Jane was properly penalized for her human mistake, i.e., being overly enthusiast about MPAs to cut some ethical corners. But Stev, I'd be careful about throwing stones, as most people live in glass houses. Fortunately, science is more self-correcting than other disciplines:
Vadas, R.L. Jr. 1994. The anatomy of an ecological controversy: honey bee searching
Though Jane Lubchenco has been caught up in this sort of brouhaha is disturbing given her role in an “integrity task force,” it is much less so than some of her past support for censorship on population issues. In the late 1980s she was appointed chair of the Ecological Society of America (ESA) committee that eventually produced the “landmark” Sustainable Biosphere Initiative (1991) white paper. While still in draft form that was criticized by some highly reputable reviewers for giving essentially zero attention to the issue of overpopulation as the biggest obstacle to “sustainability.” But Lubchenco and her committee declined to address the deficiency. Indirectly they admitted that the whole report was basically a gussied-up request for more funds for ecological research, so no offending of congressmen would be risked. Following publication of the report, other scientists chimed in with the same complaint. More-or-less complete suppression of the topic by ESA continued for the next couple of decades, until I and a few other anti-censorship, pro-environment scientists managed to put together and have approved a half-day session for ESA’s 2012 annual meeting, titled on “Population, Environment and Sustainability Issues in the U.S.”. Documentation of all of the above, with additional information on Lubchenco, ESA, AAAS, and a Californians for Population Stabilization (CAPS) exhibitor booth at the 2012 ESA meeting, can be found in “Population Camel Gets Its Nose into Ecologists’ Tent: Hope Is High That the Rest Will Follow.” https://www.thesocialcontra...
CAPS applied to have an exhibitor booth at the 2012 AAAS annual meeting in Vancouver and was turned down. That was one factor that incentivized the creation of a new organization, Scientists and Environmentalists for Population Stabilization (SEPS), dedicated primarily to operating just such booths at scientific meetings.It has now done this with great success for 26 different societies. But when SEPS applied to have a booth at the 2014 and 2016 AAAS meetings it was also turned down. AAAS’s ever-changing pretexts were “diverse, disingenuous, and puzzling,” and every time we objected to the entire AAAS board of directors. And every time they pleaded, in essence, “not in our job description – it’s a staff issue.” A preliminary account of these battles has been published: “AAAS Wields the Censor’s Hammer on U.S. Population Issues” https://capsweb.org/blog/aa...
May Berenbaum was a AAAS board member at the time, and never replied when a SEPS advisory board member who had gone to grad school with her asked for help or advice. Lubchenco was AAAS president in 1997, so her future antipathy towards SEPS was not in evidence at the time. However, in 2015 she was “outed” by AAAS CEO Rush Holt who forwarded to me several private email messages by others (without their permission).
In preparation for its application for a booth at the 2016 AAAS meeting, and anticipating continued resistance, SEPS individually invited many current and past presidents of scientific societies to endorse our booth application. Lubchenco was invited but never responded. However, 40 others did sign on, including Peter Raven, Paul Ehrlich, and Simon Levin. Rush Holt gave another curt rejection and, when challenged, put out a more detailed but highly falsehood-ridden response on December 12, 2015. He cc’d that to, among others, May Berenbaum, Peter Raven and Simon Levin. Immediately, before I could rebut that response, Levin forwarded Holt’s response to Raven and Ehrlich, with “Rush Holt’s brilliant response” in the subject line. Raven, Ehrlich and Levin all then asked to be removed from the list of endorsers of SEPS application for a booth. Raven insisted that he had been “duped,” and passed his message on to Lubchenco and possibly others. Lubchenco responded, “Peter -- thanks for sharing Rush’s excellent response. It’s good to call a spade a spade! Jane Lubchenco.” Shades of her biased, censorious attitude and actions during the late 1980s! No population booths at AAAS meetings! Away with you!
A fuller account of this failure of the scientific community, with more detailed documentation, is in preparation.
The scientific and academic communities in the U.S. have never, in my long lifetime, been so politicized and censorious – and, in some ways, totalitarian. Alejandro Mayorkas and George Soros can only be ecstatic to have so many strong “let’s not talk about population” allies in the nominally “education community.” They are winning on matters of population policy
(Don't know if a "like" succeeds from an email...hence my visit to the Stack. :) )
Would you believe, I actually know a few people who would care not a whit about such -- just carp -sorry, I couldn't resist- about the unintended consequences of it. :)
(I skipped one of the offered newsletters, because I'm already a subscriber. We'll see about the rest. Thanks.)
What a shame dishonesty and science hacks have failed their mission and likely benefited more than just by publications. Honesty, though essential to a successful society, has been lost! In the name of honesty and science purge the dishonest from science!
Jane was properly penalized for her human mistake, i.e., being overly enthusiast about MPAs to cut some ethical corners. But Stev, I'd be careful about throwing stones, as most people live in glass houses. Fortunately, science is more self-correcting than other disciplines:
Vadas, R.L. Jr. 1994. The anatomy of an ecological controversy: honey bee searching
behavior. Oikos 69: 158-166 (https://www.beesource.com/threads/the-anatomy-of-an-ecological-controversy-honey-bee-searching-behavior.365460).
And MPAs are valid mgmt. tools, though we need to stay honest & transparent about such research.
-Bob V.
Though Jane Lubchenco has been caught up in this sort of brouhaha is disturbing given her role in an “integrity task force,” it is much less so than some of her past support for censorship on population issues. In the late 1980s she was appointed chair of the Ecological Society of America (ESA) committee that eventually produced the “landmark” Sustainable Biosphere Initiative (1991) white paper. While still in draft form that was criticized by some highly reputable reviewers for giving essentially zero attention to the issue of overpopulation as the biggest obstacle to “sustainability.” But Lubchenco and her committee declined to address the deficiency. Indirectly they admitted that the whole report was basically a gussied-up request for more funds for ecological research, so no offending of congressmen would be risked. Following publication of the report, other scientists chimed in with the same complaint. More-or-less complete suppression of the topic by ESA continued for the next couple of decades, until I and a few other anti-censorship, pro-environment scientists managed to put together and have approved a half-day session for ESA’s 2012 annual meeting, titled on “Population, Environment and Sustainability Issues in the U.S.”. Documentation of all of the above, with additional information on Lubchenco, ESA, AAAS, and a Californians for Population Stabilization (CAPS) exhibitor booth at the 2012 ESA meeting, can be found in “Population Camel Gets Its Nose into Ecologists’ Tent: Hope Is High That the Rest Will Follow.” https://www.thesocialcontra...
CAPS applied to have an exhibitor booth at the 2012 AAAS annual meeting in Vancouver and was turned down. That was one factor that incentivized the creation of a new organization, Scientists and Environmentalists for Population Stabilization (SEPS), dedicated primarily to operating just such booths at scientific meetings.It has now done this with great success for 26 different societies. But when SEPS applied to have a booth at the 2014 and 2016 AAAS meetings it was also turned down. AAAS’s ever-changing pretexts were “diverse, disingenuous, and puzzling,” and every time we objected to the entire AAAS board of directors. And every time they pleaded, in essence, “not in our job description – it’s a staff issue.” A preliminary account of these battles has been published: “AAAS Wields the Censor’s Hammer on U.S. Population Issues” https://capsweb.org/blog/aa...
May Berenbaum was a AAAS board member at the time, and never replied when a SEPS advisory board member who had gone to grad school with her asked for help or advice. Lubchenco was AAAS president in 1997, so her future antipathy towards SEPS was not in evidence at the time. However, in 2015 she was “outed” by AAAS CEO Rush Holt who forwarded to me several private email messages by others (without their permission).
In preparation for its application for a booth at the 2016 AAAS meeting, and anticipating continued resistance, SEPS individually invited many current and past presidents of scientific societies to endorse our booth application. Lubchenco was invited but never responded. However, 40 others did sign on, including Peter Raven, Paul Ehrlich, and Simon Levin. Rush Holt gave another curt rejection and, when challenged, put out a more detailed but highly falsehood-ridden response on December 12, 2015. He cc’d that to, among others, May Berenbaum, Peter Raven and Simon Levin. Immediately, before I could rebut that response, Levin forwarded Holt’s response to Raven and Ehrlich, with “Rush Holt’s brilliant response” in the subject line. Raven, Ehrlich and Levin all then asked to be removed from the list of endorsers of SEPS application for a booth. Raven insisted that he had been “duped,” and passed his message on to Lubchenco and possibly others. Lubchenco responded, “Peter -- thanks for sharing Rush’s excellent response. It’s good to call a spade a spade! Jane Lubchenco.” Shades of her biased, censorious attitude and actions during the late 1980s! No population booths at AAAS meetings! Away with you!
A fuller account of this failure of the scientific community, with more detailed documentation, is in preparation.
The scientific and academic communities in the U.S. have never, in my long lifetime, been so politicized and censorious – and, in some ways, totalitarian. Alejandro Mayorkas and George Soros can only be ecstatic to have so many strong “let’s not talk about population” allies in the nominally “education community.” They are winning on matters of population policy
When you combine Roger's points with another story, things are reaching a new level of frightening. I can only imagine what this will result in: https://www.govexec.com/management/2022/01/white-house-charts-course-better-protections-civil-servant-scientists/360680/
Thank you for your work and analysis, Roger. Very appreciated!
(Don't know if a "like" succeeds from an email...hence my visit to the Stack. :) )
Would you believe, I actually know a few people who would care not a whit about such -- just carp -sorry, I couldn't resist- about the unintended consequences of it. :)
(I skipped one of the offered newsletters, because I'm already a subscriber. We'll see about the rest. Thanks.)
What a shame dishonesty and science hacks have failed their mission and likely benefited more than just by publications. Honesty, though essential to a successful society, has been lost! In the name of honesty and science purge the dishonest from science!