/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #12233281

539KiB, 1063x577, Screenshot_2020-10-15 Why Nature supports Joe Biden for US president.png

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 03:15:55 2020 No.12233281 View Reply Original Report

>Joe Biden’s trust in truth, evidence, science and democracy make him the only choice in the US election.

Science and scientists should not be involved in politics... Agree or disagree?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 03:19:31 No.12233294 Report

Quoted By: >>12233352 >>12233640 >>12233648 >>12234334

>>12233281
disagree. in a democracy people have not just the right but the responsibility to voice their opinions and the experience that informs them.
scientisim is silly but the idea that anybody should give up this right for any reason is extremely dangerous

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 03:21:29 No.12233305 Report

Quoted By: >>12233352 >>12233648

>>12233281
Scientists should absolutely be involved in politics, but their opinions should only bear special weight with regards to science policy. Otherwise you get politicians trying to draft policies that they don't understand, and voters left without perspective.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 03:23:18 No.12233308 Report

Quoted By: >>12233312

People who refer to science as some monolithic religious entity should be publically flawed. Biology is not chemistry is not physics, fuck off.
And don't get me started on social "science"

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 03:24:04 No.12233309 Report

Quoted By: >>12233316 >>12234174

>>12233281
Most scientists in the west are dependent on government grants. This dependency destroys their ability to be objective about governance. Just like people on welfare will vote for those who promise them to most welfare, those on grants will vote for those who promise the most grants, regardless of merit.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 03:24:19 No.12233312 Report

Quoted By:

>>12233308
Flogged*

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 03:25:58 No.12233315 Report

Quoted By:

>>12233281
Most scientists are statistical and mathematical illiterates whose knowledge is useless and whose findings are unreplicated and whose prestige is getting published in a journal system whose vetting process routinely misses simple mistakes and publishes outrightly fake sci-gen papers; all after getting "credentials" in oversaturated and grade inflation implementing institutions that give brown people free passes based on racist policies.

Yes, trust our gay nigger scientists.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 03:26:03 No.12233316 Report

Quoted By: >>12233368

>>12233309
nobody has the "ability to be objective" about governance, least of all the governed

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO ronald fisher.png, 852KiB, 864x942

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 03:26:20 No.12233317 Report

Quoted By: >>12233319

>>12233281
>nature supports blm
>blm deface ronald fisher's monument
safe to say nature puts politics over science.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 03:28:37 No.12233319 Report

Quoted By: >>12233324

>>12233317
>blm
Just call them "endless nigger riots". That's what they are.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 1596637237622.jpg, 220KiB, 1544x792

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 03:30:49 No.12233324 Report

Quoted By: >>12233337

>>12233319
empowered by self-hating white cultists some of whom are the editors at nature.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 03:37:34 No.12233337 Report

Quoted By:

>>12233324
>white
Anon please

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 03:43:52 No.12233350 Report

Quoted By:

Democracy is a system where a literal retard has the same voting power as Nobel prize winners.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 1601562756668.jpg, 74KiB, 480x475

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 03:44:43 No.12233352 Report

Quoted By: >>12233355 >>12233362 >>12233383 >>12233399 >>12233567 >>12233640 >>12233648

We need to compartmentalize our behaviors.
When I want to discuss politic, I take off my lab coat and put on my politic googles.
When I want to do science, I take off my political googles and put on my lab coat.
That's the professional approach to things.

Science is knowledge, devoid of any intent. If you seek to express intents (by nature irrational), you won't be finding any facts, and so you won't be doing any science.
Meddling science with politics is a one way trip to generate internal conflicts within the scientific community and hinder the advancement of science.

>>12233294
If scientists want to express their political opinion, they have to do it in their name, as individuals, not in the name of Nature, which is supposed to be a scientific organization.

>>12233305
They should get involved into politic, but only in their name.
And I encourage them to use facts and reason when debating. But not the name of science, or the name of an organization dedicated to the acquisition of knowledge.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 03:45:49 No.12233355 Report

Quoted By: >>12233648

>>12233352
this

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 03:52:14 No.12233362 Report

Quoted By: >>12233469

>>12233352
Nature became pozzed one year ago, they hired a social "scientist" as a communicator (is that the term?)

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO Screenshot 2020-10-04 113715.jpg, 398KiB, 1021x854

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 03:54:34 No.12233366 Report

Quoted By:

>>12233281
>truth, evidence, science and democracy

He , nor I or YOU would know the meaning of the words.. because all of the above have been tainted by the movement of money.. Ideas, great scientist, who actually follow the method, are victims of a funding war, but more importantly, a serious lack of exposure.. Joe bidens understanding of science comes in the form of model and on a piece of paper.. he couldnt read a scientif study, thusly the information they contain must trickle through a filter of policy, statecraft, appeal, and more importantly need-to -know... Joe Biden's Science is CULT

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 03:55:21 No.12233368 Report

Quoted By:

>>12233316
Funny way to say gib gobbers gonna gib gobber.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO dxl2ui5v2r611.jpg, 83KiB, 900x900

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 04:00:13 No.12233382 Report

Quoted By: >>12233490

>>12233281
>only stupid people should be involved in politics
>that way politicians will always agree with my stupid ideology
Yes you're absolutely correct, retard.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 04:00:13 No.12233383 Report

Quoted By: >>12233469 >>12233472

>>12233352
>not in the name of Nature, which is supposed to be a scientific organization.
Nature's a business. We're not talking about the Royal Academy here. It's not a democratic or philanthropic organization.
>in the name of science
Like I said, scientisim is dumb. But it's the public's responsibility as voters to realize that -- and you have every right to get up on a soapbox and shout it.
>way trip to generate internal conflicts within the scientific community and hinder the advancement of science.
We are far past any point in history when such a position was tenable. Science is inextricably intertwined with modern politics in a thousand ways, not the least of which is that the bulk of fundamental scientific research is done on the government's dime.
>We need to compartmentalize our behaviors.
>When I want to discuss politic, I take off my lab coat and put on my politic googles.
>When I want to do science, I take off my political googles and put on my lab coat.
>That's the professional approach to things.
Complete nonsense, your experience and knowledge inform your ability to make political judgements. If a poltician makes claims that you as a scientist know are ridiculous, you have the right and perhaps even the responsibility to make the public aware.
>Science is knowledge, devoid of any intent
A very dangerous position to take, and one that I don't believe you actually hold. There is an intent in scientific pursuit re: which areas of knowledge to explore. See for example the ethics of medical research or weapons design.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 04:12:38 No.12233399 Report

Quoted By:

>>12233352
I agree with most of this.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO Stripped.png, 506KiB, 1207x675

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 04:44:40 No.12233469 Report

Quoted By:

>>12233362
I know. And that's precisely why I can't refer to them anymore.
If a presumably scientific organization also voices the political opinion of its members, then I can't guarantee that such opinions won't find a way in the articles they publish. Because of that, I can't recommend them to my colleagues and students without running the risk of hindering their research with petty political concerns.
That doesn't mean that I won't be consulting some of the articles they publish if they are of interest, but I'll be less inclined to, and will definitely be more skeptical when I do consult them.

>>12233383
>Nature's a business
Nature is now a political business as a result of their actions.

>We are far past any point in history when such a position was tenable. Science is inextricably intertwined with modern politics in a thousand ways, not the least of which is that the bulk of fundamental scientific research is done on the government's dime.
Not a justification for status quo. You may not find it problematic, I do.

>your experience and knowledge inform your ability to make political judgements.
Then use the facts and knowledge you acquired via your experience during political debate. Merely brandishing the name of science is an appeal to authority and won't rationalize your intents.
The most eminent scientist doesn't necessarily have the best interest of others in mind, and him brandishing his reputation to justify his superiority is just a way to coerce people into submission, to persuade and not convince.

>If a poltician makes claims that you as a scientist know are ridiculous, you have the right and perhaps even the responsibility to make the public aware.
Yes. But not in the name of science, or the name of the scientific organization you work for.
If you're convinced of the truth of the facts you possess, declaring them should be sufficient. Adding that they are true because it's Science is not an argument and can be construed as manipulation.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 04:44:51 No.12233470 Report

Quoted By: >>12233648

>>12233281
I'm not a scientist, but IMO, scientists should get MORE involved in politics. the thing is, politics goes WAY beyond the vote.

OTOH, reminder that Science mag itself isn't a scientific group or anything like that, it's (AFAIU) a private company that, IMO, should NOT exist.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 04:45:43 No.12233472 Report

Quoted By: >>12233648

>>12233383
>There is an intent in scientific pursuit re: which areas of knowledge to explore.
You are right on one point. Conducting science is motivated by at least one intent: the pursuit of truth, for your own benefit or that of your community. But this intent remains irrational.
In the interest of science, this intent should be the only one allowed.
You're trying to shoehorn your own political views into science, justifying it as a way to preserve it. If you can do it, others will too, and they will have different political views than you, inevitably leading to conflicts.
Loading science with unnecessary intents and motivations will only fragment the scientific community.
This is exactly what Nature is doing.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 04:54:58 No.12233489 Report

Quoted By:

>>12233281
the only kind of solutions politicians like are non-solutions

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 04:55:07 No.12233490 Report

Quoted By: >>12233650 >>12234281

>>12233382
Einstein believed in socialism, in fact for him that was the last step of evolution, being a scientist does not mean that you are not retarded in politics and economics, as well as in any other subject that is not his specialty, physics.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 04:56:49 No.12233493 Report

Quoted By:

>>12233281
green washing
endless growth delusions

these people are all human garbage

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 05:05:13 No.12233514 Report

Quoted By: >>12233517 >>12233524 >>12233648

>>12233281
Scientists should be the politicians.

No seriously, only doctors+ should be allowed to run a country

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 05:05:38 No.12233517 Report

Quoted By:

>>12233514
>t. Plato

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 05:07:07 No.12233524 Report

Quoted By:

>>12233514
K. so now "doctorate" will just become a political fiddle factor that will be tweaked to the benefit of people who already rule, now it's only possible for politically well-connected people to get a """""doctorate""""" in anything.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 05:07:10 No.12233525 Report

Quoted By:

Typically isn't a talking point in politics but when you get absolute tards like Trump in office suddenly "I support common sense" gives you an edge over the opponent

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 05:15:07 No.12233547 Report

Quoted By:

>>12233281
Lel what does science and evidence have to do with democracy

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 05:16:12 No.12233549 Report

Quoted By: >>12233596 >>12234287

wtf, twitter has 3 layer of responses:

1)open responses, readily readable
2)responses hidden under a "more responses" link you have to click to "unlock" those responses
3)responses hidden inside the hidden "more responses" option, this item is called "offensive responses"

among the offensive responses was a "soros says" response. lmao what the fuck is this discourse manipulation.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 05:21:57 No.12233567 Report

Quoted By: >>12233648 >>12233663 >>12234059

>>12233352
Good to see that you have some principles you stand by, but if scientific knowledge can predict outcomes of certain policies, why should you disregard that information? There are numerous examples from pandemic response to climate action where scientists have shown how fucked we get if no preventive measures are taken. Politicians then take no preventive action and we get as fucked as scientists have predicted.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 05:33:24 No.12233588 Report

Quoted By:

>>12233281
you would say the opposite if theywould have supported tmupr.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 05:38:21 No.12233596 Report

Quoted By:

>>12233549
the web is the new TV: everything is manipulated. it was not too obvious when it started, but it has become very obvious.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 05:47:29 No.12233621 Report

Quoted By:

>>12233281
This dude better win. Everyone and their grandmother has endorsed him. On the flip side though, they are playing a dangerous game. Conservatives are a massive chunk of the populace; by using scientific publications to endorse a liberal candidate these journals only further erode their standing in conservative eyes. When it comes to issues like vaccination, global warming, and the like, I expect this to backfire.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 05:47:45 No.12233622 Report

Quoted By:

>>12233281
Depends, science doesn’t tell you what you ought to do only what is. So a scientist or science organization probably shouldn’t talk about the ought only on disagreements on what is. I see no issue if some person denies something like a well accepted scientific thing, to support the opposition of which that does.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 05:52:06 No.12233640 Report

Quoted By: >>12233844

>>12233294
>>12233352
any rationalism, being philosophy or science is just trying to turn fantasizing as non-fiction the made up categories and made up relations between those categories by intellectuals. This is a social construct, subject to time and geography. All relative.

math sis a subfield of philosophy restricted to first order logic. mathematicians seethe over intellectuals who do not restrict to FOL.
Anything after presocratics (who actually live as they taught, contrary toSocrates and plato, arsitotle and all those larpers) is just intellectuals larping more and more as truth tellers in monasteries and university, to get a comfy pay while contributing nothing to society, with the pinnacle being the academics in secular democracy.

if you come from the secular humanist movement where the bourgeois hype the idea to the plebs that the plebs should get a (mandatory) education (more or less for free) in order to be smarter to larp as the greeks, (and not the unofficial and very fact that people get educated to make better workers already knowing how to do a job (so the companies need not to train them) and tax payers ) then yes it is moral idea to disregard the value of the education system

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 05:55:01 No.12233648 Report

Quoted By:

>>12233514 >>12233472
>>12233470
>>12233305
>>12233294
>>12233352
>>12233567
>>12233355

>>Scientists should be the politicians.
This is your brain on french revolution. KYS fucking humanist.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 05:57:20 No.12233650 Report

Quoted By:

>>12233490
he was also a communist spy.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 06:03:52 No.12233663 Report

Quoted By: >>12233690 >>12233884

>>12233567
Read me again, at no point did I say we should just leave things as they are.
Scientists absolutely have the right, to voice their opinions, and back them with facts and logical reasoning. I most certainly encourage them to do so.
What I don't want them to do is use their position as scientists to weight in on the debate, even if it may trick some people and benefit Society and Science in the end.
Because associating your political opinions to Science is a garanted way for Science to catch all the blame.
For decades, Science has been extremely successful. The current rising distrust in Science is partly due to the fact that politicians are trying to drape themselves in its virtue.
If the guys at Nature were any bit as serious as they proclaims to be, they would have realized that fact and would have abstain from voicing their opinion.
What Nature should have done is a detailed and neutral analysis of the expected results of Trump policies if he were to be reelected, backed by scientific evidences, while keeping the whole thing devoid of any political statements.

Your opponent should only see facts and logic. If you can't convince him with that, you won't be convincing him by brandishing the name of the journal you're working for.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 06:05:41 No.12233667 Report

Quoted By:

>>12233281
>Science and scientists should not be involved in politics...
correct
because people who incorrectly think that they are "on the side of science" are going to use it inappropriately and ironically deny falsifiability, since even scientists cant help but do that dumb faggot shit

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 06:14:16 No.12233682 Report

Quoted By:

>>12233281
Scientists can give their opinion on elections like anyone else can

But a peer review journal publishing an opinion on a presidential election, let alone having an editorial opinion on the matter, makes no sense.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 06:15:25 No.12233684 Report

Quoted By: >>12233687

>biden
>truth
https://nypost.com/2020/10/14/email-reveals-how-hunter-biden-introduced-ukrainian-biz-man-to-dad/

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 06:17:10 No.12233687 Report

Quoted By:

>>12233684
That's a no-no link. Your twitter and facebook accounts are going to be closed for posting that.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 06:19:01 No.12233690 Report

Quoted By: >>12233700

>>12233663
Why shouldn't they do the same for the other candidates too? The election isn't Trump vs No President. It's Trump vs Biden (and a few losers who will be lucky to break 1%).

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 06:21:28 No.12233699 Report

Quoted By:

Trumps administration has decreased funding in effectively all areas. Nobody wants him.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 06:22:31 No.12233700 Report

Quoted By:

>>12233690
I encourage them to thoroughly investigate Biden as well, because I have a very low opinion of him and his politics, and people would benefit to see the true farcical nature of this election exposed.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 07:41:53 No.12233823 Report

Quoted By:

>>12233281
Science is not inherently favorable to liberal policies, it could serve any regime especially authoritarian ones.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 07:59:10 No.12233844 Report

Quoted By:

>>12233640
you know you're posting on a kyrgyztani koi fish breeding forum right, not writing a paper for the economist.

no one here is going to bother trying to decipher any of the crap you just wrote.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 08:12:13 No.12233871 Report

Quoted By: >>12234103

>>12233281
Strongly disagree.
However, a scientist’s political opinion is worth no more than the next man’s. The only authority a scientist should hold is in matters related to their own field of study. Science is not politics, and politics is not science, no matter what your team of choice tells you.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 08:22:44 No.12233884 Report

Quoted By:

>>12233663
I'm afraid that detaching an aspect from a person depending from the context is more difficult than you think. That is to say that only mathematically ideal scientists can leave their science goggles behind when doing politics.

It is also not ideal that in science there's still much "argument from authority" reasoning going on, but that's the way things have been. Even if scientists present their experimentally backed research results in a prestigious peer-reviewed journal, most of the time a non-expert of the field will believe the results. In principle you could meticulously verify the results of the paper yourself, but almost no one will do that. How is that then any different from argument from authority? Non-experts always have to believe experts to some extent.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 08:45:36 No.12233924 Report

Quoted By:

>>12233281
>Science

True.

>Scientists

False. Their finance and wages often come from government sources (grants, academic, military) so having a trusted and invested political party with interest in *their* particular science means more money for them.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 10:03:39 No.12234059 Report

Quoted By: >>12234100 >>12234101 >>12234117

>>12233567
Personally I will never trust what a scientist say anymore. Especially if he shows symptoms of leftism or if it is a woman (more prone to be contaminated by leftism in my experience). Always read the papers themselves, and if I don't have time to check everything, assume they are lying. Even more true with historians and the like.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 10:32:19 No.12234097 Report

Quoted By: >>12234111

Trump is such a moron that "anyone but Trump" is a totally reasonable endorsement. Biden is also a moron but Trump is just a different sort of creature entirely.

He's entertaining but shouldn't hold any sort of actual power. It's literally as if Trisha Paytas were president.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 10:33:08 No.12234100 Report

Quoted By:

>>12234059
That is commendable. I hope you exhibit the same level of critique in all communication, even if the author isn't a leftist or a woman.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 10:33:22 No.12234101 Report

Quoted By: >>12234146

>>12234059
I'd bet anything your IQ is under 100

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 10:34:23 No.12234103 Report

Quoted By:

>>12233871
>except when your talking about political sciences

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO rbg_greatest_scientist.png, 272KiB, 1162x683

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 10:37:44 No.12234108 Report

Quoted By:

>>12233281
nature is just recognizing the stature of a great (perhaps the greatest) mind capable to be trusted with the launching codes

also other greatest scientist (pic related)

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 10:39:06 No.12234111 Report

Quoted By:

>>12234097
>"anyone but Trump" is a totally reasonable endorsement
and that's why we are all fucked

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 10:41:05 No.12234117 Report

Quoted By: >>12234128

>>12234059
>Personally I will never trust what a scientist say anymore
that's because you are not in academia
I do not trust a scientist since I began my phd, attended the first conferences, and ((colaborated)) in the first papers

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 10:48:03 No.12234128 Report

Quoted By: >>12234140

>>12234117
Unfortunately I am in academia.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 10:53:34 No.12234140 Report

Quoted By:

>>12234128
then, either you are a slow learner (as I am) or you knew about the corruption from the beginning. in any case, here we are, trapped knowing that we work for a third rate mafia. but it is not easy to leave cosa nostra..

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 10:53:51 No.12234141 Report

Quoted By:

They should run the country instead of sociopath grandpas.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 10:54:58 No.12234146 Report

Quoted By: >>12234161

>>12234101
If my IQ is under 100 it ironically proves what I say since I am studying for a phd but should have been filtered out because of my low iq.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 10:59:09 No.12234153 Report

Quoted By:

>>12233281
the only reason why a public person or an organisation endorses a candidate is for interest (besides extortion). they expect (are guaranteed) to be rewarded.
one can just speculate how much you have to offer to a giant like springer-nature to endorse such a weak, deranged candidate. risk your credibility. (let's be clear: I can understand not supporting trump, even be adversarial to him, but we are talking here about a nearly brain dead man to say the least. the price tag must be enormous)

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 11:01:06 No.12234161 Report

Quoted By: >>12234170

>>12234146
this, but unironically
iq 81 here, phd in astrophysics.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 11:04:39 No.12234170 Report

Quoted By: >>12234199

>>12234161
Iq horseshoe theory ?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 11:06:22 No.12234174 Report

Quoted By: >>12234196

>>12233281
Disagree. It's perfectly valid when someone in a major power undermines, defunds, mocks and prevents scientific development, including disease or disaster prevention.

>>12233309
>Being publicly funded bad
>But eating out of a corpo waste bin on conflict of interest subjects is A-ok
You also don't seem to understand just how difficult and scrutinized getting a grant is. It's a competitive process and only a fraction ever get funded.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 11:16:20 No.12234196 Report

Quoted By: >>12234208

>>12234174
>a major power undermines, defunds, mocks and prevents scientific development, including disease or disaster prevention
in an ideal /sci/ you should support that with poof. but in any case, even if true, that's what a democratically elected government of a given country has done. it will be different next time maybe, if us citizens want.

springer-nature, by contrast, is a huge corporation not even american. the level of interference is.. just imagine Uspekhi Fizicheskikh Nauk editorializing on this.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 11:17:30 No.12234199 Report

Quoted By:

>>12234170
nah. numerical radiative transfer, polarization, spectroscopy, that kind of stuff

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 11:21:56 No.12234207 Report

Quoted By:

>>12233281
Unfortunately scientists have to become involved because of political interference with their work. True scientists would be hardcore libertarians and just play to whatever side will support their research. A good scientist doesn't care about who is at the top of the political heap, only how to get their support.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 11:22:20 No.12234208 Report

Quoted By:

>>12234196
it is funny because although they are big (really big) corporations and do not recognize land or flag, springer could be directly traced to germany, and nature to the uk. both big powers that the us at some point fought and defeated. and here they are now, teaching them (with a certain air of superiority and paternalism) how to run their businesses

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 11:37:16 No.12234249 Report

Quoted By: >>12234346

>>12233281
Fucking politics should not be involved with science

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 11:42:46 No.12234270 Report

Quoted By:

>>12233281
>Science and scientists should not be involved in politics... Agree or disagree?
I think scientists personally can be involved in politics, but scientific organizations should not be

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 11:44:08 No.12234275 Report

Quoted By:

>>12233281
Nature isn't science, is one of the scientific ((((((media)))))).
Science has been corrupted by the political correctness wave too.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 11:46:35 No.12234281 Report

Quoted By:

>>12233490
Every country has socialist policies. You're not even responding to my point. Saying scientists can be wrong is not a reason why scientists should not be in politics, unless there is some other group of people that is never wrong.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 11:48:16 No.12234287 Report

Quoted By:

>>12233549
>among the offensive responses was a "soros says" response.
And the problem is...?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 12:10:40 No.12234334 Report

Quoted By:

>>12233294
Once in a while you get posts like these that make coming to 4chan worthwhile.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 12:15:42 No.12234346 Report

Quoted By:

>>12234249
Politics govern every decision made by a collective you fucking retard, being "apolitical" only exists if you're legitimately too dumb to think about abstract social concepts

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 15 Oct 2020 12:16:03 No.12234347 Report

Quoted By:

Was such a weak leader bidens son is a damn meth head

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

Your latest searches