Biology is for girlies

« Which century are we in again? | TMS: 50 not out »

Biology is for girlies

by loiswakeman @ 25/05/2007 – 10:00:01

"Do we actually need biology in this technological age?" – John Humphreys on the Today Programme this morning.

My opinion of journalists is not high as you can tell from other posts here, but can Mr Humphreys really be that stupid – or is he just being deliberately controversial?

Perhaps because he only 'did' frogs, amoebæ and rabbits' naughty bits at school some time last century, he imagines biology is a cissy science that isn't fit for the world today. I suspect he is not alone in that – but where do these people think that modern advances in gene therapy and medicine comes from, for instance? Media studies?
Options:
Tags:
- radio
- science
- bbc
- biology
- ignorance

6 Comments to Biology is for girlies

Hide subcomments

- Vort1gern
- http://
- 25/05/2007 @ 11:46:07
So Humphreys thinks "Facebook" is called "Faceback", and counts himself in the technologically enlightened?

He probably thinks all us kids (i.e those younger than 90) spend all our time on "gorgle" or looking things up on "wittypedia".

Best not mention cybernetics to him if he's got any qualms about the relevance of biology, although I expect he'll be reaping the benefits shortly when he starts cashing in the BBC health plan.
- Reply to comment
- Permalink
- LissaT ^Pro
- 25/05/2007 @ 14:55:17
At 14 I opted for music rather than biology as I knew that there would be no getting out of disection once it was serious O level subject. It was also my least good science, but, despite never dropping below 8th out of the 100 girls in my year at the grammar school in chemistry or below 5th in physics, I was not allowed to do either of these subjects as I was in the second group for maths (in theory 25th to 50th). This is going the long way around to tell you that, although I have no formal scientific education beyond the age of 14, I have no doubts as to the importance of biology in this techological age.
- Reply to comment
- Permalink
- sallyontour ^Pro
- 01/06/2007 @ 17:09:11
I'm afraid I ran out of the school biology lab screaming, never to return, after a plague of locusts escaped via my long hair (drama queen, moi?). Just as well, as I'm sure could never have dissected an eyeball without puking or fainting, or both.

That didn't stop me getting an 'ology in Anatomy & Physiology in my 30s though!

PS: Everyone knows Humphreys is a nobhead.
- - loiswakeman
  - http://lois.co.uk
  - 04/06/2007 @ 11:03:43
  You are speaking to the person who came to, and found herself slumped on the floor of the lab, having witnessed the ox's eyeball being cut open!
  
  Funnily enough, I was fine doing my own dissections - just not watching someone else.
  - Reply to comment
  - Permalink
- (Visitor)
- 13/06/2007 @ 13:35:23
I loved Biology and I was quite good too.

My favourite memory is of a giant trolley being wheeled in and being told that if anyone was squeamish, to leave //before// they saw what was under the sheet.

It was the windpipe, lungs and heart of a cow. Still all intact. I thought it was the most fascinating thing I'd ever seen.
- Reply to comment
- Permalink
- timsuzi ^Pro
- 20/08/2007 @ 17:45:19
Biology not needed in this technological age. One can imagine that Mr Humphries, like many of his media colleagues, think human behaviour can all be explained by nurture with no room for the possibility that perhaps nature is a rather significant player in explaining why we behave in the way that we do.
- Reply to comment
- Permalink