcat.org">Pale Blue Dot</a> [worldcat.org] (book, 1994)</li><li> <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/32855551&amp;referer=brief\_results" title="worldcat.org">The Demon-Haunted World</a> [worldcat.org] (book, 1996)</li></ul></li><li>Various<ul>
	<li>The Amaz!ng Meeting (symposium, 2003 - current)</li><li>Beyond Belief (symposium, 2006 - current)</li></ul><p>If anyone can add to this list, I'd appreciate it.  It'd be nice to seek out more science shows and related things.</p><p>I'd also recommend the following on YouTube:</p><ul>
	<li> <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C1cKD93W3yg" title="youtube.com">Neil deGrasse Tyson - Stupid Design</a> [youtube.com] </li><li> <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UB\_htqDCP-s" title="youtube.com">Tim Minchin - Storm</a> [youtube.com] </li><li> <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-\_2xGIwQfik" title="youtube.com">Dawkins vs. Tyson</a> [youtube.com] </li></ul><p>(And now I need to ramble on for ages because Slashdot's software claims I have too few characters per line...  A curious requirement.  Just ignore this paragraph, it contains absolutely no meaningful information at all.  Seriously, though, check out the above YouTube clips if nothing else.  Really, Cosmos and A Short History of Nearly Everything should be given to everyone at birth...)</p></li></ul></htmltext>
<tokenext>In addition to names of the people themselves , can anybody recommend any good science documentaries/talks/books ?
I 'd recommend the following : David Attenborough Life In... series ( TV shows , 1979 - 2008 ) Planet Earth [ imdb.com ] ( TV show , 2006 ) J. Bronowski The Ascent of Man [ imdb.com ] ( TV show , 1973 ) Bill Bryson A short History of Nearly Everything [ worldcat.org ] ( book and audiobook , 2003 ) Brian Cox [ Various documentaries ] [ imdb.com ] ( TV shows , 2005 - present ) Richard Dawkins The Royal Institution Christmas Lectures : Growing Up in the Universe [ imdb.com ] ( TV show , 1991 - 1992 ) Root of All Evil ?
[ imdb.com ] ( TV show , 2006 ) The Enemies of Reason [ imdb.com ] ( TV show , 2007 ) The Genius of Charles Darwin [ imdb.com ] ( TV show , 2008 ) Neil deGrasse Tyson Death by Black Hole [ worldcat.org ] ( book and audiobook , 2007 ) Michio Kaku Visions of the Future AKA 2057 [ imdb.com ] ( TV show , 2007 ) Carl Sagan Cosmos [ imdb.com ] ( TV show and book , 1980 ) Pale Blue Dot [ worldcat.org ] ( book , 1994 ) The Demon-Haunted World [ worldcat.org ] ( book , 1996 ) Various The Amaz ! ng Meeting ( symposium , 2003 - current ) Beyond Belief ( symposium , 2006 - current ) If anyone can add to this list , I 'd appreciate it .
It 'd be nice to seek out more science shows and related things.I 'd also recommend the following on YouTube : Neil deGrasse Tyson - Stupid Design [ youtube.com ] Tim Minchin - Storm [ youtube.com ] Dawkins vs. Tyson [ youtube.com ] ( And now I need to ramble on for ages because Slashdot 's software claims I have too few characters per line... A curious requirement .
Just ignore this paragraph , it contains absolutely no meaningful information at all .
Seriously , though , check out the above YouTube clips if nothing else .
Really , Cosmos and A Short History of Nearly Everything should be given to everyone at birth... )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In addition to names of the people themselves, can anybody recommend any good science documentaries/talks/books?
I'd recommend the following:
David Attenborough
	Life In... series (TV shows, 1979 - 2008) Planet Earth [imdb.com] (TV show, 2006)J. Bronowski
	 The Ascent of Man [imdb.com] (TV show, 1973)Bill Bryson
	 A short History of Nearly Everything [worldcat.org] (book and audiobook, 2003)Brian Cox
	 [Various documentaries] [imdb.com] (TV shows, 2005 - present)Richard Dawkins
	 The Royal Institution Christmas Lectures: Growing Up in the Universe [imdb.com] (TV show, 1991 - 1992) Root of All Evil?
[imdb.com] (TV show, 2006) The Enemies of Reason [imdb.com] (TV show, 2007) The Genius of Charles Darwin [imdb.com] (TV show, 2008)Neil deGrasse Tyson
	 Death by Black Hole [worldcat.org] (book and audiobook, 2007)Michio Kaku
	 Visions of the Future AKA 2057 [imdb.com] (TV show, 2007)Carl Sagan
	 Cosmos [imdb.com] (TV show and book, 1980) Pale Blue Dot [worldcat.org] (book, 1994) The Demon-Haunted World [worldcat.org] (book, 1996)Various
	The Amaz!ng Meeting (symposium, 2003 - current)Beyond Belief (symposium, 2006 - current)If anyone can add to this list, I'd appreciate it.
It'd be nice to seek out more science shows and related things.I'd also recommend the following on YouTube:
	 Neil deGrasse Tyson - Stupid Design [youtube.com]  Tim Minchin - Storm [youtube.com]  Dawkins vs. Tyson [youtube.com] (And now I need to ramble on for ages because Slashdot's software claims I have too few characters per line...  A curious requirement.
Just ignore this paragraph, it contains absolutely no meaningful information at all.
Seriously, though, check out the above YouTube clips if nothing else.
Really, Cosmos and A Short History of Nearly Everything should be given to everyone at birth...)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28701045</id>
	<title>The Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247650260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics have some great public lectures that you can view on the net under their OUTREACH program.<br>http://perimeterinstitute.ca/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics have some great public lectures that you can view on the net under their OUTREACH program.http : //perimeterinstitute.ca/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics have some great public lectures that you can view on the net under their OUTREACH program.http://perimeterinstitute.ca/</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686721</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685433</id>
	<title>How about Al ?</title>
	<author>bricko</author>
	<datestamp>1247497860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Al Gore and Jim Hansen......heh.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Al Gore and Jim Hansen......heh .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Al Gore and Jim Hansen......heh.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686349</id>
	<title>Dr. Michio Kaku</title>
	<author>HockeyPuck</author>
	<datestamp>1247504580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I actually like watching Dr. Michio Kaku on the science channel's SCI-Q. He seems to take abstract topics (Quantum Mechanics, String Theory) or stuff out of science-fiction (like time travel) and answer them in a easy to understand (but not Sesame Street) level.  Here's 10 example questions from the show's website: <a href="http://science.discovery.com/questions/michio-kaku/michio-kaku.html" title="discovery.com">http://science.discovery.com/questions/michio-kaku/michio-kaku.html</a> [discovery.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I actually like watching Dr. Michio Kaku on the science channel 's SCI-Q .
He seems to take abstract topics ( Quantum Mechanics , String Theory ) or stuff out of science-fiction ( like time travel ) and answer them in a easy to understand ( but not Sesame Street ) level .
Here 's 10 example questions from the show 's website : http : //science.discovery.com/questions/michio-kaku/michio-kaku.html [ discovery.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I actually like watching Dr. Michio Kaku on the science channel's SCI-Q.
He seems to take abstract topics (Quantum Mechanics, String Theory) or stuff out of science-fiction (like time travel) and answer them in a easy to understand (but not Sesame Street) level.
Here's 10 example questions from the show's website: http://science.discovery.com/questions/michio-kaku/michio-kaku.html [discovery.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685525</id>
	<title>Al Gore</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247498580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Because of him your children won't be threatened by Manbearpig</htmltext>
<tokenext>Because of him your children wo n't be threatened by Manbearpig</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because of him your children won't be threatened by Manbearpig</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685763</id>
	<title>Re:LOL  Carl Sagan....scientist?  not</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247500080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Troooollllllllllllllll. Move along nothing to see here. You should know how slashdotters would react to a post that rejects science in favor of religious dogma. As such, you're just looking to stir up controversy. <br> <br>Mods, banish the above post to the depths of trollish obscurity.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Troooollllllllllllllll .
Move along nothing to see here .
You should know how slashdotters would react to a post that rejects science in favor of religious dogma .
As such , you 're just looking to stir up controversy .
Mods , banish the above post to the depths of trollish obscurity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Troooollllllllllllllll.
Move along nothing to see here.
You should know how slashdotters would react to a post that rejects science in favor of religious dogma.
As such, you're just looking to stir up controversy.
Mods, banish the above post to the depths of trollish obscurity.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685579</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685845</id>
	<title>Re:Smirking Pluto Killer - Not My Favorite</title>
	<author>arb phd slp</author>
	<datestamp>1247500680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I dislike that Neil deGrasse guy, he was quite the smirking "I'm smart and you're not" during that whole Pluto isn't a planet anymore crap. I'm with Michio Kaku as my favorite science enthusiast and speaker. He's smart, he's enthused and he didn't go around on the Tonight Show smirking about how Pluto isn't a planet. I'm also looking to punch whoever it was that decided Brontosaurus wasn't a proper name for the Brontosaurus too. (shakes fist in fury)</p></div><p>You're a little late on that one. The peer-reviewed paper that showed that the "brontosaurus" was really an apatosaur was published in 1903.</p><p>I'm a Michio Kaku fan, too and have been since I read his book Hyperspace 15 years ago.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I dislike that Neil deGrasse guy , he was quite the smirking " I 'm smart and you 're not " during that whole Pluto is n't a planet anymore crap .
I 'm with Michio Kaku as my favorite science enthusiast and speaker .
He 's smart , he 's enthused and he did n't go around on the Tonight Show smirking about how Pluto is n't a planet .
I 'm also looking to punch whoever it was that decided Brontosaurus was n't a proper name for the Brontosaurus too .
( shakes fist in fury ) You 're a little late on that one .
The peer-reviewed paper that showed that the " brontosaurus " was really an apatosaur was published in 1903.I 'm a Michio Kaku fan , too and have been since I read his book Hyperspace 15 years ago .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I dislike that Neil deGrasse guy, he was quite the smirking "I'm smart and you're not" during that whole Pluto isn't a planet anymore crap.
I'm with Michio Kaku as my favorite science enthusiast and speaker.
He's smart, he's enthused and he didn't go around on the Tonight Show smirking about how Pluto isn't a planet.
I'm also looking to punch whoever it was that decided Brontosaurus wasn't a proper name for the Brontosaurus too.
(shakes fist in fury)You're a little late on that one.
The peer-reviewed paper that showed that the "brontosaurus" was really an apatosaur was published in 1903.I'm a Michio Kaku fan, too and have been since I read his book Hyperspace 15 years ago.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685731</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685581</id>
	<title>Two come to mind...</title>
	<author>Landshark17</author>
	<datestamp>1247499000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If Bill Nye hadn't been cancelled he'd be the perfect place to start, though I'm sure you could find old episodes on youtube or find torrents.<br> <br>The other is Mythbusters. It may be a little over the head of a 5-year-old and a 2-year-old, but I think it has a fair chance of grabbing them. How can kids not love a show whose two most commonly repeated phrases are "If it's worth doing, it's worth over-doing." and "When in doubt-- C4!"</htmltext>
<tokenext>If Bill Nye had n't been cancelled he 'd be the perfect place to start , though I 'm sure you could find old episodes on youtube or find torrents .
The other is Mythbusters .
It may be a little over the head of a 5-year-old and a 2-year-old , but I think it has a fair chance of grabbing them .
How can kids not love a show whose two most commonly repeated phrases are " If it 's worth doing , it 's worth over-doing .
" and " When in doubt-- C4 !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If Bill Nye hadn't been cancelled he'd be the perfect place to start, though I'm sure you could find old episodes on youtube or find torrents.
The other is Mythbusters.
It may be a little over the head of a 5-year-old and a 2-year-old, but I think it has a fair chance of grabbing them.
How can kids not love a show whose two most commonly repeated phrases are "If it's worth doing, it's worth over-doing.
" and "When in doubt-- C4!
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687553</id>
	<title>Maybe not a hero....</title>
	<author>BigBadBus</author>
	<datestamp>1247603820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>but Ben Goldacre's book is fun and informative.</htmltext>
<tokenext>but Ben Goldacre 's book is fun and informative .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but Ben Goldacre's book is fun and informative.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685443</id>
	<title>Hrmm</title>
	<author>acehole</author>
	<datestamp>1247497860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If only there was a "Science Man" cartoon. Fighting the delusional forces of creationism. Curb stomping his nemesis Dr Dino and able to calculate PI to 30 digits. All while working at the LHC in his secret janitor identity.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If only there was a " Science Man " cartoon .
Fighting the delusional forces of creationism .
Curb stomping his nemesis Dr Dino and able to calculate PI to 30 digits .
All while working at the LHC in his secret janitor identity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If only there was a "Science Man" cartoon.
Fighting the delusional forces of creationism.
Curb stomping his nemesis Dr Dino and able to calculate PI to 30 digits.
All while working at the LHC in his secret janitor identity.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686177</id>
	<title>You, dude.</title>
	<author>cptdondo</author>
	<datestamp>1247503140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Get out there in the dirt, show them worms.  Put an apple on the sill and watch it rot.  Boil an egg until it explodes.  Shake a soda can and watch it blow up into a ball.</p><p>Science is all around you, it's active, it's alive, it's fun!  They don't want to sit in front of the TV.</p><p>Your 5 year old may be old enough for Grossology, but whatever,  Take them fishing,  Watch birds.  Climb a tree.  Look at stuff with one eye closed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Get out there in the dirt , show them worms .
Put an apple on the sill and watch it rot .
Boil an egg until it explodes .
Shake a soda can and watch it blow up into a ball.Science is all around you , it 's active , it 's alive , it 's fun !
They do n't want to sit in front of the TV.Your 5 year old may be old enough for Grossology , but whatever , Take them fishing , Watch birds .
Climb a tree .
Look at stuff with one eye closed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Get out there in the dirt, show them worms.
Put an apple on the sill and watch it rot.
Boil an egg until it explodes.
Shake a soda can and watch it blow up into a ball.Science is all around you, it's active, it's alive, it's fun!
They don't want to sit in front of the TV.Your 5 year old may be old enough for Grossology, but whatever,  Take them fishing,  Watch birds.
Climb a tree.
Look at stuff with one eye closed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685591</id>
	<title>Bill and Magic Schoolbus FTW</title>
	<author>jnmontario</author>
	<datestamp>1247499000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have to agree.  Kids love nothing more in high school science than to sit down and watch an episode or two of Bill Nye.  Plus, the added bonus is that his more adult themed shows (The Eye of Science) for kids slightly older than the targeted segment of the original series.

Also, I'm stunned at how much Magic Schoolbus comes up in conversations with my children about our world.  With topics ranging from the digestive system to how heat transfers between objects good old M.S. can captivate your kids and teach them to appreciate learning about natural systems and processes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have to agree .
Kids love nothing more in high school science than to sit down and watch an episode or two of Bill Nye .
Plus , the added bonus is that his more adult themed shows ( The Eye of Science ) for kids slightly older than the targeted segment of the original series .
Also , I 'm stunned at how much Magic Schoolbus comes up in conversations with my children about our world .
With topics ranging from the digestive system to how heat transfers between objects good old M.S .
can captivate your kids and teach them to appreciate learning about natural systems and processes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have to agree.
Kids love nothing more in high school science than to sit down and watch an episode or two of Bill Nye.
Plus, the added bonus is that his more adult themed shows (The Eye of Science) for kids slightly older than the targeted segment of the original series.
Also, I'm stunned at how much Magic Schoolbus comes up in conversations with my children about our world.
With topics ranging from the digestive system to how heat transfers between objects good old M.S.
can captivate your kids and teach them to appreciate learning about natural systems and processes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685455</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28693373</id>
	<title>Re:Mythbusters does it</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1247596020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>True, but it uses the concept of science; which is far better then most shows.</p><p>I think it is fine for kids as part of the overall science expeerience, but certianly not as their only point of scientific exposure.</p><p>You need to introduce them via something interesting.</p><p>My kids and I have built model rockets, and I will teach them some basics of rocket science.<br>Will it be complete? no, because they nede to stay intrested. When they start asking about more details I will fill them in.</p><p>For example, when figuring the approx. height the rocket will fly I will just us Burn time * how many feet per second the engine travels. + 'some extra distance for momentum" and that's it. Is it accurate? no, but is doesn't need to be.<br>When they want to put an altimeter in it, then we will add then appropriate variables to see how close we get to it's actual height.<br>Or maybe they won't want to do it again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>True , but it uses the concept of science ; which is far better then most shows.I think it is fine for kids as part of the overall science expeerience , but certianly not as their only point of scientific exposure.You need to introduce them via something interesting.My kids and I have built model rockets , and I will teach them some basics of rocket science.Will it be complete ?
no , because they nede to stay intrested .
When they start asking about more details I will fill them in.For example , when figuring the approx .
height the rocket will fly I will just us Burn time * how many feet per second the engine travels .
+ 'some extra distance for momentum " and that 's it .
Is it accurate ?
no , but is does n't need to be.When they want to put an altimeter in it , then we will add then appropriate variables to see how close we get to it 's actual height.Or maybe they wo n't want to do it again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>True, but it uses the concept of science; which is far better then most shows.I think it is fine for kids as part of the overall science expeerience, but certianly not as their only point of scientific exposure.You need to introduce them via something interesting.My kids and I have built model rockets, and I will teach them some basics of rocket science.Will it be complete?
no, because they nede to stay intrested.
When they start asking about more details I will fill them in.For example, when figuring the approx.
height the rocket will fly I will just us Burn time * how many feet per second the engine travels.
+ 'some extra distance for momentum" and that's it.
Is it accurate?
no, but is doesn't need to be.When they want to put an altimeter in it, then we will add then appropriate variables to see how close we get to it's actual height.Or maybe they won't want to do it again.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685837</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28689641</id>
	<title>Re:5 and 2 years old?</title>
	<author>tgd</author>
	<datestamp>1247580240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Cosmos was *bar none* my favorite show to watch on TV when I was 5.</p><p>Sorry you were so simple when you were a child. Don't assume all children are.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Cosmos was * bar none * my favorite show to watch on TV when I was 5.Sorry you were so simple when you were a child .
Do n't assume all children are .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cosmos was *bar none* my favorite show to watch on TV when I was 5.Sorry you were so simple when you were a child.
Don't assume all children are.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685589</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685559</id>
	<title>Re:Hrmm</title>
	<author>Tablizer</author>
	<datestamp>1247498880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Fighting the delusional forces of creationism.</p></div> </blockquote><p>That's a tough subject, even for adults. There's no slam-dunk pieces of evidence that are blatantly visible and there's a creationist retort for almost any piece of evidence offered. However, it may help kids understand that there are complex topics with so many variables that simple measurements or simple experiments are no longer sufficient and that debates on such topics can be tricky, lively, heated, but also fun. (The same with economics, history, and psychology.)<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Fighting the delusional forces of creationism .
That 's a tough subject , even for adults .
There 's no slam-dunk pieces of evidence that are blatantly visible and there 's a creationist retort for almost any piece of evidence offered .
However , it may help kids understand that there are complex topics with so many variables that simple measurements or simple experiments are no longer sufficient and that debates on such topics can be tricky , lively , heated , but also fun .
( The same with economics , history , and psychology .
)      </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fighting the delusional forces of creationism.
That's a tough subject, even for adults.
There's no slam-dunk pieces of evidence that are blatantly visible and there's a creationist retort for almost any piece of evidence offered.
However, it may help kids understand that there are complex topics with so many variables that simple measurements or simple experiments are no longer sufficient and that debates on such topics can be tricky, lively, heated, but also fun.
(The same with economics, history, and psychology.
)
     
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685443</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686173</id>
	<title>Re:Smirking Pluto Killer - Not My Favorite</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247503080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>RIght, smart people should be saddened and deeply troubled by their gifts because it means they will never be able to connect meaningfully with the truly stupid. Athletes should be also, because they will never understand what it is to be pathologically clumsy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>RIght , smart people should be saddened and deeply troubled by their gifts because it means they will never be able to connect meaningfully with the truly stupid .
Athletes should be also , because they will never understand what it is to be pathologically clumsy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>RIght, smart people should be saddened and deeply troubled by their gifts because it means they will never be able to connect meaningfully with the truly stupid.
Athletes should be also, because they will never understand what it is to be pathologically clumsy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685731</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28697929</id>
	<title>Dr Karl Kruszelnicki</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247574540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Have you heard of Dr Karl Kruszelnicki. Has an answer for all things science, and gives his answers in an entertaining manner.<br>http://abc.gov.au/science/drkarl/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Have you heard of Dr Karl Kruszelnicki .
Has an answer for all things science , and gives his answers in an entertaining manner.http : //abc.gov.au/science/drkarl/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have you heard of Dr Karl Kruszelnicki.
Has an answer for all things science, and gives his answers in an entertaining manner.http://abc.gov.au/science/drkarl/</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28689973</id>
	<title>Derek Pitts</title>
	<author>dpilot</author>
	<datestamp>1247581560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I honestly can't say that the guy's inspiring, but he's been getting a decent amount of face time on TV when astronomical facts are called for.  He at least informs, and what he says isn't obviously incorrect.  Perhaps not a ringing endorsement, but he at least deserves mention here.</p><p>On the other hand, I once saw an interview of Richard Feynmann on TV.  The guy was absolutely stunning.  You see others on TV and say, "He seems reasonably intelligent, despite being a celebrity/politician/whatever."  Feynmann was the real thing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I honestly ca n't say that the guy 's inspiring , but he 's been getting a decent amount of face time on TV when astronomical facts are called for .
He at least informs , and what he says is n't obviously incorrect .
Perhaps not a ringing endorsement , but he at least deserves mention here.On the other hand , I once saw an interview of Richard Feynmann on TV .
The guy was absolutely stunning .
You see others on TV and say , " He seems reasonably intelligent , despite being a celebrity/politician/whatever .
" Feynmann was the real thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I honestly can't say that the guy's inspiring, but he's been getting a decent amount of face time on TV when astronomical facts are called for.
He at least informs, and what he says isn't obviously incorrect.
Perhaps not a ringing endorsement, but he at least deserves mention here.On the other hand, I once saw an interview of Richard Feynmann on TV.
The guy was absolutely stunning.
You see others on TV and say, "He seems reasonably intelligent, despite being a celebrity/politician/whatever.
"  Feynmann was the real thing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28688047</id>
	<title>Science Guys and Gals</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247566140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First time I have posted here but this is an area that I am very passianate about.<br>I go around schools, parks, hotels you name it doing science shows and workshops for kids.</p><p>I know there are also a lot of very good people who do similare things here in the UK.  We also have quite a few sceince centers that also have out reach programs.</p><p>I am also noticing more and more childrens programs with science as the main idea behind them.</p><p>I personal feel that in the UK today there is more exposure for children to science thanever before but the question is will it last?</p><p>Is all this work actual doing any good and will we get more scientist because of it.  Not if the teachers do not contiune all this good work and keep that energy going. They can only do this if education is funded correctly and they are given the freedom to do so.  I have worked wih many frustrated teachers that are having to teach science parat fashion.</p><p>Please do not get me start on sceince in infant and junior school.</p><p>I am going to get of my soap box for awhile and let others comment.</p><p>Sorry about spelling and gramma but I am dyslexic and not run this throught a word proccessor</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First time I have posted here but this is an area that I am very passianate about.I go around schools , parks , hotels you name it doing science shows and workshops for kids.I know there are also a lot of very good people who do similare things here in the UK .
We also have quite a few sceince centers that also have out reach programs.I am also noticing more and more childrens programs with science as the main idea behind them.I personal feel that in the UK today there is more exposure for children to science thanever before but the question is will it last ? Is all this work actual doing any good and will we get more scientist because of it .
Not if the teachers do not contiune all this good work and keep that energy going .
They can only do this if education is funded correctly and they are given the freedom to do so .
I have worked wih many frustrated teachers that are having to teach science parat fashion.Please do not get me start on sceince in infant and junior school.I am going to get of my soap box for awhile and let others comment.Sorry about spelling and gramma but I am dyslexic and not run this throught a word proccessor</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First time I have posted here but this is an area that I am very passianate about.I go around schools, parks, hotels you name it doing science shows and workshops for kids.I know there are also a lot of very good people who do similare things here in the UK.
We also have quite a few sceince centers that also have out reach programs.I am also noticing more and more childrens programs with science as the main idea behind them.I personal feel that in the UK today there is more exposure for children to science thanever before but the question is will it last?Is all this work actual doing any good and will we get more scientist because of it.
Not if the teachers do not contiune all this good work and keep that energy going.
They can only do this if education is funded correctly and they are given the freedom to do so.
I have worked wih many frustrated teachers that are having to teach science parat fashion.Please do not get me start on sceince in infant and junior school.I am going to get of my soap box for awhile and let others comment.Sorry about spelling and gramma but I am dyslexic and not run this throught a word proccessor</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686183</id>
	<title>Your wish is granted</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247503200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://www.gocomics.com/tomthedancingbug/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.gocomics.com/tomthedancingbug/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.gocomics.com/tomthedancingbug/</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685443</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686205</id>
	<title>Get a magnet</title>
	<author>mevets</author>
	<datestamp>1247503320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>and when your kids are old enough not to eat them, some iron filings.  If they ever get bored with the magnet (who could, really), get a magnifying glass.  Continue on this thread.  Only drop to celebrities when ADD takes hold.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>and when your kids are old enough not to eat them , some iron filings .
If they ever get bored with the magnet ( who could , really ) , get a magnifying glass .
Continue on this thread .
Only drop to celebrities when ADD takes hold .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and when your kids are old enough not to eat them, some iron filings.
If they ever get bored with the magnet (who could, really), get a magnifying glass.
Continue on this thread.
Only drop to celebrities when ADD takes hold.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685953</id>
	<title>In a decade or so...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247501460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Give em Feynman's books.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)  In addition to writing well for laymen, he makes it clear he finds science fun, and he's not a stuffed shirt.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Give em Feynman 's books .
: - ) In addition to writing well for laymen , he makes it clear he finds science fun , and he 's not a stuffed shirt .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Give em Feynman's books.
:-)  In addition to writing well for laymen, he makes it clear he finds science fun, and he's not a stuffed shirt.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28691105</id>
	<title>Re:We don't need science heroes</title>
	<author>Red Flayer</author>
	<datestamp>1247586540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So then the lesson the kids take away is that people with flaws cannot be heroes?  That if you're flawed, it is worthless to aspire to great achievement?<br> <br>Celebrate the heroes, flaws and all.  Discuss the flaws with your kids.  Help them understand that it's possible to admire the admirable parts of people without also admiring their flaws.<blockquote><div><p>We need to teach our kids to get away from the idea of having "heroes" per se.</p></div></blockquote><p>There are scales of hero worship.  I think you've got a good point, but I think you need to qualify it.  We need to be careful about allowing our kids to have unbridled hero worship of flawed heroes.  But I think there's still a place for heroes... and I think it's important to note that emulation of heroes is pretty much a staple of development.  You can only temper it, you can't eliminate it.<br> <br>In the end, it boils down to one simple bit of advice... teach your kids to think independently and logically.  Teach them to look at multiple sides of every issue.  They'll learn to separate the wheat from the chaff.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So then the lesson the kids take away is that people with flaws can not be heroes ?
That if you 're flawed , it is worthless to aspire to great achievement ?
Celebrate the heroes , flaws and all .
Discuss the flaws with your kids .
Help them understand that it 's possible to admire the admirable parts of people without also admiring their flaws.We need to teach our kids to get away from the idea of having " heroes " per se.There are scales of hero worship .
I think you 've got a good point , but I think you need to qualify it .
We need to be careful about allowing our kids to have unbridled hero worship of flawed heroes .
But I think there 's still a place for heroes... and I think it 's important to note that emulation of heroes is pretty much a staple of development .
You can only temper it , you ca n't eliminate it .
In the end , it boils down to one simple bit of advice... teach your kids to think independently and logically .
Teach them to look at multiple sides of every issue .
They 'll learn to separate the wheat from the chaff .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So then the lesson the kids take away is that people with flaws cannot be heroes?
That if you're flawed, it is worthless to aspire to great achievement?
Celebrate the heroes, flaws and all.
Discuss the flaws with your kids.
Help them understand that it's possible to admire the admirable parts of people without also admiring their flaws.We need to teach our kids to get away from the idea of having "heroes" per se.There are scales of hero worship.
I think you've got a good point, but I think you need to qualify it.
We need to be careful about allowing our kids to have unbridled hero worship of flawed heroes.
But I think there's still a place for heroes... and I think it's important to note that emulation of heroes is pretty much a staple of development.
You can only temper it, you can't eliminate it.
In the end, it boils down to one simple bit of advice... teach your kids to think independently and logically.
Teach them to look at multiple sides of every issue.
They'll learn to separate the wheat from the chaff.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685803</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28691783</id>
	<title>Re:Smirking Pluto Killer - Not My Favorite</title>
	<author>happyDave</author>
	<datestamp>1247589540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The peer-reviewed paper that showed that the "brontosaurus" was really an apatosaur was published in 1903.</p></div><p>I've often used the brontosaurus/apatosaurus story to explain how often popular ideas lag behind scientific discoveries.  Literally over 100 years after it was discovered that the apatosaurus was what we had been calling the brontosaurus, there are books, movies, t-shirts, cups, and all sorts of things *at science museums* which continue the false naming convention.  This is why science needs "activists" to continue to represent to the public their most recent discoveries.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The peer-reviewed paper that showed that the " brontosaurus " was really an apatosaur was published in 1903.I 've often used the brontosaurus/apatosaurus story to explain how often popular ideas lag behind scientific discoveries .
Literally over 100 years after it was discovered that the apatosaurus was what we had been calling the brontosaurus , there are books , movies , t-shirts , cups , and all sorts of things * at science museums * which continue the false naming convention .
This is why science needs " activists " to continue to represent to the public their most recent discoveries .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The peer-reviewed paper that showed that the "brontosaurus" was really an apatosaur was published in 1903.I've often used the brontosaurus/apatosaurus story to explain how often popular ideas lag behind scientific discoveries.
Literally over 100 years after it was discovered that the apatosaurus was what we had been calling the brontosaurus, there are books, movies, t-shirts, cups, and all sorts of things *at science museums* which continue the false naming convention.
This is why science needs "activists" to continue to represent to the public their most recent discoveries.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685845</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28693589</id>
	<title>you can do it! :)</title>
	<author>idosedthekoolaid</author>
	<datestamp>1247596920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Personally, I say forget celebrities, TV, etc. Mythbusters may be fun, but that damned hat is completely inexcusable<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>While my generation had Beakman (of course, less serious but great fun) and Bill Nye, what personally got me fascinated in science was my father.</p><p>We did all kinds of fun, magical things together when I was growing up that were hands-on and FUN (which was wonderful) but which were tied closely enough to science so that as I grew I could learn more and more about a concept or field that had been introduced to me in an impressive and usually very tangible manner (way more wonderful).</p><p>For example, he and my brother and I would build and launch model rockets (well, until a certain age, we read the schematics and handed him pieces, but the 'fun, tangible, attention-grabbing' part is of course launching the finished project).</p><p>When I was maybe 6 or 7 he got me a little microscope for my birthday or christmas or something and we scooped up pond water from a little pond behind our house and I had my first look into the microscopic world. It really gives me chills to think about it now actually; it's so powerful seeing bazillions of little squiggles all moving around in there. It's even more powerful when you're informed that they're all very tiny living creatures living out their existences; I can't think of a more powerful, direct way of showing a child that there is much more to our world than what directly meets our senses.</p><p>Finally, STARGAZE with them! If you live in or near an urban area, take regular trips outside the halo of the city and talk planets, constellations, galaxies, stars, light-years. Nothing ever, EVER captured my imagination more as a young child than the mind-boggling vastness of space, the concept of infinity, black holes (WTF?!), the possibilty of other life-forms somewhere out there, maybe even intelligent ones (oh, the daydreams!), desperately wanting to experience weightlessness and wash down floating M&amp;M's with floating, semispherical kool-aid... Not to mention that it's an excellent way to spend time with your little crew<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)<br>(A telescope capable of seeing a bit of detail on Jupiter is nice too and $200. you can see big photos with great detail all day on TV and it doesn't AT ALL hold a candle to seeing lines on a pinhead-sized circle through a telescope with your own eyes. Not. At. All.)</p><p>Also I'd keep an eye on the Maker community. Hands-on is where it's at for younguns IMO.</p><p>(Blowin' stuff up never hurt either, if you're safe about it<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... When my brother and I were really young we were shown the ol' vinegar + baking soda miracle and "blew up" all sorts of corked bottles, etc. that way.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:) )</p><p>Good luck!<br>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Personally , I say forget celebrities , TV , etc .
Mythbusters may be fun , but that damned hat is completely inexcusable ; ) ...While my generation had Beakman ( of course , less serious but great fun ) and Bill Nye , what personally got me fascinated in science was my father.We did all kinds of fun , magical things together when I was growing up that were hands-on and FUN ( which was wonderful ) but which were tied closely enough to science so that as I grew I could learn more and more about a concept or field that had been introduced to me in an impressive and usually very tangible manner ( way more wonderful ) .For example , he and my brother and I would build and launch model rockets ( well , until a certain age , we read the schematics and handed him pieces , but the 'fun , tangible , attention-grabbing ' part is of course launching the finished project ) .When I was maybe 6 or 7 he got me a little microscope for my birthday or christmas or something and we scooped up pond water from a little pond behind our house and I had my first look into the microscopic world .
It really gives me chills to think about it now actually ; it 's so powerful seeing bazillions of little squiggles all moving around in there .
It 's even more powerful when you 're informed that they 're all very tiny living creatures living out their existences ; I ca n't think of a more powerful , direct way of showing a child that there is much more to our world than what directly meets our senses.Finally , STARGAZE with them !
If you live in or near an urban area , take regular trips outside the halo of the city and talk planets , constellations , galaxies , stars , light-years .
Nothing ever , EVER captured my imagination more as a young child than the mind-boggling vastness of space , the concept of infinity , black holes ( WTF ? !
) , the possibilty of other life-forms somewhere out there , maybe even intelligent ones ( oh , the daydreams !
) , desperately wanting to experience weightlessness and wash down floating M&amp;M 's with floating , semispherical kool-aid... Not to mention that it 's an excellent way to spend time with your little crew : ) ( A telescope capable of seeing a bit of detail on Jupiter is nice too and $ 200 .
you can see big photos with great detail all day on TV and it does n't AT ALL hold a candle to seeing lines on a pinhead-sized circle through a telescope with your own eyes .
Not. At .
All. ) Also I 'd keep an eye on the Maker community .
Hands-on is where it 's at for younguns IMO .
( Blowin ' stuff up never hurt either , if you 're safe about it ... When my brother and I were really young we were shown the ol ' vinegar + baking soda miracle and " blew up " all sorts of corked bottles , etc .
that way .
: ) ) Good luck !
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Personally, I say forget celebrities, TV, etc.
Mythbusters may be fun, but that damned hat is completely inexcusable ;) ...While my generation had Beakman (of course, less serious but great fun) and Bill Nye, what personally got me fascinated in science was my father.We did all kinds of fun, magical things together when I was growing up that were hands-on and FUN (which was wonderful) but which were tied closely enough to science so that as I grew I could learn more and more about a concept or field that had been introduced to me in an impressive and usually very tangible manner (way more wonderful).For example, he and my brother and I would build and launch model rockets (well, until a certain age, we read the schematics and handed him pieces, but the 'fun, tangible, attention-grabbing' part is of course launching the finished project).When I was maybe 6 or 7 he got me a little microscope for my birthday or christmas or something and we scooped up pond water from a little pond behind our house and I had my first look into the microscopic world.
It really gives me chills to think about it now actually; it's so powerful seeing bazillions of little squiggles all moving around in there.
It's even more powerful when you're informed that they're all very tiny living creatures living out their existences; I can't think of a more powerful, direct way of showing a child that there is much more to our world than what directly meets our senses.Finally, STARGAZE with them!
If you live in or near an urban area, take regular trips outside the halo of the city and talk planets, constellations, galaxies, stars, light-years.
Nothing ever, EVER captured my imagination more as a young child than the mind-boggling vastness of space, the concept of infinity, black holes (WTF?!
), the possibilty of other life-forms somewhere out there, maybe even intelligent ones (oh, the daydreams!
), desperately wanting to experience weightlessness and wash down floating M&amp;M's with floating, semispherical kool-aid... Not to mention that it's an excellent way to spend time with your little crew :)(A telescope capable of seeing a bit of detail on Jupiter is nice too and $200.
you can see big photos with great detail all day on TV and it doesn't AT ALL hold a candle to seeing lines on a pinhead-sized circle through a telescope with your own eyes.
Not. At.
All.)Also I'd keep an eye on the Maker community.
Hands-on is where it's at for younguns IMO.
(Blowin' stuff up never hurt either, if you're safe about it ... When my brother and I were really young we were shown the ol' vinegar + baking soda miracle and "blew up" all sorts of corked bottles, etc.
that way.
:) )Good luck!
 </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28690403</id>
	<title>Re:F1</title>
	<author>DNS-and-BIND</author>
	<datestamp>1247583420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Certainly, that is the only reason to watch F1 "sports".  It certainly isn't worth watching for the entertainment content or competition element.  I've tried, believe me...I have tons of Euro buddies who are in love with it, and have tried explaining everything, but I suppose it's just cultural.  The only exciting thing is watching the in-car cam with the speedo, tach, brake lights, and shifter.  Otherwise it's just a parade of cars, *yawn*.  <p>Funny that the kids shouldn't be allowed to decide what they like, but have their viewing habits carefully censored to ensure that they are not exposed to subversive content.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Certainly , that is the only reason to watch F1 " sports " .
It certainly is n't worth watching for the entertainment content or competition element .
I 've tried , believe me...I have tons of Euro buddies who are in love with it , and have tried explaining everything , but I suppose it 's just cultural .
The only exciting thing is watching the in-car cam with the speedo , tach , brake lights , and shifter .
Otherwise it 's just a parade of cars , * yawn * .
Funny that the kids should n't be allowed to decide what they like , but have their viewing habits carefully censored to ensure that they are not exposed to subversive content .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Certainly, that is the only reason to watch F1 "sports".
It certainly isn't worth watching for the entertainment content or competition element.
I've tried, believe me...I have tons of Euro buddies who are in love with it, and have tried explaining everything, but I suppose it's just cultural.
The only exciting thing is watching the in-car cam with the speedo, tach, brake lights, and shifter.
Otherwise it's just a parade of cars, *yawn*.
Funny that the kids shouldn't be allowed to decide what they like, but have their viewing habits carefully censored to ensure that they are not exposed to subversive content.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686829</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28688919</id>
	<title>Sagan and Cousteau</title>
	<author>highacnumber</author>
	<datestamp>1247576160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...get them on netflix.  Neil deGrasse Tyson is OK, and I like David Attenborough's stuff too, but its amazing to go back and listen to Sagan and Cousteau.  Almost everything coming out today seems dumbed-down in comparison.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...get them on netflix .
Neil deGrasse Tyson is OK , and I like David Attenborough 's stuff too , but its amazing to go back and listen to Sagan and Cousteau .
Almost everything coming out today seems dumbed-down in comparison .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...get them on netflix.
Neil deGrasse Tyson is OK, and I like David Attenborough's stuff too, but its amazing to go back and listen to Sagan and Cousteau.
Almost everything coming out today seems dumbed-down in comparison.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28689099</id>
	<title>Re:Tyson</title>
	<author>gammaraybob</author>
	<datestamp>1247577780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd also go with NdGT. He's smart, presents well, and I just don't see any smirk behind the smile. And he doesn't insist on putting "Doctor" in front of his name every time he is mentioned, unlike MK. The latter is certainly smart enough, and certainly passionate, but I get a whiff of arrogance from him, since he seems to start every episode of Explorations with a listing of his qualifications. Also, on Explorations, MK commits frequent sins of factual error, but that may be a natural result of the show structure - it sounds live and unscripted, so factual fubars should be expected.

But my ultimate science hero is still Benton Quest<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:^).</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd also go with NdGT .
He 's smart , presents well , and I just do n't see any smirk behind the smile .
And he does n't insist on putting " Doctor " in front of his name every time he is mentioned , unlike MK .
The latter is certainly smart enough , and certainly passionate , but I get a whiff of arrogance from him , since he seems to start every episode of Explorations with a listing of his qualifications .
Also , on Explorations , MK commits frequent sins of factual error , but that may be a natural result of the show structure - it sounds live and unscripted , so factual fubars should be expected .
But my ultimate science hero is still Benton Quest : ^ ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd also go with NdGT.
He's smart, presents well, and I just don't see any smirk behind the smile.
And he doesn't insist on putting "Doctor" in front of his name every time he is mentioned, unlike MK.
The latter is certainly smart enough, and certainly passionate, but I get a whiff of arrogance from him, since he seems to start every episode of Explorations with a listing of his qualifications.
Also, on Explorations, MK commits frequent sins of factual error, but that may be a natural result of the show structure - it sounds live and unscripted, so factual fubars should be expected.
But my ultimate science hero is still Benton Quest :^).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28692107</id>
	<title>Re:Its a matter of preference...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247590980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Good point about each science having different/unique "spokespeople." David Attenborough is awesome for the naturalists, but not good for everything.  The Planet Earth and Blue Planet series' are great.  (If your kids liked Finding Nemo you can probably get them to like Blue Planet.)  Older kids may find sensationalist anti-science movies entertaining (Day after Tomorrow, Core, etc.) - "anti-science" because they do a horrible job of anything scientific - but that can be an opportunity for discussion.  "What did I like about the movie, cinematographically?"  "What intrigued me scientifically?"  "Do the events seem plausible? Why/Why not?"  "Do credible internet sources say such a thing is likely/possible?"  Even "bad" science can be a learning experience - anything that makes youngsters question things and not take them at face-value has value towards future possible scientific training.  Sometimes setting up a bad example to be criticized (like such movies) can be a better learning experience than providing a shining example of "good" science.  There are some "good" science movies out there, too: Winged Migration, Microcosmos, Supervolcano...just look online.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Good point about each science having different/unique " spokespeople .
" David Attenborough is awesome for the naturalists , but not good for everything .
The Planet Earth and Blue Planet series ' are great .
( If your kids liked Finding Nemo you can probably get them to like Blue Planet .
) Older kids may find sensationalist anti-science movies entertaining ( Day after Tomorrow , Core , etc .
) - " anti-science " because they do a horrible job of anything scientific - but that can be an opportunity for discussion .
" What did I like about the movie , cinematographically ?
" " What intrigued me scientifically ?
" " Do the events seem plausible ?
Why/Why not ?
" " Do credible internet sources say such a thing is likely/possible ?
" Even " bad " science can be a learning experience - anything that makes youngsters question things and not take them at face-value has value towards future possible scientific training .
Sometimes setting up a bad example to be criticized ( like such movies ) can be a better learning experience than providing a shining example of " good " science .
There are some " good " science movies out there , too : Winged Migration , Microcosmos , Supervolcano...just look online .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good point about each science having different/unique "spokespeople.
" David Attenborough is awesome for the naturalists, but not good for everything.
The Planet Earth and Blue Planet series' are great.
(If your kids liked Finding Nemo you can probably get them to like Blue Planet.
)  Older kids may find sensationalist anti-science movies entertaining (Day after Tomorrow, Core, etc.
) - "anti-science" because they do a horrible job of anything scientific - but that can be an opportunity for discussion.
"What did I like about the movie, cinematographically?
"  "What intrigued me scientifically?
"  "Do the events seem plausible?
Why/Why not?
"  "Do credible internet sources say such a thing is likely/possible?
"  Even "bad" science can be a learning experience - anything that makes youngsters question things and not take them at face-value has value towards future possible scientific training.
Sometimes setting up a bad example to be criticized (like such movies) can be a better learning experience than providing a shining example of "good" science.
There are some "good" science movies out there, too: Winged Migration, Microcosmos, Supervolcano...just look online.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685749</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685749</id>
	<title>Its a matter of preference...</title>
	<author>damn\_registrars</author>
	<datestamp>1247500080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Each science has its own heroes in the current day.  If you really want to establish a science hero for your kids, choose which science you want to teach them about first.  Much as Einstein isn't a great hero to evolutionary biologists, Darwin isn't a great hero to modern physicists.  You could, of course, try to cover a wide variety of scientific disciplines (and their respective heroes) in a short amount of time, but you would probably do better to start with more approachable subjects and bring up the heroes of those.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Each science has its own heroes in the current day .
If you really want to establish a science hero for your kids , choose which science you want to teach them about first .
Much as Einstein is n't a great hero to evolutionary biologists , Darwin is n't a great hero to modern physicists .
You could , of course , try to cover a wide variety of scientific disciplines ( and their respective heroes ) in a short amount of time , but you would probably do better to start with more approachable subjects and bring up the heroes of those .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Each science has its own heroes in the current day.
If you really want to establish a science hero for your kids, choose which science you want to teach them about first.
Much as Einstein isn't a great hero to evolutionary biologists, Darwin isn't a great hero to modern physicists.
You could, of course, try to cover a wide variety of scientific disciplines (and their respective heroes) in a short amount of time, but you would probably do better to start with more approachable subjects and bring up the heroes of those.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686469</id>
	<title>Macgyver</title>
	<author>Kreios</author>
	<datestamp>1247505360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you're looking for the ultimate science hero, I don't think you can go past Richard Dean Anderson, aka. Macgyver</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 're looking for the ultimate science hero , I do n't think you can go past Richard Dean Anderson , aka .
Macgyver</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you're looking for the ultimate science hero, I don't think you can go past Richard Dean Anderson, aka.
Macgyver</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686191</id>
	<title>Re:Tyson</title>
	<author>kjenks</author>
	<datestamp>1247503260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Tyson gets my vote, too, but my kids like: Bill Nye the Science Guy, Beakman (from Beakman's World), Alton Brown.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Tyson gets my vote , too , but my kids like : Bill Nye the Science Guy , Beakman ( from Beakman 's World ) , Alton Brown .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tyson gets my vote, too, but my kids like: Bill Nye the Science Guy, Beakman (from Beakman's World), Alton Brown.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28689015</id>
	<title>Re:Mythbusters does it</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247577240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Yes. Mythbusters is perfect! Teach them to jump to conclusions based on extremely small data sets and horribly designed/non-existent control objects.</p></div><p>Just like real scientists who announce bizarre links between normal everyday activities and cancer based on 3\% statistical deviations on a 100 person sample group! Sleeping on your stomach rather than on your back gives you cancer, <i>scientists said so!</i></p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes .
Mythbusters is perfect !
Teach them to jump to conclusions based on extremely small data sets and horribly designed/non-existent control objects.Just like real scientists who announce bizarre links between normal everyday activities and cancer based on 3 \ % statistical deviations on a 100 person sample group !
Sleeping on your stomach rather than on your back gives you cancer , scientists said so !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes.
Mythbusters is perfect!
Teach them to jump to conclusions based on extremely small data sets and horribly designed/non-existent control objects.Just like real scientists who announce bizarre links between normal everyday activities and cancer based on 3\% statistical deviations on a 100 person sample group!
Sleeping on your stomach rather than on your back gives you cancer, scientists said so!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685471</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685415</id>
	<title>Richard Dawkins</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247497620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm 19, and Dawkins has been an enormous influence on me. A few years back he was one of figures that helped me jetisson religion, and ever since I've had a greater curiousity about science.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm 19 , and Dawkins has been an enormous influence on me .
A few years back he was one of figures that helped me jetisson religion , and ever since I 've had a greater curiousity about science .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm 19, and Dawkins has been an enormous influence on me.
A few years back he was one of figures that helped me jetisson religion, and ever since I've had a greater curiousity about science.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28688901</id>
	<title>Clifford Stoll</title>
	<author>inamorty</author>
	<datestamp>1247576040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Eccentric, but <a href="http://www.ted.com/talks/clifford\_stoll\_on\_everything.html" title="ted.com" rel="nofollow">engrossing none the less</a> [ted.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Eccentric , but engrossing none the less [ ted.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Eccentric, but engrossing none the less [ted.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28692439</id>
	<title>Re:Tyson</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247592240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>An ego as large as the universe?  It's of impressive size even if it's not that large.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>An ego as large as the universe ?
It 's of impressive size even if it 's not that large .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An ego as large as the universe?
It's of impressive size even if it's not that large.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685731</id>
	<title>Smirking Pluto Killer - Not My Favorite</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247499900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I dislike that Neil deGrasse guy, he was quite the smirking "I'm smart and you're not" during that whole Pluto isn't a planet anymore crap. I'm with Michio Kaku as my favorite science enthusiast and speaker. He's smart, he's enthused and he didn't go around on the Tonight Show smirking about how Pluto isn't a planet. I'm also looking to punch whoever it was that decided Brontosaurus wasn't a proper name for the Brontosaurus too. (shakes fist in fury)</htmltext>
<tokenext>I dislike that Neil deGrasse guy , he was quite the smirking " I 'm smart and you 're not " during that whole Pluto is n't a planet anymore crap .
I 'm with Michio Kaku as my favorite science enthusiast and speaker .
He 's smart , he 's enthused and he did n't go around on the Tonight Show smirking about how Pluto is n't a planet .
I 'm also looking to punch whoever it was that decided Brontosaurus was n't a proper name for the Brontosaurus too .
( shakes fist in fury )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I dislike that Neil deGrasse guy, he was quite the smirking "I'm smart and you're not" during that whole Pluto isn't a planet anymore crap.
I'm with Michio Kaku as my favorite science enthusiast and speaker.
He's smart, he's enthused and he didn't go around on the Tonight Show smirking about how Pluto isn't a planet.
I'm also looking to punch whoever it was that decided Brontosaurus wasn't a proper name for the Brontosaurus too.
(shakes fist in fury)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686043</id>
	<title>Re:Mythbusters does it</title>
	<author>twostix</author>
	<datestamp>1247502120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Yes. Mythbusters is perfect! Teach them to jump to conclusions based on extremely small data sets and horribly designed/non-existent control objects."</p><p>Sounds like a great deal of climatology.</p><p>Hell sounds like the reality in many "scientific" disciplines (I'm looking at YOU social "sciences" that freely mix yourself up with ultra left wing politics).</p><p>And no I'm not a conservative or AGW denier.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Yes .
Mythbusters is perfect !
Teach them to jump to conclusions based on extremely small data sets and horribly designed/non-existent control objects .
" Sounds like a great deal of climatology.Hell sounds like the reality in many " scientific " disciplines ( I 'm looking at YOU social " sciences " that freely mix yourself up with ultra left wing politics ) .And no I 'm not a conservative or AGW denier .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Yes.
Mythbusters is perfect!
Teach them to jump to conclusions based on extremely small data sets and horribly designed/non-existent control objects.
"Sounds like a great deal of climatology.Hell sounds like the reality in many "scientific" disciplines (I'm looking at YOU social "sciences" that freely mix yourself up with ultra left wing politics).And no I'm not a conservative or AGW denier.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685471</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685985</id>
	<title>Try this venue...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247501640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How about watching with them some of the talks from TED?</p><p>http://www.ted.com/</p><p>Interesting, challenging and inspiring presentations from some of the best, brightest and innovative among us.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about watching with them some of the talks from TED ? http : //www.ted.com/Interesting , challenging and inspiring presentations from some of the best , brightest and innovative among us .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about watching with them some of the talks from TED?http://www.ted.com/Interesting, challenging and inspiring presentations from some of the best, brightest and innovative among us.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686121</id>
	<title>Find some younger ones</title>
	<author>ChipR</author>
	<datestamp>1247502720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm a huge fan of Drs. Tyson and Kaku, as mentioned elsewhere.  I'd suggest looking at some of the newer popularizers for your own younglings.  People like <a href="http://www.richardwiseman.com/" title="richardwiseman.com" rel="nofollow">Richard Wiseman</a> [richardwiseman.com], <a href="http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/" title="discovermagazine.com" rel="nofollow">Bad Astronomy's </a> [discovermagazine.com]<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil\_Plait" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Phil Plait</a> [wikipedia.org], the colorful crew at <a href="http://deepseanews.com/" title="deepseanews.com" rel="nofollow">Deep Sea News</a> [deepseanews.com], and probably any number of other blogs linked from the above.</p><p>Get the little nibblers interested from the start!  We can use all the scientists (or at least science-literate) that we can get.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm a huge fan of Drs .
Tyson and Kaku , as mentioned elsewhere .
I 'd suggest looking at some of the newer popularizers for your own younglings .
People like Richard Wiseman [ richardwiseman.com ] , Bad Astronomy 's [ discovermagazine.com ] Phil Plait [ wikipedia.org ] , the colorful crew at Deep Sea News [ deepseanews.com ] , and probably any number of other blogs linked from the above.Get the little nibblers interested from the start !
We can use all the scientists ( or at least science-literate ) that we can get .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm a huge fan of Drs.
Tyson and Kaku, as mentioned elsewhere.
I'd suggest looking at some of the newer popularizers for your own younglings.
People like Richard Wiseman [richardwiseman.com], Bad Astronomy's  [discovermagazine.com]Phil Plait [wikipedia.org], the colorful crew at Deep Sea News [deepseanews.com], and probably any number of other blogs linked from the above.Get the little nibblers interested from the start!
We can use all the scientists (or at least science-literate) that we can get.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685905</id>
	<title>Pinker</title>
	<author>adamgolding</author>
	<datestamp>1247501100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Steven Pinker is how I found Psychology, Cognitive Science, and Linguistics.  Best popular writer on the subjects, even if you dislike his theories.  His writing on Philosophy is a little weaker, but still engaging.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Steven Pinker is how I found Psychology , Cognitive Science , and Linguistics .
Best popular writer on the subjects , even if you dislike his theories .
His writing on Philosophy is a little weaker , but still engaging .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Steven Pinker is how I found Psychology, Cognitive Science, and Linguistics.
Best popular writer on the subjects, even if you dislike his theories.
His writing on Philosophy is a little weaker, but still engaging.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28707515</id>
	<title>Re:Tyson</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247648520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Same here - Neil dGrasse Tyson is by far the closest thing our generation has to a Carl Sagan. Between his appearances on the Colbert Report and the NovaScienceNow show and podcasts he's very accessible and inspiring. Also, Bill Nye has a regular show on the Hippie network (green?). Always a fun introduction for kids to science. My 7 and 3 year olds watch both shows.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Same here - Neil dGrasse Tyson is by far the closest thing our generation has to a Carl Sagan .
Between his appearances on the Colbert Report and the NovaScienceNow show and podcasts he 's very accessible and inspiring .
Also , Bill Nye has a regular show on the Hippie network ( green ? ) .
Always a fun introduction for kids to science .
My 7 and 3 year olds watch both shows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Same here - Neil dGrasse Tyson is by far the closest thing our generation has to a Carl Sagan.
Between his appearances on the Colbert Report and the NovaScienceNow show and podcasts he's very accessible and inspiring.
Also, Bill Nye has a regular show on the Hippie network (green?).
Always a fun introduction for kids to science.
My 7 and 3 year olds watch both shows.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28688925</id>
	<title>Re:Tyson</title>
	<author>thefuz</author>
	<datestamp>1247576220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Huge fan of Neil deGrasse Tyson as well - check out his new show <a href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/sciencenow/" title="pbs.org" rel="nofollow">Nova Science Now</a> [pbs.org].  It's a little parochial, but I believe it's intended for a younger audience - it definitely has a good fun factor with solid science qualities.  Also love seeing him on Colbert.  Total riot!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Huge fan of Neil deGrasse Tyson as well - check out his new show Nova Science Now [ pbs.org ] .
It 's a little parochial , but I believe it 's intended for a younger audience - it definitely has a good fun factor with solid science qualities .
Also love seeing him on Colbert .
Total riot !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Huge fan of Neil deGrasse Tyson as well - check out his new show Nova Science Now [pbs.org].
It's a little parochial, but I believe it's intended for a younger audience - it definitely has a good fun factor with solid science qualities.
Also love seeing him on Colbert.
Total riot!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685755</id>
	<title>Re:LOL  Carl Sagan....scientist?  not</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247500080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can't be serious. Surely this is an attempt at humor?</p><p>Sagan was a well-respected scientist before he wrote anything.</p><p>So if you aren't joking, then you must be trolling. Knock it off.</p><p>And if you aren't being a troll, then you're just a dick. Fuck off.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You ca n't be serious .
Surely this is an attempt at humor ? Sagan was a well-respected scientist before he wrote anything.So if you are n't joking , then you must be trolling .
Knock it off.And if you are n't being a troll , then you 're just a dick .
Fuck off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can't be serious.
Surely this is an attempt at humor?Sagan was a well-respected scientist before he wrote anything.So if you aren't joking, then you must be trolling.
Knock it off.And if you aren't being a troll, then you're just a dick.
Fuck off.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685579</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686145</id>
	<title>Just Astronomy?</title>
	<author>Fegmaniac</author>
	<datestamp>1247502840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you want to go outside the cosmos, consider a "pop culture" figure.  I, for one, enjoy the science of Alton Brown's shows.  My 3 yr old loves AB as well.  My mother is a family and consumer sciences teacher and uses his shows to demonstrate the science behind cooking.  I'm a physician and enjoy the way he takes difficult topics and presents them in a (off-the-wall) manner for everyman.  Don't limit your science to astronomy...</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you want to go outside the cosmos , consider a " pop culture " figure .
I , for one , enjoy the science of Alton Brown 's shows .
My 3 yr old loves AB as well .
My mother is a family and consumer sciences teacher and uses his shows to demonstrate the science behind cooking .
I 'm a physician and enjoy the way he takes difficult topics and presents them in a ( off-the-wall ) manner for everyman .
Do n't limit your science to astronomy.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you want to go outside the cosmos, consider a "pop culture" figure.
I, for one, enjoy the science of Alton Brown's shows.
My 3 yr old loves AB as well.
My mother is a family and consumer sciences teacher and uses his shows to demonstrate the science behind cooking.
I'm a physician and enjoy the way he takes difficult topics and presents them in a (off-the-wall) manner for everyman.
Don't limit your science to astronomy...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28694759</id>
	<title>Re:Dr Alice Roberts &amp; Dr Ian Stewart,</title>
	<author>risk one</author>
	<datestamp>1247602260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I couldn't agree more. Alice Roberts is well on her way to becoming the new David Attenborough.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I could n't agree more .
Alice Roberts is well on her way to becoming the new David Attenborough .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I couldn't agree more.
Alice Roberts is well on her way to becoming the new David Attenborough.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28688489</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685573</id>
	<title>Re:Mythbusters does it</title>
	<author>hansamurai</author>
	<datestamp>1247498940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's an XKCD for that:</p><p><a href="http://xkcd.com/397/" title="xkcd.com">http://xkcd.com/397/</a> [xkcd.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's an XKCD for that : http : //xkcd.com/397/ [ xkcd.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's an XKCD for that:http://xkcd.com/397/ [xkcd.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685471</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28688303</id>
	<title>Re:5 and 2 years old?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247569380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd also add to that list "Nina and the Neurons". <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nina\_and\_the\_Neurons" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nina\_and\_the\_Neurons</a> [wikipedia.org] V. good, basic stuff, particulary for the youngest. Available on the iPlayer.</p><p>For the oldest - Johnny Ball <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnny\_Ball" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnny\_Ball</a> [wikipedia.org] had some great stuff when I were a lad, on science history and invetinos. Probably the one programme I remember most.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd also add to that list " Nina and the Neurons " .
http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nina \ _and \ _the \ _Neurons [ wikipedia.org ] V. good , basic stuff , particulary for the youngest .
Available on the iPlayer.For the oldest - Johnny Ball http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnny \ _Ball [ wikipedia.org ] had some great stuff when I were a lad , on science history and invetinos .
Probably the one programme I remember most .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd also add to that list "Nina and the Neurons".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nina\_and\_the\_Neurons [wikipedia.org] V. good, basic stuff, particulary for the youngest.
Available on the iPlayer.For the oldest - Johnny Ball http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnny\_Ball [wikipedia.org] had some great stuff when I were a lad, on science history and invetinos.
Probably the one programme I remember most.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685589</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28690603</id>
	<title>Re:Tyson</title>
	<author>doormat9</author>
	<datestamp>1247584320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just another vote for Tyson.  He's pretty much the Sagan of our time, and just as ubiquitous on PBS.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just another vote for Tyson .
He 's pretty much the Sagan of our time , and just as ubiquitous on PBS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just another vote for Tyson.
He's pretty much the Sagan of our time, and just as ubiquitous on PBS.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685449</id>
	<title>Take them to the Creationist Museum</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247497920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><br>They'll learn all about the Earth remarkable 6000 year journey from nothingness to the present day and how baby dinosaurs were on Noah's Ark. You know... <i> <b>science!</b> </i> <br> <br>.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They 'll learn all about the Earth remarkable 6000 year journey from nothingness to the present day and how baby dinosaurs were on Noah 's Ark .
You know... science ! .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They'll learn all about the Earth remarkable 6000 year journey from nothingness to the present day and how baby dinosaurs were on Noah's Ark.
You know...  science!   .</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687363</id>
	<title>Dad is the greatest hero</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247601780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously, you can be their scientific hero for a long time still.</p><p>All you need to do is reward them for being curious! Answering their questions and help them make observations. Grant them your time to help them figure out things, and they will learn to think for themselves. They will find their (other) heroes themselves, once they have learned that finding things out is fun and when they actually need them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , you can be their scientific hero for a long time still.All you need to do is reward them for being curious !
Answering their questions and help them make observations .
Grant them your time to help them figure out things , and they will learn to think for themselves .
They will find their ( other ) heroes themselves , once they have learned that finding things out is fun and when they actually need them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, you can be their scientific hero for a long time still.All you need to do is reward them for being curious!
Answering their questions and help them make observations.
Grant them your time to help them figure out things, and they will learn to think for themselves.
They will find their (other) heroes themselves, once they have learned that finding things out is fun and when they actually need them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686983</id>
	<title>Phil Plait</title>
	<author>Sir Realist</author>
	<datestamp>1247510280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/" title="discovermagazine.com" rel="nofollow">Phil Plait</a> [discovermagazine.com] is pretty good as a crusader for critical thinking / science, though not one particularly aimed at children.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Phil Plait [ discovermagazine.com ] is pretty good as a crusader for critical thinking / science , though not one particularly aimed at children .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Phil Plait [discovermagazine.com] is pretty good as a crusader for critical thinking / science, though not one particularly aimed at children.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685709</id>
	<title>Re:LOL  Carl Sagan....scientist?  not</title>
	<author>TinBromide</author>
	<datestamp>1247499780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't think the submitter was asking for a Sunday school answers to a request for science instruction. While it is perfectly acceptable to use God to fill the holes in knowledge for the time being (if a society must because it has a sever phobia of areas of uncertainty and doubt), it is not acceptable for a society to refuse to acknowledge scientific findings, or refuse the future possibility of what science may find simply because it has already answered that particular question with the stock "The Creator did it."</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think the submitter was asking for a Sunday school answers to a request for science instruction .
While it is perfectly acceptable to use God to fill the holes in knowledge for the time being ( if a society must because it has a sever phobia of areas of uncertainty and doubt ) , it is not acceptable for a society to refuse to acknowledge scientific findings , or refuse the future possibility of what science may find simply because it has already answered that particular question with the stock " The Creator did it .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think the submitter was asking for a Sunday school answers to a request for science instruction.
While it is perfectly acceptable to use God to fill the holes in knowledge for the time being (if a society must because it has a sever phobia of areas of uncertainty and doubt), it is not acceptable for a society to refuse to acknowledge scientific findings, or refuse the future possibility of what science may find simply because it has already answered that particular question with the stock "The Creator did it.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685579</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685673</id>
	<title>Say NO to celebrity science</title>
	<author>Kohath</author>
	<datestamp>1247499600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Science should be practical.  It's good when it helps people.  Any individual scientist who has done science to help people is worth looking up to.  That also goes for anyone else of any profession.</p><p>You're asking for celebrities.  Celebrities are not famous for helping people, they're famous for appearing on TV.  Do you really think it's wise to teach your kids to look up to whoever the TV producers want to put on TV?  Are TV producers wise?</p><p>Why not teach them to value practical virtue rather than vanity?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Science should be practical .
It 's good when it helps people .
Any individual scientist who has done science to help people is worth looking up to .
That also goes for anyone else of any profession.You 're asking for celebrities .
Celebrities are not famous for helping people , they 're famous for appearing on TV .
Do you really think it 's wise to teach your kids to look up to whoever the TV producers want to put on TV ?
Are TV producers wise ? Why not teach them to value practical virtue rather than vanity ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Science should be practical.
It's good when it helps people.
Any individual scientist who has done science to help people is worth looking up to.
That also goes for anyone else of any profession.You're asking for celebrities.
Celebrities are not famous for helping people, they're famous for appearing on TV.
Do you really think it's wise to teach your kids to look up to whoever the TV producers want to put on TV?
Are TV producers wise?Why not teach them to value practical virtue rather than vanity?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686643</id>
	<title>Oldies but Goodies</title>
	<author>Tony Stark</author>
	<datestamp>1247506920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Stephen Hawking is still around.  In fact, he has written two children's books George's Secret Key to the Universe and George and the Cosmic Treasure Hunt.  I think that's the type of things that would hook kids on science pretty young.
Other than that I would say maybe Richard Dawkins if we're talking about current living scientists and to a lesser extent and on a different level (maybe controversially) Ray Kurzweil.
As far as all time heroes who are still influential to this day, of course Albert Einstein, and I personally like Oppenheimer and Feynman.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Stephen Hawking is still around .
In fact , he has written two children 's books George 's Secret Key to the Universe and George and the Cosmic Treasure Hunt .
I think that 's the type of things that would hook kids on science pretty young .
Other than that I would say maybe Richard Dawkins if we 're talking about current living scientists and to a lesser extent and on a different level ( maybe controversially ) Ray Kurzweil .
As far as all time heroes who are still influential to this day , of course Albert Einstein , and I personally like Oppenheimer and Feynman .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Stephen Hawking is still around.
In fact, he has written two children's books George's Secret Key to the Universe and George and the Cosmic Treasure Hunt.
I think that's the type of things that would hook kids on science pretty young.
Other than that I would say maybe Richard Dawkins if we're talking about current living scientists and to a lesser extent and on a different level (maybe controversially) Ray Kurzweil.
As far as all time heroes who are still influential to this day, of course Albert Einstein, and I personally like Oppenheimer and Feynman.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686721</id>
	<title>Re:Good luck with that</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247507460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Lemme guess, There Is No Alternative to right-wing objectivism?  Because everyone should be Rugged Individualists Working for Science for Profit so that the Free Market might Solve All Problems.  Actually attempting to care about others makes us Dirty Pinko Commies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Lem me guess , There Is No Alternative to right-wing objectivism ?
Because everyone should be Rugged Individualists Working for Science for Profit so that the Free Market might Solve All Problems .
Actually attempting to care about others makes us Dirty Pinko Commies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lemme guess, There Is No Alternative to right-wing objectivism?
Because everyone should be Rugged Individualists Working for Science for Profit so that the Free Market might Solve All Problems.
Actually attempting to care about others makes us Dirty Pinko Commies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686123</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28689805</id>
	<title>heroes</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247580840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dawkins. And Craig Venter.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dawkins .
And Craig Venter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dawkins.
And Craig Venter.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28689785</id>
	<title>Re:Alton Brown</title>
	<author>Goldsmith</author>
	<datestamp>1247580720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm a scientist and I love Alton Brown's show!</p><p>If we were half as creative in our lectures, science classes would be much more popular (and make more sense to more people).</p><p>It is too bad that with very few exceptions, the "science" people most folks are aware of are actually cooks, special effects artists or politicians.  It would be nice if more scientists were just known for good science.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm a scientist and I love Alton Brown 's show ! If we were half as creative in our lectures , science classes would be much more popular ( and make more sense to more people ) .It is too bad that with very few exceptions , the " science " people most folks are aware of are actually cooks , special effects artists or politicians .
It would be nice if more scientists were just known for good science .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm a scientist and I love Alton Brown's show!If we were half as creative in our lectures, science classes would be much more popular (and make more sense to more people).It is too bad that with very few exceptions, the "science" people most folks are aware of are actually cooks, special effects artists or politicians.
It would be nice if more scientists were just known for good science.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686301</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685511</id>
	<title>J. C. Venter</title>
	<author>joocemann</author>
	<datestamp>1247498520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>look him up...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>look him up.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>look him up...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685789</id>
	<title>Re:Mythbusters does it</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247500200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In Australian (specifically the state of Queensland) high schools, they like to teach kids to think "scientifically", and "design their own experiments", then write a 60 page report, plus a log book, and sometimes a poster. The kids just don't have the scientific maturity to design a correct experiment (i.e. statistically significant), but they do a bang-up job on the report. All neat, good grammar, pretty graphs and diagrams.</p><p>They don't enjoy it much (a 60 page report is honors thesis territory) and they aren't really learning any more science than if they watched Mythbusters, but at least they are able to generate a lot of paper for their teachers to mark.</p><p>A word of warning - never let education academics with no teaching or real world experience take control of the education system.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In Australian ( specifically the state of Queensland ) high schools , they like to teach kids to think " scientifically " , and " design their own experiments " , then write a 60 page report , plus a log book , and sometimes a poster .
The kids just do n't have the scientific maturity to design a correct experiment ( i.e .
statistically significant ) , but they do a bang-up job on the report .
All neat , good grammar , pretty graphs and diagrams.They do n't enjoy it much ( a 60 page report is honors thesis territory ) and they are n't really learning any more science than if they watched Mythbusters , but at least they are able to generate a lot of paper for their teachers to mark.A word of warning - never let education academics with no teaching or real world experience take control of the education system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Australian (specifically the state of Queensland) high schools, they like to teach kids to think "scientifically", and "design their own experiments", then write a 60 page report, plus a log book, and sometimes a poster.
The kids just don't have the scientific maturity to design a correct experiment (i.e.
statistically significant), but they do a bang-up job on the report.
All neat, good grammar, pretty graphs and diagrams.They don't enjoy it much (a 60 page report is honors thesis territory) and they aren't really learning any more science than if they watched Mythbusters, but at least they are able to generate a lot of paper for their teachers to mark.A word of warning - never let education academics with no teaching or real world experience take control of the education system.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685471</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28695301</id>
	<title>Anti-Hero</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247605080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How about George Bush?  As in don't be like him!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about George Bush ?
As in do n't be like him !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about George Bush?
As in don't be like him!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28693521</id>
	<title>Or</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1247596620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>T. S. Venture~</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>T. S. Venture ~</tokentext>
<sentencetext>T. S. Venture~</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685511</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685615</id>
	<title>Nova ScienceNOW</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247499300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>PBS has Nova ScienceNOW, hosted by Neil deGrasse Tyson:</p><p><a href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/sciencenow/3210/02.html" title="pbs.org">http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/sciencenow/3210/02.html</a> [pbs.org]</p><p>It's pretty good, and surprisingly current.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>PBS has Nova ScienceNOW , hosted by Neil deGrasse Tyson : http : //www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/sciencenow/3210/02.html [ pbs.org ] It 's pretty good , and surprisingly current .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>PBS has Nova ScienceNOW, hosted by Neil deGrasse Tyson:http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/sciencenow/3210/02.html [pbs.org]It's pretty good, and surprisingly current.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28694483</id>
	<title>Re:Mythbusters does it</title>
	<author>rnj</author>
	<datestamp>1247600880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And if in doubt use more explosives.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And if in doubt use more explosives .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And if in doubt use more explosives.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685421</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685707</id>
	<title>careful.... Re:J. C. Venter</title>
	<author>damn\_registrars</author>
	<datestamp>1247499780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>He could also be thought of as somewhat of an antihero in biology.  He did, after all, try to fund the human genome project with profit as a motive.  There is a pretty good argument that he would have wanted to patent the entire genome, had his group succeeded in completing a draft of the human genome first.<br> <br>
Had that happened, then the promise of genomic medicine might be even more remote.</htmltext>
<tokenext>He could also be thought of as somewhat of an antihero in biology .
He did , after all , try to fund the human genome project with profit as a motive .
There is a pretty good argument that he would have wanted to patent the entire genome , had his group succeeded in completing a draft of the human genome first .
Had that happened , then the promise of genomic medicine might be even more remote .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He could also be thought of as somewhat of an antihero in biology.
He did, after all, try to fund the human genome project with profit as a motive.
There is a pretty good argument that he would have wanted to patent the entire genome, had his group succeeded in completing a draft of the human genome first.
Had that happened, then the promise of genomic medicine might be even more remote.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685511</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28689829</id>
	<title>Re:Mythbusters does it</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247580960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>but blowing stuff up is a good way to interest kids in chemistry.

i always loved to make things go boom when i was younger.

but star wars changed that.</htmltext>
<tokenext>but blowing stuff up is a good way to interest kids in chemistry .
i always loved to make things go boom when i was younger .
but star wars changed that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but blowing stuff up is a good way to interest kids in chemistry.
i always loved to make things go boom when i was younger.
but star wars changed that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685837</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687815</id>
	<title>And why not Sagan?</title>
	<author>EddyPearson</author>
	<datestamp>1247563680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Cosmos is and will remain timeless.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Cosmos is and will remain timeless .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cosmos is and will remain timeless.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28689383</id>
	<title>top 10 science music videos</title>
	<author>rpillala</author>
	<datestamp>1247579100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This isn't exactly on topic but Wired has a page up with the "top 10 science music videos." Screen them first, obviously.</p><p>

<a href="http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/07/sciencemusic/" title="wired.com">http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/07/sciencemusic/</a> [wired.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is n't exactly on topic but Wired has a page up with the " top 10 science music videos .
" Screen them first , obviously .
http : //www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/07/sciencemusic/ [ wired.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This isn't exactly on topic but Wired has a page up with the "top 10 science music videos.
" Screen them first, obviously.
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/07/sciencemusic/ [wired.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686359</id>
	<title>popular science</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247504640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In the realm of physics science Brian Greene (The Elegant Universe) is the new "pop-star" of the popular science. The NOVA series are a good show.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In the realm of physics science Brian Greene ( The Elegant Universe ) is the new " pop-star " of the popular science .
The NOVA series are a good show .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the realm of physics science Brian Greene (The Elegant Universe) is the new "pop-star" of the popular science.
The NOVA series are a good show.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28691683</id>
	<title>TED Talks</title>
	<author>darkvizier</author>
	<datestamp>1247589180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Watch some TED talks with your kids, or the Tech Talks at Google.  These are about cutting edge technology and current issues, and the speakers are generally excited about what they do and interesting to listen to.  You'll also hear people from a wide variety of fields, which will give your children the opportunity to decide for themselves what they're interested in.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Watch some TED talks with your kids , or the Tech Talks at Google .
These are about cutting edge technology and current issues , and the speakers are generally excited about what they do and interesting to listen to .
You 'll also hear people from a wide variety of fields , which will give your children the opportunity to decide for themselves what they 're interested in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Watch some TED talks with your kids, or the Tech Talks at Google.
These are about cutting edge technology and current issues, and the speakers are generally excited about what they do and interesting to listen to.
You'll also hear people from a wide variety of fields, which will give your children the opportunity to decide for themselves what they're interested in.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28694619</id>
	<title>Re:Videos and books</title>
	<author>rnj</author>
	<datestamp>1247601540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How about James Burke and The Day The Universe Changed? (among others)

OK, Burke's not a scientist. He's a presenter. And he deals in broad strokes. It's still worthwhile in my opinion.</htmltext>
<tokenext>How about James Burke and The Day The Universe Changed ?
( among others ) OK , Burke 's not a scientist .
He 's a presenter .
And he deals in broad strokes .
It 's still worthwhile in my opinion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about James Burke and The Day The Universe Changed?
(among others)

OK, Burke's not a scientist.
He's a presenter.
And he deals in broad strokes.
It's still worthwhile in my opinion.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687713</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686011</id>
	<title>Why "Contemporary?"</title>
	<author>scribblej</author>
	<datestamp>1247501820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It all depends on what they like.  I love reading Richard Feynman, what difference does it make tha the's dead?  QED is still one of the most accessable books about quantum physics EVER.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It all depends on what they like .
I love reading Richard Feynman , what difference does it make tha the 's dead ?
QED is still one of the most accessable books about quantum physics EVER .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It all depends on what they like.
I love reading Richard Feynman, what difference does it make tha the's dead?
QED is still one of the most accessable books about quantum physics EVER.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685861</id>
	<title>Re:Mythbusters does it</title>
	<author>TubeSteak</author>
	<datestamp>1247500740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>At least they GET data rather than just basing their opinions what they're fed. Honestly, when was the last time you did a thorough scientific experiment in your personal life?</p></div><p>I gather scientific data every time I get in the car.<br>My hypothesis: I won't get pulled over for speeding<br>Conclusion: <i>False</i><br>Note: the hypothesis has been rigorously tested and the conclusion has been confirmed multiple times.</p><p>Or is that not the kind of scientific experiment you meant?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>At least they GET data rather than just basing their opinions what they 're fed .
Honestly , when was the last time you did a thorough scientific experiment in your personal life ? I gather scientific data every time I get in the car.My hypothesis : I wo n't get pulled over for speedingConclusion : FalseNote : the hypothesis has been rigorously tested and the conclusion has been confirmed multiple times.Or is that not the kind of scientific experiment you meant ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At least they GET data rather than just basing their opinions what they're fed.
Honestly, when was the last time you did a thorough scientific experiment in your personal life?I gather scientific data every time I get in the car.My hypothesis: I won't get pulled over for speedingConclusion: FalseNote: the hypothesis has been rigorously tested and the conclusion has been confirmed multiple times.Or is that not the kind of scientific experiment you meant?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685557</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28689155</id>
	<title>Re:Mythbusters does it</title>
	<author>Brandee07</author>
	<datestamp>1247578020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's no thing so horrifying in the world as hearing your 12 year old cousin plot a potentially dangerous experiment and when confronted about it say, "It's ok, we watch Mythbusters!"
</p><p>I will be shocked if that child survives to adulthood.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's no thing so horrifying in the world as hearing your 12 year old cousin plot a potentially dangerous experiment and when confronted about it say , " It 's ok , we watch Mythbusters !
" I will be shocked if that child survives to adulthood .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's no thing so horrifying in the world as hearing your 12 year old cousin plot a potentially dangerous experiment and when confronted about it say, "It's ok, we watch Mythbusters!
"
I will be shocked if that child survives to adulthood.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685421</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686035</id>
	<title>Re:5 and 2 years old?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247502060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hey, if  you're going to take the PBS Kids approach, then you ought to be suggesting <em>Sid the Science Kid</em>.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey , if you 're going to take the PBS Kids approach , then you ought to be suggesting Sid the Science Kid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey, if  you're going to take the PBS Kids approach, then you ought to be suggesting Sid the Science Kid.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685589</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28692717</id>
	<title>Don't forget</title>
	<author>yerktoader</author>
	<datestamp>1247593560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connections\_(TV\_series)" title="wikipedia.org">Connections</a> [wikipedia.org] and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The\_Secret\_Life\_of\_Machines" title="wikipedia.org">The Secret Life of Machines.</a> [wikipedia.org]

Not the most purely scientific shows, but excellent, fascinating and entertaining to boot.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Connections [ wikipedia.org ] and The Secret Life of Machines .
[ wikipedia.org ] Not the most purely scientific shows , but excellent , fascinating and entertaining to boot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Connections [wikipedia.org] and The Secret Life of Machines.
[wikipedia.org]

Not the most purely scientific shows, but excellent, fascinating and entertaining to boot.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685977</id>
	<title>Michio Kaku</title>
	<author>astonish</author>
	<datestamp>1247501640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>All the names listed above do the trick and a special note goes out to the cognitive scientists: Pinker, Dennett, Minsky, etc.<br> <br>

Carl Sagan was an even rarer breed though. More than just popularizing science: making it understandable and curious, he brought it to a deeper almost spiritual level and let you see both how your day to day life was a part of something so unimaginably huge and fantastic while simultaniously making a good case for our species to push the frontiers.<br> <br>

I don't think anyone can compare. If I had to try I'd pick Michio Kaku, he's a definitely more down to Earth than Sagan, but still great.<br> <br>

P.S. For a bit of history and sociology in the mix I really really suggest you pick up Connections (Season 1) and The Day the Universe Changed by James Burke. It stands beside Cosmos as my favorite TV series and will get your kids interested in economics, sociology and history on top of science.</htmltext>
<tokenext>All the names listed above do the trick and a special note goes out to the cognitive scientists : Pinker , Dennett , Minsky , etc .
Carl Sagan was an even rarer breed though .
More than just popularizing science : making it understandable and curious , he brought it to a deeper almost spiritual level and let you see both how your day to day life was a part of something so unimaginably huge and fantastic while simultaniously making a good case for our species to push the frontiers .
I do n't think anyone can compare .
If I had to try I 'd pick Michio Kaku , he 's a definitely more down to Earth than Sagan , but still great .
P.S. For a bit of history and sociology in the mix I really really suggest you pick up Connections ( Season 1 ) and The Day the Universe Changed by James Burke .
It stands beside Cosmos as my favorite TV series and will get your kids interested in economics , sociology and history on top of science .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All the names listed above do the trick and a special note goes out to the cognitive scientists: Pinker, Dennett, Minsky, etc.
Carl Sagan was an even rarer breed though.
More than just popularizing science: making it understandable and curious, he brought it to a deeper almost spiritual level and let you see both how your day to day life was a part of something so unimaginably huge and fantastic while simultaniously making a good case for our species to push the frontiers.
I don't think anyone can compare.
If I had to try I'd pick Michio Kaku, he's a definitely more down to Earth than Sagan, but still great.
P.S. For a bit of history and sociology in the mix I really really suggest you pick up Connections (Season 1) and The Day the Universe Changed by James Burke.
It stands beside Cosmos as my favorite TV series and will get your kids interested in economics, sociology and history on top of science.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28691979</id>
	<title>Re:5 and 2 years old?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247590380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I grew up watching wildlife documentaries!  Perfectly awesome material, even for little kids.  Often include calming/classical-like music, wild colors, interesting settings.  Bonus: can help teach geography, gently puts in the back of their mind facts of life/death/reproduction, carbon/water/nutrient needs of organisms, food webs, and also can help kids realize that the whole world doesn't necessarily look like their back yard - fosters open-mindedness, I think.  For even more bang for your buck, take them on a hike or to a nature center after, so they can see things off the TV screen, too.  -science PhD student</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I grew up watching wildlife documentaries !
Perfectly awesome material , even for little kids .
Often include calming/classical-like music , wild colors , interesting settings .
Bonus : can help teach geography , gently puts in the back of their mind facts of life/death/reproduction , carbon/water/nutrient needs of organisms , food webs , and also can help kids realize that the whole world does n't necessarily look like their back yard - fosters open-mindedness , I think .
For even more bang for your buck , take them on a hike or to a nature center after , so they can see things off the TV screen , too .
-science PhD student</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I grew up watching wildlife documentaries!
Perfectly awesome material, even for little kids.
Often include calming/classical-like music, wild colors, interesting settings.
Bonus: can help teach geography, gently puts in the back of their mind facts of life/death/reproduction, carbon/water/nutrient needs of organisms, food webs, and also can help kids realize that the whole world doesn't necessarily look like their back yard - fosters open-mindedness, I think.
For even more bang for your buck, take them on a hike or to a nature center after, so they can see things off the TV screen, too.
-science PhD student</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685589</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685579</id>
	<title>LOL   Carl Sagan....scientist?    not</title>
	<author>Beat The Odds</author>
	<datestamp>1247499000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Carl should have pointed hit famous "baloney detector" at himself.

I especially like the "scientific" opening to <i>Cosmos</i>, "The Cosmos is all that is, or was, or ever will be". Nice science Carl. Atheistic philosopher maybe?

If you want to get your kids interested in the universe, introduce then to the Creator.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Carl should have pointed hit famous " baloney detector " at himself .
I especially like the " scientific " opening to Cosmos , " The Cosmos is all that is , or was , or ever will be " .
Nice science Carl .
Atheistic philosopher maybe ?
If you want to get your kids interested in the universe , introduce then to the Creator .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Carl should have pointed hit famous "baloney detector" at himself.
I especially like the "scientific" opening to Cosmos, "The Cosmos is all that is, or was, or ever will be".
Nice science Carl.
Atheistic philosopher maybe?
If you want to get your kids interested in the universe, introduce then to the Creator.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686625</id>
	<title>Dr Karl Kruszelnicki</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247506800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For Kids, Dr Karl Kruszelnicki's books would help to generate a fairly broad interest in science. His books are written in fairly short chapters on various topics which would help with kid's attention spans.<br>.<br>See <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl\_Kruszelnicki" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">wikipedia</a> [wikipedia.org] or <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/science/drkarl/" title="abc.net.au" rel="nofollow">Dr Karl's Page on ABC Science</a> [abc.net.au]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For Kids , Dr Karl Kruszelnicki 's books would help to generate a fairly broad interest in science .
His books are written in fairly short chapters on various topics which would help with kid 's attention spans..See wikipedia [ wikipedia.org ] or Dr Karl 's Page on ABC Science [ abc.net.au ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For Kids, Dr Karl Kruszelnicki's books would help to generate a fairly broad interest in science.
His books are written in fairly short chapters on various topics which would help with kid's attention spans..See wikipedia [wikipedia.org] or Dr Karl's Page on ABC Science [abc.net.au]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28701349</id>
	<title>Re:Good luck with that</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247655120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am a dirty pinko commie and I really don't care about people. This jungle<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-P</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am a dirty pinko commie and I really do n't care about people .
This jungle : -P</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am a dirty pinko commie and I really don't care about people.
This jungle :-P</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686721</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28690269</id>
	<title>Re:Alton Brown</title>
	<author>devotedlhasa</author>
	<datestamp>1247582880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What <b>butter</b> hero could you ask for?</htmltext>
<tokenext>What butter hero could you ask for ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What butter hero could you ask for?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686301</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686773</id>
	<title>Erd&#197;'s</title>
	<author>BlueCollarCamel</author>
	<datestamp>1247507880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wish I was born earlier so I could have met Paul Erd&#197;'s. I can only dream to be half the mathematician he was.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wish I was born earlier so I could have met Paul Erd   's .
I can only dream to be half the mathematician he was .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wish I was born earlier so I could have met Paul ErdÅ's.
I can only dream to be half the mathematician he was.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686829</id>
	<title>F1</title>
	<author>vigmeister</author>
	<datestamp>1247508360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Get them to follow F1. The competitive nature and the inherent coolness of racing cars will get them hooked. The breadth in sciences covered by the sport is pretty cool ranging from the biology of weight loss from dehydration of the drivers to the electronics behind precision timing. It is a breathtakingly awesome sport even when none of the competitors are performing well.</p><p>P.S. Be very careful to make sure they do not start watching any other programming on SpeedTV!</p><p>Cheers!<br>--<br>Vig</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Get them to follow F1 .
The competitive nature and the inherent coolness of racing cars will get them hooked .
The breadth in sciences covered by the sport is pretty cool ranging from the biology of weight loss from dehydration of the drivers to the electronics behind precision timing .
It is a breathtakingly awesome sport even when none of the competitors are performing well.P.S .
Be very careful to make sure they do not start watching any other programming on SpeedTV ! Cheers ! --Vig</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Get them to follow F1.
The competitive nature and the inherent coolness of racing cars will get them hooked.
The breadth in sciences covered by the sport is pretty cool ranging from the biology of weight loss from dehydration of the drivers to the electronics behind precision timing.
It is a breathtakingly awesome sport even when none of the competitors are performing well.P.S.
Be very careful to make sure they do not start watching any other programming on SpeedTV!Cheers!--Vig</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685471</id>
	<title>Re:Mythbusters does it</title>
	<author>LBArrettAnderson</author>
	<datestamp>1247498100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes.  Mythbusters is perfect!  Teach them to jump to conclusions based on extremely small data sets and horribly designed/non-existent control objects.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes .
Mythbusters is perfect !
Teach them to jump to conclusions based on extremely small data sets and horribly designed/non-existent control objects .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes.
Mythbusters is perfect!
Teach them to jump to conclusions based on extremely small data sets and horribly designed/non-existent control objects.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685421</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687141</id>
	<title>Ranga Yogeshwar</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247512800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He is the guy presenting "Quarks &amp; Co" in German TV. Unfortunately most of you won't be able to follow it because it is in German. But he is really great.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He is the guy presenting " Quarks &amp; Co " in German TV .
Unfortunately most of you wo n't be able to follow it because it is in German .
But he is really great .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He is the guy presenting "Quarks &amp; Co" in German TV.
Unfortunately most of you won't be able to follow it because it is in German.
But he is really great.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28690413</id>
	<title>Re:Tyson</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247583420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I second that. Tyson's public appearances may not be as high brow as Sagan's, but he is definately trying to make science accessable to the general population. His book is a little better than Nova Science Now at interesting the scientific adult mind.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I second that .
Tyson 's public appearances may not be as high brow as Sagan 's , but he is definately trying to make science accessable to the general population .
His book is a little better than Nova Science Now at interesting the scientific adult mind .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I second that.
Tyson's public appearances may not be as high brow as Sagan's, but he is definately trying to make science accessable to the general population.
His book is a little better than Nova Science Now at interesting the scientific adult mind.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686797</id>
	<title>Buster and...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247508120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the Mythbusters have been making a pretty good run at putting a scientific spin on the bustation of myths.  Plus they blow stuff up. Kids like that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the Mythbusters have been making a pretty good run at putting a scientific spin on the bustation of myths .
Plus they blow stuff up .
Kids like that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the Mythbusters have been making a pretty good run at putting a scientific spin on the bustation of myths.
Plus they blow stuff up.
Kids like that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687455</id>
	<title>Is it necessary to be a "modern" scientist?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247602800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Feynman. Richard Feynman. Always.</p><p>And Carl Sagan too...</p><p>And hey! Why not George Gamow???</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Feynman .
Richard Feynman .
Always.And Carl Sagan too...And hey !
Why not George Gamow ? ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Feynman.
Richard Feynman.
Always.And Carl Sagan too...And hey!
Why not George Gamow??
?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685495</id>
	<title>Re:Mythbusters does it</title>
	<author>Tablizer</author>
	<datestamp>1247498340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>2nd'ed. My son has loved that show since he was around 6. However, they do show a lot of explosions and potentially dangerous experiments that may encourage kids to take scary risks. A long talk is in order before-hand.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>2nd'ed .
My son has loved that show since he was around 6 .
However , they do show a lot of explosions and potentially dangerous experiments that may encourage kids to take scary risks .
A long talk is in order before-hand .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>2nd'ed.
My son has loved that show since he was around 6.
However, they do show a lot of explosions and potentially dangerous experiments that may encourage kids to take scary risks.
A long talk is in order before-hand.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685421</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687073</id>
	<title>Re:5 and 2 years old?</title>
	<author>mcelrath</author>
	<datestamp>1247511780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A three year old is perfectly capable of asking and answering her own questions.  This is a fundamental aspect of science (as well as learning, growing up, and life).  Therefore it should be taught as soon as the child is capable of understanding it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A three year old is perfectly capable of asking and answering her own questions .
This is a fundamental aspect of science ( as well as learning , growing up , and life ) .
Therefore it should be taught as soon as the child is capable of understanding it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A three year old is perfectly capable of asking and answering her own questions.
This is a fundamental aspect of science (as well as learning, growing up, and life).
Therefore it should be taught as soon as the child is capable of understanding it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685589</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28690943</id>
	<title>Look for heros closer to home.</title>
	<author>tocs</author>
	<datestamp>1247585820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Of course it is great to have heroes to point out to kids (or adults) but I believe that the greatest inspiration comes from sources closer to home.

If you are always pointing to outside sources for inspiration it is easy to forget the world around us. It begins to be easy to forget that the physics, biology, economics, and all the other great things that popular scientists are talking about is all around and is directly affecting our lives. We forget to study the world by looking around ourselves and asking the simple question.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course it is great to have heroes to point out to kids ( or adults ) but I believe that the greatest inspiration comes from sources closer to home .
If you are always pointing to outside sources for inspiration it is easy to forget the world around us .
It begins to be easy to forget that the physics , biology , economics , and all the other great things that popular scientists are talking about is all around and is directly affecting our lives .
We forget to study the world by looking around ourselves and asking the simple question .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course it is great to have heroes to point out to kids (or adults) but I believe that the greatest inspiration comes from sources closer to home.
If you are always pointing to outside sources for inspiration it is easy to forget the world around us.
It begins to be easy to forget that the physics, biology, economics, and all the other great things that popular scientists are talking about is all around and is directly affecting our lives.
We forget to study the world by looking around ourselves and asking the simple question.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685837</id>
	<title>Re:Mythbusters does it</title>
	<author>syousef</author>
	<datestamp>1247500620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>They teach the heart of the Scientific Method and show it as being FUN. Test the hypothesis - then retest it, just like Jaime and Adam do every episode.</i></p><p>I realise this will be modded down but it has to be said - the Mythbusters are a horrible, horrible influence. They demonstrate the misuse and sloppy application of the scientific method, and how to jump to a generalised conclusion based on insufficient evidence. Many if not most of their shows should end with "insufficient data", not "busted", "proven" and "plausible".</p><p>They are good entertainment value if you like to see wild ideas tested or see things blown up, but I honestly believe that introducing kids to such sloppy science does more harm than good.</p><p>Now watch me get modded down by fans of all things blown up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They teach the heart of the Scientific Method and show it as being FUN .
Test the hypothesis - then retest it , just like Jaime and Adam do every episode.I realise this will be modded down but it has to be said - the Mythbusters are a horrible , horrible influence .
They demonstrate the misuse and sloppy application of the scientific method , and how to jump to a generalised conclusion based on insufficient evidence .
Many if not most of their shows should end with " insufficient data " , not " busted " , " proven " and " plausible " .They are good entertainment value if you like to see wild ideas tested or see things blown up , but I honestly believe that introducing kids to such sloppy science does more harm than good.Now watch me get modded down by fans of all things blown up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They teach the heart of the Scientific Method and show it as being FUN.
Test the hypothesis - then retest it, just like Jaime and Adam do every episode.I realise this will be modded down but it has to be said - the Mythbusters are a horrible, horrible influence.
They demonstrate the misuse and sloppy application of the scientific method, and how to jump to a generalised conclusion based on insufficient evidence.
Many if not most of their shows should end with "insufficient data", not "busted", "proven" and "plausible".They are good entertainment value if you like to see wild ideas tested or see things blown up, but I honestly believe that introducing kids to such sloppy science does more harm than good.Now watch me get modded down by fans of all things blown up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685421</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28689389</id>
	<title>Re:Tyson</title>
	<author>ghostlibrary</author>
	<datestamp>1247579100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; I am currently going through a Neil deGrasse Tyson phase.</p><p>I became a fan of his after his "Astrophysicists Killed the Dinosaurs" talk:<br><a href="http://www.scientificblogging.com/daytime\_astronomer/astrophysicists\_killed\_dinosaurs\_neil\_degrasse\_tyson\_science\_communication" title="scientificblogging.com">http://www.scientificblogging.com/daytime\_astronomer/astrophysicists\_killed\_dinosaurs\_neil\_degrasse\_tyson\_science\_communication</a> [scientificblogging.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; I am currently going through a Neil deGrasse Tyson phase.I became a fan of his after his " Astrophysicists Killed the Dinosaurs " talk : http : //www.scientificblogging.com/daytime \ _astronomer/astrophysicists \ _killed \ _dinosaurs \ _neil \ _degrasse \ _tyson \ _science \ _communication [ scientificblogging.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; I am currently going through a Neil deGrasse Tyson phase.I became a fan of his after his "Astrophysicists Killed the Dinosaurs" talk:http://www.scientificblogging.com/daytime\_astronomer/astrophysicists\_killed\_dinosaurs\_neil\_degrasse\_tyson\_science\_communication [scientificblogging.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28689763</id>
	<title>Re:BILL BILL BILL</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247580600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This.  Oh and if you can find them, Beakman's World. I don't believe that is the correct spelling, but you get the idea.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This .
Oh and if you can find them , Beakman 's World .
I do n't believe that is the correct spelling , but you get the idea .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This.
Oh and if you can find them, Beakman's World.
I don't believe that is the correct spelling, but you get the idea.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685455</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28694313</id>
	<title>Brian Greene</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247599980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian\_Greene</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian \ _Greene</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian\_Greene</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687739</id>
	<title>Future thoughts</title>
	<author>bradbury</author>
	<datestamp>1247562900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I can think of nothing that would encourage them more than reading works by K. Eric Drexler or Robert Freitas.  Though they deal more in the realm of engineering than science and are generally create a picture of possible future paths (molecular nanotechnology &amp; nanomedicine) which can easily inspire people to learn science.

The best book for nanotechnology would be <i>Engines of Creation 2.0</i>: <a href="http://e-drexler.com/p/06/00/EOC\_Cover.html" title="e-drexler.com">http://e-drexler.com/p/06/00/EOC\_Cover.html</a> [e-drexler.com] (the paperback 1987 edition is somewhat dated at this point) but you would have to go browsing through the papers by Robert @ <a href="http://www.rfreitas.com/" title="rfreitas.com">http://www.rfreitas.com/</a> [rfreitas.com] to find something which is for a younger age level.  You might even have to read them with your children and explain them.  But exploring the realms of the small (nanotechnology) and the large (astronomy) both serve as windows to get children to wonder about the world around them, how it can be understood, and potentially how it can be explored and developed.  Tools that allow these explorations (I grew up with both a microscope and a telescope in the house) are helpful as well.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I can think of nothing that would encourage them more than reading works by K. Eric Drexler or Robert Freitas .
Though they deal more in the realm of engineering than science and are generally create a picture of possible future paths ( molecular nanotechnology &amp; nanomedicine ) which can easily inspire people to learn science .
The best book for nanotechnology would be Engines of Creation 2.0 : http : //e-drexler.com/p/06/00/EOC \ _Cover.html [ e-drexler.com ] ( the paperback 1987 edition is somewhat dated at this point ) but you would have to go browsing through the papers by Robert @ http : //www.rfreitas.com/ [ rfreitas.com ] to find something which is for a younger age level .
You might even have to read them with your children and explain them .
But exploring the realms of the small ( nanotechnology ) and the large ( astronomy ) both serve as windows to get children to wonder about the world around them , how it can be understood , and potentially how it can be explored and developed .
Tools that allow these explorations ( I grew up with both a microscope and a telescope in the house ) are helpful as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can think of nothing that would encourage them more than reading works by K. Eric Drexler or Robert Freitas.
Though they deal more in the realm of engineering than science and are generally create a picture of possible future paths (molecular nanotechnology &amp; nanomedicine) which can easily inspire people to learn science.
The best book for nanotechnology would be Engines of Creation 2.0: http://e-drexler.com/p/06/00/EOC\_Cover.html [e-drexler.com] (the paperback 1987 edition is somewhat dated at this point) but you would have to go browsing through the papers by Robert @ http://www.rfreitas.com/ [rfreitas.com] to find something which is for a younger age level.
You might even have to read them with your children and explain them.
But exploring the realms of the small (nanotechnology) and the large (astronomy) both serve as windows to get children to wonder about the world around them, how it can be understood, and potentially how it can be explored and developed.
Tools that allow these explorations (I grew up with both a microscope and a telescope in the house) are helpful as well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686077</id>
	<title>Tim Flannery and Dr. KArl</title>
	<author>riprjak</author>
	<datestamp>1247502300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim\_Flannery" title="wikipedia.org">Dr. Tim Flannery</a> [wikipedia.org] is someone whose work I have introduced all of my young relatives too.  He may not be as well recognised outside of Australian and I can honestly say I don't always share his viewpoint; but he conveys the points well and with great passion.</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl\_Kruszelnicki" title="wikipedia.org">Dr. Karl Kruszelnicki</a> [wikipedia.org] has been doing a scientifically credible, entertaining and honest version of what the mythbuster's do on radio in Australia for donkeys years and is pure gold when it comes to making science fun and accessible.</p><p>err!<br>Jak.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dr. Tim Flannery [ wikipedia.org ] is someone whose work I have introduced all of my young relatives too .
He may not be as well recognised outside of Australian and I can honestly say I do n't always share his viewpoint ; but he conveys the points well and with great passion.Dr .
Karl Kruszelnicki [ wikipedia.org ] has been doing a scientifically credible , entertaining and honest version of what the mythbuster 's do on radio in Australia for donkeys years and is pure gold when it comes to making science fun and accessible.err ! Jak .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dr. Tim Flannery [wikipedia.org] is someone whose work I have introduced all of my young relatives too.
He may not be as well recognised outside of Australian and I can honestly say I don't always share his viewpoint; but he conveys the points well and with great passion.Dr.
Karl Kruszelnicki [wikipedia.org] has been doing a scientifically credible, entertaining and honest version of what the mythbuster's do on radio in Australia for donkeys years and is pure gold when it comes to making science fun and accessible.err!Jak.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685435</id>
	<title>Neil deGrasse Tyson</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247497860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>check out his book "The pluto files" <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Pluto-Files-Neil-deGrasse-Tyson/dp/0393065200" title="amazon.com">http://www.amazon.com/Pluto-Files-Neil-deGrasse-Tyson/dp/0393065200</a> [amazon.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>check out his book " The pluto files " http : //www.amazon.com/Pluto-Files-Neil-deGrasse-Tyson/dp/0393065200 [ amazon.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>check out his book "The pluto files" http://www.amazon.com/Pluto-Files-Neil-deGrasse-Tyson/dp/0393065200 [amazon.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686007</id>
	<title>Re:Meteorologists</title>
	<author>arb phd slp</author>
	<datestamp>1247501820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Most "meteorologists" are local hacks working for TV stations who have passed 2-week-long weather reporting school and get all their data from NOAA anyway. They do not have careers in science at all. On the contrary, their ambition is to become TV anchorman.</p><p>I would hardly call your typical local TV "meteorologist" a good example of a science teacher.</p></div><p>They usually show some text on the screen when the person doing the weather is an actual meteorologist. If it doesn't say, you can assume it's nothing but an on-air "talent" who can read the powerpoint without tripping over his or her tongue.</p><p>Where I grew up (Maine) there are a lot of people who work outdoors and they take weather very seriously, so the TV weather was always done by an actual scientist. (Also, it's a little trickier forecasting in Maine than in places where you can just look one state to the west and say "We'll get that tomorrow.")</p><p>A lot of times, a TV meteorologist does presentations at schools with the specific goal of sparking interest in science.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Most " meteorologists " are local hacks working for TV stations who have passed 2-week-long weather reporting school and get all their data from NOAA anyway .
They do not have careers in science at all .
On the contrary , their ambition is to become TV anchorman.I would hardly call your typical local TV " meteorologist " a good example of a science teacher.They usually show some text on the screen when the person doing the weather is an actual meteorologist .
If it does n't say , you can assume it 's nothing but an on-air " talent " who can read the powerpoint without tripping over his or her tongue.Where I grew up ( Maine ) there are a lot of people who work outdoors and they take weather very seriously , so the TV weather was always done by an actual scientist .
( Also , it 's a little trickier forecasting in Maine than in places where you can just look one state to the west and say " We 'll get that tomorrow .
" ) A lot of times , a TV meteorologist does presentations at schools with the specific goal of sparking interest in science .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most "meteorologists" are local hacks working for TV stations who have passed 2-week-long weather reporting school and get all their data from NOAA anyway.
They do not have careers in science at all.
On the contrary, their ambition is to become TV anchorman.I would hardly call your typical local TV "meteorologist" a good example of a science teacher.They usually show some text on the screen when the person doing the weather is an actual meteorologist.
If it doesn't say, you can assume it's nothing but an on-air "talent" who can read the powerpoint without tripping over his or her tongue.Where I grew up (Maine) there are a lot of people who work outdoors and they take weather very seriously, so the TV weather was always done by an actual scientist.
(Also, it's a little trickier forecasting in Maine than in places where you can just look one state to the west and say "We'll get that tomorrow.
")A lot of times, a TV meteorologist does presentations at schools with the specific goal of sparking interest in science.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685595</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686087</id>
	<title>The best hero of science.  Inventor of Scientology</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247502420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ron L Hubbard!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ron L Hubbard !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ron L Hubbard!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28697489</id>
	<title>Re:Videos and books</title>
	<author>CopaceticOpus</author>
	<datestamp>1247571480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can think of a couple things to add.</p><p>Brian Greene - <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The\_Fabric\_of\_the\_Cosmos" title="wikipedia.org">The Fabric of the Cosmos</a> [wikipedia.org]. Greene does an excellent job of describing high level physics in a way that those of us without physics doctorates can understand, and he highlights what is really fascinating and compelling about these discoveries.</p><p>Richard Feynman - <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surely\_You're\_Joking,\_Mr.\_Feynman!" title="wikipedia.org">Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman!</a> [wikipedia.org] This book doesn't cover much scientific detail, but it gets you into the mind of a fascinating scientist. It can show the way to thinking like a scientist - being curious about the world, favoring logic and proof over intellectual authority, etc.</p><p>I have to say that I was disappointed by A Short History of Nearly Everything. <a href="http://www.amazon.com/review/R2IPIA6ABCZ73B/" title="amazon.com">This review</a> [amazon.com] sums up my thoughts pretty well. The book is concerned more than anything with the personal details of the lives of scientists and their squabbles. I'd love to find a book that covers the same scope, but focuses more on the actual discoveries, how they were made, and what they meant.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I can think of a couple things to add.Brian Greene - The Fabric of the Cosmos [ wikipedia.org ] .
Greene does an excellent job of describing high level physics in a way that those of us without physics doctorates can understand , and he highlights what is really fascinating and compelling about these discoveries.Richard Feynman - Surely You 're Joking , Mr. Feynman ! [ wikipedia.org ] This book does n't cover much scientific detail , but it gets you into the mind of a fascinating scientist .
It can show the way to thinking like a scientist - being curious about the world , favoring logic and proof over intellectual authority , etc.I have to say that I was disappointed by A Short History of Nearly Everything .
This review [ amazon.com ] sums up my thoughts pretty well .
The book is concerned more than anything with the personal details of the lives of scientists and their squabbles .
I 'd love to find a book that covers the same scope , but focuses more on the actual discoveries , how they were made , and what they meant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can think of a couple things to add.Brian Greene - The Fabric of the Cosmos [wikipedia.org].
Greene does an excellent job of describing high level physics in a way that those of us without physics doctorates can understand, and he highlights what is really fascinating and compelling about these discoveries.Richard Feynman - Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman! [wikipedia.org] This book doesn't cover much scientific detail, but it gets you into the mind of a fascinating scientist.
It can show the way to thinking like a scientist - being curious about the world, favoring logic and proof over intellectual authority, etc.I have to say that I was disappointed by A Short History of Nearly Everything.
This review [amazon.com] sums up my thoughts pretty well.
The book is concerned more than anything with the personal details of the lives of scientists and their squabbles.
I'd love to find a book that covers the same scope, but focuses more on the actual discoveries, how they were made, and what they meant.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687713</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685847</id>
	<title>Re:Mythbusters does it</title>
	<author>troutinator</author>
	<datestamp>1247500680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Honestly, when was the last time you did a thorough scientific experiment in your personal life?</p></div><p>As a researcher every day pretty much, lol.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Honestly , when was the last time you did a thorough scientific experiment in your personal life ? As a researcher every day pretty much , lol .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Honestly, when was the last time you did a thorough scientific experiment in your personal life?As a researcher every day pretty much, lol.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685557</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685421</id>
	<title>Mythbusters does it</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247497680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>They teach the heart of the Scientific Method and show it as being FUN.   Test the hypothesis - then retest it, just like Jaime and Adam do every episode.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They teach the heart of the Scientific Method and show it as being FUN .
Test the hypothesis - then retest it , just like Jaime and Adam do every episode .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They teach the heart of the Scientific Method and show it as being FUN.
Test the hypothesis - then retest it, just like Jaime and Adam do every episode.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686073</id>
	<title>Dr Karl Kruszelnicki</title>
	<author>whatever3003</author>
	<datestamp>1247502300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>He has a website here: <a href="http://www.drkarl.com/" title="drkarl.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.drkarl.com/</a> [drkarl.com] and you can listen to him on the ABC website here: <a href="http://abc.gov.au/science/drkarl/" title="abc.gov.au" rel="nofollow">http://abc.gov.au/science/drkarl/</a> [abc.gov.au]</htmltext>
<tokenext>He has a website here : http : //www.drkarl.com/ [ drkarl.com ] and you can listen to him on the ABC website here : http : //abc.gov.au/science/drkarl/ [ abc.gov.au ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He has a website here: http://www.drkarl.com/ [drkarl.com] and you can listen to him on the ABC website here: http://abc.gov.au/science/drkarl/ [abc.gov.au]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28688777</id>
	<title>This should be a poll</title>
	<author>vikstar</author>
	<datestamp>1247574720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>with the obvious selection... Cmdr Taco.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>with the obvious selection... Cmdr Taco .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>with the obvious selection... Cmdr Taco.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28691615</id>
	<title>Re:Tyson</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247588880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Michio Kaku?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Michio Kaku ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Michio Kaku?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685991</id>
	<title>Dr Karl Kruszelnicki</title>
	<author>Fully Functional</author>
	<datestamp>1247501700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Dr Karl has written a few books and publish papers, is on TV and Radio in Australia
<a href="http://www.abc.net.au/profiles/content/s2193276.htm?site=science/k2" title="abc.net.au" rel="nofollow">http://www.abc.net.au/profiles/content/s2193276.htm?site=science/k2</a> [abc.net.au]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dr Karl has written a few books and publish papers , is on TV and Radio in Australia http : //www.abc.net.au/profiles/content/s2193276.htm ? site = science/k2 [ abc.net.au ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dr Karl has written a few books and publish papers, is on TV and Radio in Australia
http://www.abc.net.au/profiles/content/s2193276.htm?site=science/k2 [abc.net.au]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686179</id>
	<title>Why don't *you* be their hero.</title>
	<author>SetupWeasel</author>
	<datestamp>1247503140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Grab the bull by the horns. Bonus points if you can teach them the difference between theory and fact. Most scientists seem to get that one wrong these days.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Grab the bull by the horns .
Bonus points if you can teach them the difference between theory and fact .
Most scientists seem to get that one wrong these days .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Grab the bull by the horns.
Bonus points if you can teach them the difference between theory and fact.
Most scientists seem to get that one wrong these days.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685935</id>
	<title>Michio Kaku comes to mind</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247501340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But things are different now than in the Carl Sagan days - that was back when there were 3 tv stations (if you were lucky) and so most of your informal science education via TV probably had to come from one person - there just wasn't room for more.  Now you have a whole slew of places to get good quality science content in an informal and entertaining way - the Discovery family of channels are a great source for this (especially Discovery Channel, Discovery Health, the Science Channel, and Animal Planet).   Oh and don't forget History channel and History International for some of the "softer" sciences like archaeology, sociology, etc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But things are different now than in the Carl Sagan days - that was back when there were 3 tv stations ( if you were lucky ) and so most of your informal science education via TV probably had to come from one person - there just was n't room for more .
Now you have a whole slew of places to get good quality science content in an informal and entertaining way - the Discovery family of channels are a great source for this ( especially Discovery Channel , Discovery Health , the Science Channel , and Animal Planet ) .
Oh and do n't forget History channel and History International for some of the " softer " sciences like archaeology , sociology , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But things are different now than in the Carl Sagan days - that was back when there were 3 tv stations (if you were lucky) and so most of your informal science education via TV probably had to come from one person - there just wasn't room for more.
Now you have a whole slew of places to get good quality science content in an informal and entertaining way - the Discovery family of channels are a great source for this (especially Discovery Channel, Discovery Health, the Science Channel, and Animal Planet).
Oh and don't forget History channel and History International for some of the "softer" sciences like archaeology, sociology, etc.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685867</id>
	<title>Re:Mythbusters does it</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247500800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>At least they GET data rather than just basing their opinions what they're fed<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...  personal science involves questioning the status quo, not accepting everything at face value, and figuring out how to answer <b>your questions</b>. Simply because your methods wouldn't stand up to rigorous testing doesn't mean that you can't use it to make good decisions. Ultimately I think that is the role of science in peoples lives, to answer questions and aid in decisions<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... While I don't always agree with the mythbuster's methods, at least they don't sit around waiting for the talking heads to hand down the truth from on high. The scientific spirit of the program is strong if the flesh is sometimes weak.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
You have just accurately described the higher, philosophical purpose of science. Well done.<br> <br>
I feel you have also accurately summarized why MythBusters is so popular - it captures the scientific spirit without diluting it in rigor, while catering to an audience that is constantly seeking for its own answers and the associated reasons behind them. In a popular culture that provides fewer clear messages as information becomes more partisan, the individual reacts naturally in their own self interest by becoming more individual in the acquisition of their own information. MythBusters might be the lowest common denominator of this process among the 'technically minded', but how the hell are you going to accurately test 'if a playing card can actually kill a human being?'. Seriously.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>At least they GET data rather than just basing their opinions what they 're fed ... personal science involves questioning the status quo , not accepting everything at face value , and figuring out how to answer your questions .
Simply because your methods would n't stand up to rigorous testing does n't mean that you ca n't use it to make good decisions .
Ultimately I think that is the role of science in peoples lives , to answer questions and aid in decisions ... While I do n't always agree with the mythbuster 's methods , at least they do n't sit around waiting for the talking heads to hand down the truth from on high .
The scientific spirit of the program is strong if the flesh is sometimes weak .
You have just accurately described the higher , philosophical purpose of science .
Well done .
I feel you have also accurately summarized why MythBusters is so popular - it captures the scientific spirit without diluting it in rigor , while catering to an audience that is constantly seeking for its own answers and the associated reasons behind them .
In a popular culture that provides fewer clear messages as information becomes more partisan , the individual reacts naturally in their own self interest by becoming more individual in the acquisition of their own information .
MythBusters might be the lowest common denominator of this process among the 'technically minded ' , but how the hell are you going to accurately test 'if a playing card can actually kill a human being ? ' .
Seriously .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At least they GET data rather than just basing their opinions what they're fed ...  personal science involves questioning the status quo, not accepting everything at face value, and figuring out how to answer your questions.
Simply because your methods wouldn't stand up to rigorous testing doesn't mean that you can't use it to make good decisions.
Ultimately I think that is the role of science in peoples lives, to answer questions and aid in decisions ... While I don't always agree with the mythbuster's methods, at least they don't sit around waiting for the talking heads to hand down the truth from on high.
The scientific spirit of the program is strong if the flesh is sometimes weak.
You have just accurately described the higher, philosophical purpose of science.
Well done.
I feel you have also accurately summarized why MythBusters is so popular - it captures the scientific spirit without diluting it in rigor, while catering to an audience that is constantly seeking for its own answers and the associated reasons behind them.
In a popular culture that provides fewer clear messages as information becomes more partisan, the individual reacts naturally in their own self interest by becoming more individual in the acquisition of their own information.
MythBusters might be the lowest common denominator of this process among the 'technically minded', but how the hell are you going to accurately test 'if a playing card can actually kill a human being?'.
Seriously.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685557</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685949</id>
	<title>Re:Meteorologists</title>
	<author>spire3661</author>
	<datestamp>1247501400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I was watching his "thou shalt not add my speed to the speed of light" video last night, great stuff.

Your second statement reminds me of when the Shuttle Columbia blew up and my GF (wife now) DIDNT WAKE ME UP. When i got up shes like, 'O yeah the shuttle blew up" and I flipped out on her yelling "why the hell didnt you wake me????!?!?!?". I just could not comprehend how it didnt really affect her at all....   The instant she told me I flashed back to where I was when i heard about Challenger. Sorry if I got off-topic<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>I was watching his " thou shalt not add my speed to the speed of light " video last night , great stuff .
Your second statement reminds me of when the Shuttle Columbia blew up and my GF ( wife now ) DIDNT WAKE ME UP .
When i got up shes like , 'O yeah the shuttle blew up " and I flipped out on her yelling " why the hell didnt you wake me ? ? ? ? ! ? ! ? ! ? " .
I just could not comprehend how it didnt really affect her at all.... The instant she told me I flashed back to where I was when i heard about Challenger .
Sorry if I got off-topic : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was watching his "thou shalt not add my speed to the speed of light" video last night, great stuff.
Your second statement reminds me of when the Shuttle Columbia blew up and my GF (wife now) DIDNT WAKE ME UP.
When i got up shes like, 'O yeah the shuttle blew up" and I flipped out on her yelling "why the hell didnt you wake me????!?!?!?".
I just could not comprehend how it didnt really affect her at all....   The instant she told me I flashed back to where I was when i heard about Challenger.
Sorry if I got off-topic :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685523</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686869</id>
	<title>Re:5 and 2 years old?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247508780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>are you kidding me?   david attenborough nature docs are the best.  kids love it.  you get to see the interesting parts of nature and its REAL not cartoons.  the fact that its REAL footage makes it a thousand times better impression to a kid than the magic school bus.  not that there's anything wrong with the magic school bus.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>are you kidding me ?
david attenborough nature docs are the best .
kids love it .
you get to see the interesting parts of nature and its REAL not cartoons .
the fact that its REAL footage makes it a thousand times better impression to a kid than the magic school bus .
not that there 's anything wrong with the magic school bus .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>are you kidding me?
david attenborough nature docs are the best.
kids love it.
you get to see the interesting parts of nature and its REAL not cartoons.
the fact that its REAL footage makes it a thousand times better impression to a kid than the magic school bus.
not that there's anything wrong with the magic school bus.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685589</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686911</id>
	<title>Re:BILL BILL BILL</title>
	<author>Drathos</author>
	<datestamp>1247509260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've met Bill Nye (well, <i>a</i> Bill Nye) and he was a religious nutjob..</p><p>Seriously, though, this guy was just like Michael Bolton in Office Space.  Wouldn't go by Will or William because he's been Bill all his life and why should he change "just because some idiot became famous with the same name."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've met Bill Nye ( well , a Bill Nye ) and he was a religious nutjob..Seriously , though , this guy was just like Michael Bolton in Office Space .
Would n't go by Will or William because he 's been Bill all his life and why should he change " just because some idiot became famous with the same name .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've met Bill Nye (well, a Bill Nye) and he was a religious nutjob..Seriously, though, this guy was just like Michael Bolton in Office Space.
Wouldn't go by Will or William because he's been Bill all his life and why should he change "just because some idiot became famous with the same name.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685455</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686731</id>
	<title>Re:Tyson</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247507520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And George Smoot<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..... and on the Genetics side, George Church. In fact, anyone named George...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And George Smoot ..... and on the Genetics side , George Church .
In fact , anyone named George.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And George Smoot ..... and on the Genetics side, George Church.
In fact, anyone named George...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687655</id>
	<title>Re:Mythbusters does it</title>
	<author>TheTurtlesMoves</author>
	<datestamp>1247604960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=1156" title="phdcomics.com">Stuff on tv</a> [phdcomics.com] has always lacked rigor<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Stuff on tv [ phdcomics.com ] has always lacked rigor ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Stuff on tv [phdcomics.com] has always lacked rigor ;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685471</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28702351</id>
	<title>THIS THREAD FAWKING SUCKS!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247666520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thanks dipships for completly derailing an interesting topic.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/thread</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thanks dipships for completly derailing an interesting topic .
/thread</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thanks dipships for completly derailing an interesting topic.
/thread</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28688039</id>
	<title>ted talks</title>
	<author>Odinlake</author>
	<datestamp>1247566020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Browse <a href="http://www.ted.com/" title="ted.com" rel="nofollow">www.ted.com</a> [ted.com]. Personally I think everything about selfassembling nanomachines is fascinating.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Browse www.ted.com [ ted.com ] .
Personally I think everything about selfassembling nanomachines is fascinating .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Browse www.ted.com [ted.com].
Personally I think everything about selfassembling nanomachines is fascinating.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28688423</id>
	<title>How come this hasn't been mentioned yet</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247570580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Richard Feynman - Seems like an obvious choice, he was smart, charasmatic and there are many quite funny stories out there about him. Thats all aside from the fact he's revolutionised quantum theory, helped solve the Challenger disaster and built the atomic bomb. If you see any interviews with him he's also very modest.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Richard Feynman - Seems like an obvious choice , he was smart , charasmatic and there are many quite funny stories out there about him .
Thats all aside from the fact he 's revolutionised quantum theory , helped solve the Challenger disaster and built the atomic bomb .
If you see any interviews with him he 's also very modest .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Richard Feynman - Seems like an obvious choice, he was smart, charasmatic and there are many quite funny stories out there about him.
Thats all aside from the fact he's revolutionised quantum theory, helped solve the Challenger disaster and built the atomic bomb.
If you see any interviews with him he's also very modest.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686265</id>
	<title>Don Herbert</title>
	<author>techno-vampire</author>
	<datestamp>1247503800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you really want to interest your two rugrats in basic science, you need to go back to the basics: <a href="http://mrwizardstudios.com/" title="mrwizardstudios.com">Watch Mr. Wizard.</a> [mrwizardstudios.com]  Not only did Mr. Wizard teach basic science, he did it with experiments that you could easily duplicae at home.  And, he did it live, with no editing, no retakes, no special effects to make things come out right.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you really want to interest your two rugrats in basic science , you need to go back to the basics : Watch Mr. Wizard. [ mrwizardstudios.com ] Not only did Mr. Wizard teach basic science , he did it with experiments that you could easily duplicae at home .
And , he did it live , with no editing , no retakes , no special effects to make things come out right .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you really want to interest your two rugrats in basic science, you need to go back to the basics: Watch Mr. Wizard. [mrwizardstudios.com]  Not only did Mr. Wizard teach basic science, he did it with experiments that you could easily duplicae at home.
And, he did it live, with no editing, no retakes, no special effects to make things come out right.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687035</id>
	<title>Re:Tyson</title>
	<author>eonlabs</author>
	<datestamp>1247511120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How about Brian Greene?<br><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Elegant-Universe-Brian-Greene/dp/B001IDLCNM/ref=sr\_1\_2?ie=UTF8&amp;s=books&amp;qid=1247549920&amp;sr=8-2" title="amazon.com">http://www.amazon.com/Elegant-Universe-Brian-Greene/dp/B001IDLCNM/ref=sr\_1\_2?ie=UTF8&amp;s=books&amp;qid=1247549920&amp;sr=8-2</a> [amazon.com]</p><p>I found his writing to be pretty clear, light reading for quantum and relativistic introductions.</p><p>His examples are well thought out and simple enough for an intelligent twelve year old to understand (Kudos if you catch the reference).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about Brian Greene ? http : //www.amazon.com/Elegant-Universe-Brian-Greene/dp/B001IDLCNM/ref = sr \ _1 \ _2 ? ie = UTF8&amp;s = books&amp;qid = 1247549920&amp;sr = 8-2 [ amazon.com ] I found his writing to be pretty clear , light reading for quantum and relativistic introductions.His examples are well thought out and simple enough for an intelligent twelve year old to understand ( Kudos if you catch the reference ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about Brian Greene?http://www.amazon.com/Elegant-Universe-Brian-Greene/dp/B001IDLCNM/ref=sr\_1\_2?ie=UTF8&amp;s=books&amp;qid=1247549920&amp;sr=8-2 [amazon.com]I found his writing to be pretty clear, light reading for quantum and relativistic introductions.His examples are well thought out and simple enough for an intelligent twelve year old to understand (Kudos if you catch the reference).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686251</id>
	<title>Re:Mythbusters does it</title>
	<author>ozbird</author>
	<datestamp>1247503740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>You mean, they should try experiments <i>without</i> applying C4?  That's crazy talk!</htmltext>
<tokenext>You mean , they should try experiments without applying C4 ?
That 's crazy talk !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You mean, they should try experiments without applying C4?
That's crazy talk!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685471</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28691867</id>
	<title>Re:Brian Cox</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1247589840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, Brian Cox won't bore the hell out of a 5 and 2 year old~</p><p>You people are so busy waving your science dicks around you have missed the question.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , Brian Cox wo n't bore the hell out of a 5 and 2 year old ~ You people are so busy waving your science dicks around you have missed the question .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, Brian Cox won't bore the hell out of a 5 and 2 year old~You people are so busy waving your science dicks around you have missed the question.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687449</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687895</id>
	<title>Re:Say NO to celebrity science</title>
	<author>jschrod</author>
	<datestamp>1247564460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is not about celebrity science, this is about role models. And, as <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=role+model+study" title="google.com">scientific studies show</a> [google.com], role models are important for field selection and motivation of pupils and students.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is not about celebrity science , this is about role models .
And , as scientific studies show [ google.com ] , role models are important for field selection and motivation of pupils and students .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is not about celebrity science, this is about role models.
And, as scientific studies show [google.com], role models are important for field selection and motivation of pupils and students.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685673</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686185</id>
	<title>At that age?  (mine are 5.5 and 3.25)</title>
	<author>frooddude</author>
	<datestamp>1247503260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bill Nye, my kids have the theme song memorized.</p><p>Sid the Science Kid.  Not bad really, drives the whole "it's not magic, figure it out!" thing.</p><p>And just to throw in some non-TV things:</p><p>Lego for the fine motor skills and figuring out how to make something cool</p><p>Find a sport your kid is into.  I can't stand baseball and I like soccer (playing at least), I don't know if it's genetic or what, but my son is much the same.  Sports are cool because of things like gravity and all his friends.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bill Nye , my kids have the theme song memorized.Sid the Science Kid .
Not bad really , drives the whole " it 's not magic , figure it out !
" thing.And just to throw in some non-TV things : Lego for the fine motor skills and figuring out how to make something coolFind a sport your kid is into .
I ca n't stand baseball and I like soccer ( playing at least ) , I do n't know if it 's genetic or what , but my son is much the same .
Sports are cool because of things like gravity and all his friends .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bill Nye, my kids have the theme song memorized.Sid the Science Kid.
Not bad really, drives the whole "it's not magic, figure it out!
" thing.And just to throw in some non-TV things:Lego for the fine motor skills and figuring out how to make something coolFind a sport your kid is into.
I can't stand baseball and I like soccer (playing at least), I don't know if it's genetic or what, but my son is much the same.
Sports are cool because of things like gravity and all his friends.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28689427</id>
	<title>Re:BILL BILL BILL</title>
	<author>jank1887</author>
	<datestamp>1247579220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>and ME!?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>and ME !
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and ME!
?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685455</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685703</id>
	<title>Tyson and Krulwich FTW</title>
	<author>7grain</author>
	<datestamp>1247499780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is a no-brainer!<br>
<br>
1. Check out <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neil\_deGrasse\_Tyson" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Neil deGrasse Tyson</a> [wikipedia.org], who hosts the excellent show <a href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/sciencenow/" title="pbs.org" rel="nofollow">Nova ScienceNOW</a> [pbs.org], currently in it's third season. It runs just after NOVA for several weeks in a row.<br>
<br>
2. Try <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert\_Krulwich" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Robert Krulwich</a> [wikipedia.org], who co-hosts the great NPR show &amp; podcast RadioLab, with the equally wonderful Jad Abumrad. They are great for driving and listening.<br>
<br>
Both are brilliant at making complicated sciencey topics seem fun and interesting. My 13 year old daughter enjoys both shows immensely with me. RadioLab, especially, is fun and funny, and you can gather up all podcasts on iTunes (there are about 25 full shows presently, plus lots of smaller in-between podcasts).<br>
<br>
Both of these guys appear frequently on public radio shows too, like Ira Flatow's <a href="http://www.sciencefriday.com/" title="sciencefriday.com" rel="nofollow">Science Friday</a> [sciencefriday.com], which is also good but a little more current eventsy.<br>
<br>
Hope you enjoy these!</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a no-brainer !
1. Check out Neil deGrasse Tyson [ wikipedia.org ] , who hosts the excellent show Nova ScienceNOW [ pbs.org ] , currently in it 's third season .
It runs just after NOVA for several weeks in a row .
2. Try Robert Krulwich [ wikipedia.org ] , who co-hosts the great NPR show &amp; podcast RadioLab , with the equally wonderful Jad Abumrad .
They are great for driving and listening .
Both are brilliant at making complicated sciencey topics seem fun and interesting .
My 13 year old daughter enjoys both shows immensely with me .
RadioLab , especially , is fun and funny , and you can gather up all podcasts on iTunes ( there are about 25 full shows presently , plus lots of smaller in-between podcasts ) .
Both of these guys appear frequently on public radio shows too , like Ira Flatow 's Science Friday [ sciencefriday.com ] , which is also good but a little more current eventsy .
Hope you enjoy these !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a no-brainer!
1. Check out Neil deGrasse Tyson [wikipedia.org], who hosts the excellent show Nova ScienceNOW [pbs.org], currently in it's third season.
It runs just after NOVA for several weeks in a row.
2. Try Robert Krulwich [wikipedia.org], who co-hosts the great NPR show &amp; podcast RadioLab, with the equally wonderful Jad Abumrad.
They are great for driving and listening.
Both are brilliant at making complicated sciencey topics seem fun and interesting.
My 13 year old daughter enjoys both shows immensely with me.
RadioLab, especially, is fun and funny, and you can gather up all podcasts on iTunes (there are about 25 full shows presently, plus lots of smaller in-between podcasts).
Both of these guys appear frequently on public radio shows too, like Ira Flatow's Science Friday [sciencefriday.com], which is also good but a little more current eventsy.
Hope you enjoy these!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686779</id>
	<title>Re:Mythbusters does it</title>
	<author>Landshark17</author>
	<datestamp>1247508000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I can't find a link to the specific xkcd that I'm thinking of, but the upshot of it was that it is not the quality of the Mythbuster's scientific method that makes it valuable, but rather the fact that it instills in people the drive to hold ideas up to testing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't find a link to the specific xkcd that I 'm thinking of , but the upshot of it was that it is not the quality of the Mythbuster 's scientific method that makes it valuable , but rather the fact that it instills in people the drive to hold ideas up to testing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't find a link to the specific xkcd that I'm thinking of, but the upshot of it was that it is not the quality of the Mythbuster's scientific method that makes it valuable, but rather the fact that it instills in people the drive to hold ideas up to testing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685471</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687045</id>
	<title>How about their parents ...</title>
	<author>MacTO</author>
	<datestamp>1247511360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You don't have to be a great scientist or a great communicator to inspire a child with science.  All that you really need to do is ask key questions that will encourage your children to observe the world around them, and to think about it rationally.</p><p>When the time comes, your children will probably find their own heros from the world of science.  These will people will reflect their own ambitions, may they be in physics or biology or chemistry (or even something as unscientific as mathematics).</p><p>And if they chose to go somewhere else in life, that should be fine to.  As long as they have a clear vision on how they can contribute to the world, they will probably find some sort of direction in life.  After all, even artists and tradespeople help to make our world a much richer and better place.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You do n't have to be a great scientist or a great communicator to inspire a child with science .
All that you really need to do is ask key questions that will encourage your children to observe the world around them , and to think about it rationally.When the time comes , your children will probably find their own heros from the world of science .
These will people will reflect their own ambitions , may they be in physics or biology or chemistry ( or even something as unscientific as mathematics ) .And if they chose to go somewhere else in life , that should be fine to .
As long as they have a clear vision on how they can contribute to the world , they will probably find some sort of direction in life .
After all , even artists and tradespeople help to make our world a much richer and better place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You don't have to be a great scientist or a great communicator to inspire a child with science.
All that you really need to do is ask key questions that will encourage your children to observe the world around them, and to think about it rationally.When the time comes, your children will probably find their own heros from the world of science.
These will people will reflect their own ambitions, may they be in physics or biology or chemistry (or even something as unscientific as mathematics).And if they chose to go somewhere else in life, that should be fine to.
As long as they have a clear vision on how they can contribute to the world, they will probably find some sort of direction in life.
After all, even artists and tradespeople help to make our world a much richer and better place.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686765</id>
	<title>Re:Good luck with that</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247507820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sounds like you got a case of the mondays!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds like you got a case of the mondays !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds like you got a case of the mondays!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686123</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28691785</id>
	<title>Sid the Science Kid &amp; Ms. Frizzle</title>
	<author>jbeaupre</author>
	<datestamp>1247589540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sid the Science Kid on PBS is a surprisingly good science show for young kids.  It encourages kids to ask questions, try experiments, make observations, draw conclusions, apply what they learn to real life and so on.  On fairly basic subjects, but treated in a fun and serious way.  <a href="http://muppet.wikia.com/wiki/Sid\_the\_Science\_Kid" title="wikia.com">http://muppet.wikia.com/wiki/Sid\_the\_Science\_Kid</a> [wikia.com] <br> <br>

My kids are also hooked on The Magic School Bus.  A little bit fantastic, but it covers complex subjects.  The immune system, ecology, properties of fluids, etc.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sid the Science Kid on PBS is a surprisingly good science show for young kids .
It encourages kids to ask questions , try experiments , make observations , draw conclusions , apply what they learn to real life and so on .
On fairly basic subjects , but treated in a fun and serious way .
http : //muppet.wikia.com/wiki/Sid \ _the \ _Science \ _Kid [ wikia.com ] My kids are also hooked on The Magic School Bus .
A little bit fantastic , but it covers complex subjects .
The immune system , ecology , properties of fluids , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sid the Science Kid on PBS is a surprisingly good science show for young kids.
It encourages kids to ask questions, try experiments, make observations, draw conclusions, apply what they learn to real life and so on.
On fairly basic subjects, but treated in a fun and serious way.
http://muppet.wikia.com/wiki/Sid\_the\_Science\_Kid [wikia.com]  

My kids are also hooked on The Magic School Bus.
A little bit fantastic, but it covers complex subjects.
The immune system, ecology, properties of fluids, etc.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687411</id>
	<title>Re:Mythbusters does it</title>
	<author>syousef</author>
	<datestamp>1247602380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I feel you have also accurately summarized why MythBusters is so popular - it captures the scientific spirit without diluting it in rigor</i></p><p>You should replace the word 'rigor' with 'science'.</p><p>The scientific spirit is NOT about labeling anything that doesn't blow up or come to a ridiculous conclusion based on limited data as boring. The wonder is not in the special effects. It's not in wild hand waving. It's not in redneck pseduo-science.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I feel you have also accurately summarized why MythBusters is so popular - it captures the scientific spirit without diluting it in rigorYou should replace the word 'rigor ' with 'science'.The scientific spirit is NOT about labeling anything that does n't blow up or come to a ridiculous conclusion based on limited data as boring .
The wonder is not in the special effects .
It 's not in wild hand waving .
It 's not in redneck pseduo-science .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I feel you have also accurately summarized why MythBusters is so popular - it captures the scientific spirit without diluting it in rigorYou should replace the word 'rigor' with 'science'.The scientific spirit is NOT about labeling anything that doesn't blow up or come to a ridiculous conclusion based on limited data as boring.
The wonder is not in the special effects.
It's not in wild hand waving.
It's not in redneck pseduo-science.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685867</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686941</id>
	<title>Re:Meteorologists</title>
	<author>dbIII</author>
	<datestamp>1247509680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The above poster is talking about real meteorologists who you may not have seen on your local TV and not a young US weathergirl.  In many countries they have real meteorologists presenting the weather on some TV stations and as stated above many of them visit schools on a regular basis.  I suppose the way to tell is if they act like a science teacher or are old and ugly then they have been employed because they know what they are talking about.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The above poster is talking about real meteorologists who you may not have seen on your local TV and not a young US weathergirl .
In many countries they have real meteorologists presenting the weather on some TV stations and as stated above many of them visit schools on a regular basis .
I suppose the way to tell is if they act like a science teacher or are old and ugly then they have been employed because they know what they are talking about .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The above poster is talking about real meteorologists who you may not have seen on your local TV and not a young US weathergirl.
In many countries they have real meteorologists presenting the weather on some TV stations and as stated above many of them visit schools on a regular basis.
I suppose the way to tell is if they act like a science teacher or are old and ugly then they have been employed because they know what they are talking about.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685595</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685723</id>
	<title>Michio Kaku</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247499900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Michio Kaku does it all. Theoretical Physicist. Constantly on the television and has two radio shows, in addition to teaching at City College of New York.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Michio Kaku does it all .
Theoretical Physicist .
Constantly on the television and has two radio shows , in addition to teaching at City College of New York .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Michio Kaku does it all.
Theoretical Physicist.
Constantly on the television and has two radio shows, in addition to teaching at City College of New York.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28689007</id>
	<title>They Might Be Giants</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247577120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>New kids' album "Here Comes Science", coming soon:<br>http://www.amazon.com/Here-Comes-Science-Amazon-com-Exclusive/dp/B002FKZ4UO</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>New kids ' album " Here Comes Science " , coming soon : http : //www.amazon.com/Here-Comes-Science-Amazon-com-Exclusive/dp/B002FKZ4UO</tokentext>
<sentencetext>New kids' album "Here Comes Science", coming soon:http://www.amazon.com/Here-Comes-Science-Amazon-com-Exclusive/dp/B002FKZ4UO</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686021</id>
	<title>It's you</title>
	<author>snookums</author>
	<datestamp>1247502000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know you're looking for outside influences, but don't forget to be a science hero yourself. When the kids ask "why?" don't be Calvin's Dad and make up some whacky explanation (funny as that is), say "let's find out" and devise an experiment.</p><p>Of course, there's going to be some questions that don't lend themselves to experiments ("Where do babies come from?" is easy enough to explain but probably not a good practical, "Why is the sky blue?" is hard to do right without an understanding of Raleigh scattering and quantum mechanics), but wind and water are fun and relatively safe to play with, while gardening and cookery are practical and lend themselves very well to the scientific method.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know you 're looking for outside influences , but do n't forget to be a science hero yourself .
When the kids ask " why ?
" do n't be Calvin 's Dad and make up some whacky explanation ( funny as that is ) , say " let 's find out " and devise an experiment.Of course , there 's going to be some questions that do n't lend themselves to experiments ( " Where do babies come from ?
" is easy enough to explain but probably not a good practical , " Why is the sky blue ?
" is hard to do right without an understanding of Raleigh scattering and quantum mechanics ) , but wind and water are fun and relatively safe to play with , while gardening and cookery are practical and lend themselves very well to the scientific method .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know you're looking for outside influences, but don't forget to be a science hero yourself.
When the kids ask "why?
" don't be Calvin's Dad and make up some whacky explanation (funny as that is), say "let's find out" and devise an experiment.Of course, there's going to be some questions that don't lend themselves to experiments ("Where do babies come from?
" is easy enough to explain but probably not a good practical, "Why is the sky blue?
" is hard to do right without an understanding of Raleigh scattering and quantum mechanics), but wind and water are fun and relatively safe to play with, while gardening and cookery are practical and lend themselves very well to the scientific method.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28690087</id>
	<title>My science heroes</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247582100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Dr." Kent Hovind<br>Anyone from the Discovery Institute<br>Ray "Bananas" Comfort<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Dr. " Kent HovindAnyone from the Discovery InstituteRay " Bananas " Comfort ; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Dr." Kent HovindAnyone from the Discovery InstituteRay "Bananas" Comfort ;-)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686707</id>
	<title>Re:Good luck with that</title>
	<author>gad\_zuki!</author>
	<datestamp>1247507400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Shame the steely-eyed libertarian uber-rationalist doomsayers like yourself have yet to master the fallacy of idealizing the past.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Shame the steely-eyed libertarian uber-rationalist doomsayers like yourself have yet to master the fallacy of idealizing the past .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Shame the steely-eyed libertarian uber-rationalist doomsayers like yourself have yet to master the fallacy of idealizing the past.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686123</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686549</id>
	<title>SE/PO types... and parents.</title>
	<author>Shag</author>
	<datestamp>1247506080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are a lot of people who work in science education and public outreach.  Staff at museums and planetaria, for example.  Outreach people from research facilities (here on Mauna Kea, just about every observatory has official outreach people).  And people who just think what they do is so fun and cool they want to share it with people.</p><p>I'm fortunate enough to work in astronomy, and I love bringing my daughter up to the visitor station for stargazing or hiking, or video-chatting with her while operating or observing.  I also volunteer at the visitor station, lead tours of the summit, and generally "reach out" to anyone who's interested.  I don't get any observing time on the 8-meter I operate, but I just got offered some time on a 2-meter and am going to work with my daughter, my nephew and my neighbors' kids to come up with a project.</p><p>These are 8-14 year olds, so they can probably weigh in on whether we should look at asteroids, kuiper belt objects, supernovae, black holes, or whatever.  But I started in the field when my daughter was 5, and even though the first few years she was mostly just wanting to look at stuff in the sky, and not caring so much about what it actually was, she's grown up knowing that her dad gets to do really cool stuff, instead of just sitting in a cubicle.  Probably also doesn't hurt that she has autographed photos of a couple NASA astronauts she's met.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>There are a lot of science outreach activities in our town, like <a href="http://www.astroday.net/" title="astroday.net">AstroDay</a> [astroday.net] and Onizuka Science Day and robotics competitions and all that... plus public talks, the world's first 3-D planetarium, and... okay, okay, the whole farkin' island is one giant playground for any kid (or adult) who's into natural sciences at all.</p><p>Find your local science museums or science centers or observatories or planetaria or whatever, find out who handles the local robotics competition, etc.  Plenty of unknown heroes out there.</p><p>Oh, one word of advice, though: don't expect the kids to go for <i>your</i> favorite science.  I may be an astro-geek, and her mom's a social scientist, but my daughter tends more toward chemistry.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are a lot of people who work in science education and public outreach .
Staff at museums and planetaria , for example .
Outreach people from research facilities ( here on Mauna Kea , just about every observatory has official outreach people ) .
And people who just think what they do is so fun and cool they want to share it with people.I 'm fortunate enough to work in astronomy , and I love bringing my daughter up to the visitor station for stargazing or hiking , or video-chatting with her while operating or observing .
I also volunteer at the visitor station , lead tours of the summit , and generally " reach out " to anyone who 's interested .
I do n't get any observing time on the 8-meter I operate , but I just got offered some time on a 2-meter and am going to work with my daughter , my nephew and my neighbors ' kids to come up with a project.These are 8-14 year olds , so they can probably weigh in on whether we should look at asteroids , kuiper belt objects , supernovae , black holes , or whatever .
But I started in the field when my daughter was 5 , and even though the first few years she was mostly just wanting to look at stuff in the sky , and not caring so much about what it actually was , she 's grown up knowing that her dad gets to do really cool stuff , instead of just sitting in a cubicle .
Probably also does n't hurt that she has autographed photos of a couple NASA astronauts she 's met .
: ) There are a lot of science outreach activities in our town , like AstroDay [ astroday.net ] and Onizuka Science Day and robotics competitions and all that... plus public talks , the world 's first 3-D planetarium , and... okay , okay , the whole farkin ' island is one giant playground for any kid ( or adult ) who 's into natural sciences at all.Find your local science museums or science centers or observatories or planetaria or whatever , find out who handles the local robotics competition , etc .
Plenty of unknown heroes out there.Oh , one word of advice , though : do n't expect the kids to go for your favorite science .
I may be an astro-geek , and her mom 's a social scientist , but my daughter tends more toward chemistry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are a lot of people who work in science education and public outreach.
Staff at museums and planetaria, for example.
Outreach people from research facilities (here on Mauna Kea, just about every observatory has official outreach people).
And people who just think what they do is so fun and cool they want to share it with people.I'm fortunate enough to work in astronomy, and I love bringing my daughter up to the visitor station for stargazing or hiking, or video-chatting with her while operating or observing.
I also volunteer at the visitor station, lead tours of the summit, and generally "reach out" to anyone who's interested.
I don't get any observing time on the 8-meter I operate, but I just got offered some time on a 2-meter and am going to work with my daughter, my nephew and my neighbors' kids to come up with a project.These are 8-14 year olds, so they can probably weigh in on whether we should look at asteroids, kuiper belt objects, supernovae, black holes, or whatever.
But I started in the field when my daughter was 5, and even though the first few years she was mostly just wanting to look at stuff in the sky, and not caring so much about what it actually was, she's grown up knowing that her dad gets to do really cool stuff, instead of just sitting in a cubicle.
Probably also doesn't hurt that she has autographed photos of a couple NASA astronauts she's met.
:)There are a lot of science outreach activities in our town, like AstroDay [astroday.net] and Onizuka Science Day and robotics competitions and all that... plus public talks, the world's first 3-D planetarium, and... okay, okay, the whole farkin' island is one giant playground for any kid (or adult) who's into natural sciences at all.Find your local science museums or science centers or observatories or planetaria or whatever, find out who handles the local robotics competition, etc.
Plenty of unknown heroes out there.Oh, one word of advice, though: don't expect the kids to go for your favorite science.
I may be an astro-geek, and her mom's a social scientist, but my daughter tends more toward chemistry.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28700763</id>
	<title>gap-filling fools</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247601540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's childish to fill in the gap left by science with stupid stories (God). I don't know why we're here, whether we have an inmortal soul, etc, and I DON'T NEED TO! Living with that conceptual vaccuum and not being worried really differentiates mature persons from 40 year old kids.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's childish to fill in the gap left by science with stupid stories ( God ) .
I do n't know why we 're here , whether we have an inmortal soul , etc , and I DO N'T NEED TO !
Living with that conceptual vaccuum and not being worried really differentiates mature persons from 40 year old kids .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's childish to fill in the gap left by science with stupid stories (God).
I don't know why we're here, whether we have an inmortal soul, etc, and I DON'T NEED TO!
Living with that conceptual vaccuum and not being worried really differentiates mature persons from 40 year old kids.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687595</id>
	<title>Can't believe...</title>
	<author>Anenome</author>
	<datestamp>1247604240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can't believe no one has mentioned Ray Kurzweil. He and Vernor Vinge are the proponents of the Technological Singularity, perhaps the most technologically important upcoming development that mankind will ever witness--and forever be changed by.</p><p>You think the development of the microchip or the cellphone changed people's lives, what happens when we begin integrating both into our brains. The Singularity is the true beginning of the next stage of evolution.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't believe no one has mentioned Ray Kurzweil .
He and Vernor Vinge are the proponents of the Technological Singularity , perhaps the most technologically important upcoming development that mankind will ever witness--and forever be changed by.You think the development of the microchip or the cellphone changed people 's lives , what happens when we begin integrating both into our brains .
The Singularity is the true beginning of the next stage of evolution .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't believe no one has mentioned Ray Kurzweil.
He and Vernor Vinge are the proponents of the Technological Singularity, perhaps the most technologically important upcoming development that mankind will ever witness--and forever be changed by.You think the development of the microchip or the cellphone changed people's lives, what happens when we begin integrating both into our brains.
The Singularity is the true beginning of the next stage of evolution.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686137</id>
	<title>Subscribe to a decent magazine</title>
	<author>SplashMyBandit</author>
	<datestamp>1247502840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How about encouraging them through a subscription to a non-pulp magazine when they're a bit older. Having something like Popular Science or National Geographic lying around they're bound to dip in and read from time to time. It certainly got me more interested in a whole bunch of things (not only science, history and other cultures too) and might get them interested by osmosis - without shoving it at them so they eventually reject it.

Meanwhile, how about you do cool stuff with them, encourage questions and explain as best you can (plenty of parents can be inadvertantly dismissive when tired). Don't discourage tales of legend and magic, but it turns out that you can get quite a few stories out of history and science itself. They probably won't end up as scientists, but that's ok too as long as they're happy and fulfilled in other ways.</htmltext>
<tokenext>How about encouraging them through a subscription to a non-pulp magazine when they 're a bit older .
Having something like Popular Science or National Geographic lying around they 're bound to dip in and read from time to time .
It certainly got me more interested in a whole bunch of things ( not only science , history and other cultures too ) and might get them interested by osmosis - without shoving it at them so they eventually reject it .
Meanwhile , how about you do cool stuff with them , encourage questions and explain as best you can ( plenty of parents can be inadvertantly dismissive when tired ) .
Do n't discourage tales of legend and magic , but it turns out that you can get quite a few stories out of history and science itself .
They probably wo n't end up as scientists , but that 's ok too as long as they 're happy and fulfilled in other ways .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about encouraging them through a subscription to a non-pulp magazine when they're a bit older.
Having something like Popular Science or National Geographic lying around they're bound to dip in and read from time to time.
It certainly got me more interested in a whole bunch of things (not only science, history and other cultures too) and might get them interested by osmosis - without shoving it at them so they eventually reject it.
Meanwhile, how about you do cool stuff with them, encourage questions and explain as best you can (plenty of parents can be inadvertantly dismissive when tired).
Don't discourage tales of legend and magic, but it turns out that you can get quite a few stories out of history and science itself.
They probably won't end up as scientists, but that's ok too as long as they're happy and fulfilled in other ways.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686703</id>
	<title>Keep reading...</title>
	<author>postermmxvicom</author>
	<datestamp>1247507400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> <b>Currently</b>, my wife and I can get the kids excited about the world around them, but I'd like to find someone inspiring from outside the family as they <b>get older.</b></p> </div><p>

Quote from the summary. Emphasis mine.<br> <br>

See, I know you read more than the headline, because you quote the ages 5 and 2. But if you had gone just one more sentence in, you would have found out he's okay with now - he is in fact talking about "years" from now.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Currently , my wife and I can get the kids excited about the world around them , but I 'd like to find someone inspiring from outside the family as they get older .
Quote from the summary .
Emphasis mine .
See , I know you read more than the headline , because you quote the ages 5 and 2 .
But if you had gone just one more sentence in , you would have found out he 's okay with now - he is in fact talking about " years " from now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Currently, my wife and I can get the kids excited about the world around them, but I'd like to find someone inspiring from outside the family as they get older.
Quote from the summary.
Emphasis mine.
See, I know you read more than the headline, because you quote the ages 5 and 2.
But if you had gone just one more sentence in, you would have found out he's okay with now - he is in fact talking about "years" from now.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685589</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28688635</id>
	<title>My two cents</title>
	<author>hyenadude</author>
	<datestamp>1247573100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>For me personally my science heroes were (in some sort of order of importance in supporting my nerdly science interest):
1:  My parents who didnt have the answers to my questions but took me to a local library to find them myself
2:  An uncle who taught Applied Physics while I was a kid (now a school administrator) and was always showing me cool stuff and getting me geeky gifts for the holidays/birthdays
3:  A few good teachers.  A middle school teacher who gave me a college geology text after I asked too many questions about plate techtonics and a few others who kept the interest alive and made it fun
4:  Bill Nye.  Say what you will about him when I was a preteen/teen he was making science cool and fun.  Mr Wizard was cool but being from the cable tv Mtv generation Bill was the bomb

Now I still enjoy Bill Nye when I see it on PBS.  A little dated but good.  There was also Beakmans World but it was a little odd.  The OPs kids sound a little young for it but "The Universe" on the history channel is always interesting</htmltext>
<tokenext>For me personally my science heroes were ( in some sort of order of importance in supporting my nerdly science interest ) : 1 : My parents who didnt have the answers to my questions but took me to a local library to find them myself 2 : An uncle who taught Applied Physics while I was a kid ( now a school administrator ) and was always showing me cool stuff and getting me geeky gifts for the holidays/birthdays 3 : A few good teachers .
A middle school teacher who gave me a college geology text after I asked too many questions about plate techtonics and a few others who kept the interest alive and made it fun 4 : Bill Nye .
Say what you will about him when I was a preteen/teen he was making science cool and fun .
Mr Wizard was cool but being from the cable tv Mtv generation Bill was the bomb Now I still enjoy Bill Nye when I see it on PBS .
A little dated but good .
There was also Beakmans World but it was a little odd .
The OPs kids sound a little young for it but " The Universe " on the history channel is always interesting</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For me personally my science heroes were (in some sort of order of importance in supporting my nerdly science interest):
1:  My parents who didnt have the answers to my questions but took me to a local library to find them myself
2:  An uncle who taught Applied Physics while I was a kid (now a school administrator) and was always showing me cool stuff and getting me geeky gifts for the holidays/birthdays
3:  A few good teachers.
A middle school teacher who gave me a college geology text after I asked too many questions about plate techtonics and a few others who kept the interest alive and made it fun
4:  Bill Nye.
Say what you will about him when I was a preteen/teen he was making science cool and fun.
Mr Wizard was cool but being from the cable tv Mtv generation Bill was the bomb

Now I still enjoy Bill Nye when I see it on PBS.
A little dated but good.
There was also Beakmans World but it was a little odd.
The OPs kids sound a little young for it but "The Universe" on the history channel is always interesting</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28690107</id>
	<title>The surprising answer is: Steven Colbert</title>
	<author>T.E.D.</author>
	<datestamp>1247582160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just noticed this a couple of days ago, but Steven Colbert does an <em>amazing</em> amount of science reporting on his show. I stumbled across a science reporter's blog that showed guest shots from his show, and the number of them he has had on is just incredible. He's done multiple reports on Eagle conservation and multiple interviews of astronauts <em>in orbit</em>. The guest with the most visits of anyone else isn't a politician, pundit, or reporter. It is Neil deGrasse Tyson.

</p><p>He's probably singlehandedly responsible for more than half the hits on Wikipedia's elephant page.

</p><p>Oh, and let's not forget his continuing coverage of the great Bear menace.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just noticed this a couple of days ago , but Steven Colbert does an amazing amount of science reporting on his show .
I stumbled across a science reporter 's blog that showed guest shots from his show , and the number of them he has had on is just incredible .
He 's done multiple reports on Eagle conservation and multiple interviews of astronauts in orbit .
The guest with the most visits of anyone else is n't a politician , pundit , or reporter .
It is Neil deGrasse Tyson .
He 's probably singlehandedly responsible for more than half the hits on Wikipedia 's elephant page .
Oh , and let 's not forget his continuing coverage of the great Bear menace .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just noticed this a couple of days ago, but Steven Colbert does an amazing amount of science reporting on his show.
I stumbled across a science reporter's blog that showed guest shots from his show, and the number of them he has had on is just incredible.
He's done multiple reports on Eagle conservation and multiple interviews of astronauts in orbit.
The guest with the most visits of anyone else isn't a politician, pundit, or reporter.
It is Neil deGrasse Tyson.
He's probably singlehandedly responsible for more than half the hits on Wikipedia's elephant page.
Oh, and let's not forget his continuing coverage of the great Bear menace.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686123</id>
	<title>Good luck with that</title>
	<author>Gothmolly</author>
	<datestamp>1247502720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Today's kids are being taught that feelings are more important than logic, that 'social justice' is more important than the actual kind, that there's no difference between winning and losing, and that causality is just a conceit of the rich.  They'll grow up and become government housing administrators, or city employees, or socialized/unionized construction workers.  They'll grow up with a hatred of science, of objectivity, and of individuality, it will all be replaced by compassion, empathy and team spirit.</p><p>Sorry for your loss.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Today 's kids are being taught that feelings are more important than logic , that 'social justice ' is more important than the actual kind , that there 's no difference between winning and losing , and that causality is just a conceit of the rich .
They 'll grow up and become government housing administrators , or city employees , or socialized/unionized construction workers .
They 'll grow up with a hatred of science , of objectivity , and of individuality , it will all be replaced by compassion , empathy and team spirit.Sorry for your loss .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Today's kids are being taught that feelings are more important than logic, that 'social justice' is more important than the actual kind, that there's no difference between winning and losing, and that causality is just a conceit of the rich.
They'll grow up and become government housing administrators, or city employees, or socialized/unionized construction workers.
They'll grow up with a hatred of science, of objectivity, and of individuality, it will all be replaced by compassion, empathy and team spirit.Sorry for your loss.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685895</id>
	<title>how about Michio Kaku</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247500980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A good physicist and excellent TV personality.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A good physicist and excellent TV personality .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A good physicist and excellent TV personality.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685427</id>
	<title>Meteorologists</title>
	<author>perlhacker14</author>
	<datestamp>1247497800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>With all this buzz about climate change being thrown about, you can't go wrong there.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)<br>Besides, they tend to visit schools, and have a high level of visibility and impact.</p><p>On a serious note, Stephing Hawking and Carl Sagan are still around, right? So why do you need new heroes?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>With all this buzz about climate change being thrown about , you ca n't go wrong there .
; ) Besides , they tend to visit schools , and have a high level of visibility and impact.On a serious note , Stephing Hawking and Carl Sagan are still around , right ?
So why do you need new heroes ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With all this buzz about climate change being thrown about, you can't go wrong there.
;)Besides, they tend to visit schools, and have a high level of visibility and impact.On a serious note, Stephing Hawking and Carl Sagan are still around, right?
So why do you need new heroes?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685881</id>
	<title>Re:BILL BILL BILL</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247500860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;Bill Nye.</p><p>To which I reply:  Dude.  Beakman from \_Beakman's World\_.  He's the Ferris Bueller to Bill Nye's Parker Lewis.  Actually, I'm kind of undermining my own argument there, since Parker Lewis was a thousand times better than the the \_TV\_ version of Ferris Bueller.</p><p>Okay, so my new argument is that Beakman is the movie \_Ferris Bueller's Day Off\_ to Bill Nye's \_Ferris Bueller\_ the TV show.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Bill Nye.To which I reply : Dude .
Beakman from \ _Beakman 's World \ _ .
He 's the Ferris Bueller to Bill Nye 's Parker Lewis .
Actually , I 'm kind of undermining my own argument there , since Parker Lewis was a thousand times better than the the \ _TV \ _ version of Ferris Bueller.Okay , so my new argument is that Beakman is the movie \ _Ferris Bueller 's Day Off \ _ to Bill Nye 's \ _Ferris Bueller \ _ the TV show .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;Bill Nye.To which I reply:  Dude.
Beakman from \_Beakman's World\_.
He's the Ferris Bueller to Bill Nye's Parker Lewis.
Actually, I'm kind of undermining my own argument there, since Parker Lewis was a thousand times better than the the \_TV\_ version of Ferris Bueller.Okay, so my new argument is that Beakman is the movie \_Ferris Bueller's Day Off\_ to Bill Nye's \_Ferris Bueller\_ the TV show.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685455</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685973</id>
	<title>In Australia...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247501580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dr. Karl is the man (http://www.abc.net.au/science/drkarl/). Entertaining and informative.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dr. Karl is the man ( http : //www.abc.net.au/science/drkarl/ ) .
Entertaining and informative .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dr. Karl is the man (http://www.abc.net.au/science/drkarl/).
Entertaining and informative.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685589</id>
	<title>5 and 2 years old?</title>
	<author>Clover\_Kicker</author>
	<datestamp>1247499000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How about Elmo and Curious George?</p><p>You've got years before they give a rat's ass about Cosmos or David Attenborough wildlife documentaries. It's OK, they're little kids.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about Elmo and Curious George ? You 've got years before they give a rat 's ass about Cosmos or David Attenborough wildlife documentaries .
It 's OK , they 're little kids .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about Elmo and Curious George?You've got years before they give a rat's ass about Cosmos or David Attenborough wildlife documentaries.
It's OK, they're little kids.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28688489</id>
	<title>Dr Alice Roberts &amp; Dr Ian Stewart,</title>
	<author>simoncrute</author>
	<datestamp>1247571420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can think of two scientists who have done some great TV work recently.</p><p>Dr Alice Roberts, presenter of BBC's The Incredible Human Journey http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00klf6j</p><p>and Dr Iain Stewart, presenter of the BBC's The Power of the Planet http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/earthpoweroftheplanet/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I can think of two scientists who have done some great TV work recently.Dr Alice Roberts , presenter of BBC 's The Incredible Human Journey http : //www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00klf6jand Dr Iain Stewart , presenter of the BBC 's The Power of the Planet http : //www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/earthpoweroftheplanet/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can think of two scientists who have done some great TV work recently.Dr Alice Roberts, presenter of BBC's The Incredible Human Journey http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00klf6jand Dr Iain Stewart, presenter of the BBC's The Power of the Planet http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/earthpoweroftheplanet/</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28700783</id>
	<title>Re:Tyson BBC Plantes</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247688360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>geeze mention dawkins and religion and everything gets off track!</p><p>BBC planets works for me. Perfect inspiration for young students.<br>Though its a bit old already, just follow up with a visit to the JPL website for updates after each episode.<br>Its not as far out as Cosmos was; seing stuff about hinduism and debunks of superstition really<br>shook me up in grade school. BBC Planets just feels more focused and the music is spot on.<br>The graphics may eventually get stale, but the music narration and tone will keep it valid for a long time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>geeze mention dawkins and religion and everything gets off track ! BBC planets works for me .
Perfect inspiration for young students.Though its a bit old already , just follow up with a visit to the JPL website for updates after each episode.Its not as far out as Cosmos was ; seing stuff about hinduism and debunks of superstition reallyshook me up in grade school .
BBC Planets just feels more focused and the music is spot on.The graphics may eventually get stale , but the music narration and tone will keep it valid for a long time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>geeze mention dawkins and religion and everything gets off track!BBC planets works for me.
Perfect inspiration for young students.Though its a bit old already, just follow up with a visit to the JPL website for updates after each episode.Its not as far out as Cosmos was; seing stuff about hinduism and debunks of superstition reallyshook me up in grade school.
BBC Planets just feels more focused and the music is spot on.The graphics may eventually get stale, but the music narration and tone will keep it valid for a long time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687701</id>
	<title>Re:LOL Carl Sagan....scientist? not</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247562360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>While it is perfectly acceptable to use God to fill the holes in knowledge for the time being</i> <br>
<br>
is it?<br>
<br>
At some point I think we can safely say science and logical reasoning has given humankind enough answers to enough questions that we can safely assume that a god wasn't involved.<br>
<br>
Gods have always been in the holes of our knowledge thus far, yes, but they've only been there: in the holes of our knowledge.  In our knowledge we find no gods.  People do not look in any microscope or telescope and observe "the part where God works".  Physics equations don't include a god variable.<br>
<br>
Furthermore, it's safe to say that in almost any situation where people have had the technology, opportunity, and determination to gather sufficient data, we have been able to explain most any given phenomena.<br>
<br>
I agree with your post save for the above statement.  Unfalsifiable ideas have no place in a person's notion of "reality".  If it's something one still insists on personally believing, keep it that way: personal.  No one else should be negatively affected by one's inability to view reality as we best know it.  Children should NOT be taught the personal digressions from common sense their parents are afflicted with.  Places of worship do not deserve tax breaks.  Silly iron-age reasoning has no business impeding research that could very well save one of our lives.<br>
<br>
I realize this is a hopeless argument (we're talking about people that have the ability to explicitly ignore reason here...), and that this question is essentially rhetorical, but exactly how much shit does science need to figure out before religious people realize that filling gaps of knowledge with the supernatural is getting them nowhere?  What's so wrong about answering questions with "we don't know yet"?  Why can't gaps of knowledge be just that?</htmltext>
<tokenext>While it is perfectly acceptable to use God to fill the holes in knowledge for the time being is it ?
At some point I think we can safely say science and logical reasoning has given humankind enough answers to enough questions that we can safely assume that a god was n't involved .
Gods have always been in the holes of our knowledge thus far , yes , but they 've only been there : in the holes of our knowledge .
In our knowledge we find no gods .
People do not look in any microscope or telescope and observe " the part where God works " .
Physics equations do n't include a god variable .
Furthermore , it 's safe to say that in almost any situation where people have had the technology , opportunity , and determination to gather sufficient data , we have been able to explain most any given phenomena .
I agree with your post save for the above statement .
Unfalsifiable ideas have no place in a person 's notion of " reality " .
If it 's something one still insists on personally believing , keep it that way : personal .
No one else should be negatively affected by one 's inability to view reality as we best know it .
Children should NOT be taught the personal digressions from common sense their parents are afflicted with .
Places of worship do not deserve tax breaks .
Silly iron-age reasoning has no business impeding research that could very well save one of our lives .
I realize this is a hopeless argument ( we 're talking about people that have the ability to explicitly ignore reason here... ) , and that this question is essentially rhetorical , but exactly how much shit does science need to figure out before religious people realize that filling gaps of knowledge with the supernatural is getting them nowhere ?
What 's so wrong about answering questions with " we do n't know yet " ?
Why ca n't gaps of knowledge be just that ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While it is perfectly acceptable to use God to fill the holes in knowledge for the time being 

is it?
At some point I think we can safely say science and logical reasoning has given humankind enough answers to enough questions that we can safely assume that a god wasn't involved.
Gods have always been in the holes of our knowledge thus far, yes, but they've only been there: in the holes of our knowledge.
In our knowledge we find no gods.
People do not look in any microscope or telescope and observe "the part where God works".
Physics equations don't include a god variable.
Furthermore, it's safe to say that in almost any situation where people have had the technology, opportunity, and determination to gather sufficient data, we have been able to explain most any given phenomena.
I agree with your post save for the above statement.
Unfalsifiable ideas have no place in a person's notion of "reality".
If it's something one still insists on personally believing, keep it that way: personal.
No one else should be negatively affected by one's inability to view reality as we best know it.
Children should NOT be taught the personal digressions from common sense their parents are afflicted with.
Places of worship do not deserve tax breaks.
Silly iron-age reasoning has no business impeding research that could very well save one of our lives.
I realize this is a hopeless argument (we're talking about people that have the ability to explicitly ignore reason here...), and that this question is essentially rhetorical, but exactly how much shit does science need to figure out before religious people realize that filling gaps of knowledge with the supernatural is getting them nowhere?
What's so wrong about answering questions with "we don't know yet"?
Why can't gaps of knowledge be just that?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685709</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687161</id>
	<title>why would you want them interested in science?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247513040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was interested in science for most of my youth, entered into computer engineering in university and after spending 5 years in the field, couldn't get out of it fast enough.  Did an MBA and switched into finance, and now, even in the midst of this economic downturn, am making more 4x what I did as an engineer, and without the threat of being outsourced too.  In retrospect, I wish I was more interested in humanities in high school, and gotten into my current career path earlier instead of wasting 5 years.</p><p>I am still interested in science and technology, but only as a hobby.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was interested in science for most of my youth , entered into computer engineering in university and after spending 5 years in the field , could n't get out of it fast enough .
Did an MBA and switched into finance , and now , even in the midst of this economic downturn , am making more 4x what I did as an engineer , and without the threat of being outsourced too .
In retrospect , I wish I was more interested in humanities in high school , and gotten into my current career path earlier instead of wasting 5 years.I am still interested in science and technology , but only as a hobby .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was interested in science for most of my youth, entered into computer engineering in university and after spending 5 years in the field, couldn't get out of it fast enough.
Did an MBA and switched into finance, and now, even in the midst of this economic downturn, am making more 4x what I did as an engineer, and without the threat of being outsourced too.
In retrospect, I wish I was more interested in humanities in high school, and gotten into my current career path earlier instead of wasting 5 years.I am still interested in science and technology, but only as a hobby.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686461</id>
	<title>Daily Planet, Quirks and Quarks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247505300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Jay Ingram of Daily Planet on Discovery.ca, and Bob McDonald or Quirks and Quarks, a CBC radio show. Both great, don't talk down to you too much. Daily Planet has gone downhill; used to be really sciency, now it it is more like Scientific American- they have to make it palatable to the kids.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Jay Ingram of Daily Planet on Discovery.ca , and Bob McDonald or Quirks and Quarks , a CBC radio show .
Both great , do n't talk down to you too much .
Daily Planet has gone downhill ; used to be really sciency , now it it is more like Scientific American- they have to make it palatable to the kids .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Jay Ingram of Daily Planet on Discovery.ca, and Bob McDonald or Quirks and Quarks, a CBC radio show.
Both great, don't talk down to you too much.
Daily Planet has gone downhill; used to be really sciency, now it it is more like Scientific American- they have to make it palatable to the kids.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685749</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687795</id>
	<title>Re:Al Gore</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247563500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or better, a real climate scientist.</p><p><a href="http://www.withouthotair.com/" title="withouthotair.com" rel="nofollow">David MacKay</a> [withouthotair.com] is a former <a href="http://www.inference.phy.cam.ac.uk/mackay/itila/" title="cam.ac.uk" rel="nofollow">Information Theorist</a> [cam.ac.uk]. A few years ago, he started thinking in earnest about the world's energy problem, and produced the amazing book behind my first link. He's a great example of a smart, integre, generalist scientist who does whatever he thinks needs to be done, even if it has nothing to do with "his field". He is a great public speaker, and a lucid thinker.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or better , a real climate scientist.David MacKay [ withouthotair.com ] is a former Information Theorist [ cam.ac.uk ] .
A few years ago , he started thinking in earnest about the world 's energy problem , and produced the amazing book behind my first link .
He 's a great example of a smart , integre , generalist scientist who does whatever he thinks needs to be done , even if it has nothing to do with " his field " .
He is a great public speaker , and a lucid thinker .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or better, a real climate scientist.David MacKay [withouthotair.com] is a former Information Theorist [cam.ac.uk].
A few years ago, he started thinking in earnest about the world's energy problem, and produced the amazing book behind my first link.
He's a great example of a smart, integre, generalist scientist who does whatever he thinks needs to be done, even if it has nothing to do with "his field".
He is a great public speaker, and a lucid thinker.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685525</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685491</id>
	<title>Re:Mythbusters does it</title>
	<author>Weedhopper</author>
	<datestamp>1247498280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It still generates interest and gets kids thinking so Mythbusters gets a thumbs up from me but let's not pretend like they're rigorous.  I wish they'd do more end of the show disclaimers ; things they did right/wrong, etc.  Science isn't science if you're not considering all the faults and sources of error in your experiments.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It still generates interest and gets kids thinking so Mythbusters gets a thumbs up from me but let 's not pretend like they 're rigorous .
I wish they 'd do more end of the show disclaimers ; things they did right/wrong , etc .
Science is n't science if you 're not considering all the faults and sources of error in your experiments .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It still generates interest and gets kids thinking so Mythbusters gets a thumbs up from me but let's not pretend like they're rigorous.
I wish they'd do more end of the show disclaimers ; things they did right/wrong, etc.
Science isn't science if you're not considering all the faults and sources of error in your experiments.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685421</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685685</id>
	<title>Re:J. C. Venter</title>
	<author>Anonymous Crowhead</author>
	<datestamp>1247499720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Came here to say that.  A bit egotistical but still.  Check out "The Genome War".  It's fascinating.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Came here to say that .
A bit egotistical but still .
Check out " The Genome War " .
It 's fascinating .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Came here to say that.
A bit egotistical but still.
Check out "The Genome War".
It's fascinating.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685511</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686927</id>
	<title>Brian Greene</title>
	<author>zerkshop</author>
	<datestamp>1247509560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Whether you're down with String Theory or not...</p><p>-<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Fabric-Cosmos-Space-Texture-Reality/dp/0375727205/ref=sr\_1\_1?ie=UTF8&amp;s=books&amp;qid=1247548526&amp;sr=8-1" title="amazon.com" rel="nofollow">The Fabric of the Cosmos</a> [amazon.com]</p><p>-<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Elegant-Universe-Superstrings-Dimensions-Ultimate/dp/0393058581/ref=sr\_1\_3?ie=UTF8&amp;s=books&amp;qid=1247548526&amp;sr=8-3" title="amazon.com" rel="nofollow">The Elegant Universe</a> [amazon.com]</p><p>-<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Icarus-Edge-Time-Brian-Greene/dp/0307268888/ref=sr\_1\_2?ie=UTF8&amp;s=books&amp;qid=1247548526&amp;sr=8-2" title="amazon.com" rel="nofollow">Icarus at the Edge of Time</a> [amazon.com] (this would have tripped me out if read to me as a kid!)</p><p>Check out the NOVA documentaries for the Elegant Universe too</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Whether you 're down with String Theory or not...-The Fabric of the Cosmos [ amazon.com ] -The Elegant Universe [ amazon.com ] -Icarus at the Edge of Time [ amazon.com ] ( this would have tripped me out if read to me as a kid !
) Check out the NOVA documentaries for the Elegant Universe too</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whether you're down with String Theory or not...-The Fabric of the Cosmos [amazon.com]-The Elegant Universe [amazon.com]-Icarus at the Edge of Time [amazon.com] (this would have tripped me out if read to me as a kid!
)Check out the NOVA documentaries for the Elegant Universe too</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28703981</id>
	<title>Re:BILL BILL BILL</title>
	<author>Mr\_Stevo</author>
	<datestamp>1247675760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Bill Nye is still my hero. Every day after school I would watch his show then catch Newton's Apple. I also liked Bill's "In the eyes of Nye" show.
Oh, by the way, does anyone remember Beakman? What ever happened to THAT guy and his giant rat sidekick? He was REALLY cool! I still own a Beakman's World wrist watch that runs on potato slices.

There has to be a reason why you don't see too many of these shows anymore. I wonder if science and education shows are on their way out due to complete lack of interest or if there just isn't a way to present science in a way that is as exciting as Hannah Montana?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Bill Nye is still my hero .
Every day after school I would watch his show then catch Newton 's Apple .
I also liked Bill 's " In the eyes of Nye " show .
Oh , by the way , does anyone remember Beakman ?
What ever happened to THAT guy and his giant rat sidekick ?
He was REALLY cool !
I still own a Beakman 's World wrist watch that runs on potato slices .
There has to be a reason why you do n't see too many of these shows anymore .
I wonder if science and education shows are on their way out due to complete lack of interest or if there just is n't a way to present science in a way that is as exciting as Hannah Montana ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bill Nye is still my hero.
Every day after school I would watch his show then catch Newton's Apple.
I also liked Bill's "In the eyes of Nye" show.
Oh, by the way, does anyone remember Beakman?
What ever happened to THAT guy and his giant rat sidekick?
He was REALLY cool!
I still own a Beakman's World wrist watch that runs on potato slices.
There has to be a reason why you don't see too many of these shows anymore.
I wonder if science and education shows are on their way out due to complete lack of interest or if there just isn't a way to present science in a way that is as exciting as Hannah Montana?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685455</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685603</id>
	<title>Re:BILL BILL BILL</title>
	<author>nobdoor</author>
	<datestamp>1247499180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Bill Nye was too much of a straight up dweeb for me.  I preferred Beakman's World.  The huge rat and weird-girl made a good sidekick duo.

<br> 
<br> 
And dudes, don't forget Mr Wizzard!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Bill Nye was too much of a straight up dweeb for me .
I preferred Beakman 's World .
The huge rat and weird-girl made a good sidekick duo .
And dudes , do n't forget Mr Wizzard !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bill Nye was too much of a straight up dweeb for me.
I preferred Beakman's World.
The huge rat and weird-girl made a good sidekick duo.
And dudes, don't forget Mr Wizzard!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685455</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687541</id>
	<title>The other side of the fence</title>
	<author>prometx42</author>
	<datestamp>1247603640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>
 I have to second Michio Kaku for the stimulation of young minds, he's an astoundingly great communicator, quite funny and he "bottom-lines" things so well. Also, though, I think you should look into a few scientists who play the wider field, so to speak, of what is possible on the edges of mainstream science. I am speaking, in this case, about Russell Targ, also maybe Hal Putoff. These guys, although pretty rigorously qualified, tend to take a fairly broad view of reality and all of the wonderful things that the great "formalists" may be overlooking in some areas. Try not to inculcate youngsters too strongly in the status quo, I'm not advocating pseudo-science...necessarily<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;); but allow them to sense that not only is science fascinating, but that there may yet be great mysteries out there still waiting for them. Put an enormous juicy carrot on the end of the stick that is your hope for your children's science future...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have to second Michio Kaku for the stimulation of young minds , he 's an astoundingly great communicator , quite funny and he " bottom-lines " things so well .
Also , though , I think you should look into a few scientists who play the wider field , so to speak , of what is possible on the edges of mainstream science .
I am speaking , in this case , about Russell Targ , also maybe Hal Putoff .
These guys , although pretty rigorously qualified , tend to take a fairly broad view of reality and all of the wonderful things that the great " formalists " may be overlooking in some areas .
Try not to inculcate youngsters too strongly in the status quo , I 'm not advocating pseudo-science...necessarily ; ) ; but allow them to sense that not only is science fascinating , but that there may yet be great mysteries out there still waiting for them .
Put an enormous juicy carrot on the end of the stick that is your hope for your children 's science future.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
 I have to second Michio Kaku for the stimulation of young minds, he's an astoundingly great communicator, quite funny and he "bottom-lines" things so well.
Also, though, I think you should look into a few scientists who play the wider field, so to speak, of what is possible on the edges of mainstream science.
I am speaking, in this case, about Russell Targ, also maybe Hal Putoff.
These guys, although pretty rigorously qualified, tend to take a fairly broad view of reality and all of the wonderful things that the great "formalists" may be overlooking in some areas.
Try not to inculcate youngsters too strongly in the status quo, I'm not advocating pseudo-science...necessarily ;); but allow them to sense that not only is science fascinating, but that there may yet be great mysteries out there still waiting for them.
Put an enormous juicy carrot on the end of the stick that is your hope for your children's science future...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686347</id>
	<title>Neil DeGrasse Tyson FTW!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247504520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No really. Seriously. Just YouTube the guy. Check him out on The Colbert report. Look for his homage to Issac Newton. His passion for science is really infectious.</p><p>Brian Greene (the Prophet of String Theory) is also really good, but I don't think he's as compelling for younger folks as Neil.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No really .
Seriously. Just YouTube the guy .
Check him out on The Colbert report .
Look for his homage to Issac Newton .
His passion for science is really infectious.Brian Greene ( the Prophet of String Theory ) is also really good , but I do n't think he 's as compelling for younger folks as Neil .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No really.
Seriously. Just YouTube the guy.
Check him out on The Colbert report.
Look for his homage to Issac Newton.
His passion for science is really infectious.Brian Greene (the Prophet of String Theory) is also really good, but I don't think he's as compelling for younger folks as Neil.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685523</id>
	<title>Re:Meteorologists</title>
	<author>100\_Monkeys\_Typing</author>
	<datestamp>1247498580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sorta makes me sad that Carl Sagan isn't around anymore and apparently no one noticed.  Some pop star kicks the bucket and the world comes to a grinding halt.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorta makes me sad that Carl Sagan is n't around anymore and apparently no one noticed .
Some pop star kicks the bucket and the world comes to a grinding halt .
: (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorta makes me sad that Carl Sagan isn't around anymore and apparently no one noticed.
Some pop star kicks the bucket and the world comes to a grinding halt.
:(</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685427</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686401</id>
	<title>Re:Tyson</title>
	<author>skorch</author>
	<datestamp>1247504880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>What I like most about Neil DeGrasse Tyson is how he's so deeply passionate about science, the scientific process, and the very philosophy of inquiry into the nature of the universe. He is able to evangelize science, and bring that often overlooked but much needed emotion to the conversation about what could otherwise be very dry and boring subjects.<br> <br>

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Ai-VvboPnA" title="youtube.com">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Ai-VvboPnA</a> [youtube.com]
<br> <br>
Now if you can watch this and not be moved in some way, then I'm sorry, but it is my humble opinion that you are broken.
This passion is a quality that almost every good preacher, salesman, or spokesman knows and yet so many science teachers can't seem to figure out: You need to engage your audience passionately, and make them feel the importance of what you're saying, not simply explain it to them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What I like most about Neil DeGrasse Tyson is how he 's so deeply passionate about science , the scientific process , and the very philosophy of inquiry into the nature of the universe .
He is able to evangelize science , and bring that often overlooked but much needed emotion to the conversation about what could otherwise be very dry and boring subjects .
http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = 0Ai-VvboPnA [ youtube.com ] Now if you can watch this and not be moved in some way , then I 'm sorry , but it is my humble opinion that you are broken .
This passion is a quality that almost every good preacher , salesman , or spokesman knows and yet so many science teachers ca n't seem to figure out : You need to engage your audience passionately , and make them feel the importance of what you 're saying , not simply explain it to them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What I like most about Neil DeGrasse Tyson is how he's so deeply passionate about science, the scientific process, and the very philosophy of inquiry into the nature of the universe.
He is able to evangelize science, and bring that often overlooked but much needed emotion to the conversation about what could otherwise be very dry and boring subjects.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Ai-VvboPnA [youtube.com]
 
Now if you can watch this and not be moved in some way, then I'm sorry, but it is my humble opinion that you are broken.
This passion is a quality that almost every good preacher, salesman, or spokesman knows and yet so many science teachers can't seem to figure out: You need to engage your audience passionately, and make them feel the importance of what you're saying, not simply explain it to them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28691685</id>
	<title>For kids, here are some recomendations</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1247589180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Fetch! with Ruff Ruffman. I Highly recommend this show.<br>Bill Nye<br>The Magic school bus - Both the show and the books.</p><p>Be wearing of religious texts masking as science texts.<br>I've thrown more then one book doing hand waving to explain the dinosaurs.</p><p>Of course, all this pales next to just doing fun science with your kids.<br>Neat things like raising butterflies, growing plants, and always asking them why they think something happens, then test it in some manner.</p><p>Turn no the sprinklers on a sunny day and look at the rainbows. Teh creat one with a prism.</p><p>There young, you don't need to go into detail. Just teach them the wonder and excitement of finding stuff out. That is the core to a science education and critical thinking.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Fetch !
with Ruff Ruffman .
I Highly recommend this show.Bill NyeThe Magic school bus - Both the show and the books.Be wearing of religious texts masking as science texts.I 've thrown more then one book doing hand waving to explain the dinosaurs.Of course , all this pales next to just doing fun science with your kids.Neat things like raising butterflies , growing plants , and always asking them why they think something happens , then test it in some manner.Turn no the sprinklers on a sunny day and look at the rainbows .
Teh creat one with a prism.There young , you do n't need to go into detail .
Just teach them the wonder and excitement of finding stuff out .
That is the core to a science education and critical thinking .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fetch!
with Ruff Ruffman.
I Highly recommend this show.Bill NyeThe Magic school bus - Both the show and the books.Be wearing of religious texts masking as science texts.I've thrown more then one book doing hand waving to explain the dinosaurs.Of course, all this pales next to just doing fun science with your kids.Neat things like raising butterflies, growing plants, and always asking them why they think something happens, then test it in some manner.Turn no the sprinklers on a sunny day and look at the rainbows.
Teh creat one with a prism.There young, you don't need to go into detail.
Just teach them the wonder and excitement of finding stuff out.
That is the core to a science education and critical thinking.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28692155</id>
	<title>Re:Burke</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247591160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or Youtube to see all the episodes<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>http://www.youtube.com/user/JamesBurkeWeb</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or Youtube to see all the episodes : ) http : //www.youtube.com/user/JamesBurkeWeb</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or Youtube to see all the episodes :)http://www.youtube.com/user/JamesBurkeWeb</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687081</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685921</id>
	<title>Re:5 and 2 years old?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247501220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not necessarily true. I've got a 7 and a 4yo. My wife and I were in the exact same situation as the OP a few years ago and did the best we could with random sources, family science experiments, youtube videos, and so on, and it's amazing how certain things stay with them. It's probably a mistake to expect the kids to be able to take a test after each session, but over the weeks, months, and years, it's surprising how often ours have asked follow-up questions or have have asked if something they have experienced is related to something we talked about in the past.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not necessarily true .
I 've got a 7 and a 4yo .
My wife and I were in the exact same situation as the OP a few years ago and did the best we could with random sources , family science experiments , youtube videos , and so on , and it 's amazing how certain things stay with them .
It 's probably a mistake to expect the kids to be able to take a test after each session , but over the weeks , months , and years , it 's surprising how often ours have asked follow-up questions or have have asked if something they have experienced is related to something we talked about in the past .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not necessarily true.
I've got a 7 and a 4yo.
My wife and I were in the exact same situation as the OP a few years ago and did the best we could with random sources, family science experiments, youtube videos, and so on, and it's amazing how certain things stay with them.
It's probably a mistake to expect the kids to be able to take a test after each session, but over the weeks, months, and years, it's surprising how often ours have asked follow-up questions or have have asked if something they have experienced is related to something we talked about in the past.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685589</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685455</id>
	<title>BILL BILL BILL</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247497980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Bill Nye.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Bill Nye .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bill Nye.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686503</id>
	<title>Martyn Poliakoff</title>
	<author>Bordgious</author>
	<datestamp>1247505720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>You don't get a more classic science look. And his stories are great.

<a href="http://periodicvideos.com/" title="periodicvideos.com" rel="nofollow">http://periodicvideos.com/</a> [periodicvideos.com]
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martyn\_Poliakoff" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martyn\_Poliakoff</a> [wikipedia.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>You do n't get a more classic science look .
And his stories are great .
http : //periodicvideos.com/ [ periodicvideos.com ] http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martyn \ _Poliakoff [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You don't get a more classic science look.
And his stories are great.
http://periodicvideos.com/ [periodicvideos.com]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martyn\_Poliakoff [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685647</id>
	<title>Re:Mythbusters does it</title>
	<author>joocemann</author>
	<datestamp>1247499480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>whine more...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>whine more.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>whine more...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685471</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686865</id>
	<title>Forrest M. Mims III</title>
	<author>ocularDeathRay</author>
	<datestamp>1247508780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>gotta go with Forrest M. Mims III. I know there are some people out there rolling there eyes because of his stance on intelligent design, but you are missing the point. This is the guy who wrote all the books about electronics radio shack used to sell. Those books are still available, although the price is a little higher now that the shack doesn't stock them. I just saw them at Fry's though, so I know they are readily available. I started reading those books and tinkering with electronics in the 4th grade. It gave me a lifelong love of electronics and science. I still rely on the stuff I learned from those books twenty years later. Check out his website. Whether or not you agree with his conclusions, his inventions and experiments are exactly the kind of stuff I would want my kids to do.</htmltext>
<tokenext>got ta go with Forrest M. Mims III .
I know there are some people out there rolling there eyes because of his stance on intelligent design , but you are missing the point .
This is the guy who wrote all the books about electronics radio shack used to sell .
Those books are still available , although the price is a little higher now that the shack does n't stock them .
I just saw them at Fry 's though , so I know they are readily available .
I started reading those books and tinkering with electronics in the 4th grade .
It gave me a lifelong love of electronics and science .
I still rely on the stuff I learned from those books twenty years later .
Check out his website .
Whether or not you agree with his conclusions , his inventions and experiments are exactly the kind of stuff I would want my kids to do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>gotta go with Forrest M. Mims III.
I know there are some people out there rolling there eyes because of his stance on intelligent design, but you are missing the point.
This is the guy who wrote all the books about electronics radio shack used to sell.
Those books are still available, although the price is a little higher now that the shack doesn't stock them.
I just saw them at Fry's though, so I know they are readily available.
I started reading those books and tinkering with electronics in the 4th grade.
It gave me a lifelong love of electronics and science.
I still rely on the stuff I learned from those books twenty years later.
Check out his website.
Whether or not you agree with his conclusions, his inventions and experiments are exactly the kind of stuff I would want my kids to do.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28688629</id>
	<title>Not so much 'tomorrow' but... Simon Singh!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247572980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Someone has to mention Simon Singh. So far I read and loved his book on cryptography and 'Big Bang'.</p><p>See http://www.simonsingh.net/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Someone has to mention Simon Singh .
So far I read and loved his book on cryptography and 'Big Bang'.See http : //www.simonsingh.net/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Someone has to mention Simon Singh.
So far I read and loved his book on cryptography and 'Big Bang'.See http://www.simonsingh.net/</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685557</id>
	<title>Re:Mythbusters does it</title>
	<author>TinBromide</author>
	<datestamp>1247498880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>At least they GET data rather than just basing their opinions what they're fed. Honestly, when was the last time you did a thorough scientific experiment in your personal life? I think that personal science involves questioning the status quo, not accepting everything at face value, and figuring out how to answer your questions. Simply because your methods wouldn't stand up to rigorous testing doesn't mean that you can't use it to make good decisions. Ultimately I think that is the role of science in peoples lives, to answer questions and aid in decisions. <br> <br>While I don't always agree with the mythbuster's methods, at least they don't sit around waiting for the talking heads to hand down the truth from on high. The scientific spirit of the program is strong if the flesh is sometimes weak. <br> <br>P.S. Relying entirely on mythbusters for your science is just as bad as blindly believing the news (New study! Polyester socks triple your risk factor for big left toe cuticle cancer (from<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.000000003\% to<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.000000009\%) so avoid cotton/poly blends like the plague! (they also make you fat and are linked to male pattern baldness!!!))<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/sarcasm</htmltext>
<tokenext>At least they GET data rather than just basing their opinions what they 're fed .
Honestly , when was the last time you did a thorough scientific experiment in your personal life ?
I think that personal science involves questioning the status quo , not accepting everything at face value , and figuring out how to answer your questions .
Simply because your methods would n't stand up to rigorous testing does n't mean that you ca n't use it to make good decisions .
Ultimately I think that is the role of science in peoples lives , to answer questions and aid in decisions .
While I do n't always agree with the mythbuster 's methods , at least they do n't sit around waiting for the talking heads to hand down the truth from on high .
The scientific spirit of the program is strong if the flesh is sometimes weak .
P.S. Relying entirely on mythbusters for your science is just as bad as blindly believing the news ( New study !
Polyester socks triple your risk factor for big left toe cuticle cancer ( from .000000003 \ % to .000000009 \ % ) so avoid cotton/poly blends like the plague !
( they also make you fat and are linked to male pattern baldness ! ! !
) ) /sarcasm</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At least they GET data rather than just basing their opinions what they're fed.
Honestly, when was the last time you did a thorough scientific experiment in your personal life?
I think that personal science involves questioning the status quo, not accepting everything at face value, and figuring out how to answer your questions.
Simply because your methods wouldn't stand up to rigorous testing doesn't mean that you can't use it to make good decisions.
Ultimately I think that is the role of science in peoples lives, to answer questions and aid in decisions.
While I don't always agree with the mythbuster's methods, at least they don't sit around waiting for the talking heads to hand down the truth from on high.
The scientific spirit of the program is strong if the flesh is sometimes weak.
P.S. Relying entirely on mythbusters for your science is just as bad as blindly believing the news (New study!
Polyester socks triple your risk factor for big left toe cuticle cancer (from .000000003\% to .000000009\%) so avoid cotton/poly blends like the plague!
(they also make you fat and are linked to male pattern baldness!!!
)) /sarcasm</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685471</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686751</id>
	<title>Filippenko</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247507700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For sure, Alex Filippenko</p><p>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexei\_Filippenko</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For sure , Alex Filippenkohttp : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexei \ _Filippenko</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For sure, Alex Filippenkohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexei\_Filippenko</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687675</id>
	<title>A writer like I. Asimov...</title>
	<author>JollyT</author>
	<datestamp>1247562060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I learned as much basic science and math from Dr. Asimov's essays as I did in secondary school. A truly great and prolific science writer.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I learned as much basic science and math from Dr. Asimov 's essays as I did in secondary school .
A truly great and prolific science writer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I learned as much basic science and math from Dr. Asimov's essays as I did in secondary school.
A truly great and prolific science writer.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687661</id>
	<title>Re:Mythbusters does it</title>
	<author>rantingkitten</author>
	<datestamp>1247605080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They aren't perfect.  But at least they go out and conduct experiments themselves to find out whether the hypothesis holds up instead of just blindly accepting they're told.
<br> <br>
 More importantly, they often <b>discuss</b> the results afterwards -- they admit the shortcomings in the experiment, and how that might have affected the results, and how it could have been done better.  On several occasions, the Mythbusters team has repeated experiments they did earlier, with better equipment and more accurate measurements, to see if they can reproduce the results.<br>
<br>
They may be doing it for the sake of drama but they are teaching important lessons of science:  You CAN find out on your own if you want.  Expect to have to refine your tests.  Be prepared to disclose the flaws in your tests.  SHOW YOUR WORK so anyone else can attempt the same experiment.   And, perhaps most importantly, be able to admit that you were wrong, or simply don't know.. yet.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They are n't perfect .
But at least they go out and conduct experiments themselves to find out whether the hypothesis holds up instead of just blindly accepting they 're told .
More importantly , they often discuss the results afterwards -- they admit the shortcomings in the experiment , and how that might have affected the results , and how it could have been done better .
On several occasions , the Mythbusters team has repeated experiments they did earlier , with better equipment and more accurate measurements , to see if they can reproduce the results .
They may be doing it for the sake of drama but they are teaching important lessons of science : You CAN find out on your own if you want .
Expect to have to refine your tests .
Be prepared to disclose the flaws in your tests .
SHOW YOUR WORK so anyone else can attempt the same experiment .
And , perhaps most importantly , be able to admit that you were wrong , or simply do n't know.. yet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They aren't perfect.
But at least they go out and conduct experiments themselves to find out whether the hypothesis holds up instead of just blindly accepting they're told.
More importantly, they often discuss the results afterwards -- they admit the shortcomings in the experiment, and how that might have affected the results, and how it could have been done better.
On several occasions, the Mythbusters team has repeated experiments they did earlier, with better equipment and more accurate measurements, to see if they can reproduce the results.
They may be doing it for the sake of drama but they are teaching important lessons of science:  You CAN find out on your own if you want.
Expect to have to refine your tests.
Be prepared to disclose the flaws in your tests.
SHOW YOUR WORK so anyone else can attempt the same experiment.
And, perhaps most importantly, be able to admit that you were wrong, or simply don't know.. yet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685471</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685819</id>
	<title>Re:Smirking Pluto Killer - Not My Favorite</title>
	<author>spire3661</author>
	<datestamp>1247500440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ignorance is bliss?  He was dead on about Pluto, people got all emotional about a LARGE HUNK OF ICE. Would you rather scientists just ignore stuff like that and play up to popular opinion? He was smirking because he knows how stupid the 'debate' is. I liked it even better when he kind of put what Branson does into perspective and how the two of them really arent relational in anyway. LEO is a joke compared to what Tyson thinks about in terms of space travel. Im not disparaging Sir Richard Branson or the work he does in ANY WAY, but it was a good perspective.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ignorance is bliss ?
He was dead on about Pluto , people got all emotional about a LARGE HUNK OF ICE .
Would you rather scientists just ignore stuff like that and play up to popular opinion ?
He was smirking because he knows how stupid the 'debate ' is .
I liked it even better when he kind of put what Branson does into perspective and how the two of them really arent relational in anyway .
LEO is a joke compared to what Tyson thinks about in terms of space travel .
Im not disparaging Sir Richard Branson or the work he does in ANY WAY , but it was a good perspective .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ignorance is bliss?
He was dead on about Pluto, people got all emotional about a LARGE HUNK OF ICE.
Would you rather scientists just ignore stuff like that and play up to popular opinion?
He was smirking because he knows how stupid the 'debate' is.
I liked it even better when he kind of put what Branson does into perspective and how the two of them really arent relational in anyway.
LEO is a joke compared to what Tyson thinks about in terms of space travel.
Im not disparaging Sir Richard Branson or the work he does in ANY WAY, but it was a good perspective.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685731</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28694059</id>
	<title>Re:Videos and books</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247598840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My daughter loves the videos at simplescience.net. For that matter, her younger brother asks for them too.</p><p>Each topic has a music video a la Schoolhouse Rock, accompanied by a short and entertaining explanatory video filling in the details.</p><p>The music is catchy and it's free (although I ended up sending away for the $10 DVD to free the kids from my laptop).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My daughter loves the videos at simplescience.net .
For that matter , her younger brother asks for them too.Each topic has a music video a la Schoolhouse Rock , accompanied by a short and entertaining explanatory video filling in the details.The music is catchy and it 's free ( although I ended up sending away for the $ 10 DVD to free the kids from my laptop ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My daughter loves the videos at simplescience.net.
For that matter, her younger brother asks for them too.Each topic has a music video a la Schoolhouse Rock, accompanied by a short and entertaining explanatory video filling in the details.The music is catchy and it's free (although I ended up sending away for the $10 DVD to free the kids from my laptop).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687713</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685791</id>
	<title>Steven Pinker</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247500200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think Steven Pinker is a very fun, intelligent person to learn about brain sciences and philosophy.  He has a great skill in conveying complex ideas in ways that would make Sagan proud.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think Steven Pinker is a very fun , intelligent person to learn about brain sciences and philosophy .
He has a great skill in conveying complex ideas in ways that would make Sagan proud .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think Steven Pinker is a very fun, intelligent person to learn about brain sciences and philosophy.
He has a great skill in conveying complex ideas in ways that would make Sagan proud.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28689581</id>
	<title>Re:Brian Cox</title>
	<author>Sausage Nibblets</author>
	<datestamp>1247579940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It seems to me that if you want people to like Brian Cox for his scientific merits, you probably shouldn't mention his science consulting for Sunshine.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems to me that if you want people to like Brian Cox for his scientific merits , you probably should n't mention his science consulting for Sunshine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems to me that if you want people to like Brian Cox for his scientific merits, you probably shouldn't mention his science consulting for Sunshine.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687449</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686637</id>
	<title>Montreal just had a science fair ...</title>
	<author>paulgrant</author>
	<datestamp>1247506920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>that rocked, tons of companies/engineers/scientists set up booths from companies and offered interactive science stuff (oriented for kids and adults).</p><p>I really really enjoyed the couple of hours I spent there - I would have spent alot more time on-site if I had known it was going on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P</p><p>Anyway, there was a pair of "scientists" who were putting on a show (basically mad scientists) old-school style, they had bunsen burners, hookah's, old-school acetylene oil-can torches, shrinkwrap and the like and they did a skit that had me \_rolling\_ in the aisles. And mind you I dont speak a word of french<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>Very talented fellows, I think they were hired by Merck (or work for them) - either actors or scientists who \_really\_ like getting kids excited about science.</p><p>My hats off the gents they did a fantastic job.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>that rocked , tons of companies/engineers/scientists set up booths from companies and offered interactive science stuff ( oriented for kids and adults ) .I really really enjoyed the couple of hours I spent there - I would have spent alot more time on-site if I had known it was going on : PAnyway , there was a pair of " scientists " who were putting on a show ( basically mad scientists ) old-school style , they had bunsen burners , hookah 's , old-school acetylene oil-can torches , shrinkwrap and the like and they did a skit that had me \ _rolling \ _ in the aisles .
And mind you I dont speak a word of french : P : ) Very talented fellows , I think they were hired by Merck ( or work for them ) - either actors or scientists who \ _really \ _ like getting kids excited about science.My hats off the gents they did a fantastic job .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that rocked, tons of companies/engineers/scientists set up booths from companies and offered interactive science stuff (oriented for kids and adults).I really really enjoyed the couple of hours I spent there - I would have spent alot more time on-site if I had known it was going on :PAnyway, there was a pair of "scientists" who were putting on a show (basically mad scientists) old-school style, they had bunsen burners, hookah's, old-school acetylene oil-can torches, shrinkwrap and the like and they did a skit that had me \_rolling\_ in the aisles.
And mind you I dont speak a word of french :P :)Very talented fellows, I think they were hired by Merck (or work for them) - either actors or scientists who \_really\_ like getting kids excited about science.My hats off the gents they did a fantastic job.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28688135</id>
	<title>Dodgy Bob</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247567100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sam Neil did a six-part series called "Space" that I rate alongside Sagan's "Cosmos". I went back and re-watched "Cosmos" and I have to say it was a tad disappointing, mostly in terms of special effects. It still holds a special place re getting me interested in science.</p><p>Beyond that, Dawkins is still good and early Douglas Hoffstadter (sp?) too, even though most of the music stuff goes way above my head.</p><p>And just to weigh in the the science/religion debate, I think religious people are weak-minded. Civilizations, like children, eventually need to learn what's right and wrong irrespective of their father figures. No siree, no pulling punches for me. Religion is a crock, well beyond its usefulness.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sam Neil did a six-part series called " Space " that I rate alongside Sagan 's " Cosmos " .
I went back and re-watched " Cosmos " and I have to say it was a tad disappointing , mostly in terms of special effects .
It still holds a special place re getting me interested in science.Beyond that , Dawkins is still good and early Douglas Hoffstadter ( sp ?
) too , even though most of the music stuff goes way above my head.And just to weigh in the the science/religion debate , I think religious people are weak-minded .
Civilizations , like children , eventually need to learn what 's right and wrong irrespective of their father figures .
No siree , no pulling punches for me .
Religion is a crock , well beyond its usefulness .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sam Neil did a six-part series called "Space" that I rate alongside Sagan's "Cosmos".
I went back and re-watched "Cosmos" and I have to say it was a tad disappointing, mostly in terms of special effects.
It still holds a special place re getting me interested in science.Beyond that, Dawkins is still good and early Douglas Hoffstadter (sp?
) too, even though most of the music stuff goes way above my head.And just to weigh in the the science/religion debate, I think religious people are weak-minded.
Civilizations, like children, eventually need to learn what's right and wrong irrespective of their father figures.
No siree, no pulling punches for me.
Religion is a crock, well beyond its usefulness.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686295</id>
	<title>Tomorrow's Science Heroes?</title>
	<author>rampant mac</author>
	<datestamp>1247504040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is you.</p><p>I read this somewhere else, but: "If youth doesn't wannabe, they don't trytobe and they won't become. Creativity should be the #1 thing encouraged." Get them involved.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is you.I read this somewhere else , but : " If youth does n't wannabe , they do n't trytobe and they wo n't become .
Creativity should be the # 1 thing encouraged .
" Get them involved .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is you.I read this somewhere else, but: "If youth doesn't wannabe, they don't trytobe and they won't become.
Creativity should be the #1 thing encouraged.
" Get them involved.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685839</id>
	<title>More of an ensemble cast in the future, I think</title>
	<author>thesandtiger</author>
	<datestamp>1247500680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>as opposed to one or two specific "heroes."</p><p>There are so many different sources for information to be had out there, so many more science programs, than there were when Sagan was big, that I think there will be many more low-to-medium-grade "scilebrities" vs. just one or two superstars.</p><p>Other than Bill Nye, I'd say take a look at some of The Universe episodes (though they might be a bit intense for younger kids), and there are some really interesting BBC shows featuring Michio Kaku.</p><p>Mythbusters is fun stuff, and a nice sort of vicarious "making shit to blow it up" kind of thing, but it doesn't do a good job with the science (nor does it really try to, I don't think.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>as opposed to one or two specific " heroes .
" There are so many different sources for information to be had out there , so many more science programs , than there were when Sagan was big , that I think there will be many more low-to-medium-grade " scilebrities " vs. just one or two superstars.Other than Bill Nye , I 'd say take a look at some of The Universe episodes ( though they might be a bit intense for younger kids ) , and there are some really interesting BBC shows featuring Michio Kaku.Mythbusters is fun stuff , and a nice sort of vicarious " making shit to blow it up " kind of thing , but it does n't do a good job with the science ( nor does it really try to , I do n't think .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>as opposed to one or two specific "heroes.
"There are so many different sources for information to be had out there, so many more science programs, than there were when Sagan was big, that I think there will be many more low-to-medium-grade "scilebrities" vs. just one or two superstars.Other than Bill Nye, I'd say take a look at some of The Universe episodes (though they might be a bit intense for younger kids), and there are some really interesting BBC shows featuring Michio Kaku.Mythbusters is fun stuff, and a nice sort of vicarious "making shit to blow it up" kind of thing, but it doesn't do a good job with the science (nor does it really try to, I don't think.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686559</id>
	<title>DirecTV and DVR</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247506140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>My current favorite tools are a DVR with DirecTV.  Browsing the science channels and recording an assortment of things for later examination, and watching what is interesting and good quality.  And laughing with my children at the occasional movie with awful science.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My current favorite tools are a DVR with DirecTV .
Browsing the science channels and recording an assortment of things for later examination , and watching what is interesting and good quality .
And laughing with my children at the occasional movie with awful science .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My current favorite tools are a DVR with DirecTV.
Browsing the science channels and recording an assortment of things for later examination, and watching what is interesting and good quality.
And laughing with my children at the occasional movie with awful science.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686055</id>
	<title>Brian Greene</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247502180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Great scientist.  Great writer.  Great advocate for bringing science to the masses.  For example,   http://www.worldsciencefestival.com/staff</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Great scientist .
Great writer .
Great advocate for bringing science to the masses .
For example , http : //www.worldsciencefestival.com/staff</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Great scientist.
Great writer.
Great advocate for bringing science to the masses.
For example,   http://www.worldsciencefestival.com/staff</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685483</id>
	<title>For biology...</title>
	<author>fuzzyfuzzyfungus</author>
	<datestamp>1247498160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Richard Dawkins is a pretty solid popularizer, if you are interested in biology.<br> <br>

A fair number of the bloggers at scienceblogs.com are also worth a look. Some tend more toward politics/culture; but there is plenty of science stuff, including scientists and science writers doing layman-accessible writeups of interesting peer-reviewed research(<a href="http://scienceblogs.com/notrocketscience/" title="scienceblogs.com">Not Exactly Rocket Science</a> [scienceblogs.com] does pretty much exclusively that; but many of the others do it as well, from time to time, as do those on their blogrolls).<br> <br>

Beyond texts/video, of course, is equipment. Talking heads are all well and good; but microscope(should be good enough to avoid pure frustration, doesn't have to be anything fancy) will let you <i>see</i> the sort of crazy stuff living in your average drop of water. Even a cheap and nasty telescope will let you see more than Galileo was able to. A run through the <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0596514921" title="amazon.com">Illustrated guide to home chemistry experiments</a> [amazon.com] might also be a worthy endeavor.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Richard Dawkins is a pretty solid popularizer , if you are interested in biology .
A fair number of the bloggers at scienceblogs.com are also worth a look .
Some tend more toward politics/culture ; but there is plenty of science stuff , including scientists and science writers doing layman-accessible writeups of interesting peer-reviewed research ( Not Exactly Rocket Science [ scienceblogs.com ] does pretty much exclusively that ; but many of the others do it as well , from time to time , as do those on their blogrolls ) .
Beyond texts/video , of course , is equipment .
Talking heads are all well and good ; but microscope ( should be good enough to avoid pure frustration , does n't have to be anything fancy ) will let you see the sort of crazy stuff living in your average drop of water .
Even a cheap and nasty telescope will let you see more than Galileo was able to .
A run through the Illustrated guide to home chemistry experiments [ amazon.com ] might also be a worthy endeavor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Richard Dawkins is a pretty solid popularizer, if you are interested in biology.
A fair number of the bloggers at scienceblogs.com are also worth a look.
Some tend more toward politics/culture; but there is plenty of science stuff, including scientists and science writers doing layman-accessible writeups of interesting peer-reviewed research(Not Exactly Rocket Science [scienceblogs.com] does pretty much exclusively that; but many of the others do it as well, from time to time, as do those on their blogrolls).
Beyond texts/video, of course, is equipment.
Talking heads are all well and good; but microscope(should be good enough to avoid pure frustration, doesn't have to be anything fancy) will let you see the sort of crazy stuff living in your average drop of water.
Even a cheap and nasty telescope will let you see more than Galileo was able to.
A run through the Illustrated guide to home chemistry experiments [amazon.com] might also be a worthy endeavor.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687717</id>
	<title>Re:Tyson</title>
	<author>Canazza</author>
	<datestamp>1247562660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bill Nye ruined his standing with me when he appeared on an episode of Stargate Atlantis...</p><p>now I do like that show, but it was one of those 'lets see how many geek references we can get in one show while completly ignoring the story' episodes. And Nye just felt like such a limp wristed numpty, like he KNEW it was shit and didn't care.</p><p>I've known a few kids who want to get into science after seeing the new Star Trek film, but I don't know how long that's going to last (you know, like all those kids who wanted to be archeologists after watching Jurassic Park or Indiana Jones)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bill Nye ruined his standing with me when he appeared on an episode of Stargate Atlantis...now I do like that show , but it was one of those 'lets see how many geek references we can get in one show while completly ignoring the story ' episodes .
And Nye just felt like such a limp wristed numpty , like he KNEW it was shit and did n't care.I 've known a few kids who want to get into science after seeing the new Star Trek film , but I do n't know how long that 's going to last ( you know , like all those kids who wanted to be archeologists after watching Jurassic Park or Indiana Jones )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bill Nye ruined his standing with me when he appeared on an episode of Stargate Atlantis...now I do like that show, but it was one of those 'lets see how many geek references we can get in one show while completly ignoring the story' episodes.
And Nye just felt like such a limp wristed numpty, like he KNEW it was shit and didn't care.I've known a few kids who want to get into science after seeing the new Star Trek film, but I don't know how long that's going to last (you know, like all those kids who wanted to be archeologists after watching Jurassic Park or Indiana Jones)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686191</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413</id>
	<title>Tyson</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247497620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am currently going through a Neil deGrasse Tyson phase.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am currently going through a Neil deGrasse Tyson phase .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am currently going through a Neil deGrasse Tyson phase.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685929</id>
	<title>Science hero == bad</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247501280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you train your kids to want to be scientists, you will get posers.  They will become scientists because they want to be scientists, not because they want to do science.  There's a huge difference.  They won't enjoy what they are doing and they probably won't be very successful.</p><p>Put the conditions in place that will allow your kids to naturally develop an interest in science.  For example, you could take up bird watching.  Take the kids out on bird watching expeditions.  Let them learn about the environment that supports each different kind of bird.  Pretty soon, you have a budding wildlife biologist.</p><p>Does it work?  Yes it does if my kids are any indication.  Each has pursued a different subset of my wife's and my interests.  The careers they have chosen are directly traceable to the things they had fun doing as children and teenagers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you train your kids to want to be scientists , you will get posers .
They will become scientists because they want to be scientists , not because they want to do science .
There 's a huge difference .
They wo n't enjoy what they are doing and they probably wo n't be very successful.Put the conditions in place that will allow your kids to naturally develop an interest in science .
For example , you could take up bird watching .
Take the kids out on bird watching expeditions .
Let them learn about the environment that supports each different kind of bird .
Pretty soon , you have a budding wildlife biologist.Does it work ?
Yes it does if my kids are any indication .
Each has pursued a different subset of my wife 's and my interests .
The careers they have chosen are directly traceable to the things they had fun doing as children and teenagers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you train your kids to want to be scientists, you will get posers.
They will become scientists because they want to be scientists, not because they want to do science.
There's a huge difference.
They won't enjoy what they are doing and they probably won't be very successful.Put the conditions in place that will allow your kids to naturally develop an interest in science.
For example, you could take up bird watching.
Take the kids out on bird watching expeditions.
Let them learn about the environment that supports each different kind of bird.
Pretty soon, you have a budding wildlife biologist.Does it work?
Yes it does if my kids are any indication.
Each has pursued a different subset of my wife's and my interests.
The careers they have chosen are directly traceable to the things they had fun doing as children and teenagers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685519</id>
	<title>Ray Kurzweil</title>
	<author>Sybert42</author>
	<datestamp>1247498580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Might as well show them what they'll become.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Might as well show them what they 'll become .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Might as well show them what they'll become.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28688631</id>
	<title>The Podcasting Community</title>
	<author>Ginger Unicorn</author>
	<datestamp>1247572980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My current science heroes are all grass-roots enthusiasts like <a href="http://skeptoid.com/" title="skeptoid.com">Brian Dunning</a> [skeptoid.com], <a href="http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/" title="discovermagazine.com">Phil Plait</a> [discovermagazine.com], <a href="http://www.astronomycast.com/" title="astronomycast.com">Pamela Gay &amp; Fraser Cain</a> [astronomycast.com], <a href="http://www.theskepticsguide.org/" title="theskepticsguide.org">The Skeptical Rogues</a> [theskepticsguide.org], <a href="http://www.skepticality.com/" title="skepticality.com">Derek &amp; Swoopy</a> [skepticality.com] and the like. </p><p>Listening to all those podcasts and recommending them to all my friends has brought an interest in science out from purely occuring inside my own head into being a regular dialogue with people I know. It also makes you feel like the human race is actually going somewhere, instead of the general impression you get from the mainstream media that we are perpetually circling a gory hate-filled drain.</p><p> And, of course my original inspiration that started me listening to all these podcasts, Micheal Shermer, whose book "<a href="http://www.amazon.com/People-Believe-Weird-Things-Pseudoscience/dp/0805070893/ref=sr\_1\_1?ie=UTF8&amp;s=books&amp;qid=1247569230&amp;sr=8-1" title="amazon.com">Why People Believe Weird Things</a> [amazon.com]" should be given to every 13 year old as part of their school education.</p><p>If I had 500 quid to get to Las Vegas I would love to have gone <a href="http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/component/content/article/37-static/445-the-amazing-meeting-7.html" title="randi.org">to this.</a> [randi.org] Defniately doing it next year.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My current science heroes are all grass-roots enthusiasts like Brian Dunning [ skeptoid.com ] , Phil Plait [ discovermagazine.com ] , Pamela Gay &amp; Fraser Cain [ astronomycast.com ] , The Skeptical Rogues [ theskepticsguide.org ] , Derek &amp; Swoopy [ skepticality.com ] and the like .
Listening to all those podcasts and recommending them to all my friends has brought an interest in science out from purely occuring inside my own head into being a regular dialogue with people I know .
It also makes you feel like the human race is actually going somewhere , instead of the general impression you get from the mainstream media that we are perpetually circling a gory hate-filled drain .
And , of course my original inspiration that started me listening to all these podcasts , Micheal Shermer , whose book " Why People Believe Weird Things [ amazon.com ] " should be given to every 13 year old as part of their school education.If I had 500 quid to get to Las Vegas I would love to have gone to this .
[ randi.org ] Defniately doing it next year .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My current science heroes are all grass-roots enthusiasts like Brian Dunning [skeptoid.com], Phil Plait [discovermagazine.com], Pamela Gay &amp; Fraser Cain [astronomycast.com], The Skeptical Rogues [theskepticsguide.org], Derek &amp; Swoopy [skepticality.com] and the like.
Listening to all those podcasts and recommending them to all my friends has brought an interest in science out from purely occuring inside my own head into being a regular dialogue with people I know.
It also makes you feel like the human race is actually going somewhere, instead of the general impression you get from the mainstream media that we are perpetually circling a gory hate-filled drain.
And, of course my original inspiration that started me listening to all these podcasts, Micheal Shermer, whose book "Why People Believe Weird Things [amazon.com]" should be given to every 13 year old as part of their school education.If I had 500 quid to get to Las Vegas I would love to have gone to this.
[randi.org] Defniately doing it next year.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685903</id>
	<title>Will Smith, Bruce Willis, Harrison Ford</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247501040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Honorable mention goes to Christopher Lloyd and Jonathan Harris (Lost in Space).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Honorable mention goes to Christopher Lloyd and Jonathan Harris ( Lost in Space ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Honorable mention goes to Christopher Lloyd and Jonathan Harris (Lost in Space).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686009</id>
	<title>Helthy Diet of PBS and Discovery</title>
	<author>NotOverHere</author>
	<datestamp>1247501820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>     What broke me from being interested to moving to hardcore was finishing off 14 of Asimov's foundation series with the help of a well stocked library and summer vacation after 7th grade.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Mr. Wizard was the highest (I'll never forget the cage full of mousetraps and ping pong balls -- first primer to supercritical chain reactions.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; "This Old House" and "New Yankee Workshop" was possibly the best practical application of engineering.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; I'm still enthralled when I get to see James Burke's "Connections" or "Beyond 2000."</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; A little over topic: The 14yr perv in me loved the late night showings of Desomond Morris's "The Human Animal".  Those taught me more than ol' Mom's little "talks" or any magazine could.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What broke me from being interested to moving to hardcore was finishing off 14 of Asimov 's foundation series with the help of a well stocked library and summer vacation after 7th grade .
      Mr. Wizard was the highest ( I 'll never forget the cage full of mousetraps and ping pong balls -- first primer to supercritical chain reactions .
      " This Old House " and " New Yankee Workshop " was possibly the best practical application of engineering .
        I 'm still enthralled when I get to see James Burke 's " Connections " or " Beyond 2000 .
"         A little over topic : The 14yr perv in me loved the late night showings of Desomond Morris 's " The Human Animal " .
Those taught me more than ol ' Mom 's little " talks " or any magazine could .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>     What broke me from being interested to moving to hardcore was finishing off 14 of Asimov's foundation series with the help of a well stocked library and summer vacation after 7th grade.
      Mr. Wizard was the highest (I'll never forget the cage full of mousetraps and ping pong balls -- first primer to supercritical chain reactions.
      "This Old House" and "New Yankee Workshop" was possibly the best practical application of engineering.
        I'm still enthralled when I get to see James Burke's "Connections" or "Beyond 2000.
"
        A little over topic: The 14yr perv in me loved the late night showings of Desomond Morris's "The Human Animal".
Those taught me more than ol' Mom's little "talks" or any magazine could.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685767</id>
	<title>Re:Mythbusters does it</title>
	<author>StoneDog</author>
	<datestamp>1247500080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I must disagree with this analysis. I have watched every episode, including out-takes and a lot of extra footage. They do indeed do controls and a large number of trials for their experiments. They constantly complain of the limits imposed by the 1-hour time requirements. It is clearly not lab work as it really exists, but as someone who has done real grinding work in the lab, I don't think that there is any better way of killing a love for science in little kids than trying to convince them that repeating an experiment 100 times is fun.</p><p>Ages 2 and 5 are a time for wonder and magic. It is not the time to wow them with the scientific method. It works better than any other way of knowing, but it is *not* sexy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I must disagree with this analysis .
I have watched every episode , including out-takes and a lot of extra footage .
They do indeed do controls and a large number of trials for their experiments .
They constantly complain of the limits imposed by the 1-hour time requirements .
It is clearly not lab work as it really exists , but as someone who has done real grinding work in the lab , I do n't think that there is any better way of killing a love for science in little kids than trying to convince them that repeating an experiment 100 times is fun.Ages 2 and 5 are a time for wonder and magic .
It is not the time to wow them with the scientific method .
It works better than any other way of knowing , but it is * not * sexy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I must disagree with this analysis.
I have watched every episode, including out-takes and a lot of extra footage.
They do indeed do controls and a large number of trials for their experiments.
They constantly complain of the limits imposed by the 1-hour time requirements.
It is clearly not lab work as it really exists, but as someone who has done real grinding work in the lab, I don't think that there is any better way of killing a love for science in little kids than trying to convince them that repeating an experiment 100 times is fun.Ages 2 and 5 are a time for wonder and magic.
It is not the time to wow them with the scientific method.
It works better than any other way of knowing, but it is *not* sexy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685471</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687267</id>
	<title>Re:Mythbusters does it</title>
	<author>EvilIdler</author>
	<datestamp>1247514300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Honestly, when was the last time you did a thorough scientific experiment in your personal life?</p></div><p>Yeah, people don't let me handle explosives. Not after The Incident. Mythbusters is all I've got!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Honestly , when was the last time you did a thorough scientific experiment in your personal life ? Yeah , people do n't let me handle explosives .
Not after The Incident .
Mythbusters is all I 've got !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Honestly, when was the last time you did a thorough scientific experiment in your personal life?Yeah, people don't let me handle explosives.
Not after The Incident.
Mythbusters is all I've got!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685557</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685777</id>
	<title>Re:Mythbusters does it</title>
	<author>jhmorris8541</author>
	<datestamp>1247500140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Mythbusters it TV.  It is for entertainment purposes, not science.  I look at it as a way to get kids interested in science and engineering, not teach them science or engineering.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Mythbusters it TV .
It is for entertainment purposes , not science .
I look at it as a way to get kids interested in science and engineering , not teach them science or engineering .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mythbusters it TV.
It is for entertainment purposes, not science.
I look at it as a way to get kids interested in science and engineering, not teach them science or engineering.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685471</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686099</id>
	<title>Re:Its a matter of preference...</title>
	<author>hairykrishna</author>
	<datestamp>1247502480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm a physicist. Darwin's a hero to me. Not as much as Feynman admittedly but he's still a hero.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm a physicist .
Darwin 's a hero to me .
Not as much as Feynman admittedly but he 's still a hero .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm a physicist.
Darwin's a hero to me.
Not as much as Feynman admittedly but he's still a hero.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685749</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685595</id>
	<title>Re:Meteorologists</title>
	<author>Jane Q. Public</author>
	<datestamp>1247499060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Most "meteorologists" are local hacks working for TV stations who have passed 2-week-long weather reporting school and get all their data from NOAA anyway. They do not have careers in science at all. On the contrary, their ambition is to become TV anchorman.
<br> <br>
I would hardly call your typical local TV "meteorologist" a good example of a science teacher.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Most " meteorologists " are local hacks working for TV stations who have passed 2-week-long weather reporting school and get all their data from NOAA anyway .
They do not have careers in science at all .
On the contrary , their ambition is to become TV anchorman .
I would hardly call your typical local TV " meteorologist " a good example of a science teacher .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most "meteorologists" are local hacks working for TV stations who have passed 2-week-long weather reporting school and get all their data from NOAA anyway.
They do not have careers in science at all.
On the contrary, their ambition is to become TV anchorman.
I would hardly call your typical local TV "meteorologist" a good example of a science teacher.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685427</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687081</id>
	<title>Burke</title>
	<author>gardyloo</author>
	<datestamp>1247511960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Perhaps not a *scientist* (though he's eminently conversant with its history and methods), and perhaps not a hero for tomorrow (I don't know of recent productions of his), but James Burke is a brilliant entertainer and expositor about science. Any of his earliest reports, up through <i>The Day the Universe Changed</i> (unmatched, in my opinion, by any TV series except <i>Nova</i> or <i>Nature</i>), through <i>Connections^</i>N, are unparalleled productions, equal parts one-man-play, documentary, and science history as it should be.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Amazon *finally* has <i>The Day the Universe Changed</i> on DVD for less than $200; one was hard-put to find it for less than $700 for a long time, and torrents were a fan's friend.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps not a * scientist * ( though he 's eminently conversant with its history and methods ) , and perhaps not a hero for tomorrow ( I do n't know of recent productions of his ) , but James Burke is a brilliant entertainer and expositor about science .
Any of his earliest reports , up through The Day the Universe Changed ( unmatched , in my opinion , by any TV series except Nova or Nature ) , through Connections ^ N , are unparalleled productions , equal parts one-man-play , documentary , and science history as it should be .
      Amazon * finally * has The Day the Universe Changed on DVD for less than $ 200 ; one was hard-put to find it for less than $ 700 for a long time , and torrents were a fan 's friend .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps not a *scientist* (though he's eminently conversant with its history and methods), and perhaps not a hero for tomorrow (I don't know of recent productions of his), but James Burke is a brilliant entertainer and expositor about science.
Any of his earliest reports, up through The Day the Universe Changed (unmatched, in my opinion, by any TV series except Nova or Nature), through Connections^N, are unparalleled productions, equal parts one-man-play, documentary, and science history as it should be.
      Amazon *finally* has The Day the Universe Changed on DVD for less than $200; one was hard-put to find it for less than $700 for a long time, and torrents were a fan's friend.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686243</id>
	<title>Douglas Adams</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247503680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know this is far from contemporary but Douglas Adams is the way I would start my children on science. This may seem strange to a lot of people as Adams' science is very much hidden under a veneer of bizarre and fantastic fiction. Nevertheless the lessons which to me are the most important any scientist should learn are that anything is possible and that one should maintain an open mind and expect to always be wrong, always be surprised, and always be changing your assumptions. I think a better education of these principles would prevent much of the 'bad science' in our society. Adams bypasses the how and why and moves right to 'what would it be like' which means the ethical and global issues of science are explored in a unique way. I also think that science is a form of exploration and if you teach someone a codified set of rules for exploring they will only ever discover what you yourself could have discovered or even what an automaton with the same set of rules could discover. Teach your children that the scope of what is possible, both via scientific exploration and also simply by the nature of the universe, is infinite and beautiful and each will find his own way to explore, and hopefully ask you for help if s/he gets stuck.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know this is far from contemporary but Douglas Adams is the way I would start my children on science .
This may seem strange to a lot of people as Adams ' science is very much hidden under a veneer of bizarre and fantastic fiction .
Nevertheless the lessons which to me are the most important any scientist should learn are that anything is possible and that one should maintain an open mind and expect to always be wrong , always be surprised , and always be changing your assumptions .
I think a better education of these principles would prevent much of the 'bad science ' in our society .
Adams bypasses the how and why and moves right to 'what would it be like ' which means the ethical and global issues of science are explored in a unique way .
I also think that science is a form of exploration and if you teach someone a codified set of rules for exploring they will only ever discover what you yourself could have discovered or even what an automaton with the same set of rules could discover .
Teach your children that the scope of what is possible , both via scientific exploration and also simply by the nature of the universe , is infinite and beautiful and each will find his own way to explore , and hopefully ask you for help if s/he gets stuck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know this is far from contemporary but Douglas Adams is the way I would start my children on science.
This may seem strange to a lot of people as Adams' science is very much hidden under a veneer of bizarre and fantastic fiction.
Nevertheless the lessons which to me are the most important any scientist should learn are that anything is possible and that one should maintain an open mind and expect to always be wrong, always be surprised, and always be changing your assumptions.
I think a better education of these principles would prevent much of the 'bad science' in our society.
Adams bypasses the how and why and moves right to 'what would it be like' which means the ethical and global issues of science are explored in a unique way.
I also think that science is a form of exploration and if you teach someone a codified set of rules for exploring they will only ever discover what you yourself could have discovered or even what an automaton with the same set of rules could discover.
Teach your children that the scope of what is possible, both via scientific exploration and also simply by the nature of the universe, is infinite and beautiful and each will find his own way to explore, and hopefully ask you for help if s/he gets stuck.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28693455</id>
	<title>Re:Meteorologists</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1247596320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Since Meteorologists aren't Climatologist, I don't see why you would talk to them about climate.</p><p>New Hero's are need for each generation, to inspire them. Science moves on. They certainly made some wide shoulder for us to stand on. There were greats before Hawking and Sagan.</p><p>Plus Hawking only seem to be accessible later in the sciences, where as Sagan can get basic idea across.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Since Meteorologists are n't Climatologist , I do n't see why you would talk to them about climate.New Hero 's are need for each generation , to inspire them .
Science moves on .
They certainly made some wide shoulder for us to stand on .
There were greats before Hawking and Sagan.Plus Hawking only seem to be accessible later in the sciences , where as Sagan can get basic idea across .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since Meteorologists aren't Climatologist, I don't see why you would talk to them about climate.New Hero's are need for each generation, to inspire them.
Science moves on.
They certainly made some wide shoulder for us to stand on.
There were greats before Hawking and Sagan.Plus Hawking only seem to be accessible later in the sciences, where as Sagan can get basic idea across.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685427</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685695</id>
	<title>Brian Greene</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247499780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Brian Greene has written two really good books on physics for the interested layperson.  One is specifically on String Theory (The Elegant Universe).  The other covers a broader range of physics topics (The Fabric of the Cosmos).  Both books are very well written.  I personally like TFOTC a bit more since it's not so focused on a single topic.  I really hope he continues to write physics popularizations in the future.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Brian Greene has written two really good books on physics for the interested layperson .
One is specifically on String Theory ( The Elegant Universe ) .
The other covers a broader range of physics topics ( The Fabric of the Cosmos ) .
Both books are very well written .
I personally like TFOTC a bit more since it 's not so focused on a single topic .
I really hope he continues to write physics popularizations in the future .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Brian Greene has written two really good books on physics for the interested layperson.
One is specifically on String Theory (The Elegant Universe).
The other covers a broader range of physics topics (The Fabric of the Cosmos).
Both books are very well written.
I personally like TFOTC a bit more since it's not so focused on a single topic.
I really hope he continues to write physics popularizations in the future.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687791</id>
	<title>TV has changed</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247563500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>TV has changed too much in the last 30 years to be able to create lasting heroes like Sagan and Attenborough. The golden age when the big broadcasters could afford to put on these epic series, and they were still original, has passed, and been replaced with material that is largely one-off and oriented around what advertisers want from it.</p><p>Heroes take a long time to make, and modern TV assumes that its viewers (and advertisers) are too impatient. That's the view I get, anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>TV has changed too much in the last 30 years to be able to create lasting heroes like Sagan and Attenborough .
The golden age when the big broadcasters could afford to put on these epic series , and they were still original , has passed , and been replaced with material that is largely one-off and oriented around what advertisers want from it.Heroes take a long time to make , and modern TV assumes that its viewers ( and advertisers ) are too impatient .
That 's the view I get , anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>TV has changed too much in the last 30 years to be able to create lasting heroes like Sagan and Attenborough.
The golden age when the big broadcasters could afford to put on these epic series, and they were still original, has passed, and been replaced with material that is largely one-off and oriented around what advertisers want from it.Heroes take a long time to make, and modern TV assumes that its viewers (and advertisers) are too impatient.
That's the view I get, anyway.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687023</id>
	<title>Re:Tyson</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247510880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I like the dude.  But for kids, a loudmouth Jew like Feynman would be more effective.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I like the dude .
But for kids , a loudmouth Jew like Feynman would be more effective .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I like the dude.
But for kids, a loudmouth Jew like Feynman would be more effective.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28689471</id>
	<title>Not Exactly Rocket Science</title>
	<author>arensb</author>
	<datestamp>1247579400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Gotta give a shout out to Ed Yong, who writes <a href="http://scienceblogs.com/notrocketscience/" title="scienceblogs.com" rel="nofollow">Not Exactly Rocket Science</a> [scienceblogs.com]. He has a knack for summarizing research papers and show why they're cool.</p><p>Phil Plait at Bad Astronomy is also good at sharing his enthusiasm for astronomy. And the Astronomy Picture of the Day has pretty pictures.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Got ta give a shout out to Ed Yong , who writes Not Exactly Rocket Science [ scienceblogs.com ] .
He has a knack for summarizing research papers and show why they 're cool.Phil Plait at Bad Astronomy is also good at sharing his enthusiasm for astronomy .
And the Astronomy Picture of the Day has pretty pictures .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Gotta give a shout out to Ed Yong, who writes Not Exactly Rocket Science [scienceblogs.com].
He has a knack for summarizing research papers and show why they're cool.Phil Plait at Bad Astronomy is also good at sharing his enthusiasm for astronomy.
And the Astronomy Picture of the Day has pretty pictures.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685705</id>
	<title>Re:Mythbusters does it</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247499780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When a positive hypothetical is put forward, it only takes one example to the contrary to prove it false.  This is called a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... counterexample.  And I am a statistician so please don't bring up sample size.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When a positive hypothetical is put forward , it only takes one example to the contrary to prove it false .
This is called a ... counterexample. And I am a statistician so please do n't bring up sample size .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When a positive hypothetical is put forward, it only takes one example to the contrary to prove it false.
This is called a ... counterexample.  And I am a statistician so please don't bring up sample size.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685471</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28688185</id>
	<title>Sorry to Tag, but missing the obvious... TED Talks</title>
	<author>SerpentMage</author>
	<datestamp>1247567760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sorry to tag this to the top, but I went through this thread and missing from the discussion are the TED talks!

They are broadcast via podcast and they are very every day science and about the future.I thoroughly enjoy the discussions they have because they are based on science, maths, and logical thinking...

So there is no single person, but there are a number of people...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry to tag this to the top , but I went through this thread and missing from the discussion are the TED talks !
They are broadcast via podcast and they are very every day science and about the future.I thoroughly enjoy the discussions they have because they are based on science , maths , and logical thinking.. . So there is no single person , but there are a number of people.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry to tag this to the top, but I went through this thread and missing from the discussion are the TED talks!
They are broadcast via podcast and they are very every day science and about the future.I thoroughly enjoy the discussions they have because they are based on science, maths, and logical thinking...

So there is no single person, but there are a number of people...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28693649</id>
	<title>Some physicists for thought</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247597160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Richard Feynman influenced me tremendously even though he's been long gone for a while.  Pick up "Surely your joking Mr. Feynman" and his other compiled lectures for a fun and easy read for children and adults.  In college I managed to catch a populist science lecture from Kip Thorne which was remarkably good, but he's getting up in age like Hawkings.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Richard Feynman influenced me tremendously even though he 's been long gone for a while .
Pick up " Surely your joking Mr. Feynman " and his other compiled lectures for a fun and easy read for children and adults .
In college I managed to catch a populist science lecture from Kip Thorne which was remarkably good , but he 's getting up in age like Hawkings .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Richard Feynman influenced me tremendously even though he's been long gone for a while.
Pick up "Surely your joking Mr. Feynman" and his other compiled lectures for a fun and easy read for children and adults.
In college I managed to catch a populist science lecture from Kip Thorne which was remarkably good, but he's getting up in age like Hawkings.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686357</id>
	<title>Good question</title>
	<author>PPH</author>
	<datestamp>1247504580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Looking at our local PBS fare as an example, most of the good science shows seem to have disappeared. NOVA is about all that's left. The rest is cooking shows, sewing shows, yoga shows, self help shows, etc. All the good science and engineering stuff is over on the Spanish language subchannel.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Looking at our local PBS fare as an example , most of the good science shows seem to have disappeared .
NOVA is about all that 's left .
The rest is cooking shows , sewing shows , yoga shows , self help shows , etc .
All the good science and engineering stuff is over on the Spanish language subchannel .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Looking at our local PBS fare as an example, most of the good science shows seem to have disappeared.
NOVA is about all that's left.
The rest is cooking shows, sewing shows, yoga shows, self help shows, etc.
All the good science and engineering stuff is over on the Spanish language subchannel.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686493</id>
	<title>Best physics presenter I've seen so far</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247505540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Brian Cox.</p><p>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian\_Cox\_(physicist)<br>http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2207118/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Brian Cox.http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian \ _Cox \ _ ( physicist ) http : //www.imdb.com/name/nm2207118/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Brian Cox.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian\_Cox\_(physicist)http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2207118/</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686343</id>
	<title>"Science Hero"? Well duh...</title>
	<author>mad.frog</author>
	<datestamp>1247504460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's gotta be <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom\_Strong" title="wikipedia.org">Tom Strong</a> [wikipedia.org], or perhaps the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science\_hero" title="wikipedia.org"> Five Swell Guys</a> [wikipedia.org]...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's got ta be Tom Strong [ wikipedia.org ] , or perhaps the Five Swell Guys [ wikipedia.org ] .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's gotta be Tom Strong [wikipedia.org], or perhaps the  Five Swell Guys [wikipedia.org]...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686957</id>
	<title>Easy</title>
	<author>Miamicoastguard</author>
	<datestamp>1247509980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>... Feynman.<br>I think you are missing the point by searching for someone in the present. To understand the breakthroughs of today you need an understanding of yesterdays science. Introduce them to Feynman and Tesla. Teach them the beauty of the mysterious and the undiscovered it'll teach them what real science is about - understanding nature.</htmltext>
<tokenext>... Feynman.I think you are missing the point by searching for someone in the present .
To understand the breakthroughs of today you need an understanding of yesterdays science .
Introduce them to Feynman and Tesla .
Teach them the beauty of the mysterious and the undiscovered it 'll teach them what real science is about - understanding nature .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... Feynman.I think you are missing the point by searching for someone in the present.
To understand the breakthroughs of today you need an understanding of yesterdays science.
Introduce them to Feynman and Tesla.
Teach them the beauty of the mysterious and the undiscovered it'll teach them what real science is about - understanding nature.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28700731</id>
	<title>it's a game, no it's science!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247600700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is great for kids, and it's real science:</p><p>http://fold.it/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is great for kids , and it 's real science : http : //fold.it/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is great for kids, and it's real science:http://fold.it/</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685715</id>
	<title>An Australian</title>
	<author>stryyker</author>
	<datestamp>1247499840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Dr. Karl. He has nice colourful shirts and plenty of books.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dr. Karl. He has nice colourful shirts and plenty of books .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dr. Karl. He has nice colourful shirts and plenty of books.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28698731</id>
	<title>History channel's "The Universe"</title>
	<author>JThundley</author>
	<datestamp>1247580420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's a cool show on the History channel called "The Universe". They have very intelligent and interesting people talking about science while entertaining with mind-blowing cgi graphics. Check it out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's a cool show on the History channel called " The Universe " .
They have very intelligent and interesting people talking about science while entertaining with mind-blowing cgi graphics .
Check it out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's a cool show on the History channel called "The Universe".
They have very intelligent and interesting people talking about science while entertaining with mind-blowing cgi graphics.
Check it out.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686023</id>
	<title>Re:Its a matter of preference...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247502000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I disagree. If there's anything the ID debacle has taught us, it's that many scientist *do* in fact have heroes from several disciplines! The discussion between Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss (in Voices of Science) directly refutes the specific examples you give. Before having heroes, I believe kids should understand the scientific method and how it is independent of discipline, and for that matter how it can be applied in everyday life, i.e., how to rational. For that, use what the kids are naturally fascinated by, rainbows, soap bubbles and so on with no regard for specialisation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I disagree .
If there 's anything the ID debacle has taught us , it 's that many scientist * do * in fact have heroes from several disciplines !
The discussion between Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss ( in Voices of Science ) directly refutes the specific examples you give .
Before having heroes , I believe kids should understand the scientific method and how it is independent of discipline , and for that matter how it can be applied in everyday life , i.e. , how to rational .
For that , use what the kids are naturally fascinated by , rainbows , soap bubbles and so on with no regard for specialisation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I disagree.
If there's anything the ID debacle has taught us, it's that many scientist *do* in fact have heroes from several disciplines!
The discussion between Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss (in Voices of Science) directly refutes the specific examples you give.
Before having heroes, I believe kids should understand the scientific method and how it is independent of discipline, and for that matter how it can be applied in everyday life, i.e., how to rational.
For that, use what the kids are naturally fascinated by, rainbows, soap bubbles and so on with no regard for specialisation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685749</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686195</id>
	<title>Re:Smirking Pluto Killer - Not My Favorite</title>
	<author>SirJorgelOfBorgel</author>
	<datestamp>1247503260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Taken completely by surprise by your comment about Brontosaurus not being a proper name for a Brontosaurus (I somehow missed this) I decided to invoke the evil (Google) and look it up. I have decided your shaking your fist in fury is completely justified and I shall join you in this endeavour.  Other amazing discoveries include that such beasts as pterodactyls are by definition (formally) not dinosaurs.

Coupled with all the tech science and space mags I read today, this was an informative day!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Taken completely by surprise by your comment about Brontosaurus not being a proper name for a Brontosaurus ( I somehow missed this ) I decided to invoke the evil ( Google ) and look it up .
I have decided your shaking your fist in fury is completely justified and I shall join you in this endeavour .
Other amazing discoveries include that such beasts as pterodactyls are by definition ( formally ) not dinosaurs .
Coupled with all the tech science and space mags I read today , this was an informative day !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Taken completely by surprise by your comment about Brontosaurus not being a proper name for a Brontosaurus (I somehow missed this) I decided to invoke the evil (Google) and look it up.
I have decided your shaking your fist in fury is completely justified and I shall join you in this endeavour.
Other amazing discoveries include that such beasts as pterodactyls are by definition (formally) not dinosaurs.
Coupled with all the tech science and space mags I read today, this was an informative day!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685731</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687449</id>
	<title>Brian Cox</title>
	<author>zoeblade</author>
	<datestamp>1247602800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seeing as everyone else has Adam Savage, Neil deGrasse Tyson and Richard Dawkins pretty well covered, and you already know about Carl Sagan and presumably Richard Feynman and J. Bronowski, I should probably add Brian Cox to the list.</p><p>He's a particle physicist at CERN, and has an unrealistic level of enthusiasm for absolutely everything.  It seems a good bet that the physicist in Sunshine was based on him, especially considering that he was the science consultant for the film.  He's in a whole bunch of documentaries enthusing about how great the latest scientific discoveries are.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seeing as everyone else has Adam Savage , Neil deGrasse Tyson and Richard Dawkins pretty well covered , and you already know about Carl Sagan and presumably Richard Feynman and J. Bronowski , I should probably add Brian Cox to the list.He 's a particle physicist at CERN , and has an unrealistic level of enthusiasm for absolutely everything .
It seems a good bet that the physicist in Sunshine was based on him , especially considering that he was the science consultant for the film .
He 's in a whole bunch of documentaries enthusing about how great the latest scientific discoveries are .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seeing as everyone else has Adam Savage, Neil deGrasse Tyson and Richard Dawkins pretty well covered, and you already know about Carl Sagan and presumably Richard Feynman and J. Bronowski, I should probably add Brian Cox to the list.He's a particle physicist at CERN, and has an unrealistic level of enthusiasm for absolutely everything.
It seems a good bet that the physicist in Sunshine was based on him, especially considering that he was the science consultant for the film.
He's in a whole bunch of documentaries enthusing about how great the latest scientific discoveries are.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685873</id>
	<title>Re:Mythbusters does it</title>
	<author>tanke</author>
	<datestamp>1247500860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=1156" title="phdcomics.com" rel="nofollow"> If tv science was like real science...</a> [phdcomics.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>If tv science was like real science... [ phdcomics.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext> If tv science was like real science... [phdcomics.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685421</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28693509</id>
	<title>Timothy Ferris</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247596560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I loved Timothy Ferris' "The whole shebang (1998)" and wish there was something similar written more recently (with up to date information).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I loved Timothy Ferris ' " The whole shebang ( 1998 ) " and wish there was something similar written more recently ( with up to date information ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I loved Timothy Ferris' "The whole shebang (1998)" and wish there was something similar written more recently (with up to date information).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685979</id>
	<title>Re: Me too</title>
	<author>MadMorf</author>
	<datestamp>1247501640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...Got a bit of a man-crush going...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...Got a bit of a man-crush going.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...Got a bit of a man-crush going...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685553</id>
	<title>Re:Tyson</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247498760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd go with Neil too. While not as nerdy as previous generations' "science guys", he really does have a passion for science and seems genuinely interested in spreading the love.<br><br>And Nova Science Now is a great show for the kids.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd go with Neil too .
While not as nerdy as previous generations ' " science guys " , he really does have a passion for science and seems genuinely interested in spreading the love.And Nova Science Now is a great show for the kids .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd go with Neil too.
While not as nerdy as previous generations' "science guys", he really does have a passion for science and seems genuinely interested in spreading the love.And Nova Science Now is a great show for the kids.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686125</id>
	<title>David Attenborough</title>
	<author>Ginger\_Chris</author>
	<datestamp>1247502720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I know he's not a scientist per se, but David Attenborough had a huge influence on me as a child, along with BBC nature as a whole. As a child I'd watch them over and over and that interest passed over to the other sciences as a whole. He's the perfect person to get your kids into science as a whole. (I teach physics now).</htmltext>
<tokenext>I know he 's not a scientist per se , but David Attenborough had a huge influence on me as a child , along with BBC nature as a whole .
As a child I 'd watch them over and over and that interest passed over to the other sciences as a whole .
He 's the perfect person to get your kids into science as a whole .
( I teach physics now ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know he's not a scientist per se, but David Attenborough had a huge influence on me as a child, along with BBC nature as a whole.
As a child I'd watch them over and over and that interest passed over to the other sciences as a whole.
He's the perfect person to get your kids into science as a whole.
(I teach physics now).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28688611</id>
	<title>Re:Say NO to celebrity science</title>
	<author>Registered Coward v2</author>
	<datestamp>1247572740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Science should be practical.  It's good when it helps people.  Any individual scientist who has done science to help people is worth looking up to.  That also goes for anyone else of any profession.</p></div><p>Actually, science is about understanding how things work, engineering is about making the how practical; though the boundary is often blurred./P.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Science should be practical .
It 's good when it helps people .
Any individual scientist who has done science to help people is worth looking up to .
That also goes for anyone else of any profession.Actually , science is about understanding how things work , engineering is about making the how practical ; though the boundary is often blurred./P .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Science should be practical.
It's good when it helps people.
Any individual scientist who has done science to help people is worth looking up to.
That also goes for anyone else of any profession.Actually, science is about understanding how things work, engineering is about making the how practical; though the boundary is often blurred./P.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685673</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685803</id>
	<title>We don't need science heroes</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247500380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We need to teach our kids to get away from the idea of having "heroes" per se. Have a look at some of the greats of the past and you'll find they had character flaws that you do not want children emulating. Read biographies on Newton (sociopath who enjoyed humilating and disgracing others), Einstein (mysogynist who refused to accept QM), Feynman (womaniser who enjoyed conning people). Teach them to admire and focus the work and aspire to doing great work, not to have fuzzy hair and charisma but patchy people skills.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We need to teach our kids to get away from the idea of having " heroes " per se .
Have a look at some of the greats of the past and you 'll find they had character flaws that you do not want children emulating .
Read biographies on Newton ( sociopath who enjoyed humilating and disgracing others ) , Einstein ( mysogynist who refused to accept QM ) , Feynman ( womaniser who enjoyed conning people ) .
Teach them to admire and focus the work and aspire to doing great work , not to have fuzzy hair and charisma but patchy people skills .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We need to teach our kids to get away from the idea of having "heroes" per se.
Have a look at some of the greats of the past and you'll find they had character flaws that you do not want children emulating.
Read biographies on Newton (sociopath who enjoyed humilating and disgracing others), Einstein (mysogynist who refused to accept QM), Feynman (womaniser who enjoyed conning people).
Teach them to admire and focus the work and aspire to doing great work, not to have fuzzy hair and charisma but patchy people skills.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685511
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685707
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685731
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686195
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686123
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686721
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28701045
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685647
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686123
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686707
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685731
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685845
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28691783
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685589
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687073
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685749
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28692107
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28691615
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685979
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28689099
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685749
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686099
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685579
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685755
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685511
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685685
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685589
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28689641
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_93</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685427
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685523
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685949
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687713
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28697489
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686191
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687717
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687035
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685455
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28689427
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685557
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685861
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685767
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685455
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28703981
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685455
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685603
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_94</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685673
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687895
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686301
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28689785
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_96</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685427
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685595
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686941
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28689015
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28689155
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_86</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685589
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686703
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686123
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686765
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686043
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_91</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685455
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28689763
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686779
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685837
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28693373
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685573
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685589
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28691979
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685837
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28689829
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685511
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28693521
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685427
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685523
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28691745
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685579
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685763
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687081
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28692155
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685491
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_85</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687655
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687713
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28694619
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685673
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28688611
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_84</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685749
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686461
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685589
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686869
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686123
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686721
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28701349
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686301
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28690269
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685777
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28692439
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685789
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685589
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28688303
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28688631
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685427
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28693455
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28694483
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685557
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687267
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686829
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28690403
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28689389
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685443
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685559
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685705
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_95</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685579
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685709
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687701
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685455
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685881
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687713
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28694059
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685557
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685867
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687411
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28690603
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685553
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28690413
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687661
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28707515
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686731
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685589
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686035
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685589
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685921
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685731
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686173
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_89</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685589
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28688541
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686251
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_92</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28700783
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685731
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685819
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_88</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687449
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28689581
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685443
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686183
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685455
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685591
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686401
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685525
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687795
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687023
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28688925
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687449
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28691867
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685495
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685803
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28691105
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_87</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685873
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685557
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685847
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28688185
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_90</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685749
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686023
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685455
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686911
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685427
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685595
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686007
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685455
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685619
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2154229_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28688489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28694759
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2154229.29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685673
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28688611
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687895
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2154229.27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686865
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2154229.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686185
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2154229.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686137
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2154229.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685435
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2154229.28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685579
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685763
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685709
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687701
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685755
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2154229.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685427
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28693455
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685595
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686941
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686007
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685523
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685949
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28691745
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2154229.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685511
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28693521
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685685
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685707
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2154229.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28691785
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2154229.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687449
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28691867
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28689581
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2154229.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685803
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28691105
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2154229.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685421
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685471
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685705
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686251
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685557
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685867
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687411
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685861
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687267
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685847
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685789
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685573
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685777
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685647
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687655
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686779
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28689015
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685767
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686043
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687661
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28689155
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685495
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28694483
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685837
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28689829
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28693373
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685491
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685873
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2154229.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685581
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2154229.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685615
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2154229.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685413
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28689389
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687035
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28688185
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686731
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28688925
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28689099
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28700783
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685979
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28690413
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685553
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28691615
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687023
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28692439
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28707515
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686401
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685731
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685845
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28691783
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686195
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685819
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686173
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28688631
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686191
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687717
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28690603
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2154229.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685749
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686099
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686461
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28692107
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686023
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2154229.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686829
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28690403
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2154229.32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687713
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28694619
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28697489
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28694059
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2154229.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685415
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2154229.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685589
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686035
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28689641
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686869
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686703
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685921
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687073
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28691979
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28688541
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28688303
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2154229.30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687595
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2154229.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685791
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2154229.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685525
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687795
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2154229.33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686349
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2154229.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686301
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28690269
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28689785
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2154229.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686123
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686707
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686765
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686721
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28701045
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28701349
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2154229.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685443
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685559
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686183
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2154229.31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687081
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28692155
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2154229.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687541
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2154229.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28687815
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2154229.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685455
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28703981
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685603
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685619
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28689763
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685591
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686911
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28689427
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685881
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2154229.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28688489
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28694759
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2154229.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28685449
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2154229.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2154229.28686011
</commentlist>
</conversation>
