3 ms·

The US Assault on Science: National Academies Letter

95 points by pmags 2y ago

pmags 2y ago
The letter itself: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/03/31/health/scientists-letter.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/03/31/health/scient...
shanekandy 2y ago
Article: https://archive.is/TOvAo https://archive.is/TOvAo The letter: https://archive.is/3rIir https://archive.is/3rIir
_ea1k 2y ago
[flagged]
- ailun 2y ago
  Hard to believe that this is your good-faith take on the substance of the letter.
- pmags 2y ago
  That's a very, shall we say "interesting", interpretation of the following paragraphs: > The quest for truth—the mission of science?requires that scientists freely explore new questions and report their findings honestly, independent of special interests. The administration is engaging in censorship, destroying this independence. It is using executive orders and financial threats to manipulate which studies are funded or published, how results are reported, and which data and research findings the public can access. The administration is blocking research on topics it finds objectionable, such as climate change, or that yields results it does not like, on topics ranging from vaccine safety to economic trends. > A climate of fear has descended on the research community. Researchers, afraid of losing their funding or job security, are removing their names from publications, abandoning studies, and rewriting grant proposals and papers to remove scientifically accurate terms (such as “climate change” ) that agencies are flagging as objectionable. Although some in the scientific community have protested vocally, most researchers, universities, research institutions, and professional organizations have kept silent to avoid antagonizing the administration and jeopardizing their funding
  - _ea1k 2y ago
    I used to hear the same kind of rhetoric from Republicans a lot. They are destroying this or that or the other. "Oh, what specific things? What executive order?" - Usually nothing but handwaving. This letter presents itself in exactly the same way, regardless of underlying substance. "The administration is engaging in censorship" is useless as persuasion. If you want to persuade people that don't naturally agree with your politics, you have to be specific.
fuckyah 2y ago
[dead]
feoren 2y ago
Here's what I don't understand. Let's say you're a selfish multi-billionaire, essentially having won at life, and now you want more. Essentially the only things your money can't buy you are long life, health (both physical and mental), and perhaps the ability to explore places humans have never ventured and create things humans have never created. If you want any chance at these things, wouldn't you want to encourage as much scientific innovation as possible? Steve Jobs died at 56 of pancreatic cancer. Wouldn't these people want science to advance as fast as possible, before they too get cancer, or at least die of some age-related disease that science might otherwise have been able to cure? Why is the billionaire class so dead-set on tearing down scientific institutions? It makes no sense even if you assume they're selfish assholes. It only makes sense if they are extremely stupid selfish assholes who are so blinded by their own evilness that they are cannibalizing their own futures for the fleeting sensation of their societal rank going up (due to them tearing down the rest of society around them). Is that really the explanation? I've never believed in purely evil cartoon villains before, but I just don't see any other explanation anymore.
- davesque 2y ago
  I think it's because science, knowledge, and truth are the great equalizers. In the limit, they put everyone on an equal playing field, which would also eliminate the advantage of wealth.
  - sebazzz 2y ago
    True long-term thinking.
- makeitdouble 2y ago
  Power. That's what you do if you want power. Edit: For those in doubt, a parallel: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward > The Great Leap Forward stemmed from multiple factors, including "the purge of intellectuals, the surge of less-educated radicals
  - mindslight 2y ago
alfor 2y ago
[flagged]
- pmags 2y ago
  To be clear: * The signatories are the elected members of the US National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. * Being elected to one of these marks you as among the most distinguished and influential scientists in your field. This is a high honor and many outstanding scientists will go their whole careers never being considered for election to NAS, NAE, etc.
- TacticalCoder 2y ago
  [dead]
- AppleAtCha 2y ago
  Can you give an example of fraud that has been found by doge? If so it is to be commended, but I suspect they are just labelling stuff approved by congress and previous administrations fraud whenever they don't like it.
  - Fauntleroy 2y ago
    You don't need examples when you have faith
  - fzeroracer 2y ago
    I can give an example. DOGE uncovered a plan to rebuild critical SSA infrastructure fraudulently and on an incredibly short timescale by giving it to the least competent people possible thanks to political nepotism [1]. [1] https://www.wired.com/story/doge-rebuild-social-security-administration-cobol-benefits/ https://www.wired.com/story/doge-rebuild-social-security-adm...
__MatrixMan__ 2y ago
They taught us that the renaissance/enlightenment was when we woke up and started caring about facts and now we were just in the process of refining the process, and that now all that willful ignorance is behind us. I think Feyerabend had it right: Science is fundamentally anarchical. It will perennially offend those who are drunk with power. We should've been learning to carry science forward despite powerful adversaries trying to shut us down--to take it underground like it was a criminal endeavor. Instead we focused on publication and on groveling after funding and no nobody knows what to do because the funding faucet has been shut off. And just when AI was starting to look like it might become a decent lab assistant. How sad.
- pmags 2y ago
  That all sounds romantic, but molecular biology labs, spinning confocal microscopes, clean rooms, super computers, particle accelerators, etc are all hard to come by "underground".
  - tharkun__ 2y ago
    Except for particle accelerators. I hear CERN specifically did build that underground. </SCNR>
    - pmags 2y ago
      Touche! ;-)
  - __MatrixMan__ 2y ago
    Yeah, there are limits to what you can do in your garage. I'm just saying that we should push them. For instance, it seems likely that certain powerful parties will attempt to censor evidence of a pathogen outbreak if it makes them look negligent. I'd like to be prepared to derive consensus about the nature of the threat despite their efforts. Some work is being done in this direction at https://openbioeconomy.org/research/ https://openbioeconomy.org/research/ (not affiliated, just a fan).
- Tadpole9181 2y ago
Chinjut 2y ago
[flagged]
- actionfromafar 2y ago
  Well, it does mention Musk, so I guess we have to flag it.
hypertexthero 2y ago
Why is the letter behind a NY Times paywall and not on the National Academies’ website at https://www.nasonline.org/ https://www.nasonline.org/ ? The Guardian — https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/mar/31/scientists-letter-trump-administration https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/mar/31/scientists-l... — has a link to this Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/13gmMJOMsoNKC4U-A8rhJrzu_xhgS51PEfNMPG9Q_cmE/edit?tab=t.0 https://docs.google.com/document/d/13gmMJOMsoNKC4U-A8rhJrzu_...
1970-01-01 2y ago
I agree with the letter, however there is merit to defunding due to the replication crisis. That should have at least been mentioned in the letter. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis
- rickydroll 2y ago
  Instead of defunding, fund somebody else to replicate the claim. We should start rewarding researchers for disproving or confirming another person's work at the same level as we would the original researcher. I would go as far as to say that a confirming researcher should get top billing along with the initial researcher.
  - kyleee 2y ago
    Indeed that would be awesome, and original researchers should be incentivized to do things that facilitate replication attempts, ex. sharing code, etc.
spacemadness 2y ago
The other mystery to unravel is the tech industry rallying behind a leader who wants to undo the very fabric of what makes the tech industry possible. Less taxes I get. Killing any chance of regulation so monopolies can continue to monopoly I get. I don't know why any non-cultist tech leader would want less science and technology education and research.
- ergonaught 2y ago
  They recognized what was coming and knelt rather than having their balls busted. Also, they're already wealthy, they have what matters in the foreseeable future. This is unequivocally not an endorsement of their choices.
  - whoiscroberts 2y ago
    Or they are not too worried…

95 points by pmags 2y ago

The letter itself: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/03/31/health/scientists-letter.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/03/31/health/scient...

shanekandy 2y ago

Article: https://archive.is/TOvAo https://archive.is/TOvAo The letter: https://archive.is/3rIir https://archive.is/3rIir

_ea1k 2y ago

[flagged]

ailun 2y ago
Hard to believe that this is your good-faith take on the substance of the letter.
pmags 2y ago
That's a very, shall we say "interesting", interpretation of the following paragraphs: > The quest for truth—the mission of science?requires that scientists freely explore new questions and report their findings honestly, independent of special interests. The administration is engaging in censorship, destroying this independence. It is using executive orders and financial threats to manipulate which studies are funded or published, how results are reported, and which data and research findings the public can access. The administration is blocking research on topics it finds objectionable, such as climate change, or that yields results it does not like, on topics ranging from vaccine safety to economic trends. > A climate of fear has descended on the research community. Researchers, afraid of losing their funding or job security, are removing their names from publications, abandoning studies, and rewriting grant proposals and papers to remove scientifically accurate terms (such as “climate change” ) that agencies are flagging as objectionable. Although some in the scientific community have protested vocally, most researchers, universities, research institutions, and professional organizations have kept silent to avoid antagonizing the administration and jeopardizing their funding
- _ea1k 2y ago
  I used to hear the same kind of rhetoric from Republicans a lot. They are destroying this or that or the other. "Oh, what specific things? What executive order?" - Usually nothing but handwaving. This letter presents itself in exactly the same way, regardless of underlying substance. "The administration is engaging in censorship" is useless as persuasion. If you want to persuade people that don't naturally agree with your politics, you have to be specific.

fuckyah 2y ago

[dead]

feoren 2y ago

Here's what I don't understand. Let's say you're a selfish multi-billionaire, essentially having won at life, and now you want more. Essentially the only things your money can't buy you are long life, health (both physical and mental), and perhaps the ability to explore places humans have never ventured and create things humans have never created. If you want any chance at these things, wouldn't you want to encourage as much scientific innovation as possible? Steve Jobs died at 56 of pancreatic cancer. Wouldn't these people want science to advance as fast as possible, before they too get cancer, or at least die of some age-related disease that science might otherwise have been able to cure? Why is the billionaire class so dead-set on tearing down scientific institutions? It makes no sense even if you assume they're selfish assholes. It only makes sense if they are extremely stupid selfish assholes who are so blinded by their own evilness that they are cannibalizing their own futures for the fleeting sensation of their societal rank going up (due to them tearing down the rest of society around them). Is that really the explanation? I've never believed in purely evil cartoon villains before, but I just don't see any other explanation anymore.

davesque 2y ago
I think it's because science, knowledge, and truth are the great equalizers. In the limit, they put everyone on an equal playing field, which would also eliminate the advantage of wealth.
- sebazzz 2y ago
  True long-term thinking.
makeitdouble 2y ago
Power. That's what you do if you want power. Edit: For those in doubt, a parallel: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward > The Great Leap Forward stemmed from multiple factors, including "the purge of intellectuals, the surge of less-educated radicals
- mindslight 2y ago

alfor 2y ago

[flagged]

pmags 2y ago
To be clear: * The signatories are the elected members of the US National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. * Being elected to one of these marks you as among the most distinguished and influential scientists in your field. This is a high honor and many outstanding scientists will go their whole careers never being considered for election to NAS, NAE, etc.
TacticalCoder 2y ago
[dead]
AppleAtCha 2y ago
Can you give an example of fraud that has been found by doge? If so it is to be commended, but I suspect they are just labelling stuff approved by congress and previous administrations fraud whenever they don't like it.
- Fauntleroy 2y ago
  You don't need examples when you have faith
- fzeroracer 2y ago
  I can give an example. DOGE uncovered a plan to rebuild critical SSA infrastructure fraudulently and on an incredibly short timescale by giving it to the least competent people possible thanks to political nepotism [1]. [1] https://www.wired.com/story/doge-rebuild-social-security-administration-cobol-benefits/ https://www.wired.com/story/doge-rebuild-social-security-adm...

__MatrixMan__ 2y ago

They taught us that the renaissance/enlightenment was when we woke up and started caring about facts and now we were just in the process of refining the process, and that now all that willful ignorance is behind us. I think Feyerabend had it right: Science is fundamentally anarchical. It will perennially offend those who are drunk with power. We should've been learning to carry science forward despite powerful adversaries trying to shut us down--to take it underground like it was a criminal endeavor. Instead we focused on publication and on groveling after funding and no nobody knows what to do because the funding faucet has been shut off. And just when AI was starting to look like it might become a decent lab assistant. How sad.

pmags 2y ago
That all sounds romantic, but molecular biology labs, spinning confocal microscopes, clean rooms, super computers, particle accelerators, etc are all hard to come by "underground".
- tharkun__ 2y ago
  Except for particle accelerators. I hear CERN specifically did build that underground. </SCNR>
  - pmags 2y ago
    Touche! ;-)
- __MatrixMan__ 2y ago
  Yeah, there are limits to what you can do in your garage. I'm just saying that we should push them. For instance, it seems likely that certain powerful parties will attempt to censor evidence of a pathogen outbreak if it makes them look negligent. I'd like to be prepared to derive consensus about the nature of the threat despite their efforts. Some work is being done in this direction at https://openbioeconomy.org/research/ https://openbioeconomy.org/research/ (not affiliated, just a fan).
Tadpole9181 2y ago

Chinjut 2y ago

[flagged]

actionfromafar 2y ago
Well, it does mention Musk, so I guess we have to flag it.

hypertexthero 2y ago

Why is the letter behind a NY Times paywall and not on the National Academies’ website at https://www.nasonline.org/ https://www.nasonline.org/ ? The Guardian — https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/mar/31/scientists-letter-trump-administration https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/mar/31/scientists-l... — has a link to this Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/13gmMJOMsoNKC4U-A8rhJrzu_xhgS51PEfNMPG9Q_cmE/edit?tab=t.0 https://docs.google.com/document/d/13gmMJOMsoNKC4U-A8rhJrzu_...

1970-01-01 2y ago

I agree with the letter, however there is merit to defunding due to the replication crisis. That should have at least been mentioned in the letter. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis

rickydroll 2y ago
Instead of defunding, fund somebody else to replicate the claim. We should start rewarding researchers for disproving or confirming another person's work at the same level as we would the original researcher. I would go as far as to say that a confirming researcher should get top billing along with the initial researcher.
- kyleee 2y ago
  Indeed that would be awesome, and original researchers should be incentivized to do things that facilitate replication attempts, ex. sharing code, etc.

spacemadness 2y ago

The other mystery to unravel is the tech industry rallying behind a leader who wants to undo the very fabric of what makes the tech industry possible. Less taxes I get. Killing any chance of regulation so monopolies can continue to monopoly I get. I don't know why any non-cultist tech leader would want less science and technology education and research.

ergonaught 2y ago
They recognized what was coming and knelt rather than having their balls busted. Also, they're already wealthy, they have what matters in the foreseeable future. This is unequivocally not an endorsement of their choices.
- whoiscroberts 2y ago
  Or they are not too worried…