Notes

1. Edward O. Wilson, Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge (New York: Vintage Books; 1998).

2. H. Allen Orr, “The Big Picture,” see http://bostonreview.net/archives/BR23.5ZOrr. html, 1998.

3. Karl Popper, “Survey of Some Fundamental Problems,” in Logic of Scientific Discovery (New York: Routledge; 2002), pp. 3-26. This essay is a brief, exceptionally clear and readable introduction to Popper's thinking.

4. Peter Godfrey-Smith, Theory and Reality (Chicago: University ofChicago Press; 2003).

5. Massimo Pigliucci, Nonsense on Stilts. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 2010).

6. Francis Crick, The Astonishing Hypothesis: The Scientific Search for the Soul (New York: Touchstone; 1994); also, Daniel Dennett, Consciousness Explained (New York: Back Bay Books; 1991); Christof Koch, Confessions of a Romantic Reductionist (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2012);

7. Brian Greene, The Elegant Universe: Superstrings, Hidden Dimensions, and the Quest for the Ultimate Theory (New York: Vintage Books; 2003).

8. Pigliucci, Nonsense, pp. 33-40. Although I disagree with Pigliucci's conclusions re­garding the demarcation problem, his chapter on “Almost Science” is a nice overview of the issues confronting modern physics and other scientific projects in the “transi­tional zone” between science and pseudoscience.

9. Jordi Cat, “The Unity of Science,” in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2014 ed.), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2014/entries/ scientific-unity/.

10. The notion of science as aiming to give one “tidy account” has been much debated in the context of the pluralism of science and in the relationship of science to femi­nist and multicultural concerns. Scientific monism is opposed to pluralism, and the concepts encompass issues such as demarcation and reductionism among others. Cf. Sandra Harding, Objectivity and Diversity: Another Logic of Scientific Research (Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 2015); see, e.g., chapter 5, “Pluralism, Multiplicity, and the Disunity of Science,” for an overview of some of these matters.

11. Daniel Dennett, Darwin’s Dangerous Idea: Evolution and the Meanings of Life (New York: Simon & Schuster; 1995).

12. Steven Weinberg, “Against Philosophy,” in Dreams of a Final Theory: The Scientist’s Search for the Ultimate Laws of Nature (New York: Vintage Books; 1994), pp. 166-190. Weinberg makes essentially the same distinctions between kinds of reductionism as Dennett does; Weinberg adds that the findings of particle physicists are simply not useful to less fundamental science. This essay of Weinberg responds to a notorious tract by the philosopher Paul Feyerabend, Against Method, that argued that the prin­ciple for understanding “science” was “anything goes.”

13. John Tooby and Leda Cosmides, “The Psychological Foundations of Culture,” in Jerome Barkow, Leda Cosmides, and John Tooby (Eds.), The Adapted Mind: Evolutionary Psychology and the Generation of Culture (New York: Oxford University Press; 1992).

14. Tooby, Cosmides, Adapted Mind, chapter 1.

15. Steven L. Goldman, Science Wars: What Scientists Know and How They Know It (Chantilly, VA: The Teaching Company; 2006).

16. Paul R. Gross and Norman Levitt, Higher Superstition: The Academic Left and Its Quarrels with Science (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press; 1994).

17. Margo Wilson and Martin Daly, “The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Chattel,” in Barkow, Cosmides, and Tooby (Eds.), Adapted Mind, chapter 7.

18. Roger Shepard, “The Perceptual Organization ofColor: An Adaptation to Regularities in the Terrestrial World,” in Barkow, Cosmides, and Tooby (Eds.), Adapted Mind, chapter 13,

19. Gordon F. Orians and Judith Heerwagen, “Evolved Responses to Landscapes,” in Barkow, Cosmides, and Tooby (Eds.), Adapted Mind, chapter 15.

20. Popper, “The Problem of the Empirical Basis,” Logic. Chapter 5 is the source for the discussion in this section.

21. Glenn Branch, “Whence Lumpers and Splitters?,” https://ncse.com/blog/2014/11/ whence-lumpers-splitters-0016004

22. Alvarez hypothesis; see Paul R.

23. Clifford Geertz, “Local Knowledge: Further Essays in Interpretive Anthropology,” https://monoskop.org/File:GGeertz_Clifford_Local_Knowledge_Further_Essays_ in_Interpretive_Anthrop ology_1983.pdf.

24. Sandra Harding, Objectivity and Diversity: Another Logic of Scientific Research (Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 2015).

25. Bryan Magee, Philosophy and the Real World: An Introduction to Karl Popper (London: Open Court; 1985).

26. Robert W Wilson, “The Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation,” Nobel Prize lecture, http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1978/wilson- lecture.pdf, 1978. Penzias and Wilson intended to measure fundamental cosmolog­ical properties; however, their discovery of the CMBR resulted from their attempts to improve their telescope’s performance.

27. J. Kimmelman, J. S. Mogil, and U. Dirnagl, “Distinguishing Between Exploratory and Confirmatory Preclinical Research Will Improve Translation,” PLoS Biology 12:e1001863, 2014. See also S. C. Landis, S. G. Amara, K. Asadullah, C. P. Austin, R. Blumenstein, E. W Bradley, et al., “A Call for Transparent Reporting to Optimize the Predictive Value of Preclinical Research,” Nature 490:187-191, 2012.

28. Christine L. Borgman, Big Data, Little Data, No Data: Scholarship in the Networked World (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2015)

29. “Big Science-Little Science” distinction made by Derek de Solla Price, quoted in Borgmann, Big Data, pp. 5-7.

30. Size is, of course, relative. Years ago, some faculty colleagues and I heard that a US Senator from Maryland had expressed interest in visiting a “small laboratory” at our university. To the question of how small a lab the Senator had in mind, the answer was, “Oh, nothing with a budget over $3 million dollars a year.” We had a good laugh at that.

31. In a typical plot, the magnitude of the dataset, y = f(x), is plotted against the numbers of laboratories (x), increasing to the right on the x-axis. Working with a dataset that large; f(x) = x^-2; i.e., the size of the dataset decreases as the negative square of the num­bers of laboratories.

32. Borgman, Big Data, p. 5.

33. Ibid., p. 8. See also Adam R. Ferguson, Jessica L. Nielson, Melissa H. Cragin, Anita E. Bandrowski, and Maryann E. Martone, “Big Data from Small Data: Data-Sharing in the ‘Long Tail' of Neuroscience,” Nature Neuroscience 17:1442-1447, 2014.

34. “Omics” like “omes,” are English neologisms loosely related to a Greek language stem. The “ome” suffix has come to refer to the totality of a subject matter, and “omics,” is the study of an “ome.” Evidently they are not recent coinages, however. Reportedly, “biome” appeared in print in 1916; see https://en.wiktionaryorg/wiki/Appendix:Suffixes_-ome_and_-omics.

35. International Consortium Completes Human Genome Project, “All Goals Achieved; New Vision for Genome Research Unveiled,” http://www.genome.gov/11006929

36. Ryan C. Shean, Negar Makhsous, Rodney L. Crawford, Keith R. Jerome, and Alexander L. Greninger, “Draft Genome Sequences of Six Novel Picorna-Like Viruses from Washington State Spiders,” Genome Announcement 5: e01705-16, 2017.

37. S. R. Gill, M. Pop, R. T. Deboy, P. B. Eckburg, P. J. Turnbaugh, B. S. Samuel, et al., “Metagenomic Analysis of the Human Distal Gut Microbiome,” Science 312:1355­1359, 2006; P. J. Turnbaugh, R. E. Ley, M. Hamady, C. M. Fraser-Liggett, R. Knight, and J. I. Gordon, “The Human Microbiome Project,” Nature.449:804-810, 2007; Human microbiome project at the NIH; see https://hmpdacc.org/hmp/

38.

39. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fecal_microbiota_transplant

40. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fecal-transplants-may-up-risk- of-obesity-onset/

41. Santiago Ramon y Cajal, Advice for a Young Investigator, translated by Neeley Swanson and Larry W Swanson (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1999).

42. Initial guesses as to the number of human genes ranged from 50,000-140,000 to as high as 2 million in the mid-1960s (https://www.genome.gov/human-genome- project/What)As an intriguing twist, Gill et al., “Metagenomic Analysis” (Note 37), point out that the gut microbiome has about 100x more genes than the standard human genome, meaning that each of us is essentially a “human supra-organism” with a vastly larger genome than we realize.

43. I. Ezkurdia, D. Juan, J. M. Rodriguez, A. Frankish, M. Diekhans, J. Harrow et al., “Multiple Evidence Strands Suggest that There May Be as Few as 19,000 Human Protein-Coding Genes,” Human Molecular Genetics 23:5866-5878, 2014.

44. The animal with the most genes? The water flea! See https://www.wired.com/2011/ 02/water-flea-genome; https://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=118530

45. A. Cipriano and M. Ballarino, “The Ever-Evolving Concept of the Gene: The Use of RNA/Protein Experimental Techniques to Understand Genome Functions,” Frontiers in Molecular Bioscience 5:20, 2018.

46. Francis X. Diebold, “A Personal Perspective on the Origin(s) and Development of “Big Data”: The Phenomenon, the Term, and the Discipline,” Second Version. Penn Institute for Economic Research Working Paper No. 13-003, http://ssrn.com/ abstract=2202843.

47. Doug Laney, https://blogs.gartner.com/doug-laney/deja-vvvue-others-claiming- gartners-volume-velocity-variety-construct-for-big-data/, 2001.

48. 42 V's of big data: https://www.elderresearch.com/company/blog/42-v-of-big-data.

49. https://www.space.com/38471-gravitational-waves-neutron- star-crashes- discovery-explained.html.

50. M. Dehghani, K. Johnson, J. Hoover, E. Sagi, J. Garten, N. J. Parmar et al., “Purity Homophily in Social Networks,” Journal of Experimental Psychology, General 145:366-375,2016.

51. Mechanical Turk is an Amazon website where businesses can go to contract with workers who are paid to do a variety of online tasks; visit https://www.mturk.com/ worker/help.

52. P. W Anderson, “More Is Different,” Science 177:393-396, 1972.

53. D. A. Beard and M. J. Kushmerick, “Strong Inference for Systems Biology,” PLoS Computational Biology 5:e1000459.

54. http://livingknowledge.anu.edu.au/html/educators/02_questions.htm. The term “Indigenous Science” was coined by Dr. Apela Colorado (www.wisn.org); see also https://www.culturalsurvival.org/publications/cultural-survival-quarterly/ indigenous-science; http://blogs.nwic.edu/briansblog/files/2011/02/Discovering- Indigenous-TEK-Implications-for-Science.pdf.

55. https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidbressan/2017/07/05/indigenous-knowledge- helps-scientists-to-assess-climate-change/#5721d4e25527, Indig science and global warming; http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v6/n4/full/nclimate2954. html?WT.feed_name=subjects_climate-change-adaptation&foxtrotcallback=true; https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/article/61/6/477/225035/Linking- Indigenous-and-Scientific-Knowledge-of.

56. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrysopogon_zizanioides. Description of vet­iver grass (Chrysopogon zizanioide) and many of its uses; http://www.vetiver.org/ ICV3-Proceedings/SA_stemborer.pdf. Van den Berg et al. found that female stem borer moths preferred to lay eggs in vetiver grass than in corn (maize), but the sur­vival of their larvae was much lower in this grass than an alternative or in the corn. The authors suggest that vetiver grass can act as a protectant for crops such as corn and perhaps rice. Vetiver is also reputedly repellent to termites; see B. C. Zhu, G. Henderson, F. Chen, H. Fei, and R. A. Laine, “Evaluation of Vetiver Oil and Seven Insect-Active Essential Oils Against the Formosan Subterranean Termite,” Journal of Chemical Ecology 27:1617-1625, 2001.; http://lacoastpost.com/blog/lpTh1639 (and correspondence at end). The blog cites evidence that vetiver may not have advantages over native grasses.

57. https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/medicine/laureates/2015/tu-lecture.html; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_Youyou. Tu's successes were rooted in Indigenous science, and yet they relied heavily on modern science techniques, including the Scientific Method, careful record-keeping, controlled studies, animal models, clin­ical trials, and synthetic drug development. Owing to traditional cultural values and the atmosphere created by Mao Zedong's “cultural revolution,” Tu Youyou's name did not appear on the first papers describing artemisinin. For most of her life she lived in relative obscurity until two Western scientists eventually identified Tu as the person most responsible for discovering artemisinin. She had been known as the Professor of Three “Withouts”—without a graduate degree, without research experience abroad, and without membership in a prestigious scientific society.

58. David Casarett, Stoned: A Doctor’s Case for Medical Marijuana (New York: Penguin Books; 2015). A layman's summary by a skeptical physician of current information about effects and potential uses of medical marijuana; liberally laced with anecdotal, often witty, personal inquiries into the world of medical marijuana.

59. D. Fancourt, R. Perkins, S. Ascenso, L. A. Carvalho, A. Steptoe, and A. Williamon, “Effects of Group Drumming Interventions on Anxiety, Depression, Social Resilience and Inflammatory Immune Response among Mental Health Service Users,” PLoS One 14;11(3):e0151136, 2016.