Von der Qualität der Forschung an Universitäten im Allgemeinen und der Klimaforschung im Besonderen
Auf Schundniveau angekommen.
Eigentlich hatte man ja das MIT für eine Spitzenuniversität gehalten.
1/ Dorian Abbot is a geophysicist at the University of Chicago. He was to give MIT's prestigious Carlson Lecture on Oct. 21. The topic was to be climates of extrasolar planets. Shamefully, MIT canceled the lecture under pressure from activists who objected to his political views.
— Robert P. George (@McCormickProf) October 3, 2021
2/ Those who pressured MIT to cancel Dr. Abbot's lecture oppose his views on "diversity, equity, and inclusion": https://t.co/WYHpV1bFu5. As you can see, these have nothing to do with the topic of his Carlson Lecture. The activists cancel anyone who dissents from their dogmas.
— Robert P. George (@McCormickProf) October 3, 2021
3/ It is impossible to exaggerate how disgraceful MIT's capitulation to a mob's demands to cancel Dr. Dorian Abbot's lecture is. That he was qualified on the basis of his achievements as as a geophysical scientist to give the Carlson Lecture was never questioned–nor could it be.
— Robert P. George (@McCormickProf) October 3, 2021
4/ MIT's caving in to a cancel mob's demand to disinvite a distinguished scientist who had been invited on the basis of his achievements to give an honorific lecture shows just how badly science today has been politicized. The integrity of science can't survive politicization.
— Robert P. George (@McCormickProf) October 3, 2021
5/ Every honorable scientist should be raising his or her voice in condemnation of the cravenness of those at MIT who are responsible for canceling Dorian Abbot's Carlson Lecture. In condemning the politicization of science, there should be unanimity–at least among scientists.
— Robert P. George (@McCormickProf) October 3, 2021
Interessant auch der verlinkte Newsweek-Artikel:
American universities are undergoing a profound transformation that threatens to derail their primary mission: the production and dissemination of knowledge. The new regime is titled “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion” or DEI, and is enforced by a large bureaucracy of administrators. Nearly every decision taken on campus, from admissions, to faculty hiring, to course content, to teaching methods, is made through the lens of DEI. This regime was imposed from the top and has never been adequately debated. In the current climate it cannot be openly debated: the emotions around DEI are so strong that self-censorship among dissenting faculty is nearly universal.
The words “diversity, equity and inclusion” sound just, and are often supported by well-intentioned people, but their effects are the opposite of noble sentiments. Most importantly, “equity” does not mean fair and equal treatment. DEI seeks to increase the representation of some groups through discrimination against members of other groups. The underlying premise of DEI is that any statistical difference between group representation on campus and national averages reflects systemic injustice and discrimination by the university itself. The magnitude of the distortions is significant: for some job searches discrimination rises to the level of implicitly or explicitly excluding applicants from certain groups.
Die blanke Dummheit marxistischer Ideologie, dass Menschen völlig gleich und identisch sein müssten und jeder statistische Unterschied, jegliche Korrelation immer nur auf einer Diskriminierung von außen beruhen könne, die mit allen Mitteln neutralisiert werden muss.
Wie soll man den Universitäten eigentlich noch irgendetwas glauben?
Allgemein oder zum Thema Klima? Von solchen Leuten lassen wir uns die Klimapolitik diktieren?
Sind Universitäten nur noch Waschanlagen für marxistischen Einfluss, um diesen eine Wissenschaftsfassade zu geben?
Wer glaubt denen noch etwas?