Skip to comments."March for Science" 4/22/17: A Push for "diversity" in Science. Is it important?
Posted on 04/21/2017 10:37:08 AM PDT by rlmorel
March For Science
The non-partisan March for Science celebrates the discovery, understanding, and sharing of scientific knowledge as crucial to the success, health, and safety of the human race. Thousands are expected to participate in Boston and across the country, with the main event happening on the National Mall in Washington, D.C.
Reading the "About Us" part of the web site, I saw this:
Science based on diversity: Diversity Statement
"We are committed to making science accessible to everyone and encouraging people from diverse backgrounds and experiences to pursue science careers. Diverse science teams outperform homogeneous teams and produce broader, more creative, and stronger work. We believe that regardless of past practices, science should never be used to disenfranchise or marginalize groups of people. Rather, all persons have the right to pursue and enjoy the fruits of science regardless of age, gender, ethnicity, disability, sexual orientation, religion or lack thereof, political affiliation, or socioeconomic status. Science belongs to all people, and should be done for all people.
Diverse representation through our speakers and volunteers is only part of our commitment to intersectional inclusion. We want to also use the moment to discuss the existing systemic problems underlying academia, cultural norms, and scientific institutions with relation to science. It is important to address the reasons why there is a lack of diversity in the first place and develop holistic solutions for fixing systems that result in inequality.
To this end we employ a range of outreach volunteers who have two goals: ensure that people, regardless of age, gender, ethnicity, disability, sexual orientation, religion or lack thereof, political affiliation, or socioeconomic status are welcome at our event and to work as messengers to bring the publics concerns to the organizers. We see outreach as a dialogue and recognize that often our role is not to speak but rather to step aside and listen.
We also welcome discussions and academic research on ways to improve access to participation in and benefitting from science. Our speakers and action items that will be released after the event will reflect this concern."
Then I read the "About Us>Mission/Diversity Statement" and saw this text above. My first thought, beyond the stench of liberalism and an astroturfed leftist agenda under the aegis of "science", was focused on the statement "Diverse science teams outperform homogeneous teams and produce broader, more creative, and stronger work."
Really? I had to wonder, on what do they base that categorical statement? Has anyone ever seen a study that supports this claim at all, never mind one that was jury-rigged to produce the result they desired.
Granted, it is the exact same type of verbiage used to tout the claims of Anthropoegenic (man caused) Global Warming and just about any other ostensible "science based" thing they try to push, so there is no surprise there.
I constantly hear this type of claim about diversity (applied by leftists to everything from elementary school sports to PHD studies in mathematics) and how it imbues everything with a magical synergy to make the sum greater than the parts. How can someone's race contribute positively to scientific endeavor? I see including elements solely for race, gender, or sexual preference as far more likely to water down and diminish any scientific discussion than to add to it.
Just wanted to open it for discussion.
If only the Theory of Relativity had been discovered by a person of color, things would have been TOTALLY different. /s
“Diverse science teams outperform homogeneous teams and produce broader, more creative, and stronger work.”
Really? And the science that this statement is based upon is...where?
Basically, if talented and intelligent people of a given background are not turning towards science, the discipline loses out on their potential talent. So there’s an objective benefit to diversity.
Also, challenges experienced by people of a given background may not be addressed if they’re not there to address them.
We thought we were diverse, but do to Gender and Race appropriation we are now homogenous. But that could change on a whim.
Yep gotta have diverse scientific researchers.
So we need a woman, who is a member of a minority group, who is lesbian, or has other gender identity issues.....
Sounds like we can’t abide having white heterosexual men involved.
White men are allowed only if homosexual.......,
>>We believe that regardless of past practices, science should never be used to disenfranchise or marginalize groups of people.<<
What past practices? Eugenics? Phrenology? “The Bell Curve?”
I have never seen a single study that concludes that diversity produces better results than homogeneity.
First, I must state that the blacks I know ALL have real PhDs in real academic subjecrs (e.g., STEM). They did the math, suffered the torture and EARNED their degrees.
Given that, we all know this “March for Science” is only intended to get low IQ dorks (a la Dorkbama the Muslim eunuch, even though that clown would have failed even high school physics) into the sciences where they can perform feats like adding 2+2 and getting 6 (for large values of 2 as two approaches 3) and “proving” that C02 and white privilege destroyed the dinosaurs and blew up Vesuvius.
Just wait, it will come, and dat’s the twuth.
After all, look at the clowns in the press, in law, in libarts departments, and......in politics.
This is the worst thing possible that can happen to science.
I’ve had a lot of conversations about the sad state of science today due to the fact that so many scientists today aren’t really scientists.
This reflects that and will only reinforce it.
Evidence? As a scientist-- the smartest, most driven teams with the right skill sets and strong leadership outperform other teams. There could be some diversity to the team, but in a meritocracy this does not correlate to success, it is fairly random. If team members do not have similar, shared values to the extent they don't get along well, even in a meritocracy a diverse team will under perform. In a non-meritocracy (e.g. affirmative action environment), the diversity of the team is forced by requiring "diversity" to take priority over talent and required skill sets; in this case the diverse team ALWAYS underperforms.
They voted against it, right?
But islam is pro-feminist.
I am prepared to believe that diverse science teams outperform homogeneous teams in procuring state and federal grant money. I am skeptical that they are superior in any other dimension — unless “diversity,” in this context, is a codeword for having a reasonable representation of Jewish, Indian, and Asian researchers on board. But somehow, I don’t think that’s that test.
Affirmative Action morphed into diversity - diversity is a very different animal designed for very different reasons. It is the far more insidious.
Some people confuse AA with Diversity. Affirmative Action and qualifications we understand - giving low IQ and poorly prepared africans and other unqualified peoples the opportunity to fail again (depending on how its rigged).
Diversity has most simply become the new way to cheat.
A march for science sounds like a good way to politicize it. Science is an area where Americans are competing with the whole world to get a job. There’s not a diversity problem in science.
1) “Discrimination” is NONE of the federal government’s business. Discrimination is our God-given right of the freedom to choose.
2) MLK himself said that people should not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character. So IMO we should dispense with this diversity b/s and simply promote by deed and character, not by gender or race.
Diversity? Well, we’ve let in buttload of dumb people so maybe now we can get some smart ones.
The Left wants science to be their invention of how they want things to be.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.