|
Post by robeiae on Dec 20, 2017 10:26:25 GMT -5
There's also a small probability that most members of Congress are aliens in disguise. Guess we need another program...
And I guess that's two alien autopsy videos?
For the record, I think SETI makes sense and is defensible.
|
|
|
Post by Optimus on Dec 31, 2017 3:02:20 GMT -5
Back to the original point of the thread... I didn't see if anyone had posted this, so I apologize if I'm repeating someone else's post. The more I read about the "CDC's 7 banned words" story, the more skeptical I became, notably after the HHS director came out and emphatically denied it, and the more I realized that my initial reaction was wrong, though understandably knee-jerk given similar things that actually have happened from this administration. Given my limited experience in the sometimes unnecessarily politically-charged process of getting grant proposals approved, and the stories one of my research buddies told me about how the funding was cut for a study he was involved in (dealing with police use of deadly force statistics) almost immediately after Trump took office, and how some researchers were starting to creatively "reword" their grant proposals in order to get them approved, I started to suspect that what likely really happened was probably a meeting (either formal or informal) to discuss budgetary/grant concerns, and during that meeting there was likely a discussion (not a ban) where people were strongly urged in a *wink, wink, nudge, nudge* kind of way to find creative ways to word their proposals if they wanted to get them approved by the Congressional higher ups. Today, I ran across this Slate article that pretty much confirmed my suspicions that this "ban" wasn't actually a ban and was instead just a suggestion of how to get research proposals past the GOP bigots in charge of the money when writing out budget and grant proposals: This is one of those stories that straddles the line between legitimate concern and fake news. The most shocking thing is really that it's not shocking that scientists are having to resort to these tactics. It's sad that we have the type of ignorant political leaders that necessitate these types of tactics.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Dec 31, 2017 10:01:27 GMT -5
I think both are equally sad, myself. But Opty, note the analysis I linked to upthread: www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/12/fight-over-seven-health-related-words-president-s-next-budgetAside from "evidence-based," the terms in question don't have a significant presence in recent previous budget requests (for budgets that were before Trump). Hell, "fetus" and "entitlement" aren't there at all. Regardless, I hope everyone goes back and looks at their outrage and admits that they got played by people at WaPo and elsewhere. This was shameful on the part of the reporters.
|
|
|
Post by celawson on Dec 31, 2017 12:41:31 GMT -5
Regardless, I hope everyone goes back and looks at their outrage and admits that they got played by people at WaPo and elsewhere. This was shameful on the part of the reporters. Everyone?.....
|
|
|
Post by Don on Jan 1, 2018 4:35:36 GMT -5
Regardless, I hope everyone goes back and looks at their outrage and admits that they got played by people at WaPo and elsewhere. This was shameful on the part of the reporters. Everyone?..... We're gonna rename you ThreadKiller McMeanieFace, just for that comment. Not that it's all that hard to kill a thread around here.
|
|