In Defense of "Silly" Science: A Conversation with Carly Anne York

By Lauren Koenig

Carly Anne York didn't set out to become a science communicator—she just kept saying yes to meaningful opportunities.

Now, as the author of The Salmon Cannon and the Levitating Frog And Other Serious Discoveries of Silly Science, she's defending curiosity-driven research at a time when it's increasingly under threat. Her book highlights seemingly odd research projects—HeroRATs detecting tuberculosis, frogs levitating in magnetic fields, and yes, salmon cannons—that have contributed to breakthrough innovations and driven economic growth.

York is currently an associate professor at Lenoir-Rhyne University and has spent her career translating complex research into accessible stories that she's shared across diverse platforms. Here, she discusses finding narratives within scientific research, the importance of optimism in science communication, and why basic research is like turning on a light in a dark room.

Image courtesy of Carly Anne York

​Your career spans teaching, research, writing for different audiences, science communication across multiple platforms, and running an animal sanctuary​--one of its adorable inhabitants has even gone viral! What led you to build this kind of portfolio career rather than following a more traditional single-track academic path?

I didn’t set out to build a “portfolio career” so much as I kept saying yes to opportunities that felt meaningful. I’ve always loved animals, so studying them, and eventually running an animal sanctuary, was never a separate decision; it’s just part of who I am. I also never intentionally set out to become a science communicator. In fact, I was communicating science to the public long before I even knew there was a name for it. It always felt important to me that scientific knowledge didn’t stay locked behind academic walls. Most of that journey started very informally, with a Twitter account, but it grew as I realized how even small moments of connection are important.

As a science communicator, you're part of a growing wave of women making science more accessible across a variety of platforms: TED-Ed, YouTube, podcasts, and also writing books for children and adults. How have you noticed the landscape changing for women in STEM and science communication during your career?  

I see a real shift: more women owning their voices across platforms and redefining what expertise looks like. That said, the playing field still isn’t level. Women are often expected to be more accessible, more polished, more everything—and criticism can be harsher. But there’s also strength in community. Women in science communication amplify one another, collaborate openly, and push back against the idea that there’s only one “right” way to be a scientist.

One of the book's strengths is how you use storytelling to make complex science accessible and memorable. How did you develop that skill—learning to find the narrative in scientific research? And has bringing these kinds of stories into your classroom changed how your students engage with the material?  

I spent so much time reading scientific papers that I couldn’t help but wonder about the people behind the research. Scientists are endlessly fascinating, so finding the narratives within the science came naturally. What was harder was learning to let go of my academic writing voice and instead tell accessible stories for a general audience. I’ve seen that shift most clearly in the classroom. When students begin to see science as a human process rather than a collection of facts to memorize, they ask better questions. They’re less afraid of being wrong. And they start to see themselves not just as consumers of knowledge, but as potential contributors to it.

Was there a particular story in the book that became your personal favorite to research, or one that changed how you think about science? And were there any stories you loved that didn't make the final cut?

I love the section on the HeroRATs. I honestly could write an entire book about them. The HeroRAT program is such a remarkable initiative, harnessing rats’ extraordinary sense of smell to save human lives. 

Some of the success stories in the book took decades or even centuries to be realized. When students and early-career researchers face skepticism about "silly" research where applications might seem like a stretch, how can they make the case for its value today—whether to funders, advisors, or just family at the holiday dinner table? As you write in your book, "It has been estimated that more than half of all economic growth comes from innovations that began in the world of basic discovery." Are there particular strategies or ways of framing the conversation that you've seen resonate?
  
I think the quote you used here is incredibly powerful! That along with the statistic that it takes about 30 years to often see knowledge that we acquired through basic research translate into real-world applications. I also like to say that basic research is like turning on a light in a dark room. You can’t solve a problem if you can’t see the tool to fix it. 

Science communication sometimes gets criticized for oversimplifying or sensationalizing research, but your book strikes a really nice balance—staying accessible without sacrificing nuance. How do you navigate that tension between accessibility and accuracy, both in your writing and in your teaching?

I think of it as translation, not simplification. You can make something understandable without making it shallow. That means being honest about uncertainty, avoiding hype, and trusting your audience to handle nuance. In teaching, I’m transparent about what we don’t know yet. In writing, I let complexity exist, but I try to guide readers through it instead of dropping them into the deep end.

Your book highlights how some of the best scientific breakthroughs come from collaborations that often come about by chance—like the biologist studying humpback whale tubercules who collaborated with engineers and an entrepreneur to create more efficient wind turbine design. Yet academic funding is inherently competitive. What are your thoughts on this tension between the collaborative nature of discovery and the competitive structure of research?

This tension is real. Discovery thrives on collaboration, but funding structures often reward isolation and speed over openness. Some of the most exciting breakthroughs happen at the edges between disciplines, often through chance encounters. I think we need systems that reward generosity and shared credit, not just individual productivity. Science advances fastest when we stop treating knowledge like a scarce resource.

The book's humor and optimistic tone really stands out, and what makes it so refreshing is that it's grounded in real stories—scientists actually succeeding in changing narratives and public perception, not just sugarcoating the challenges. In a time when conversations about academia often focus on burnout, funding cuts, and skepticism, why was it important to you to write with such optimism about science? What do you want readers to feel about the future of curiosity-driven research?

There’s a lot of negativity around science right now, between funding cuts and increasing skepticism in the public, and while those issues are real, we’re also drowning in discouraging narratives. I really believe you catch more flies with honey. I wanted to take a lighter approach to a heavy topic and remind people why science is still something worth caring about.

For students or early-career scientists who want to start sharing their work publicly—whether through social media, blogs, videos, or other platforms—what advice would you give them as they're getting started? What do you wish you'd known when you began?

Start small. Be authentic. And don’t wait for permission. You don’t need to be an “expert” on everything, just honest about what you know and what you’re learning. I wish I’d known earlier that not everyone will like your work, and that’s okay. Find the audience that does resonate with you, and build from there.

Now that the book is out in the world, what projects are you most excited about—whether in your teaching, science communication, or your animal sanctuary work? What has you energized right now?  
I’m incredibly excited to start another book. I loved the research process, and I can’t wait to dive back into more stories of discovery!

Lauren Koenig

Lauren Koenig is Editor-in-Chief of the Scientista Foundation and a science writer whose work appears on the Scientista blog and other science news sites. She holds a PhD in biology and works in UX research in academic publishing.