5 ms·

In the world of astrophysics, one failed cancel campaign led to another

81 points by pinewurst 4y ago

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
moloch-hai 4y ago
These things always come down to a contest between power and truth: which matters more, to the individual? Can truth turn their wrath, or only fuel it further? Do they heed or attack seekers after truth? Pay close attention, because truth is our only defense against runaway power.
- listenallyall 4y ago
  > truth is our only defense against runaway power. A lot of today's "truth" is simply what powerful people say it is. If you disagree, tough.
  - moloch-hai 4y ago
    Truth and "truth" are, of course, opposites.
    - listenallyall 4y ago
      Yea, but neither side comes out and says they represent "truth" (in quotes).
      - moloch-hai 4y ago
        But we can tell.
gautamdivgi 4y ago
What needs to be understood is that people are conditioned by their times and the company they keep. It does not mean they didn't do great things we should refuse to acknowledge. Yes, there should never be a hero complex. Flaws should be told as often as the feats. It's not done. Maybe the solution through the whole cancel campaign morass is to tell all sides of a person who has done great things. Acknowledge the wrongs and the achievements.
- at_a_remove 4y ago
  Except the guy in question didn't do anything wrong. Other than, you know, exist in a certain time and place.
doodlebugging 4y ago
I'm not a doctor nor do I play one on TV but if I had to make a diagnosis I would say based on this story that astrophysics appears to have a social media disease. It could be a cancer similar to that social media cancer affecting other parts of our society. It is definitely a disease though and looks to be spread by oratorial infection of gullible individuals who transmit to their peers using digital tools. Education may be the only effective treatment in the long term though it takes time and a commitment to the truth at all levels of society to accomplish that goal. It is very serious for this lady to start making sexual assault allegations against colleagues. Things like this taint reputations for a lifetime since there will always be someone who hears about the allegation but not about the supporting data or the end conclusions.
- spoiler 4y ago
  > It is very serious for this lady to start making sexual assault allegations against colleagues. Things like this taint reputations for a lifetime since there will always be someone who hears about the allegation but not about the supporting data or the end conclusions. For the reasons you laid out, the people who consciously and falsely accuses someone of a crime should be charged with the same crime, but double the penalty (for they tried to both ruin a life, and deceive/abuse the system). Obviously malice needs to be proven in this case too.
  - doodlebugging 4y ago
    Slander and libel laws probably cover this situation. I agree that the penalties should be high for someone who intentionally invents charges like this and spreads them today. In past years the damages to reputations could be a lot more local and shorter duration when the false charges are refuted with facts. Local people would know the full story and would be less inclined to hold something like this against a person once charges were proven false. The accuser would take the reputational hit. Today you make charges like this online on social media and there is no way to scrub that from the record. Those allegations will persist like an incurable disease and will be accessible to anyone locally or internationally who searches for info about the accused. That reputational hit will persist on the accused for their lifetime and into their children's lifetime. Penalties for false allegations like this should be very harsh.
dmix 4y ago
> they insisted that Oluseyi’s research “changes nothing.” According to the fallback case against Webb that they articulated, the mere fact that Webb was in any kind of leadership position at the State Department meant that he bore personal responsibility for all of the anti-gay social panic then unfolding around him. Guilt by association is a dangerous precedent. > [George Mason University astronomy professor Peter] Plavchan said that in July 2021, as word circulated in academia that Dr. Oluseyi might win an appointment at George Mason, he heard from a professor at a different university who claimed that Dr. Oluseyi had mishandled a federal grant and sexually harassed a woman. [..] They found nothing to substantiate these charges This initially started off as typical slacktivism 101. But slacktivism seems to be evolving to become something much more serious and effective. It's the easiest thing in the world is to sit on Twitter whine about words and labels used for a science project. Just like it was probably the easiest option for 1950s congressmen to run a giant purity test, accuse people of being communists, and get them blacklisted... instead of focusing on actually doing a better job with the country than communism. Social media used to just be whining part but now we're seeing backroom blacklisting tactics getting refined and expanded to more and more places.
yucky 4y ago
[flagged]
gammarator 4y ago
This is a highly biased and misleading account, both of Webb's role in the Lavender Scare and of the supposed rigor of the arguments deployed in support of the JWST naming. Personally the most compelling accounting of this matter I've seen is in the internal emails exchanged within NASA discussing the naming, which were made public by FOIA [1 & 2]. I would especially draw your attention to the analysis of an external historian (whose name is redacted) beginning on page 301 of [1], which rightly emphasizes Webb's direct, personal involvement in Oval Office discussions with President Truman about these matters. NASA chose to ignore this information and retain the JWST name. After substantial community pressure a more detailed historical report was released [3], which in my view clarifies that Webb was not the motive force behind the efforts at State but in no way exonerates him. At the end of the day, the telescope was named by a NASA administrator for another NASA administrator. Was Webb personally a bigot? Unclear. Was Webb a person of his time and a practitioner of realpolitik? Seems likely. Did the actions taken under his direction make life worse for gays and lesbians? Definitely. Would it have been better if NASA had chosen to honor someone else with the naming of a $10B telescope? Indisputably. [1] https://media.nature.com/original/magazine-assets/d41586-022-00845-6/20247466 https://media.nature.com/original/magazine-assets/d41586-022... [2] https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-00845-6 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-00845-6 [3] https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-shares-james-webb-history-report https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-shares-james-webb-history-...
- naasking 4y ago
  > After substantial community pressure a more detailed historical report was released [3], which in my view clarifies that Webb was not the motive force behind the efforts at State but in no way exonerates him. Exonerates him of what, specifically? > Did the actions taken under his direction make life worse for gays and lesbians? Definitely. Were they actually under his direction? Because it seems like it was a federal law, so why exactly does that qualify as "his direction"? > Would it have been better if NASA had chosen to honor someone else with the naming of a $10B telescope? Indisputably. I dispute it. Not because Webb is a "better" candidate than anyone else, but because I dispute the core implication that merely existing in a time and place and following the law, with no actual evidence of wrongdoing, by itself implicates a person in some kind of wrongdoing that should disqualify their contributions from being recognized.
xqcgrek2 4y ago
This incident is only a broader symptom of social media as a tool and weapon to grandstand and signal virtue to others. As the profession of science is highly social, especially in fields of little consequence to everyday lives such as astrophysics that has little external feedback, pathologies that lead to such incidents can develop. In the end, it's little more than a high school cafeteria, replete with mean girls. I'm suspicious of any scientist or researcher that has a very active Twitter account. It means their priorities are not straight.
barganzo 4y ago
Seems like a lot of people are very excited about throwing IBJIYONGI [0] under the bus for being outspoken but few are actually interested in reading Nasa's account of the situation [1:2] released in November: > Based on the available evidence, the agency does not plan to change the name of the James Webb Space Telescope. However, the report illuminates that this period in federal policy – and in American history more broadly – was a dark chapter that does not reflect the agency’s values today. Understanding this history will help to guide NASA in its work to advance full equality for LGBTQI+ Americans, and equal opportunities for LGBTQI+ NASA employees. By sharing these findings, we also hope to promote public understanding of the history of discrimination against LGBTQI+ employees throughout the federal government and strengthen our efforts to confront the barriers that LGBTQI+ Americans continue to face. It is disappointing that most of the pro-change activists continue to waste their breath arguing semantics instead of letting it go. It must sting for the engineers and scientists working on JWST to see so many non-stakeholders still complaining about the name. It is more disappointing that so many new members of the conversation seem happiest to tear down and bully the individuals who asked for change. Eternal September, yet again. [0] If you are trying to decipher the intimidating username, it is explained here: https://medium.com/@chanda/why-i-took-a-break-from-twitter-e4aeb3bb4777 https://medium.com/@chanda/why-i-took-a-break-from-twitter-e... [1] https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/nasa_historical_investigation_james_webb_0.pdf https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/nasa_hi... [2] https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-shares-james-webb-history-report https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-shares-james-webb-history-...
poulpy123 4y ago
Looks like someone found a way to advance her career without having to bother to do real science
- b215826 4y ago
  I don't want to join the dogpile against the woman criticized in the article, but yes, it has to be mentioned that she has written some batshit crazy stuff about how theoretical physics is imbued with white supremacist ideas. Stuff that would make Alan Sokal cringe. For example, > Ultimately, the discourse about the quantum gravity model of string theory provides an example of how white supremacist racial prestige asymmetry produces an antiempiricist epistemic practice among physicists, white empiricism. In string theory, we find an example wherein extremely speculative ideas that require abandoning the empiricist core of the scientific method and which are endorsed by white scientists are taken more seriously than the idea that Black women are competent observers of their own experiences. In practice, invalidating Black women's standpoint is an antiempirical disposal of data, in essence turning white supremacist social structures into an epistemic practice in science. Therefore, while traditionally defined empiricism is the stated practice of scientists, white empiricism -- where speculative white, male testimony is more highly valued than reality-based testimony from Black women -- is the actual practice of scientists. > Quantum chromodynamics is a colorful name for a theory that uses color as an analogy for physical properties that have nothing to do with color. Unfortunately, QCD came of age in a time when Black people were still using a moniker given to us by white people -- "colored" -- and to this day, textbooks still sometimes call it "colored physics". A Black feminist physicist working in the 1960s would never have used this language, which -- though it lacks the same social meaning -- recalls for me the Third Reich-era phrase "Aryan physics"... What I'm saying is, I love the idea of QCD, but the language is a hot mess. > Black thought can help us free science from the white supremacist traditions of scientists.
- europeanguy 4y ago
  Reminds me of Sabine hosenfelder
  - naasking 4y ago
vpastore 4y ago
Women
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

81 points by pinewurst 4y ago

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

These things always come down to a contest between power and truth: which matters more, to the individual? Can truth turn their wrath, or only fuel it further? Do they heed or attack seekers after truth? Pay close attention, because truth is our only defense against runaway power.

listenallyall 4y ago
> truth is our only defense against runaway power. A lot of today's "truth" is simply what powerful people say it is. If you disagree, tough.
- moloch-hai 4y ago
  Truth and "truth" are, of course, opposites.
  - listenallyall 4y ago
    Yea, but neither side comes out and says they represent "truth" (in quotes).
    - moloch-hai 4y ago
      But we can tell.

gautamdivgi 4y ago

What needs to be understood is that people are conditioned by their times and the company they keep. It does not mean they didn't do great things we should refuse to acknowledge. Yes, there should never be a hero complex. Flaws should be told as often as the feats. It's not done. Maybe the solution through the whole cancel campaign morass is to tell all sides of a person who has done great things. Acknowledge the wrongs and the achievements.

at_a_remove 4y ago
Except the guy in question didn't do anything wrong. Other than, you know, exist in a certain time and place.

doodlebugging 4y ago

I'm not a doctor nor do I play one on TV but if I had to make a diagnosis I would say based on this story that astrophysics appears to have a social media disease. It could be a cancer similar to that social media cancer affecting other parts of our society. It is definitely a disease though and looks to be spread by oratorial infection of gullible individuals who transmit to their peers using digital tools. Education may be the only effective treatment in the long term though it takes time and a commitment to the truth at all levels of society to accomplish that goal. It is very serious for this lady to start making sexual assault allegations against colleagues. Things like this taint reputations for a lifetime since there will always be someone who hears about the allegation but not about the supporting data or the end conclusions.

spoiler 4y ago
> It is very serious for this lady to start making sexual assault allegations against colleagues. Things like this taint reputations for a lifetime since there will always be someone who hears about the allegation but not about the supporting data or the end conclusions. For the reasons you laid out, the people who consciously and falsely accuses someone of a crime should be charged with the same crime, but double the penalty (for they tried to both ruin a life, and deceive/abuse the system). Obviously malice needs to be proven in this case too.
- doodlebugging 4y ago
  Slander and libel laws probably cover this situation. I agree that the penalties should be high for someone who intentionally invents charges like this and spreads them today. In past years the damages to reputations could be a lot more local and shorter duration when the false charges are refuted with facts. Local people would know the full story and would be less inclined to hold something like this against a person once charges were proven false. The accuser would take the reputational hit. Today you make charges like this online on social media and there is no way to scrub that from the record. Those allegations will persist like an incurable disease and will be accessible to anyone locally or internationally who searches for info about the accused. That reputational hit will persist on the accused for their lifetime and into their children's lifetime. Penalties for false allegations like this should be very harsh.

dmix 4y ago

> they insisted that Oluseyi’s research “changes nothing.” According to the fallback case against Webb that they articulated, the mere fact that Webb was in any kind of leadership position at the State Department meant that he bore personal responsibility for all of the anti-gay social panic then unfolding around him. Guilt by association is a dangerous precedent. > [George Mason University astronomy professor Peter] Plavchan said that in July 2021, as word circulated in academia that Dr. Oluseyi might win an appointment at George Mason, he heard from a professor at a different university who claimed that Dr. Oluseyi had mishandled a federal grant and sexually harassed a woman. [..] They found nothing to substantiate these charges This initially started off as typical slacktivism 101. But slacktivism seems to be evolving to become something much more serious and effective. It's the easiest thing in the world is to sit on Twitter whine about words and labels used for a science project. Just like it was probably the easiest option for 1950s congressmen to run a giant purity test, accuse people of being communists, and get them blacklisted... instead of focusing on actually doing a better job with the country than communism. Social media used to just be whining part but now we're seeing backroom blacklisting tactics getting refined and expanded to more and more places.

yucky 4y ago

[flagged]

gammarator 4y ago

This is a highly biased and misleading account, both of Webb's role in the Lavender Scare and of the supposed rigor of the arguments deployed in support of the JWST naming. Personally the most compelling accounting of this matter I've seen is in the internal emails exchanged within NASA discussing the naming, which were made public by FOIA [1 & 2]. I would especially draw your attention to the analysis of an external historian (whose name is redacted) beginning on page 301 of [1], which rightly emphasizes Webb's direct, personal involvement in Oval Office discussions with President Truman about these matters. NASA chose to ignore this information and retain the JWST name. After substantial community pressure a more detailed historical report was released [3], which in my view clarifies that Webb was not the motive force behind the efforts at State but in no way exonerates him. At the end of the day, the telescope was named by a NASA administrator for another NASA administrator. Was Webb personally a bigot? Unclear. Was Webb a person of his time and a practitioner of realpolitik? Seems likely. Did the actions taken under his direction make life worse for gays and lesbians? Definitely. Would it have been better if NASA had chosen to honor someone else with the naming of a $10B telescope? Indisputably. [1] https://media.nature.com/original/magazine-assets/d41586-022-00845-6/20247466 https://media.nature.com/original/magazine-assets/d41586-022... [2] https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-00845-6 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-00845-6 [3] https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-shares-james-webb-history-report https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-shares-james-webb-history-...

naasking 4y ago
> After substantial community pressure a more detailed historical report was released [3], which in my view clarifies that Webb was not the motive force behind the efforts at State but in no way exonerates him. Exonerates him of what, specifically? > Did the actions taken under his direction make life worse for gays and lesbians? Definitely. Were they actually under his direction? Because it seems like it was a federal law, so why exactly does that qualify as "his direction"? > Would it have been better if NASA had chosen to honor someone else with the naming of a $10B telescope? Indisputably. I dispute it. Not because Webb is a "better" candidate than anyone else, but because I dispute the core implication that merely existing in a time and place and following the law, with no actual evidence of wrongdoing, by itself implicates a person in some kind of wrongdoing that should disqualify their contributions from being recognized.

xqcgrek2 4y ago

This incident is only a broader symptom of social media as a tool and weapon to grandstand and signal virtue to others. As the profession of science is highly social, especially in fields of little consequence to everyday lives such as astrophysics that has little external feedback, pathologies that lead to such incidents can develop. In the end, it's little more than a high school cafeteria, replete with mean girls. I'm suspicious of any scientist or researcher that has a very active Twitter account. It means their priorities are not straight.

barganzo 4y ago

Seems like a lot of people are very excited about throwing IBJIYONGI [0] under the bus for being outspoken but few are actually interested in reading Nasa's account of the situation [1:2] released in November: > Based on the available evidence, the agency does not plan to change the name of the James Webb Space Telescope. However, the report illuminates that this period in federal policy – and in American history more broadly – was a dark chapter that does not reflect the agency’s values today. Understanding this history will help to guide NASA in its work to advance full equality for LGBTQI+ Americans, and equal opportunities for LGBTQI+ NASA employees. By sharing these findings, we also hope to promote public understanding of the history of discrimination against LGBTQI+ employees throughout the federal government and strengthen our efforts to confront the barriers that LGBTQI+ Americans continue to face. It is disappointing that most of the pro-change activists continue to waste their breath arguing semantics instead of letting it go. It must sting for the engineers and scientists working on JWST to see so many non-stakeholders still complaining about the name. It is more disappointing that so many new members of the conversation seem happiest to tear down and bully the individuals who asked for change. Eternal September, yet again. [0] If you are trying to decipher the intimidating username, it is explained here: https://medium.com/@chanda/why-i-took-a-break-from-twitter-e4aeb3bb4777 https://medium.com/@chanda/why-i-took-a-break-from-twitter-e... [1] https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/nasa_historical_investigation_james_webb_0.pdf https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/nasa_hi... [2] https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-shares-james-webb-history-report https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-shares-james-webb-history-...

poulpy123 4y ago

Looks like someone found a way to advance her career without having to bother to do real science

b215826 4y ago
I don't want to join the dogpile against the woman criticized in the article, but yes, it has to be mentioned that she has written some batshit crazy stuff about how theoretical physics is imbued with white supremacist ideas. Stuff that would make Alan Sokal cringe. For example, > Ultimately, the discourse about the quantum gravity model of string theory provides an example of how white supremacist racial prestige asymmetry produces an antiempiricist epistemic practice among physicists, white empiricism. In string theory, we find an example wherein extremely speculative ideas that require abandoning the empiricist core of the scientific method and which are endorsed by white scientists are taken more seriously than the idea that Black women are competent observers of their own experiences. In practice, invalidating Black women's standpoint is an antiempirical disposal of data, in essence turning white supremacist social structures into an epistemic practice in science. Therefore, while traditionally defined empiricism is the stated practice of scientists, white empiricism -- where speculative white, male testimony is more highly valued than reality-based testimony from Black women -- is the actual practice of scientists. > Quantum chromodynamics is a colorful name for a theory that uses color as an analogy for physical properties that have nothing to do with color. Unfortunately, QCD came of age in a time when Black people were still using a moniker given to us by white people -- "colored" -- and to this day, textbooks still sometimes call it "colored physics". A Black feminist physicist working in the 1960s would never have used this language, which -- though it lacks the same social meaning -- recalls for me the Third Reich-era phrase "Aryan physics"... What I'm saying is, I love the idea of QCD, but the language is a hot mess. > Black thought can help us free science from the white supremacist traditions of scientists.
europeanguy 4y ago
Reminds me of Sabine hosenfelder
- naasking 4y ago

vpastore 4y ago

Women

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]