I’m not. I’m old, and have been following this conflict for decades. Hamas very often targets innocent Israelis in their attacks, and hides behind innocent Palestinians to make it difficult for Israel to target them. You can argue about whether it is justifiable or not that they do this, but there are many, many sources that they do.
There were many innocent civilians living in Nazi Germany, and a lot of them died in the interest of stopping them.
We try to minimize innocent deaths in war, but when the group you are fighting against uses hospitals as military locations and innocent people as human shields, it becomes difficult to do so
Removing an episode for being racist (even though this one wasn’t racist) is not cultural genocide. Wearing blackface (I know, this wasn’t blackface) is not a culture that needs to be preserved.
Many publications on arxiv (or biorxiv or medrxiv, etc) are early drafts, or otherwise not scientifically rigorous and wouldn’t be published in an actual journal due to failing peer review. Take what you find there with a grain of salt.
Although you should also take any single peer-reviewed article with a grain of salt as well.
Specifically, the corresponding author (which should have their email listed in the publication)
Keep in mind you may get an “uncorrected proof” or “author copy” since many authors don’t want to run afoul of their publisher’s guidelines on giving out copies
Thanks for the information. Each of these are indeed troubling. But I think it’s disingenuous to say “science” is at fault for these. Shitty people doing shitty things for their own shitty reasons seems to be at play. Some of those reasons are for scientific funding or clout, but I think I comfortably speak for a lot of scientists when I say the scientific output is not worth it.
I think we’re mainly on the same page with a lot of this, we just have different descriptions of who we think the bad guy is. My view is that humans have the capacity for great evil, especially when motivated by profit or fame, but that science itself isn’t the root cause of this evil but is instead a catalyst enabling people to become famous as a result of it. It’s the fame, in my opinion, that drives people to do these terrible things. Science itself doesn’t really benefit, and is arguably hurt, by these actions, since there are likely other less harmful ways to research these topics.
Of course, I am biased. I have a career in science, after all. But I do genuinely believe that science does not require these terrible actions to thrive.
Every single time someone does a report on crime and breaks down data by race you’re seeing racist social science in action
Maybe I’m misinterpreting but… is your solution to ignore race and pretend it doesn’t exist? That we should be ignorant of how different groups are being treated and pretend everyone is the same? I think we both agree that minorities in many countries are more likely to be poor and have lower social mobility, and so it’s important to study them. As an example from my field: Alzheimer’s is significantly more likely if you’re a minority, especially black or hispanic, due to their reduced ability to access healthy food (food deserts) and quality healthcare due to past redlining. The only way we know this is by studying it.
Forced hysterectomies
That’s not science, that’s horrible treatment of minority groups and medical malpractice. No scientist with any degree of repute supports that shit.
I’m unfamiliar with the others: genetics being politically correct (this statement makes no sense to me), Mauna Kea, or Guam.
Ah, yes. Good catch, I did mention that there is no scientific evidence to support any widespread negative effects of the vaccines, and there continues to not be. You’re more than able to put yourself in the running for the Nobel prize for saving millions of lives by finding and publishing this evidence, though, since it seems that you’re so confident in it.
I did not state that “no one credible would believe them”, and your links about slavery are irrelevant because the discussion was about vaccines, not racism.
And I didn’t lie. Literally none of my colleagues thinks there is any merit to antivax scaremongering.
I’m happy to have this conversation but you really need to contribute more. I’ve described numerous ways we currently combat racism in science. Would you like to provide a recent example of racist science that we can discuss?
You’re very good at putting words into people’s mouths (I didn’t even mention antivax theories), and that point is where I end the conversation. Good day