[TBC: According to 1 Thessalonians:5:21, we are to “Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.” “Proving” or “testing” is part of determining what is good or true. Humanity (speaking in general), despite claims to be in pursuit of truth, has consistently moved away from truth. In recent years Science has more increasingly moved away from “reproducibility,” that is, testing, or “falsifiability” in order to see whatever idea is advanced is “true.” That movement has greatly impacted those scientists who question whether something is true or just an idea without support.]
‘Fixing Science’ conference called ‘dangerous’ for discussing problems with faculty research
The National Association of Scholars (NAS) is facing accusations of harboring a “white supremacy agenda” and of being “dangerous” over the group’s upcoming conference that will explore how a massive amount of scientific findings published in peer-reviewed journals cannot be reproduced.
Topics to be explored include “groupthink” and the so-called settled science of climate change. Other subjects to be tackled are economics and health science.
But hyperbolic criticism of the conference, which included major social media traction, has prompted two graduate students set to be speakers at the event to bow out for fear their careers could be damaged, according to organizers.
Yet the traditionalist scholarly association, which describes itself online as a group that aims to foster “intellectual freedom” and that “searches for the truth,” is moving forward with the event.
It [was scheduled] for early February in Oakland, California, and titled “Fixing Science: Practical Solutions for the Irreproducibility Crisis.”
“‘Fixing Science’ brings together scholars from several disciplines to talk about practical ways to fix how scientists work,” reads its eventbrite page. “Panelists will suggest how research, scientists, academics, government officials, and philanthropists should reform scientific research.”
Leonid Schneider of “For Better Science” criticized the conference, noting: “The upcoming conference was much ridiculed on Twitter for being a white men-only event. A faux-pas, easily fixed by inviting some women next time and all is well. But there are much bigger problems with NAS, and climate change denialism is not the only one. Many posts on NAS website are openly misogynous and others raise the suspicion of white supremacy agenda.”
Later he insinuated NAS scholars Lee Jussim and Brian Earp “will probably come to have their egos rubbed by fellow white men of conservative persuasion.”
When asked by if he thought it was appropriate to attribute a negative characteristic to an individual’s race while accusing others of racism, Schneider’s only response was: “If you think white men are being discriminated against, then you maybe should join NAS.
When asked to clarify the position of NAS on the issue of climate change, Wood stated that the organization believes “it is a worthy topic of scientific investigation.”
He said he believes questions surrounding the lack of an academic consensus on climate change should not be the sole reason to shut down a public debate, and that such action “undermines real science.”
“The NAS takes no position on the science itself — on whether significant man-made global warming exists, how much, what mechanisms might be involved, and so forth,” Wood said. “We are focused on the integrity of the process of inquiry, not the outcome of that inquiry.”