Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Axios)   When the government forms a scientific integrity panel, the first thing they'll screw up is their scientific integrity   (axios.com) divider line
    More: Fail, Research, White House, Scientific method, Science, Bill Clinton, scientific integrity policies, first report, Pseudoscience  
•       •       •

1569 clicks; posted to Politics » on 18 Jan 2022 at 7:41 PM (17 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



29 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2022-01-18 10:30:27 AM  
Key takeaways: The first report from the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy calls for strengthening existing agency policies that protect federal science from suppression, manipulation and influence, including from politicians.

Budget for 2022: $0.00

I mean it is a free market and all.

Also, subs? Can we retire the Reagan line that Government is bad? It isn't. The politicians bought off by the Government that institute bad policy are bad. We need libraries, fire departments, public schools, water systems, sewer systems, NASA and many other programs that actually do good work if funded properly.
 
2022-01-18 12:16:12 PM  
Thomas Jefferson owned slaves, but authored the Declaration of Independence. Merely because a person is horribly flawed doesn't mean they can't ever express any notion of what "better" might look like.
 
2022-01-18 7:44:27 PM  
How can you have a scientific panel without conflicts of interest.  There are only 5 or 6 scientists in the country.
 
2022-01-18 7:45:19 PM  
But the report doesn't specify how violators should be held accountable and how those consequences would be enforced, Carter says.

So they have no intention of actually doing anything, just creating the illusion that they are. Like basically every other federal agency.
 
2022-01-18 7:51:57 PM  

austerity101: But the report doesn't specify how violators should be held accountable and how those consequences would be enforced, Carter says.

So they have no intention of actually doing anything, just creating the illusion that they are. Like basically every other federal agency.


Similar to but not exactly like a subpoena.
 
2022-01-18 7:52:20 PM  
So... it's going to be as useless as the panel he put together on reforming the judiciary, I take it.
 
2022-01-18 7:54:35 PM  
Is the Biden Administration shooting itself in the foot again, to make sure the Republicans don't do it first?
 
2022-01-18 7:54:41 PM  
Yeah read the details then have a farking yawn and proceed with your day.
 
2022-01-18 7:55:43 PM  
And then I read the article and saw the feeble, withered thing I was expected to misconstrue as a sign of foul play.

Article's a hit piece by jackoffs who stand to lose a great deal in an age of truth and honesty.
 
2022-01-18 7:56:48 PM  

DarkSoulNoHope: Is the Biden Administration shooting itself in the foot again, to make sure the Republicans don't do it first?


No, someone involved knew a guy related to a thing and had a paper that was retracted at one point for obsolescence.
 
2022-01-18 7:59:27 PM  
I thought the co-chair was going to be found to have published some paper called "C19 Chemtrails and the Flat Earth".  I was kind of relieved.
 
2022-01-18 7:59:39 PM  
Just as a reminder, the previous president put his unqualified son in law in charge of both Middle Eastern policy and pandemic response.
 
2022-01-18 8:02:35 PM  
ISSUING A RETRACTION IS A GOOD THING YOU MUPPETS.

The alternative is scientists hiding their errors.
 
2022-01-18 8:03:45 PM  
I'm old enough to remember when Democrats held the upper hand vis-a-vis scientific credibility.
 
2022-01-18 8:06:59 PM  

abb3w: Thomas Jefferson owned slaves, but authored the Declaration of Independence. Merely because a person is horribly flawed doesn't mean they can't ever express any notion of what "better" might look like.


He also died in debt building his monument to his vanity, Monticello, and in the process reneged on a promise made to Polish freedom fighter Tadeusz Kosciuszko to free his slaves upon his death.

Which is to say, perhaps we ought to quit acting like a bunch of slave-owning deadbeats who believed in phrenology came up with the best system of government ever.
 
2022-01-18 8:08:36 PM  
FTA:Union of Concerned Scientists

Let me guess, let by Susan Collins?
 
2022-01-18 8:13:33 PM  

backhand.slap.of.reason: I'm old enough to remember when Democrats held the upper hand vis-a-vis scientific credibility.


Aren't all the anti-vaxxholes R?  So the Ds still do.
 
2022-01-18 8:18:44 PM  
Anything designed by a team that has to cater to both the left, the right, the media, and "unrelated interest groups" plus have a fifteen-minute meeting each morning to decide when the rest of the daily meetings will be held is probably doomed to failure.
 
2022-01-18 8:24:57 PM  

abb3w: Thomas Jefferson owned slaves, but authored the Declaration of Independence. Merely because a person is horribly flawed doesn't mean they can't ever express any notion of what "better" might look like.


Might I also add to that; just because an idea is good doesn't mean it couldn't benefit from refinement or someday need to fully be replaced. 200 years is a long time I think it's safe to say that none of the founding fathers would have anything useful to say about the modern world without receiving a whole bunch of education and context first.
 
2022-01-18 8:31:48 PM  
We used to have a Congressional Office of Technology Assessment, formed in the 70's I believe as digital tech started to become more and more mainstream. It's purpose was to try and plan ahead for the adoption of emerging tech. Newt farking Gingrich ordered it closed because he claimed it was replicating work being done in the private sector.

And by private sector, he meant partisan funded think tanks.

fark Newt Gingrich with a cactus.
 
2022-01-18 8:32:11 PM  
I'm guessing it's full of lawyers and political hacks?
 
2022-01-18 9:07:08 PM  
What a pithy headline. So full of folksy wisdom and down home bullsh*t.
 
2022-01-18 9:12:02 PM  
OMG A SCIENTIFIC PAPER GOT RETRACTED!!!111!!1!

ffs, does anyone even remember the trash people TFG had in every farking department? i mean i know how time has seemed to slow to a crawl and that bullshiat seems decades old now, but IT WAS ONLY A YEAR AGO
 
2022-01-18 9:15:37 PM  

gottagopee: OMG A SCIENTIFIC PAPER GOT RETRACTED!!!111!!1!

ffs, does anyone even remember the trash people TFG had in every farking department? i mean i know how time has seemed to slow to a crawl and that bullshiat seems decades old now, but IT WAS ONLY A YEAR AGO


and i'll add: trash people who were unqualified, blatantly profiting off their office, deliberately dismantling their departments, and *still* entirely unrepentant
 
2022-01-18 9:18:20 PM  

Pointy Tail of Satan: I'm guessing it's full of lawyers and political hacks?


It could be filled with passionate, brilliant experts in their fields with ironclad principles and a devoted reverence of truth as an idea, and you'd never know it from the outside.  Most people couldn't even recognize that, looking directly at it.  Fewer still remember what it was.

This degradation is intentional.  You are part of it.
 
2022-01-18 9:50:05 PM  
This is the most boring scandal ever... I wish all scandals were like this.
 
2022-01-18 11:39:49 PM  

austerity101: But the report doesn't specify how violators should be held accountable and how those consequences would be enforced, Carter says.

So they have no intention of actually doing anything, just creating the illusion that they are. Like basically every other federal agency.


Step 1: Replace agency heads
Step 2: Replace senior leadership
Step 3: Force out career employees
Step 4: Remove Inspector Generals

Not really seeing how new rules are going to do anything the old rules didn't do, when the whole problem was that the last guy just replaced all the people responsible for enforcing the rules in the first place.
 
2022-01-19 9:31:39 AM  

EyeballKid: abb3w: Thomas Jefferson owned slaves, but authored the Declaration of Independence. Merely because a person is horribly flawed doesn't mean they can't ever express any notion of what "better" might look like.

He also died in debt building his monument to his vanity, Monticello, and in the process reneged on a promise made to Polish freedom fighter Tadeusz Kosciuszko to free his slaves upon his death.

Which is to say, perhaps we ought to quit acting like a bunch of slave-owning deadbeats who believed in phrenology came up with the best system of government ever.


What's wrong with dying in debt? Your debt dies with you - if anything people should try to get banks to loan them every last nickel right up until they keep over.

Living in debt and needing to pay it off is hard, living in debt with no need to actually pay it off is easy.
 
2022-01-19 11:11:36 AM  

hugadarn: Might I also add to that; just because an idea is good doesn't mean it couldn't benefit from refinement or someday need to fully be replaced. 200 years is a long time I think it's safe to say that none of the founding fathers would have anything useful to say about the modern world without receiving a whole bunch of education and context first.


They probably wouldn't. Contrariwise, some of what they said at the time is still considered to have at least some merits. Nohow, people who differ on viewpoints will tend to disagree on what parts of what things and which people said back then still has (or ever had) merit; and there definitely seems to have been some further development in at least some branches of philosophy since their day.
 
Displayed 29 of 29 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.