[Edu-sig] Acadmic gender gap (was Thoughts)

[ajsiegel at optonline.net]

----- Original Message -----
From: Kirby Urner <urnerk at qwest.net>
Date: Wednesday, December 8, 2004 11:42 am
Subject: RE: RE: [Edu-sig] Acadmic gender gap (was Thoughts)

> 
> > Which leaves the alternative, at least for those of us 
> unaffiliated,  to
> > rant at them.  Or at least that is the only alternative I have 
> been able
> > to see.
> > 
> > But nobody likes a ranter.
> > 
> > I should know ;)
> > 
> > Art
> 
> Those with money who don't like the science party line of the day, are
> likely to create affiliations out of whole cloth, and fund counter-
> science.

The analogy you are making doesn't completely work for me. I don't see the issue here as competing science.  I see bad science in the face of questions that cannot be answered by science.  If my thesis is correct, if I stick with science, I can only counter with more bad science.

But you describe the dynamics correctly. It becomes a funding game. *If* we were talking science, one can sleep with the confidence that in the end, the better science would prevail.

If I am correct, and there is no scientific counter to be made, funding will decide the day. 

And one cannot sleep so well.

And my darker visions arise again.

Art


> In the global warming department, you'll find the Hoover Institute 
> withfunding from Scaife, pushing back against the UCSD Scripps 
> Institution of
> Oceanography and National Geographic, for example.  
> 
> At least that's my current birds eye view, which may be 
> inaccurate, since
> global warming is only a peripheral vision thing for me at the 
> moment --
> right out there with OWL, DAML and RDF.
> 
> In any case, that's an alternative to ranting as an unaffiliated 
> being.Either make some new friends, or, failing that, buy some.
> 
> Kirby
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Edu-sig mailing list
> Edu-sig at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig
>