From the combox:
“The only possible justification I can see for the authors to vоmіt out this gагbаgе is because race is suddenly the hot-button topic, and they think they manage to sсаm some university or ‘wоkе’ geoscience company into giving them a research grant. It’s sad how science has been subvегtеd by social politics.”
“This is poor scholarship on the part of the authors and a grave oversight on the part of peer reviewers for Nature. Third, while the authors discuss diversity they imply strongly that they are most interested in diversity with respect to immutable characteristics, rather than viewpoint diversity or diversity of thought. Viewpoint diversity is critical to good research, and yet it goes ignored.”
“I am surprised at this level of scholarship in Nature”
About that third comment above: There is no reason to put “scholarship” and “Nature Communications” in the same sentence if this paper is supposed to be an example.
Read the comments before they are disallowed on some Woke ground or other, perhaps by Bret Weinstein’s former students, now Stormtroopers in positions of power. Rejoice that you are probably somehow paying for it all.
See also: We are informed at Nature Communications that geology is not a safe field for persons of color due to rock hammers. Is it significant that the same people who simply do not want to accept that Darwin had transparent white supremacy beliefs think that geologists’ rock hammers are a big problem?