4 ms·

I am a PhD research scientist at one of these Montana universities. I am merely commenting on how the situation has played politically. But thank you for explai

I am a PhD research scientist at one of these Montana universities. I am merely commenting on how the situation has played politically. But thank you for explaining to me what "scientific fact" is.

toss1 4y ago
Congratulations — an impressive achievement! Yet how is it that you are here publicly writing and posting multiple paragraphs defending the existence and authors of a bill that would ban teaching scientific theories? There is little that is more anti-scientific than attempting to ban science. Whatever local politics may have lead to this, the larger and most relevant context is that the right wing in this country and internationally is making a major anti-science push, against every part of science from evolution to vaccines, in the interest of installing quasi- or actual Christo-fascist governments. This bill is part and parcel of that push, and no local politics, however heinous, can excuse that; yet here you are attempting to excuse it. Failing to recognize the borader anti-science context and not wholly objecting to it (despite some perceived positives regarding your resented board of regents) quite obscures and contradicts your scientific background and achievements. The appearance is that your local political outlook is more core to your being than all your laudable scientific work, to the point that it is not even evident that you did any.
- COGlory 4y ago
  >Yet how is it that you are here publicly writing and posting multiple paragraphs defending the existence and authors of a bill that would ban teaching scientific theories? I must be missing the part where I'm defending it. Perhaps a reading comprehension issue on my side? I'm pointing out that with the Board's actions, this type of reaction from the legislature was predictable. And all the Board had to do was act differently and they could have avoided it. How is that a defense of this bill? In my very first comment, I end with the term "lose-lose". The way the Board acted was bad - they overturned a public ballot initiative and claimed they have no public recourse. Obviously the way legislature reacted is also bad. Hence the term "lose-lose". >This bill is part and parcel of that push, and no local politics, however heinous, can excuse that; yet here you are attempting to excuse it. You've provided no evidence for this claim. I've provided substantial evidence to the contrary.
  - toss1 4y ago
    >>missing the part where I'm defending it. OK, 1) pointing out that both houses, the Gov, and Exec suite are all Repubs does not lead to the conclusion that it cannot pass, but increases it's liklihood (unless something unspecified and unusual is going on). 2) "MUS Board of Regents ... are doing the state a great disservice. And their behavior begets crap like this. That sounds an awful lot like "what skirt was she wearing"? To your credit, you do also say "Which is also stupid and awful". But the whole thing is effectively excusing the existence of this bill, as if it were a trivial annoying response to some local/state issue, when it in fact is part o a global movement to install Christofascism and destroy science for all time. Maybe you're not intending to defend it, but the result is that you certainly are at best, framing it as trivial rather than the serious issue that it is. and that amounts to at least a weak defense of a voice permitting it to continue to exist, rather than directly opposing it. Evidence? I've been following this for years. Just type "antiscience aggression movement" into DDG and start scrolling. Here's a few of the first results [0,1,2,3]. We are already effectively in a hot war with global authoritarian movements, not only in Ukraine, but also in locally and foreign-pushed attempts to undermine the democracy at home. A key component of democracy is the independence of all key institutions, the govt executive, legislative, and judicial branches, but also the academy, industry, religion, commerce, localities, charities, etc. Under Authoritarianism, all of these institutions are coerced and/or corrupted to serve the will of the ruling executive or religion. Ending science (which requires independent thought) and reigning in the Academy under the rule of the state are two of these components. You may see this as just a local tempest in a teapot, just as people might see local gerrymandering as just a local issue. But, make no mistake: both the anti-science bill and the corralling the university leadership moves are just part of this much larger goal of implementing and consolidating authoritarian power. Your Regents are not playing offense, but defense, and your hot tempest is just one ember in the global fire. [0] https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-antiscience-movement-is-escalating-going-global-and-killing-thousands/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-antiscience-m... [1] https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2020/10/what-caused-the-u-s-anti-science-trend/ https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2020/10/what-caused-t... [2] https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.3001369 https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/jou... [3] https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/antiscience-beliefs-jeopardize-us-democracy/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/antiscience-belie...

I am a PhD research scientist at one of these Montana universities. I am merely commenting on how the situation has played politically. But thank you for explaining to me what "scientific fact" is.

toss1 4y ago

Congratulations — an impressive achievement! Yet how is it that you are here publicly writing and posting multiple paragraphs defending the existence and authors of a bill that would ban teaching scientific theories? There is little that is more anti-scientific than attempting to ban science. Whatever local politics may have lead to this, the larger and most relevant context is that the right wing in this country and internationally is making a major anti-science push, against every part of science from evolution to vaccines, in the interest of installing quasi- or actual Christo-fascist governments. This bill is part and parcel of that push, and no local politics, however heinous, can excuse that; yet here you are attempting to excuse it. Failing to recognize the borader anti-science context and not wholly objecting to it (despite some perceived positives regarding your resented board of regents) quite obscures and contradicts your scientific background and achievements. The appearance is that your local political outlook is more core to your being than all your laudable scientific work, to the point that it is not even evident that you did any.

COGlory 4y ago
>Yet how is it that you are here publicly writing and posting multiple paragraphs defending the existence and authors of a bill that would ban teaching scientific theories? I must be missing the part where I'm defending it. Perhaps a reading comprehension issue on my side? I'm pointing out that with the Board's actions, this type of reaction from the legislature was predictable. And all the Board had to do was act differently and they could have avoided it. How is that a defense of this bill? In my very first comment, I end with the term "lose-lose". The way the Board acted was bad - they overturned a public ballot initiative and claimed they have no public recourse. Obviously the way legislature reacted is also bad. Hence the term "lose-lose". >This bill is part and parcel of that push, and no local politics, however heinous, can excuse that; yet here you are attempting to excuse it. You've provided no evidence for this claim. I've provided substantial evidence to the contrary.
- toss1 4y ago
  >>missing the part where I'm defending it. OK, 1) pointing out that both houses, the Gov, and Exec suite are all Repubs does not lead to the conclusion that it cannot pass, but increases it's liklihood (unless something unspecified and unusual is going on). 2) "MUS Board of Regents ... are doing the state a great disservice. And their behavior begets crap like this. That sounds an awful lot like "what skirt was she wearing"? To your credit, you do also say "Which is also stupid and awful". But the whole thing is effectively excusing the existence of this bill, as if it were a trivial annoying response to some local/state issue, when it in fact is part o a global movement to install Christofascism and destroy science for all time. Maybe you're not intending to defend it, but the result is that you certainly are at best, framing it as trivial rather than the serious issue that it is. and that amounts to at least a weak defense of a voice permitting it to continue to exist, rather than directly opposing it. Evidence? I've been following this for years. Just type "antiscience aggression movement" into DDG and start scrolling. Here's a few of the first results [0,1,2,3]. We are already effectively in a hot war with global authoritarian movements, not only in Ukraine, but also in locally and foreign-pushed attempts to undermine the democracy at home. A key component of democracy is the independence of all key institutions, the govt executive, legislative, and judicial branches, but also the academy, industry, religion, commerce, localities, charities, etc. Under Authoritarianism, all of these institutions are coerced and/or corrupted to serve the will of the ruling executive or religion. Ending science (which requires independent thought) and reigning in the Academy under the rule of the state are two of these components. You may see this as just a local tempest in a teapot, just as people might see local gerrymandering as just a local issue. But, make no mistake: both the anti-science bill and the corralling the university leadership moves are just part of this much larger goal of implementing and consolidating authoritarian power. Your Regents are not playing offense, but defense, and your hot tempest is just one ember in the global fire. [0] https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-antiscience-movement-is-escalating-going-global-and-killing-thousands/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-antiscience-m... [1] https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2020/10/what-caused-the-u-s-anti-science-trend/ https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2020/10/what-caused-t... [2] https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.3001369 https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/jou... [3] https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/antiscience-beliefs-jeopardize-us-democracy/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/antiscience-belie...