This Washington Post article (click headline to read, or find it archived here), shows how chilled the research climate in America has become because of the Administration’s threats. And the Admin hasn’t even said anything about evolution yet. (Has anybody ever asked Trump or RFK Jr. whether they accept evolution?)
The threats involve not just the potential of being demonized for publishing on a subject that the administration might denigrate, but also the possibility of researchers in that area being punished because they’re foreigners.
A few quotes:
The subject: evolution.
. . . .Although President Donald Trump’s executive orders have not targeted research involving evolution, the authors’ unease about publishing on the subject reflects the fear and uncertainty now rippling through the science world.
The paper “was months of work, but at the same time I know the current situation, and I’m scared for my friends in the U.S.,” said the European evolutionary biologist, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they feared retaliation. “I told them, ‘If you think it is too dangerous, don’t do it.’ ”
Now granted, this is for a symposium volume (something that Steve Gould called the least-read form of scientific literature), with the paper and volume described in this way:
The withheld paper described ways in which evolution unfolds in both living and nonliving systems, a subject relevant to the search for life elsewhere in the universe. The authors included measurements and genomic data on different species. An example of evolution in the nonliving world would be the growth of the universe after the Big Bang, as new minerals and elements came into being, the European scientists said.
. . .The special edition of the Royal Society journal that was to have included the withdrawn paper, emerged from the Workshop on Information Selection and Evolution last October in Washington, which drew a multidisciplinary collection of 100 researchers from as far away as Japan to discuss the latest thinking on evolution.
“People were talking about the evolution of languages, the evolution of technology, the evolution of species, the evolution of minerals and atoms and planets and things like this,” Wong said. “It was just so scintillating.”
Of course there’s a big difference between biological evolution and the idea of “change”, even though people have tried to analogize them by confecting the idea of “memes” (which can’t explain the evolution of minerals, atoms, or planets), so this heterogeneity is why the volume doesn’t get my juices flowing.
But that is not the point. NO scientific paper should be withheld, or the authors forced to hide their real names, because they work and publish in a well-accepted field or are living under a government that is bludgeoning people left and right. Every day it gets crazier, and every day science becomes subject to more censorship.
I’m open to being corrected, but in my opinion, this article lacks any evidence and is merely based on hearsay and speculations about potential consequences. I draw a parallel between this article and the actual environment promoted by the Biden administration, which necessitated the publication of your essay, “In Defense of Merit in Science,” in the “Journal of Controversial Ideas.”
I think the main factor here is fear of being deported rather than fear of being cancelled.
This is awful. While I‘m glad to be made aware that researchers have this concern—and it’s unfortunate that they feel the need to act on it—I nonetheless hope that Johnson’s piece doesn’t get the attention of the Trump administration. I wouldn’t want them to put evolution in the crosshairs. We have enough trouble as it is.
Scientists are afraid to publish on evolution, but how did this sort of thing get past the gates?
Is this for real?
Abstract
Urological diseases have two groups of causes: Decreased Oxygen Utilization and Jinn. Decreased Oxygen Utilization is caused by Positive Ions from man-made activities. Positive ions induce acidity and inflammation in our body, which are at the base of almost all diseases; the best treatment against Positive Ions is the use of Negative Ions, while Medicine is powerless in many cases. What is amazing, that the Negative Ions help also to diagnose the presence of the Jinn as a cause of the disease and remove the Evil of Satan as Allah “sent down upon you from the sky, rain by which to purify you and remove from you the evil (suggestions) of Satan and to make steadfast your hearts and plant firmly thereby your feet.” (Quran, Al Anfal 8:11). During the rain and thunderstorm there is a massive discharge of Negative Ions. Jinn contain more Positive Ions. The cure is only by Allah and when Ruqya is associated with Negative Ions the cure is quicker.
https://lupinepublishers.com/reproductive-medicine-journal/fulltext/urological-diseases-ruqya-and-negative-ions-treatment.ID.000123.php
Meh. Kind of like the Onion, with the exception that some people think it’s real. It’s one of those fake, predatory journals. It’s not peer-reviewed and the authors pay to have their drek published. They dress it up and make it look like a scientific publication, but its like the National Enquirer. Caveat emptor.
And the chutzpah, to name one’s predatory publishing house after a big bad predator.
Lupine are listed as a predatory publisher in Beall’s list. See this discussion about them (https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is_Lupen_Publisher_a_predatory_publisher), including the following from one commenter:
“this is a publisher mentioned in the updated version of the Beall’s list of potential predatory publishers (https://beallslist.net/#update ). This is a red flag, but there are more:
-Contact info mentions an US address that is nothing but a virtual office (in other words they hide their true origin)
-Take for example “Journal of Anthropological and Archaeological Sciences” (https://lupinepublishers.com/anthropological-and-archaeological-sciences/). Prominently mentioned impact factor (ISI indexing), is a notorious example of a fake metric often used by predatory journals https://beallslist.net/misleading-metrics/
-No mentioning of any serious indexing in for example Scopus or ESCI. On the contrary, their indexing info includes numerous meaningless memberships (like Sci-Hub…)
-See for more disturbing news about them http://flakyj.blogspot.com/search/label/Lupine“
I knew it! THAT’S why at 55 it takes me so long to pee!
Damn Jinns!
Reminds me of that rich Turkish fraudster/playboy who commissioned a huge, complicated, professional looking full color tome about why evolution isn’t true (Hint: Koran).
He’s like the Jerry Coyne of Bizarroland!
D.A.
NYC
David: I’ve had personal experience with this one! An Ahmadi Muslim gave me a copy of what I assume was this piece of crap after I gave a talk pointing out the crazy things Muslim “scientists” published on things like the efficacy of Camel urine in the treatment of disease. These fine publications enabled their advancement in academic positions. This tome was huge with color illustrations. He wouldn’t take it back, so I eventually trashed it. Now, I sort of wished I had saved it.
I have a copy of that very fine piece of crap, “Atlas of Creation, Volume 1” by Harun Yahya. I use it to prop up some nice fossils (which in the front matter Yahya tells us have “discredited evolution”). Who knew?
Bold corresponds to the WaPo article’s characterization of “the science world” – quoted from Wikipedia :
“Fear, uncertainty, and doubt (FUD) is a manipulative propaganda tactic used in sales, marketing, public relations, politics, polling, and cults. FUD is generally a strategy to influence perception by disseminating negative and dubious or false information, and is a manifestation of the appeal to fear.”
Many examples in this article :
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty,_and_doubt
Without more details (it is paywalled) on the manuscript we don’t know what the potential ideological problem is besides the word “evolution” and the uncertainty and doubt as to what the administration thinks about the word “evolution” – also missing from the article.
I conclude this is skillfully crafted dialectical agitprop, blending truth with FUD.
My first thought also.
In fact, it could even be true that the authors experienced fear exactly as reported, but the fact that it is reported and amplified puts it into that category. It could also be that the authors thought that this is a good way to get some publicity.
Much of the anti-Trump reporting uses the same style. TBH, so did the anti-Biden reporting from the right (more in terms of the fear of half-naked men wearing lingerie reading stories to kids, but the same type of hooks).
If I could add one note, and this is for PCC(E) as well – calling it agitptop does not mean much more than that.
I can understand there are word police in the administration, which is is bad, and it’s a shame if someone is inhibited from publishing – I’m taking those as true – and sure, it’s a bit emotional because all of the readers here are enthusiastic about science and stuff!
But those are laid out deliberately to produce an emotional reaction importantly including the comments here, to make us basically fight and struggle each other until we all reach Unity.
Addendum :
I recommend :
Propaganda – The Formation of Men’s Attitudes
Jacques Ellul
Transl. Kellen & Lerner
Vintage/Random House
1965
… IMHO the time has come to take seriously “propaganda” (I was spurred to read it more by this post – ended up highlighting lots of passages).
IMHO Ellul makes the case that everyone has been swimming in it, and pushed around by it, most of the time, even if they can recognize it.
If I may be allowed some length (the writing tends to sprawl), here’s a perhaps salient excerpt to connect to the post :
[begin quote]
““When propaganda ceases in a group where it has had powerful effect, what do we see? A social disintegration of the group and a corresponding internal disintegration of the individuals within it. They completely withdraw into themselves and reject all participation in social or political life—through uncertainty, through fear, through discouragement. They begin to feel that everything is useless, that there is no need to have opinions or participate in political life. They are now wholly disinterested in all that was the center of their lives. As far as they are concerned, everything will go on henceforth “without me.” ”
[ end quote]
Note that the objective of propaganda (as Ellul has it) is not ideological, but to cause individuals to act in some way. Check this book out.
I don’t think evolutionary biologists or writers on atheism can be complacent about this pending issue. The Christianists are out in force, looking for “Anti-Christian bias.” Their definition of Freedom is being saved from eternal sin. They see no virtue in freedom of thought and are actively looking to oppose it.
The demands for Creationism to be given equal validity with Evolutionary science has already been proposed, and it won’t be long before the Feds start requiring it to receive funding. Eventually, science will be seen as a direct assault on biblical truth, and actively suppressed.
I don’t think this will happen, simply because evolution is established science. It would be like people stopping vaccinating their kids for measles because of RFK Jr. But I still worry what the present Supreme Court will do if they ever get an evolution vs. creationism case.
The fact that we consider it established science is what motivates them. They are determined to force schools to present evolution as a theory on equal footing with “creation science”. And what WAS established law will be challenged as anti religious bias. This is their moment and I expect them to seize it.
I’m willing to believe that these two US-based researchers genuinely fear the consequences of publishing their paper. Seems like misplaced fear but it’s subjective.
OTOH as a professor with a PhD student to feed, a grant running out, and a big grant proposal deadline later this year, I’m envious of someone who can afford to just not publish their research. That’s a privilege most of us don’t have.
Someone who “just lost a job because of a canceled government grant” should need to publish everything s/he can to qualify for a new job. If s/he doesn’t need to do that, there’s some context missing that would be good to know before I decide whether this claim not to want to publish is a reasonable response to a real danger, or something else.
I don’t think the fear is misplaced at all. A man with a court order allowing him to remain in the US was deported to a PRISON without a hearing. Hundreds of students have had their visas revoked for exercising free speech rights. The administration is ignoring court orders. The US appears to be entering a period of government lawlessness. Fear is warranted.
“Hundreds of students have had their visas revoked for exercising free speech rights.”
The question, Matthew, is if as foreign nationals whether they actually have those rights. I believe they do, but there are many folks learned in law -and I am not one- who don’t think so.
True, the Supreme Court has never rules on the question. But I am worried whenever the government starts punishing people based on their political views.
SCOTUS has absolutely heard and decided this very argument 70 years ago. Yes, foreign nationals in the US have freedom of speech rights. However, the President has the authority to deport them for their speech.
Deportation is not considered a punishment, and thus not subject to 1st or 5th amendment restriction.
I think the distinction is between revoking visas (an administrative act subject to judicial review) and fines & jail sentences. No one, citizen or alien, can be imprisoned or fined for speech but a visa can be revoked for any reason if the government deems the holder to be injurious to the nation. One of those reasons could be political speech. A person deported in chains becomes a free man once he reaches his country of citizenship (unless that country wants to imprison him under its own law.) It is not a punishment.
It’s a bit like in the real world of work. Your employer can fire you for making public political speech at work, or even away from work if your speech refers back to your workplace. The usual reason, although no reason need be given, would be that your speech alienates customers and other workers and damages the business. But neither the boss nor the police can put you in jail for anything you said.
I generally agree with you. There is the question of whether we ¨should¨ revoke visas for speech, since the US in founded in part on the concept that freedom (speech, religion, press, etc.) is our most important attribute. The more worrying development is that this administration is circumventing the courts, or in some cases simply ignoring their rulings. The worst example is Mr. Garcia who WAS sent to a prison (albeit in his home country) without a hearing, when he also had an existing court order saying he could not be deported. The right of habeas corpus has been ruled by the Supreme Court as applying for all persons in the US regardless of citizenship status and they are blatantly ignoring that ruling.
There was a news bit on NPR recently about a student researcher (perhaps a grad student) from China who is being deported on un-founded fears that he might be a spy. There was no evidence mentioned of this, and the student was described as having a history of criticism of the Chinese government. This action was spun up from some lawmakers from the far right who are worked up about the possibility of Chinese spies in academia, and I’d admit that is feasible.
Now in comparison to how NPR tells news about Gaza protests on campus, I don’t know if every detail about this one is factual. But I can see how a foreign national from a government who is being Watched by the current admin. would want to keep a very low profile. So this might not be about the E-word. It could be because they are from certain countries.
Here is the transcript of that story.
https://www.npr.org/transcripts/nx-s1-5351537
May I encourage everyone to contact their legislative representatives and express their views about what is happening to science and academia in this country? We hear this often but many of us rarely do it.
There are boxes to leave comments on most representative’s webpages, and in most cases tallies are kept as to which subjects are of most concern. Write early and often!
I wish I believed it would help.
I think it is all nonsense. These researchers are attracting far more attention to themselves by going to the Post than they would by publishing an obscure paper in an obscure venue.
+1
Indeed. My takeaways from the abstract posted above are that 1) the authors are doing themselves a favor by not posting this junk and 2) they are not scientists.
If anyone was going to deport them, it is more likely now than if they had gone ahead with publication.
If this is even real, and not performative, a subjective fear of deportation is hardly a stick to beat the administration with. This is all getting a little ridiculous/tedious by the left wing media.
Truly shameful, but I understand their reasoning. Trump continues to insist the innocent man imprisoned in El Salvador belongs to a gang and is a criminal without evidence, and he talks about deporting citizens as well. He may start with criminals, but I doubt he will remain with them. Further, I doubt they will be repatriated after they serve their terms.
TDS is analogous to paranoia. And if someone claims aliens are trying to control their mind by beaming neutrons at them, the correct response is not to install a neutron detector in their house.
Liers. This is a total performative bs.
So are we attacking Trump and blaming him for other peoples paranoia? How is this any different from when “woke” individuals try to cancel someone over “feeling offended” or just “feeling” like someone isn’t anti bad things enough, even though there is no evidence, and any feeling of offense is not justified nor reasonable?
I’m sorry but this is absurd. Especially since a month ago MAGA supporters had a falling out with the Trump Musk duo because they signaled that they wanted to keep and expand H1B visas, while the supporters basically want all immigration stopped. I don’t know by what means these scientists are legally immigrated into US, but I’d wager they fit with Trump’s desire to get the best of the best minds into the country.
And insinuations that Trump would somehow take revenge on scientists for writing an evolution paper is insane. The guy isn’t a typical conservative republican evangelist. A few decades ago he literally was a registered Democrat. He’s the first US president to openly show support for gay marriage at the start of his campaign. He’s not a product of the right wing anti evolutionists/creationists. I wish I remembered which prominent atheist I saw speculating that Trump might actually be atheist himself. In any case, trying to make Trump as some mouth frothing anti evolutionist, to the point where he would specifically target someone for 1 paper is borderline disgusting.
Criticize Trump for actual anti scientific views, like not supporting actions to fight global warming, but don’t give me this crap of “what if he’ll punish people for believing in evolution”.
There’s only one reason someone in their position as scientists would have a valid fear of deportation, and that is if they know they lied about something at some point, and they were not actually legally allowed in the country. But since I have no evidence of this being the case, I merely call them deeply paranoid. And I don’t understand why we should give paranoid people the spotlight.
Whether we should or not, we clearly do. Various conspiracy theories seem current in the present administration, so they’re even news-worthy (FSVO worthy).
And people still think this is not the birth of a totalitarian regime?
No worries here; in the name of fostering intellectual diversity, NSF can establish directorates to make grants for Creation Science. And for Flat-Earthism.