NASA, Yale, and Stanford Scientists Consider 'Scientific Exile' (404media.co) 218
An anonymous reader quotes a report from 404 Media: Last week, Aix Marseille University, France's largest university, invited American scientists who believe their work is at risk of being censored by Donald Trump administration's anti-science policies to continue their research in France. Today, the university announced that it is already seeing great interest from scientists at NASA, Yale, Stanford, and other American schools and government agencies, and that it wants to expand the program to other schools and European countries to absorb all the researchers who want to leave the United States. "We are witnessing a new brain drain," Eric Berton, Aix Marseille University's president, said in a press release. "We will do everything in our power to help as many scientists as possible continue their research. However, we cannot meet all demands on our own. The Ministry of Education and Research is fully supporting and assisting us in this effort, which is intended to expand at both national and European levels."
The press release from the university claims that researchers from Stanford, Yale, NASA, the National Institute of Health, George Washington University, "and about 15 other prestigious institutions," are now considering "scientific exile." More than 40 American scientists have expressed interest in the program, it said. Their key research areas are "health (LGBT+ medicine, epidemiology, infectious diseases, inequalities, immunology, etc.), environment and climate change (natural disaster management, greenhouse gases, social impact, artificial intelligence), humanities and social sciences (communication, psychology, history, cultural heritage), astrophysics."
"The current Executive Orders have led to a termination of one of my research grants. While it was not a lot of money, it was a high profile, large national study," one researcher who has reached out to Aix Marseille University in order to take advantage of the program told me. 404 Media granted the researcher anonymity because speaking about the program might jeopardize their current position at a leading American university. "While I have not had to lay off staff as a result of that particular cancellation, I will have to lay off staff if additional projects are terminated. Everything I focus on is now a banned word." The program, called "Safe Place for Science," initially will fund 15 researchers with 15 million Euros. Aix Marseille University says that it is already working closely with the regional government and France's Chamber of Commerce and Industry "to facilitate the arrival of these scientists and their families in the region, offering support with employment, housing, school access, transportation, and visas." "We are doing what is necessary to provide them with the best living environment. We are ready to welcome them and will make them true children of the country!" Renaud Muselier, President of the Regional Council of Provence-Alpes-Cote d'Azur, said in a statement.
The press release from the university claims that researchers from Stanford, Yale, NASA, the National Institute of Health, George Washington University, "and about 15 other prestigious institutions," are now considering "scientific exile." More than 40 American scientists have expressed interest in the program, it said. Their key research areas are "health (LGBT+ medicine, epidemiology, infectious diseases, inequalities, immunology, etc.), environment and climate change (natural disaster management, greenhouse gases, social impact, artificial intelligence), humanities and social sciences (communication, psychology, history, cultural heritage), astrophysics."
"The current Executive Orders have led to a termination of one of my research grants. While it was not a lot of money, it was a high profile, large national study," one researcher who has reached out to Aix Marseille University in order to take advantage of the program told me. 404 Media granted the researcher anonymity because speaking about the program might jeopardize their current position at a leading American university. "While I have not had to lay off staff as a result of that particular cancellation, I will have to lay off staff if additional projects are terminated. Everything I focus on is now a banned word." The program, called "Safe Place for Science," initially will fund 15 researchers with 15 million Euros. Aix Marseille University says that it is already working closely with the regional government and France's Chamber of Commerce and Industry "to facilitate the arrival of these scientists and their families in the region, offering support with employment, housing, school access, transportation, and visas." "We are doing what is necessary to provide them with the best living environment. We are ready to welcome them and will make them true children of the country!" Renaud Muselier, President of the Regional Council of Provence-Alpes-Cote d'Azur, said in a statement.
This is what America voted for. (Score:5, Insightful)
'nuff said.
Re:This is what America voted for. (Score:4, Informative)
See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re:This is what America voted for. (Score:5, Insightful)
They voted for snake oil, so snake oil is all they'll end up with.
Re: (Score:2)
Like a lot of things more complicated than appearances [youtu.be], but then Slashdot isn't Psychology Today.
Re:Food Justice Science (Score:4, Informative)
Left versus right is just divide and conquer while all our political parties are owned and controlled by upper class influences based on campaign contributions and political lobbying. The political right is controlled by the upper class, the political left by the upper middle class. Meanwhile, the working poor have no political representation, this is what classism looks like. Classism is a deep and often overlooked reality, meanwhile, politics, at least in many modern systems, is largely a game of power and money. The traditional left vs. right divide often just serves to keep people fighting over cultural or social issues while the economic structure remains untouched.
Campaign financing, lobbying, and corporate interests ensure that both major sides cater to wealthier classes, albeit in different ways. The right tends to favor policies that benefit big business and capital owners, while the left often pushes policies that align with the professional-managerial class. Meanwhile, the working class, those who would benefit most from structural economic reform, struggle to find a real voice in mainstream politics.
Classism is definitely at play, and political representation for the working poor is virtually nonexistent in many systems. The question is: how do we break out of this cycle? Grassroots movements? Direct action? Independent candidates? Or does the system itself need a complete overhaul?
Re: (Score:2)
And grassroots movements need power to be heard so they get corrupted or simply are setup from the start as propaganda machines.
No, the answer will come from technology. The powerful are as dependent on technology as everyone, and technology is a systemic evolutionary force, as it were. It brings change, often to be exploited by the powerful, but there's also a few extra percent in favour of the little people. It's that slim margin which has tended to progress towards freedom rather than tyranny in the long
Re: (Score:2)
I disagree, the upper class owns and controls most of the technology and they have first and unfettered access to it. Indeed, throughout history, the upper class has utilized technology to maintain power and exploit the working class. In response, grassroots movements have had to emerge to challenge these injustices. However, technologies often serve to reinforce existing power structures. For instance, the introduction of mechanical sewing machines in the 19th century was initially hailed as a liberation f
Re:Food Justice Science (Score:4, Informative)
I don't think the claim even requires a sophisticated argument. The internet has been transformative, even revolutionary. Yet education has not improved, what has improved is the propagandizing of the public. Putin's influence has increased, billionaire influence has increased, foreign adversary influence has increased, religious fundamentalism has increased. It is an unfettered tool of propaganda, an authoritarian's dream.
Technology itself is values-neutral, but all evidence suggests that technology is enabling the enemy. The world is becoming owned by the few and is rapidly becoming uninhabitable for the many. Along the way, people who see themselves as in the middle an aspiring upward happily support a wealthy agenda because they think that will be them and they are more than happy to see those below them suffer. They fail to see that by eliminating those below them, they become the lower class next up on the chopping block.
Re: (Score:3)
"Meanwhile, the working poor have no political representation, this is what classism looks like."
BOTH SIDES!
The "working poor" may be underrepresented but they have more than none. Also, if "left versus right" is just a political tool then the "political right" and "political left" are also merely tools, they do not represent anyone. Finally, when the "political right" uses the term "left" as a pejorative, it's not referring to the "upper middle class", it's referring to the "others". There is only one e
Re:Food Justice Science (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem with your stance is that it never ends there. Either Science is free from political coercion or it is not. The second case makes for a quite bad future for countries doing it.
Re:Food Justice Science (Score:5, Insightful)
And it would even be fair since Trump would cancel any grant "intended to teach" anyone anything. But like everything Trump does, it ends up shitting on his own base since there are no grants "intended to teach transgender and queer" anything.
But hey, buddy, fly your homophobia flags, it's celebrated now.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
If cancelling a grant intended to teach transgender and queer urban farmers about "food justice", is anti-science, then I am all for it.
The irony of all that is that neither of those are science, but political.
I'm concerned about brain drain as well, but it was strange to see inequailties and LGBT+ (Why not LGBTQ+?) in the mix. It is a mess, but considering that if sexual preference and a desire to dress as the opposite sex is somehow science, then I caution people to be careful, because we've fallen into politically motivated "science" in the past. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Lysenkoism, which was promoted by the Soviet Union as
Re: (Score:3)
Everything can be studied scientifically. Science is a method.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Everything can be studied scientifically. Science is a method.
But science requires falsification.
How does one falsify political opinions or religion?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Regardless, I'm not inclined to mix science with politics, it gets really messy, really quickly.
Then why are you? Your assumption of what the LGBT reference is is straight out of Fox news' political agenda after all. There is plenty of legitimate scientific research happening in this area, here's an example of an aggregate study citing tons of other related research as a singular example https://www.sciencedirect.com/... [sciencedirect.com].
Everything listed are legitimate areas of scientific research falling under things like the social sciences, medical science, psychology, etc.
Re: (Score:2)
but considering that if sexual preference and a desire to dress as the opposite sex is somehow science
I don't see why some aspects of human behaviour should be exempted from scientific study simply because some people are politically opposed to that kind of behaviour.
since that particular ideology based "science" holds that a body can change itself
Your politically motivated ideology has no place in science. There are in fact a number of non DNA mechanisms for heredity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Regard
Re: (Score:2)
If cancelling a grant intended to teach transgender and queer urban farmers about "food justice", is anti-science, then I am all for it
Show me the grant. All federal grants, once funded, were publicly available in a database including their aims, justification, methods, and funding (you will probably have to use the wayback machine because I believe most of these databases were taken down to hide the administration's incompetence and lying). So if this is a real grant, then: Show me.
And if it isn't a real grant, it's not actually a bad idea for a future grant. America needs more farmers, and most farmers are aging white men, and our curr
Re: (Score:3)
If cancelling a grant intended to teach transgender and queer urban farmers about "food justice", is anti-science, then I am all for it.
Pretty on brand for the anti-science folk to base their opposition on imaginary grants.
Re:This is what America voted for. (Score:5, Insightful)
They also voted for one of the most prolific public liars of all time. Voter beware.
Well, vote stupid, get stupid results. As can be nicely seen at this time already. If they are not stopped, Trump and Elonia will do enough damage that cleaning it up will take several decades, if still possible at all. The second is becoming a real possibility.
Re:This is what America voted for. (Score:4, Informative)
This is what I really don't get about Trump voters and MAGA.
Look, plenty of politicians and the media skew the truth, add a certain spin, cherry pick facts and lie by omission. A certain degree of manipulation will probably always exist, since the incentives for this sort of behavior are just too strong.
But Trump is just... off the charts. He doesn't even try to "skew" or to "spin", he just flat out lies almost every single time, and all of it is so well documented and in many cases easily refuted. And Trump voters simply don't care that their admiration and respect for Trump is not reciprocated in the least, since he will constantly lie to their face about almost anything, as long as it advances his interests. It is an astonishing display of ignorance in the face of a patholigical liar who has learned that he can get away with it, because nobody will hold him accountable, and on the contrary, his fans will love him even more for his wild and agitating but also completely false claims.
This is why many people say that MAGA - Trumpism is a cult. It is not rational.
Re: (Score:2)
I mean people where like there is this project 2025 and Trump is going to do it. And Trump said "I'm not afflilated with that and I'm not doing it". That of course means he was and would. So they elected him and he's doing exactly what everyone said he would do.
This is not shocking nor suprising. I'm rooting for him to make it so bad people learn this time. At least he's bringing the stock market to it's knees during the first part of the year before my 401k is maxed out.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:This is what America voted for. (Score:5, Insightful)
"They voted for egg price reductions..."
No they didn't. That's just the media spin after the fact. They voted for hatred.
"...they voted for better economy than the other guys..."
No they didn't. We had the greatest economic recovery in the world. That's just Republican spin and it convinced no one who wasn't a low information voter.
"...they voted to keep Mexicans out..."
There you go! That's what they voted for.
"At no point was a gutting of major science any part of a republican campaign platform."
You are very, very wrong about that. Eliminating the department of education, "woke research" funding, the EPA, HHS, vaccines. These are all part of a "republican campaign platform" if we can even call it that. The platform is to destroy anything that can oppose Trump, and science opposes Trump. The demonization of Fauci is for a very specific reason, do you deny that imprisoning Fauci was not part of the campaign? Of course it was.
Re: (Score:2)
No they didn't. They voted for egg price reductions, they voted for better economy than the other guys, they voted to keep Mexicans out. At no point was a gutting of major science any part of a republican campaign platform.
Then it makes one wonder why they voted for the guy with the worse economic record vis a vis jobs, consumer confidence, investor confidence, trade balance, and taxes (and about whose economic policies 16 Nobel-winning economists penned a public letter warning of the dire consequences which we are now beginning to experience), the guy whose tariffs would increase the price of all food, including eggs (as well as gasoline and almost everything else), and the guy who had deported fewer people in his first term
This is how the US snapped up Germany's Best (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Those are just details. And remember, "jewish" in this context is an ethnic reference not a religious one. Anti-semitism was powerful propaganda then, so effective that Nazis were happy to see leading scientists leave.
What we are seeing today is no different, it's just the details that are. Jews are not so much the focus, brown people from "shithole" countries are, but it's all the same. Also, don't forget that 6 million non-jews also died in the holocaust, the germans happily murdered white people too,
Re: (Score:2)
Climate science is getting utterly wrecked by the current admistration, and that may well be the most useful and important science our species has, along with medical science , which quelle surprise is also facing serious defunding.
The Replication crisis (More a minor concern than a crisis, its not particularly widespread outside of certain niche fields but words like "crisis" sell pop-sci mags I guess) is an issue, but that isn't even remotely addressed by ANY of this.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:This is how the US snapped up Germany's Best (Score:4, Informative)
useful "science"? Quantum mechanics only became "useful" 50 years after it was invented. Granted it was mathematics at the time, yet your electronic tat depends upon it today. Same with relativity, what was Einstein thinking?
Science is a web. Once you start poking gaping holes in it, no cutting edge science will get funded because any new cutting edge science can be made to look useless by a certain class of dumbasses who will point to it and say: see....I cannot conceive of a company making money off this.
BTW: most of Chemistry and Biology looks like useless "science" using your demented criteria, yet your Grandmother's cancer treatments are drivien by all the "useless" Chemistry and Biology that has gone on before. Better hope it doesn't get canceled before you come down with cancer.
Re: (Score:2)
Musk believes that private research will replace publicly funded.
Why would it? Thing of that logically for a moment. There's nothing at all stopping private research from researching these topics right now. Why would a government which previously had no impact on private research suddenly impact them by ... not impacting them?
Private research is driven by profit motive alone. It's either there or it isn't. It won't change due to the policy of a government.
Cultural changes (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Didn't we already have a brain drain from the US to the UK over the Bush W era bans relating to embryonic stem cell research?
https://www.science.org/conten... [science.org]
"Stem Cell Expert Leaves U.S.
UCSF fertility researcher transfers to Britain, spurring fears of brain drain
17 Jul 2001
By Gretchen Vogel
A noted U.S. fertility researcher is relocating to England in a move that some researchers say underscores the uncertainty created by the current debate over government funding of research involving embryonic stem cells
Re: (Score:3)
Professional scientists are fairly used to working in multilingual environents, and anyway, almost all scientists speak at least some english, even the french. They'll be fine. US and UK academics accept posts at french universities, and vice versa, all the time.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"famous French intolerance of English speakers" in my experience is a myth.
I speak French. In fact French is my second language, and English the third. I have lived in France for a while, a number of years ago.
I now have an American family. When traveling to France with them for vacation, I speak to the "natives" in French. But said natives, noticing that the others speak English, will speak back to me in English. It's been happening over and over and over again.
There is no intolerance, at least none that I
Re: (Score:3)
I suspect the language barrier could be a significant issue outside the academic environment.
I have worked in France, Germany and the Netherlands. In all of these, English is commonly taught in school.
The only thing that I would say is, try to use the local language. People will appreciate you trying, and help you out if you do, but get things wrong. Refusing to even try is guaranteed to exasperate the locals.
Until Le Pen (Score:3)
France is also at the brink. At any point, Le Pen may win. Then what? Gypsy around from place to place whenever there's a far-right head of state?
Re: (Score:3)
France is also at the brink. At any point, Le Pen may win. Then what? Gypsy around from place to place whenever there's a far-right head of state?
Le Pen is nowhere near close to winning in France. The French presidential election uses a run-off system. Because the majority of voters sit to the left/center, this is where all the major parties are busy fighting it out for voters. It means Le Pen can sit on the edge of the fight and collect up all the far right voters without any real challenge. Due to the number of far right supporters growing (which is an issue) this has allowed her to get into the second round in the last few election, as the left/ce
Such optimism (Score:2)
You're assuming that LePen will be less attractive than some wide eyes loon from the hard left who comes second in the first round of voting. Given the choice of LePen and Melenchon, the choice is less than obvious. And a sudden event that destroys the credibility of the anti-LePen candidate in the last week before the vote could be equally disastrous.
I hope I'm wrong...
Re: (Score:2)
The only people who think Le Pen may win are those people who don't understand the electoral system. They may be the second largest party in absolute terms, but that's because of voter dilution in the first round of voting. In the runoff round it becomes a two party race and then you see how Le Pen despite looking equal to her main opposition in the first round vote suddenly gets her arse handed to her in the election which matters.
I can't blame you for this though. To an outsider, especially if you're Amer
We're screwed!!!! (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
if you leave "science X" to be determined by others, then you lose influence. It is always better to have a voice rather than let others decide. Social science has a lot of impact on how we view things, teach things, and conduct public policy. It is the scientific formalisation of culture.
There's a lunar eclipse going on now (Score:2)
But because it can't be tied to Trump, Musk, or AI, it's not a topic for Slashdot anymore.
Re: (Score:2)
"There is no dark side of the moon really, matter of fact, it's all dark."
Re: (Score:2)
I live in western Washington state... so that's all happening above the cloud layer anyway.
Build a wall! (Score:2)
Be Careful, Extremely Careful (Score:3)
They are not as vehement nor as yellow as drumpf.
But their political incline smells the same shit our grandparents fought during and before WWII.
And mainstream media are mostly in the hand [acrimed.org] of people who are openly nazis like bolloré [wikipedia.org] and stérin [wikipedia.org]. Big companies are very compatible with nazis, just look at the bush family (especially the grandparent of the pretzel guy).
Include ma€ron himself in the lot. When elected, he was supposed to fight the extreme right nazis, but he keeps making deals with them (to keep the left at bay), and he's capable of quoting nazis in German to the face of a jewish lawyer [x.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Nice sketch, the punchline was great.
Re: (Score:3)
and he's capable of quoting nazis in German to the face of a jewish lawyer
I'm not sure what you're going with there, but the ability to quote Nazis is important. It shows that they were researched. Frankly I'm more worried about people who can't quote them, it shows ignorance of history.
Do Not Enable Musk or Trump (Score:2)
No one man can terrorize a whole nation unless we are all his accomplices.”
Edward R. Murrow
Say what? (Score:2)
> LGBT+ medicine
What?
If they are the ones trying to peddle biological abuse of kids, yeah, you better get a different job.
If they are looking at advanced techniques and procedures for INFORMED fully grown ADULTS to make a decision, then all the best of luck to you.
maybe "science" is part of the problem (Score:2, Troll)
Is it relevant to note we spent four years being clubbed over the head with "science" that COVID didn't come from a lab in order to silence dissent?
Is it relevant to note that Dr "I am science" Fauci turns out to have signed off on the funding for that Wuhan gain of function research?
Is it relevant to note that the same people insisting science is irrefutable use phrases like "that woman's penis" and "birthing people"?
Is it relevant to note that Michael " hockey stick" Mann has not only been repeatedly deb
Nazi (Score:2)
Came here expecting half a dozen comments on the theme of "This is what happened to lots of scientists, including Einstein himself, before WW2 started" and found I've somehow accidentally stepped into the Nazi portion of the site, which I didn't even know existed.
Wow, Slashdot. Seriously. What the hell.
Less than 4 years (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
greenhouse gases
Basic fucking physics? Not science! XD
Re: (Score:3)
It's roman_mir, anything that's not going to immediately make money for someone is evil and should be prohibited. He's one of the most hard-core Libertardians you'll ever meet.
Re:sprinkle sprinkle (Score:4, Informative)
Ignoring an existential threat because it is supposedly a "political statement" is a (stupid) political statement.
Re: (Score:2)
who said anything about ignoring an 'existential threat'? Again, I wouldn't pay my own money to someone studying 'greenhouse gases' at a university, but you are absolutely welcome to spend as much as you personally desire on it. I certainly can see some use in private enterprise building engines based on Na (sodium) to bind CO2 and precipitate it into the oceans, deacidifying the water in process, while both, reflecting the Sun light with the mist created by the chemical reaction and producing energy. I
Re: (Score:2)
1. Propose privately funded cockamamie geoengineering schemes.
2. ??
3. Profit!
Re: (Score:3)
The original Underwear Gnomes had a more realistic business plan than this.
Re: (Score:2)
I suppose you support private roads, police and fire departments. People who want roads and safety can pay for them, but it shouldn't be paid for society as a whole.
Re: (Score:2)
who said anything about ignoring an 'existential threat'? Again, I wouldn't pay my own money to someone studying 'greenhouse gases' at a university, but you are absolutely welcome to spend as much as you personally desire on it. I certainly can see some use in private enterprise building engines based on Na (sodium) to bind CO2 and precipitate it into the oceans, deacidifying the water in process, while both, reflecting the Sun light with the mist created by the chemical reaction and producing energy. I would do that as private enterprise, we have plenty of sodium on this planet and we could certainly use another way to produce energy as well. However this should be done privately, not with money that is either taxed, borrowed or printed by a government.
Private enterprise is about making money. What is your plan after country that do pay for science end up taking over your profit driven country?
We know what technology does when the motive is profit. It goes for the most profit, and promising things that don't make money or have immediate payoff are not pursued. Meanwhile other countries might end up eating your lunch. But for a short time, much shareholder value was created.
Re:sprinkle sprinkle (Score:5, Insightful)
Astronomers in the 1960ies and 1970ies for instance calculated the greenhouse effect on the different planets of the Solar system before sending probes there, because they needed an estimate of the conditions to design the probes. You need a very heat resistant probe for Venus, and a probe that does not easily freeze on Mars. The same is valid for the probes sent later to the Jupiter's atmosphere (a lander for the Ulysses probe) and to Saturn (Cassini-Huygens). Physicists know very well how to calculate the greenhouse effect around a stellar body from the gasses in the atmosphere.
Why all this gets suddenly invalid and a matter of faith when applied to Earth, I simply don't know. My guess is wishful thinking coupled with the idea that something ceases to exist if you don't look too close.
Re: (Score:3)
Why all this gets suddenly invalid and a matter of faith when applied to Earth, I simply don't know. My guess is wishful thinking coupled with the idea that something ceases to exist if you don't look too close.
These people are living in a made-up reality where they understand everything, everything is just fine and their leaders are great, capable, honest and will lead them into utopia....
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:sprinkle sprinkle (Score:5, Insightful)
You’re such a fucking tool, hanging your entire argument on the phrase that appears in this summary of a report. Obviously this is just a catch-all term of convenience used by the journalist, and what the researchers actually do will be studying one set of very specific and very obviously scientific topics, for example, ocean acidification. There’s plenty of active research into carbonate chemistry and pH levels, impact on marine calcifiers, oceanic carbon sequestration, ecological impacts on marine food webs, regional variability in acidification, etc. It all has immense scientific value and obviously is crucial to human welfare including the economics you are so tumescent about (eg the fishing industry and our ability to get calories from the ocean.
One of the worst aspects of modern right wing stupidity is that you’re all so stupid that you cannot conceive of people not being stupid. So you see the phrase “greenhouse gases” and have a shit-fit because you imagine that what’s happening is a bunch of pseudo-scientists doing political research into “greenhouse gases” because you’re just too stupid to conceive of the truth actually being that it’s real scientists doing scientific research into real areas of scientific inquiry.
Re:sprinkle sprinkle (Score:5, Insightful)
The depth of scientific rot in America is such that people feel no shame in saying that "they don't believe "greenhouse gases" is science."
And this statement is made without irony.
Morons no longer fear the shaming of their own stupidity.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:sprinkle sprinkle (Score:4, Insightful)
Most climate science is done in the geology department of universities.
Most epidemiology takes place in the same school as biostatistics.
Your comments are completely asinine. Nor is it your job as a lay person (nor the administration's job as a fucking bunch of idiots) to suppose what a "useful study" is, to suppose what funding is usefully spent with no insight into the various fields, or to degenerate science into "useful" and "not useful."
You have no idea. You've probably never read a scientific journal related to any of these topics, and you've probably never talked to a single person with a single degree in any of the fields.
That's just my wild ass guess.
Science is under attack in America. America's STEM lead is about to crumble because morons are in charge, and the uniformed think their uninformedness is superior to Departments with centuries if not millennia of cumulative research experience.
Re: (Score:2)
Calm down Francis. You're almost as hyperbolic as the article writer.
Re: (Score:3)
All science is done through consensus. Consensus just means most people agree on a topic. For example it took a century for the "atomic theory" to be generally accepted (to reach consensus); but people practising homeopathy still disagree as they defend the continuous model of matter. An example of topic where there isn't a consensus is how to classify the four/five original lineages of birds.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
As I said, wouldn't spend my own money on it and wouldn't force or expect anyone else to spend a dime on it.
You are free to pay $0 in taxes in the USA so you can in fact live your goals.
Re: sprinkle sprinkle (Score:2)
Re: sprinkle sprinkle (Score:2)
Re: sprinkle sprinkle (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
shut up retard
Re: (Score:3)
The guy he responded to literally said that. It was so dumb you figured it couldn't be real but he just literally said it.
I don't believe the following to be science:
LGBT+ medicine, inequalities, social impact, greenhouse gases, psychology, cultural heritage, history (I have nothing against history, I just don't think of it as science, it is record keeping and we don't seem to learn anything from it anyway collectively), natural disaster management, communication
Re: sprinkle sprinkle (Score:3)
Re:sprinkle sprinkle (Score:4, Interesting)
Science is a process and methodology, not a topic you find personally interesting. You can pretend social sciences don't exist, but that doesn't mean they cease existing, it just means you look like an ignorant twat when you post online.
Re: (Score:2)
How uneducated are you? Failed elementary school?
Re: (Score:3)
You have identified yourself as an utter fucking moron. Why are you on a site for people with brains?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
trump is definitely more pro science than bidet
Not true. Trump knows about as much science as a bidet, and much less than a golden toilet.
Re:No need for woke-fake-science at universities (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
It's Friday afternoon in Russia and Asia. Trust me Slashdot isn't as bad as you think. It's just bad right now given which timezone is active on the internet. I guarantee you'll wake up tomorrow and find all the fuckwits currently modded +1 down at -1 where they sensibly belong.
Re: (Score:2)
Congratulations, you are part of the problem.
Re:Credibility (Score:4, Insightful)
You lost all credibility the minute I read "LGBT+ medicine"
No, you pretty obviously stopped there because you knew you'd be exposed if you tried to argue about any of the items listed after that - many of which are on the MAGA shitlist:
- health (epidemiology, infectious diseases, inequalities, immunology, etc.)
- environment and climate change (natural disaster management, greenhouse gases, social impact, artificial intelligence)
- humanities and social sciences (communication, psychology, history, cultural heritage)
- astrophysics [oh gosh, the universe is more than 4000 years old?!]
Re: (Score:2)
LOL ignoring the precise and explicit comment that was made.
I guess there now an official right-wingers version of English too.
Re:Credibility (Score:4, Informative)
LGBT+ medicine is the medicine that applies to the health problems specific to LGBT+ people. As these people which make up 5-10% of the general population, it is a small but not tiny fraction. (Most medicine anyway applies to a tiny fraction of the population.) Examples of needs of need of LGBT+ people are infectious diseases that are prevalent among gays, or surgery/post-surgery in Trans, and psychological support. These topics are covered by doctors of several specialities, but it also makes sense to collect them under a common denomination, at least because such people may want to refer to a single doctor that understands the whole picture rather than consulting different specialists who only see an aspect.
Re: (Score:2)
"Examples of needs of need of LGBT+ people are infectious diseases that are prevalent among gays, or surgery/post-surgery in Trans, and psychological support. "
All of which are exactly the same as in the general population.
"...makes sense to collect them under a common denomination, at least because such people may want to refer to a single doctor that understands the whole picture rather than consulting different specialists who only see an aspect."
Well that's not a goal for the general population so it do
Re:Credibility (Score:5, Interesting)
A tiny percentage of the human population with a minor behavioral deviance regarding mating habits is completely irrelevant to the world of science.
Technically, that statement also applies to people with schizophrenia.
It's pretty clear that the "science" here is "political science."
So, you're in the camp that believes that romantic and sexual preferences are strictly a personal choice and not physiological? That's exactly why we study things in a scientific way -- to know why people behave the way they do, and if necessary, to debunk people like you.
Re:Credibility (Score:5, Insightful)
Clearly there is a need for "LGBT+ medicine" because the president just declared everyone in the US to be female, due to a basic lack of understanding about how gender works.
Re: (Score:2)
Completely unrelated to chromosomes!
Thanks for letting us know that you don't know jack
Re: (Score:2)
how is this a "science?"
Maybe because science is a process, and not a topic?
There is zero scientific value to studying such nonsense.
Much of your modern life you have to thank for topics others have said had "zero scientific value in studying". It's fortunate you don't decide what is or isn't worth studying.
A tiny percentage of the human population with a minor behavioral deviance regarding mating habits is completely irrelevant to the world of science.
Everyone is a tiny percentage of a human population when you label various human traits. For example James Harrison had an insanely rare medical condition which made him orders of magnitude more unique than LGBTQ+ people, not worth studying right? Oh except that the study of his rare
Re: (Score:2)
Everyone is a tiny percentage of a human population when you label various human traits.
Nah, white racists are a surprisingly large percentage of the human population, so OP isn't at any risk at all.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah science never bothers studying things that don't happen all that much. Durr hurr hurr hurr hurr hurr hurr guhhhh.
Re: (Score:2)