4 ms·

Here's 20 articles from the September edition of Geology, zero seem to be political. https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/geology/issue https://pubs.geoscienceworld

Here's 20 articles from the September edition of Geology, zero seem to be political. https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/geology/issue https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/geology/issue August also seems politics free, though I'm too lazy to check five issues to see if it's 99%

harry8 4y ago
Geology is the only science you're aware of? Try psychology, sociology, medicine, climatology and the things in this direction. I probably agree with the broad thrust if the politics in those fields and that isn't the point!
klipt 4y ago
Geology is more of a hard science so harder to make political. Softer science like social science or psychology seems easy to politicize though. "Studies show that people need <my favorite policy> to truly be mentally healthy"
- babypuncher 4y ago
  Climatology is a hard science yet it is also one of the most politically debated in popular media. I think the real factor here is whether or not a large cohort of people find inconvenience in what the scientists of a given field are saying
- muglug 4y ago
  There are a lot of hard sciences! Mechanics / Electromagnetics / Thermodynamics / Kinetics / Inorganic Chemistry / Electrochemistry / Analytical Chemistry / Earth Sciences / Anatomy / Botany / Biology / Zoology / Neurobiology / Marine Biology / Embryology / Ecology / Palaeontology / Genetics / Cell Biology / Ethology / Astronomy / Meteorology / Geology / Atmospheric Sciences / Glaciology / Climatology / Structural Geology Most psychology papers are also fairly difficult to politicise. Like, try to politicise this: https://www.pnas.org/eprint/WREBM4QSJCM8MUAMJXEH/full https://www.pnas.org/eprint/WREBM4QSJCM8MUAMJXEH/full
  - klipt 4y ago
    > try to politicise this Okay! "human learnability of abstract network representations" Which humans? Did they test it works equally well for all races and genders and body shapes, or is their model of human learning biased to work best for buff white men and is inferior for everyone else? What's in the abstract network representations, are they truly neutral, or are we just helping humans to learn from biased data that will make them subconsciously more racist/sexist/heightist?
- wumpus 4y ago
  Geology is 100% political when it is talking about climate change. Imagine how political geology was when it was the major proof against the world being created in 4004 BC.
- bigbillheck 4y ago
  > Geology is more of a hard science so harder to make political Go tell it to a young-earth creationist.
hayst4ck 4y ago
The problem with the person you're responding to, is that they are a layman. They think what they read in magazines or see on Facebook is science. Spending time in academia and reading articles in a field you know something about makes it clear they are quite far from science. So when you said "publish science" you meant what shows up in academic journals, while when the other person said "publish science" they were thinking of an article written primarily for the purpose of engagement. The same idea probably wasn't being referenced. Sadly, it falls on academia's shoulders to understand this problem (that before a layman sees anything "sciency" it's filtered through people who need to get an emotional reaction to drive engagement, and that defines the public perception of science) and put the work into ameliorating it. Sadly, it's a conflict of interest that probably helps procuring funds.

harry8 4y ago

Geology is the only science you're aware of? Try psychology, sociology, medicine, climatology and the things in this direction. I probably agree with the broad thrust if the politics in those fields and that isn't the point!

klipt 4y ago

Geology is more of a hard science so harder to make political. Softer science like social science or psychology seems easy to politicize though. "Studies show that people need <my favorite policy> to truly be mentally healthy"

babypuncher 4y ago
Climatology is a hard science yet it is also one of the most politically debated in popular media. I think the real factor here is whether or not a large cohort of people find inconvenience in what the scientists of a given field are saying
muglug 4y ago
There are a lot of hard sciences! Mechanics / Electromagnetics / Thermodynamics / Kinetics / Inorganic Chemistry / Electrochemistry / Analytical Chemistry / Earth Sciences / Anatomy / Botany / Biology / Zoology / Neurobiology / Marine Biology / Embryology / Ecology / Palaeontology / Genetics / Cell Biology / Ethology / Astronomy / Meteorology / Geology / Atmospheric Sciences / Glaciology / Climatology / Structural Geology Most psychology papers are also fairly difficult to politicise. Like, try to politicise this: https://www.pnas.org/eprint/WREBM4QSJCM8MUAMJXEH/full https://www.pnas.org/eprint/WREBM4QSJCM8MUAMJXEH/full
- klipt 4y ago
  > try to politicise this Okay! "human learnability of abstract network representations" Which humans? Did they test it works equally well for all races and genders and body shapes, or is their model of human learning biased to work best for buff white men and is inferior for everyone else? What's in the abstract network representations, are they truly neutral, or are we just helping humans to learn from biased data that will make them subconsciously more racist/sexist/heightist?
wumpus 4y ago
Geology is 100% political when it is talking about climate change. Imagine how political geology was when it was the major proof against the world being created in 4004 BC.
bigbillheck 4y ago
> Geology is more of a hard science so harder to make political Go tell it to a young-earth creationist.

hayst4ck 4y ago

The problem with the person you're responding to, is that they are a layman. They think what they read in magazines or see on Facebook is science. Spending time in academia and reading articles in a field you know something about makes it clear they are quite far from science. So when you said "publish science" you meant what shows up in academic journals, while when the other person said "publish science" they were thinking of an article written primarily for the purpose of engagement. The same idea probably wasn't being referenced. Sadly, it falls on academia's shoulders to understand this problem (that before a layman sees anything "sciency" it's filtered through people who need to get an emotional reaction to drive engagement, and that defines the public perception of science) and put the work into ameliorating it. Sadly, it's a conflict of interest that probably helps procuring funds.