 |
| Shankbone, David. "Felisa Wolfe-Simon 2011 Shankbone". 2/5/2016 via Wikipedia. Attribution 3.0 Unported. |
In general, she appears as an American female in her mid to late thirties. Her facial structure is sharp and defined, and her features are clear and symmetrical. Her auburn hair falls in waves over her scarf and Northface jacket when she is working outside, and over her medium-length, neutral-colored dresses when she is giving a presentation.
Amidst the insanity that she was forced to deal with following the initial discrepancy, Wolfe-Simon was able to maintain her composure when speaking with the media. During interviews, she answered questions calmly and honestly, stating that she does not intend to let the media inhibit her from continuing her work.
On paper, Wolfe-Simon sounds as though she is a mature and honest biologist whose sole purpose is to invoke an interest in science in those who are not familiar. When listening to her speak, however, her tone approaches condescending, and her speeches seem staged. She utilizes facial expressions and hand gestures to get her points across and to convey emotion, but the flow in her words is lacking.
What claims has she made?
In this video from YouTube, Wolfe-Simon states that "all life on Earth required [the six major elements]... I've shown here today that we've discovered a microbe that can substitute arsenic for phosphorus in its major bio molecules."
As this statement encompassed the bulk of the controversial study, there was a lot of hype surrounding the release of the information at the NASA press conference. Because of this, and because of her brief explanation of what doors this could open for scientists, Wolfe-Simon's speech appealed to emotions of viewers across the globe.
Due to the overall lack of explanation on the study itself, there was little to no credibility awarded to Wolfe-Simon's claim. In addition, as information about the procedures followed began to surface, more skepticism arose.
Because the other stakeholders include her team and those who published their work, this claim is nearly identical to claims of the others. By process of elimination, Wolfe-Simon has the least in common with NASA, as they are a giant, world-renowned organization, and she is a small scale individual biologist.
In an interview with Science Magazine during the aftershock, Wolfe-Simon responds to the criticism and to the media. She states multiple times that her main goal in releasing any prior or future information is to spark an interest in science, and to further the knowledge of the science community.
In implying that her intentions are everything but selfish, Wolfe-Simon is appealing to the emotions of the audience. The claim is backed by her continued interest in collaboration on future projects, and by her incessant reminders in the interview.
In general, the claim is sort of similar to those of the other stakeholders, such as NASA and Science Magazine. It is implied that the two organizations will similarly continue to collaborate with other scientists, and that their intend to use their resources for the betterment of the science community.
Finally, found in this article is a well-hidden and bold claim made by Wolfe-Simon. She states, "There is nothing in the data of these new papers that contradicts our published data." Due to the fact that I came across this quote buried in the depths of the internet, I would assume that it did not carry much weight in the controversy.
Similarly, because the whole event unfolded so quickly, it is safe to infer that there was not a lot of time between this quote and her subsequent apologies and recognition of her mistakes. Because the situation ended the way it did in terms of who was correct and who wasn't, this claim was not given much attention.
No comments:
Post a Comment