Scott, I’m sorry but your posts seem a bit wordy these days… now...

First 590 Last

Share
Profile

Follow
stayer

10,216 Posts.

213

27/12/23

19:43

Post #: 71633005
Share

Originally posted by Scott th Ratbag ↑

"plenty of research that suggests the mechanisms that are used for funding science have an impact on what is selected for “research”, on the way research is designed and conducted and what is published". ...... agreed. during conservative Govs politics plays a bigger part in deciding grants. during Lab years the decision making process is handed back to appropriate authorities. this was particularly noticeable during the last 3 Govs when politicians appointed people to positions of authority based on climate denial rather than allowing the science boards to select the strictly science based standards.

the prime (worst) example of this was on the CSIRO CEO position appointed by Abbott, who also reduced meteorology funding and removed the climate science faculty at CSIRO. yes, and the loss of pure research from Howard's time when he enabled businesses to fund research for their own needs. at the same time Howard reduced the business deduction for R&D.

"I wonder if they ever reflect on that". ...... reflection, like understanding actual science, is anathema.... it risks funding out where ones beliefs are wrong.

Expand

Scott, I’m sorry but your posts seem a bit wordy these days… now you’re carried away with Shakespeare and all! However, I do hope you had a good Christmas and all the best for 2024 though!
I don’t follow all of the personnel appointments, but the two organisations you mentioned used to be beyond reproach in terms of sticking to due scientific process...it has been obvious to me that for about a decade that the CSIRO has traded its scientific rigour for some kind of semi scientific endeavour influenced by social activism.

The BOM is not beyond saving, but it too seems headed the same way, perhaps about 6 years behind the CSIRO in terms of losing its way.
7 Upvote

Reply