Culture Intelligent Design Peer review Science

Marchin,’ Marchin’ becomes an institution

Spread the love

Pos-Darwinista writes to draw our attention to

A quick guide to effective grassroots advocacy for scientists

Abstract: The current political climate in the United States has mobilized scientists to become more cognizant of the need to advocate for sustainable science funding from the federal government and for acceptance of evidence-based policy making that relies on the best available scientific data. Many scientists, however, do not learn about science policy or how to advocate in Washington, D.C., or at the local level as part of their scientific training. Here we explain why science advocacy is important and provide steps on how to get involved by communicating with elected officials and engaging in the local community. pdf (public access)

What’s the problem here? People are not listening to scientists the way they used to?

Okay, something has changed. It’s more likely that science has changed than that human nature has changed. But what?

Still, most peer review, scandals are rarified. You might care if you knew but usually you don’t. On the other hand, the corruptocrat crime labs damage people who may never have spent much time thinking about science until now. But now they think about it negatively.

Then there are the global doomsayers whose own environmental footprint might be visible from the moon on a clear day.

Those are the sorts of doubts that are fanned rather than assuaged by the tone deafness we so often encounter.

Worse, when scientists hit the streets waving signs and chanting doggerel, they melt into the mass of angry identity groups. Shouting louder, as Nature advises the cautious, won’t help. Lots of people can shout louder than most scientists.

See also: Marchin’, marchin’ for Science (Hint: the problems are back at your desk, not out in the streets)

Blinkers Award goes to… Tom Nichols at Scientific American! On why Americans “hate science”

and

The war on freedom is rotting our intellectual life: Intersectionality

4 Replies to “Marchin,’ Marchin’ becomes an institution

  1. 1
    vmahuna says:

    This is about funding (free money) and tenure (career protection). If politicians must justify giving away free money to college professors for “research” that produces no useful results, then taxpayers will stop the streams of free money. And so will end the careers of LOTS of mediocre to poor “scientists”. I mean, they might actually have to get JOBS, where they would actually have to produce USEFUL research and analysis. Every day. For the rest of their lives.

  2. 2
    Seversky says:

    One march isn’t really an institution. Not yet.

  3. 3
    Seversky says:

    vmahuna @ 1

    This is about funding (free money) and tenure (career protection).

    Everybody wants free money and security. Look at tax breaks for churches and the prosperity gospelers.

  4. 4
    ET says:

    One march isn’t really an institution.

    There were two marches- one was allegedly for science and the other was allegedly for the climate. No one on the climate side wants to talk about the number one cause of environmental havoc- animal agriculture. They just want to mindlessly bash CO2 even though our planet is getting greener due to the CO2.

    Both marches were, in reality, marches for dogma and the suppression of dissention.

Leave a Reply