One caveat, though.
In contrast, science held different values-international in scope, forging friendships and working relationships across national boundaries and political systems, encouraging a dispassionate habit of thought, and ultimately leading to fresh knowledge and technology that would benefit all mankind.
By definition, science has no values other than the pursuit of truth. The author decries the politicization of science, but here he is saying that "real science" holds what are indisputably political values. Perhaps most scientists hold these values, and I even personally agree with most of them. But that doesn't make them scientific.
Science, like pure capitalism, has no values. Both are merely efficient methods of achieving certain goals. Those goals can be good or evil.
A scientist who vehemently disagreed with all these values could still do perfectly valid scientific research. It's not politically correct to bring it up, but some of the experiments done by the Nazis on humans had significant scientific value.
ping