It looks like the “non-partisan” March for Science could very well provide some interesting material over the next few weeks. Let’s start with this report:
Hundreds of science supporters gathered here in Copley Square this afternoon at a rally coinciding with the annual meeting of AAAS, which publishes Science. Ralliers chose the meeting—the first major gathering of scientists since Trump took office—as an opportune moment to demonstrate that the science community plans to fight recent policies that many see as dangerous to the role of science in society.
“We scientists want to send a message to Mr. Trump, and that’s that America runs on science,” Geoffrey Supran, a postdoctoral fellow studying energy modeling at MIT and science history at Harvard, tells Science. “Neither scientists nor citizens are going to stand idly by while the administration peddles anti-science rhetoric and alternative facts.”
Note how the post-doc claims to represent “We scientists” to make a partisan, political comment.
And check out this picture:
Like that sign? “Latest Trump Tweet: Earth is Flat. GOP agrees!”
Nothing partisan there. Move along.
But here’s what really caught my eye:
The Rally to Stand Up for Science, which was supported by over a dozen science activism groups, is not the first of its kind, and it won’t be the last.
Science activism groups? Hmmm.
So let’s have a look at The Rally to Stand Up for Science page.
Looks like this pretty much the same people behind the March for Science. We get that signature position statement: – “A diverse group of scientists produces increasingly diverse research, which broadens, strengthens, and enriches scientific inquiry, and therefore, our understanding of the world” and the acknowledgement it’s part of the lead up to the MfS:
This rally builds on the momentum of other scientist-led efforts since the election, including a rally outside the American Geophysical Union conference in December, and soon—the Science March taking place in DC and in cities around the world this April 22.
Which means we may finally have a snapshot of some of the activist groups who are likely behind the March for Science:
PARTNERS: ClimateTruth.org Action, The Natural History Museum, Union of Concerned Scientists, 314 Action, 500 Women Scientists, 350 Mass for a Better Future, Greenpeace USA, Mass Sierra Club, Toxics Action Center, Alliance for Climate Education, Radius MIT, MIT Alumni for Climate Action Leadership, MIT Sloan Sustainability Initiative, MIT UA Sustainability Committee, Fossil Free MIT, Divest BU, Divest Harvard, MIT Sustainability Summit, Climate Justice Caucus (a student group at the Harvard Kennedy School)
Hmmm. Looks like some partisan connections to me. And it could be worse. Does it actually have anti-science connections?
Greenpeace USA. From their web page:
Greenpeace does not rent, share, sell or trade supporter e-mail addresses and telephone numbers. In addition, we do not rent, share, sell or trade information about what activities or donations supporters have undertaken on our Web site. Occasionally we do make names and postal addresses of select donors, available to reputable advocacy, environmental and animal rights organizations.
Whoa! Donate to Greenpeace and they may share your name and address with “animal rights organizations.”
I guess that should not surprise anyone given that
Mike Rodman was PETA’s HR Director for 7 years until the organization moved to Norfolk, VA, from Washington, D.C. in 1996. He then went on to become the HR Director of Greenpeace USA for a decade before becoming an HR executive at the World Health Organization, a position he retired from 3 years ago.
Whether you agree with it or not, animal experimentation has been an essential component of science for over a century. We know the March for Science position on climate change policy. They’ve been crystal clear on that. But what about the use of animals in scientific experiments? Don’t you think they should be just as clear and unequivocal in their support for animal experimentation?
As for the Union of Concerned Scientists, they have a history of helping to promote anti-GMO hysteria.
Has the March for Science likewise come out in support of GMOs?