Monty and a camper at Camp Inquiry '09

Let me tell you a story about one of Monty’s songs. Monty and I met at Camp Inquiry last summer, where he taught songwriting to the campers during the day, and entertained us with his own songs around the campfire in the evenings. It is hard to say which of his songs was our favorite, since they were all so fun, but one that had everyone humming all week was his astronomy-based ditty Roundy Round. Monty couldn’t come to camp this year, so my Handsome Skeptic Husband brought along his twelve-string and played several Monty tunes each evening as we ate S’mores. On the first night of camp this year, Roundy Round was new to many of the campers, but the younger girls who had been at camp last year jumped up to dance and spin in circles as soon as it began. By the end of the week, all the campers knew the song. I was surprised, though, at the last campfire, to see kids of all ages, even teenagers, jump up and start spinning in circles to Roundy Round. In my experience, it takes a lot to get a teenager to act goofy in front of their peers, and to let go and have fun, rather than worry about how they look. But the infectious fun, and sneaky science, of a Monty song has the power to get a cool teenager to let loose and enjoy the moment.

You could wait until later in the fall to buy Monty’s new album, or you can play a part now in getting it produced. Monty is crowd-sourcing the cost to professionally produce this album by getting pledges on Kickstarter. You can listen to Episode 21 of Podcast Beyond Belief to hear Monty explain the whole project, or watch the video on the Kickstarter page.

Monty is already more than half way to his goal, but the deadline of August 22, 2010, is fast approaching. If, instead of waiting to buy the album later, you go to Kickstarter and pledge $20 now, you will receive a physical copy of the CD once it is ready, as well as two bonus MP3s. Of course you could pledge more to help him reach his goal faster. In fact, if you pledge $750 or more he’ll give you and your group a free concert. $2000 or more will even get you your very own song, based on your favorite science topic, included on the album! This is a great idea for your local skeptics group. Band together to raise $2000, and Monty will write a song specifically for your group. How awesome!

Watch this fan video my Handsome (and Multi-Talented) Skeptic Husband made for Monty’s song Roundy Round and try to picture 70 people around a campfire, singing about Copernicus, and dancing in circles. Because Monty makes science fun.

Roundy Round by Monty Harper

He said, “The ceiling, too?”

“No, not the ceiling.”

“Well, then what color will you paint the ceiling?”

“It will stay white.”

“Well, what about the door? The floor?”

This makes perfect, logical sense. I told him I was going to paint the whole thing, and he accepted that as truth. Until I clarified what I really meant, which was not at all what I originally said.

This literalness can lead to wacky misunderstandings, but it can also lead to real problems. If children hear something that is not true, but is presented as fact, especially when it is ubiquitous in the media, and is being repeated by their friends, they naturally will believe it. And if this “fact” is that the world will end in just a few short years, and by extension everyone they love will die, this could possibly lead to real anxiety in kids.

I teach science to elementary school kids, and one day I had a group of 4th graders and we were discussing astronomy. One child raised his hand and asked if I had heard about the planet that is going to hit the earth in 2012. I asked who else had heard this, and they all raised their hands. I spent some time explaining why it isn’t true, and why I’m not at all worried, and how I think these type rumors can be spread by TV and movies. If there were any kids in that class who were actually worried, I hope I allayed their fears.

This shows me that there are probably very few kids who haven’t heard at least something about the 2012 myth. Maybe your kids have heard it, and are at least a little worried. So, just in case, let’s make a pact. All of us will bring this up at dinner tonight, and explain to our kids what the rumors are, and why they aren’t true, and why we aren’t worried. OK?

But, wait, how best to explain it all? It’s complicated! Astronomy blog Universe Today has many, many articles about the 2012 nonsense. Here’s an article by David Morrison in Skeptical Inquirer about the subject. The 2012 Hoax.org website has tons of in-depth information about where this myth came from, why it isn’t true, and who the people are who are profiting from this hoax. They also link to an article in the Examiner that discusses what to do and say if your child already is anxious and upset about 2012.

Once you have learned enough to make a compelling case, have that discussion with your kids. Start with general questions like, “What’s 2012?”, and “Have you ever heard of the Mayan Calendar?” to see if they have already heard about it, and what they think they know. Then tell them about your research.

Afterward, come back here and share with us how it went.

I am interested in science and science education, and I firmly believe that a great way for kids to learn science is to give them the chance to do it themselves. There are a gazillion fun, easy science experiments your kids can do at home using everyday household items! My goal with this series is to show you, dear readers and dear podcast listeners, how to do a few, so maybe you can try them with your kids!

There are several different types of gooey science that you can make, and people call each by different names. The one we will make today is what I call oobleck, but many people call it goo, glop or quicksand goo, and it is basically cornstarch and water. (Not to be confused with silly putty or slime, which are both polymers.)

Oobleck gets its name from a Dr. Seuss book called “Bartholomew and the Oobleck“, in which the King of Didd decides he’s bored with the regular weather, so he asks his magicians to make something different. Unfortunately, what then falls from the sky is ooey, gloppy oobleck, which turns out to be the kingdom’s largest environmental disaster ever. The king asks for advice, and Bartholomew solves the crises by suggesting the king admit he made a mistake in thinking he needed to use magic to improve on nature, and to say he was sorry. This happily causes the oobleck to melt away. So, while we wait for the CEO of a certain oil company to apologize, we can make our own oobleck!

Required supplies:

Corn starch
Water
Measuring cups
Spoons or popsicle sticks to stir with
Cups or bowls
Ziplock bag or airtight container for storage

How to:

Use two parts corn starch to one part water, for example 1/2 cup of cornstarch and 1/4 cup of water.
You can add a drop or two of food coloring, if desired.
Stir until all the powder is incorporated. If the ratio is right, it is hard to stir, but flows together when you stop stirring. Small children may need help with stirring.

To observe:

With gentle treatment, oobleck acts like a liquid.
With harsh treatment, oobleck acts like a solid.
For example, if you slowly push your finger down into the oobleck, the fluid will behave like a liquid and allow your finger to enter. However, if you quickly poke the oobleck with your finger, your finger will bounce off the surface, like a solid. Also, you can quickly roll a small amount into a ball and hold it in your fingers for a moment, before it begins to run and drip.

What’s happening:

Oobleck is what is called a non-Newtonian fluid. Non-Newtonian fluids act very strangely because they do not have a constant coefficient of viscosity. Regular fluids have a constant viscosity. Viscosity is the measure of how easily a fluid flows. For example, water has a low viscosity and flows easily, whereas maple syrup has a higher viscosity, and flows less readily. Oobleck’s viscosity changes depending on what you do to it. If you apply a force to it very quickly (poke it), its viscosity increases, and it resists flow, and seems solid. If you treat it more gently, and apply smaller forces over longer amounts of time (push finger in slowly), it flows more easily. Weird!

Clean up and Storage

Oobleck cleans up easily with a damp cloth and water. It is super messy on little hands, so we limit it to the kitchen table. You can store it for a few days in an airtight container in the refrigerator to prevent mold.

For even more cornstarch fun, check out Steve Spangler’s website, where his son Jack explains how to make cornstarch monsters (shapes that dance and jump around) using oobleck and an old stereo!

The strange properties of oobleck were ridiculously demonstrated using 1000 pounds of cornstarch by the Mythbusters. Don’t try this at home!!

So now our son can say hello in Chinese, and all my smugness about my plans to keep him away from the TV have evaporated.  TV is a tool.  Example:  Daddy had to go to class tonight, and goodbyes are tough.  The answer?  Latest Ni Ho Kai Lan episode.  And a couple animal cookies.  Totally eases the pain.

Sure, you can judge me, but ask yourself:  wouldn’t that ease your pain?  Cookies and TV.  Does it get any better?  No!  Don’t even try to lie.

So here’s a study (found via Stats.org) that shows what the negative effects of TV on toddlers.  We try to limit it to thirty minutes.  But who am I kidding?  We fail.  Often.  This study has shown up in a few places, including the LA Times:

A large-scale, long-running Canadian study of children found that for every extra hour of TV time a toddler watches weekly, she is likely in fourth grade to have lower levels of classroom engagement and poorer performance in math, is more likely to be the victim of bullying, to be sedentary and to have a higher body-mass index.

Dangit.  How do I rectify this with my firm belief that TV is awesome?

We’re not really sedentary people.  We get the boy to the park daily.  Twice a day on weekends.  We play with him.  We build Duplo stuff with him.  And we also hang out with him while he watches his shows, and we chat.  I feel like somehow, we must be the exception here.  We’re just so amazing that TV can’t hurt our giant brains, right?

But I guess I’ll scale it back a bit.  Thirty minutes a day.  Fine.  I mean for the kid, not me.

This routine took place during a “World of Dance” competition and the internet is abuzz with outrage over the bawdy moves and risqué costumes. While talented, the dancers do sort of look like…well, women who dance for a living--and I’m not talking about at the Met. Two of the parents made an appearance on ABC’s Good Morning America to defend the video. They say it was taken out of context and never meant to be viewed by millions of strangers. Apparently, this type of routine is normal, according to the parents.

What bothers me, other than this lame explanation, is the crowd reaction. The bumping and grinding get the biggest cheer from the crowd, which surely is made up of kids, parents and other adults. It’s all just so weird to watch. But, are we overreacting?

Yes, the girls dance in a sexually suggestive manner, but they won’t automatically become promiscuous later in life. That assumption would be ridiculous. I took a lot of dance classes as a young girl and we had recitals and performances. The costumes probably were a little more bathing suit-like than burlesque, but still pretty form fitting. Still, I don’t remember doing moves like this. Not because I couldn’t do them (I couldn’t) but because I shouldn’t. Like Chris Rock said, just because you CAN drive with your feet doesn’t mean you SHOULD. Just because an 8-year old can shake her moneymaker doesn’t mean she should.

So, I don’t fault the girls. The song is catchy and they are clearly great dancers. Long-term harm? Most likely none. But, I’m wondering what kind of parents think this is normal? What world these parents have immersed themselves in where this is age appropriate?

Or, am I just out of touch with what “age appropriate” means?

Let’s hear it, moms and dads out there. Weigh in on what your reaction was….

Atheism is not this cold, arbitrary, removed thought process or ideology that promotes immortality or unethical behavior, as so many people think. In fact, atheism generally includes quite an extensive set of rational beliefs that just about everyone can agree with (or at least not disagree with); the general public just doesn’t know enough about it, and they have a lot of disinformation and misinformation to sort through in order to come to some sort of a conclusion that’s based on fact.

And I am worried a bit about how to explain to my now-16-month-old daughter, as she gets older, exactly what Mom and Dad believe, why we believe it, and why we so often seem to disregard the beliefs of other people she encounters, especially the beliefs repeated by their children.

Children are amazingly insightful and intuitive. I’ve met very few children who couldn’t sense discontent when adults around them were trying to mask it. And I’ve met very few children who aren’t really listening to every little thing you say even when you think they’re not. (Perhaps this is evolution in one of its finer moments.) So when my daughter, Lulu, comes into contact with someone who tells her that a god is real and if she doesn’t believe she’ll go to hell, or when one of the kids in her class says to her that her kitty may have died but is in heaven, I know I have to say more than just “Oh, we don’t believe that, sweetie. Here, finish your dinner.”

Because that’s not true! Who is the “we” here? Your dad and I? No, we don’t, but you might. Really. Does it make sense to you? Do you think it’s possible? What evidence do you have? Do you think you need evidence to come to a conclusion about something like this? And if not, why not?

We’re rational people. We’re not closed-minded, but we’re also not so open-minded that our brains fall out. We encourage critical thinking. In fact, I want nothing more than to encourage critical thinking in my child, because regardless of where it leads her, it will always guide her.

For just as the parents who teach faith as fact to their children acknowledge that the child will most likely repeat it to other children, our children will repeat, in some form, our responses. Civility is key here, but misunderstanding in this kind of situation can so easily happen, especially with such vested interests in these kinds of beliefs.

So I ask the rational parents out there—all of you: atheists, theists, nontheists, and anyone in between—how have you handled a situation in which your child was confronted with faith as fact? What do you do? How do you explain it? What advice can you give other parents who really need some guidance on how to confront this problem?

The top places to be a mom are Norway, Australia, and Iceland. The worst places are Chad, Niger and then Afghanistan at the very bottom. Surprising (to me) was that the U.S. ranks 28th, which is actually down a spot from the previous year. Here’s why:

One in every 4,800 American women dies due to pregnancy. It’s one of the highest maternal-morbidity rates in the developed world. To put that number into perspective, in Bosnia, Herzegovina, Greece and Italy, the risk of maternal death is less than one in 25,000 — and in Ireland, it’s less than one in 47,600.

But it’s not just American moms who die due to pregnancy: American babies don’t fare so well, either. Our infant-mortality rate is pretty dismal for the developed world, with eight out of every 1,000 children dying before their fifth birthdays. A child born in the U.S. is more than twice as likely as a child born in Finland, Iceland, Sweden or Singapore to die before his fifth birthday. Also, the U.S. has the least-generous maternity-leave policy of any developed country, fewer women in elected government positions than other developed countries and fewer kids enrolled in preschool.

The list illustrates that access to education, economic opportunities and proper health care provide the best chance for mothers and children to survive and thrive. In the U.S., we should do a lot better. So, what’s the deal with the ranking?

First, let’s look at infant mortality.

“Infant mortality is defined as the number of children born alive who die after birth — but this differs state to state and country to country,” said Dr. Benjamin Sachs, a fellow of the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

For example, he says in the U.S., a baby born at 17 weeks who later died would be considered a miscarriage. But, a baby born at 23 weeks who later died would count towards the infant mortality rate, even though it only had a 20% chance of survival outside the womb. In some other countries, this would instead be considered a miscarriage.

Abortion politics in the U.S. also are thought to play a factor.

“About 20 percent of the children who die in the U.S. do so from birth defects,” said Sachs. “In a country that has a liberal abortion policy, those children will die in abortion — some countries even allow third-trimester abortions so their rates [of infant mortality] are going to be lower,” he said.

Next, let’s look at maternal mortality, which is shockingly high for a country so rich as ours. Only, that’s the difference. If you’re a rich American, you’re more likely to be better educated, with better health care. But, if you’re in a lower economic class, or an illegal immigrant, you’re at greater risk.

Powers said Save the Children’s research has also found that pregnant “minority” women who seek medical care do not end up getting the same quality of care as pregnant women “in the majority.”

That is appalling.

There are 40 million people in the U.S. without health insurance, a large population of which are illegal immigrants. The doctors interviewed agreed that the rates would improve if every pregnant woman were guaranteed access to health care.

Also, other factors at play may include the obesity epidemic here as well as the older age of some mothers.

The bottom line: Maternal and infant mortality rates are complicated issues where more than one factor may be at fault. Still, the U.S. has a long way to go–especially when it comes to maternity leave, flexible workplaces, and affordable health care. We can do better for our mothers.

Photo

Yep, you read that right. Take them and leave them. Alone.

Lenore explains it best in her blog:

The crime rate in America is back to where it was in the early ’70s. Crime was going up then, and it peaked around 20 years later. By the mid ’90s it was coming down and continues to do so. So the strange fact — very hard to digest — is that if YOU were playing outside in the ’70s or ’80s, your kids today are safer than you were! I know it doesn’t feel that way. In fact, here’s an interesting poll about how the majority of people feel crime is going up when actually its going down. But anyway, the point is:

Most of us used to play outside in the park, without our parents, without cell phones, without Purell or bottled water and we survived! Thrived! We cherish the memories! And if you believe the million studies that I’m always publishing here, kids are healthier, happier and better-adjusted if they get to spend some time each day in “free play,” without adults hovering.

I know there will be shrill voices insisting, “Predators are gonna love this holiday!” but keep a level head. Crime is down. Awareness is up. There is safety in numbers, which means getting kids outside again, together. This won’t happen until we actually start DOING IT.

She makes a great case about how we (Americans) are hovering over our kids too much. Let them play outside! Have you walked around in your neighborhood recently? I have, and I don’t see what I remember from MY childhood, which was a bunch of kids running around playing games together. We played hide-n-seek, kick the can, Red Rover, and more. Do kids still play those games outside?

I’m JUST as guilty as the next paranoid mom. But, I think I know why. When I was in elementary school, a girl in the grade above mine was raped and murdered on her way home from school. I knew her well and was friendly with her family. Did it traumatize me? You bet. And, our community changed the very day that happened. Parents kept their kids home after that day. (The murderer was never caught, so that didn’t help relieve parental anxiety.) There was a definite shift in the way kids were treated. No more walking home from school…no more playing outside. It’s sad, really, because another incident never happened and the kids were the ones to suffer.

But, as Lenore herself says, “Free-Range Kids never says there is no risk in the world, only that the risk is small and worth taking, as it always has been. The trade-off is kids who make up games, who solve problems, who discover nature and get moving (to coin a phrase). Kids who don’t need a screen to entertain them. Playing outside, on their own, is what kids all over the world do. We have forgotten how vital and wonderful it is.”

So, let’s embrace this day and get our kids back outside in neighborhoods.

[Via Motherlode / NYTimes]

Photo

The wonderfully insightful Lenore Skenazy (of Free Range Kids) argues that we’re overdoing it. Our kids don’t need us to jump through hoops to keep them entertained. Let THEM do it themselves.

You must play with your kids is so ingrained that we feel terrible when we’re bored sick by the idea of pouring another imaginary cup of tea. But maybe, like most pain, that boredom is trying to tell us something: Kiddie games are for KIDS. They really don’t need us!

No one is saying to neglect your kids. There are times for museums, classes, swim lessons, and games of Chutes and Ladders with Dad. However, it’s also important to let children do their own thing without an adult giving direction. Sometimes we forget that.

So, thanks to Lenore for the reminder!

Photo

The site, based on this series of books, is targeted toward tween girls:

What would it be like to build the first robot that could interact with people? Or to study human remains in search of criminal evidence? In Women’s Adventures in Science, readers will learn about the trailblazing women who are leaders in a variety of scientific fields, from robotics to forensics.

The site looks like a lot of fun and I hope that it inspires more young girls to embrace science.

[Via Science-Based Parenting]