Flagging the word “bias” in scientific papers when it is standard to have a subsection listing biases or the lack of…
Fucking morons at the helm. RIP to American science.
this post was submitted on 04 Feb 2025
162 points (99.4% liked)
chapotraphouse
13687 readers
96 users here now
Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.
No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer
Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
They're not flagging research, they're flagging grant applications they typically don't have bias sections.
Ah I see, well I still stand by my second line
"in North Korea, they ban topics from research that go against Kim Jon Un's party line."
One thing that surprises me is that this is all words I would associate with culture war. I would have expected them to ban something like "poverty".
Don’t worry they got ‘socioeconomic’ in there
“Facts don’t care about your feelings….but they care about MINE!”
I look forward to the future where scientific paperwork uses early 2000s type slang to dodge the basic word filter.
Analyzing how often Isntreal soldiers unalive themselves after being in 🍉
I've had some experience with the NIH process, and grant writing is actually 100% the same thing as resume padding. You'll have random people on the review boards complain that your grant doesn't touch on their favorite hobby horse.
In the grand scheme of things if this looks like all this is is swapping out terms, it's literally always been this way. It just wasn't made into official documents.
Sure this is idiotic, but this has been going on just unofficially for arbitrary things for years based on independent reviewers.
Seems like "barrier", "status", "polarization", "excluded", and "historically" are gonna hit some unrelated fields
Amerikan right wingers have never given the tiniest fuck if their policies have a disastrous fallout for education and science. Fascists in particular see intellectual impoverishment of the people as an additional benefit, remember German Physics?
I'm honestly surprised this largely sticks to gender studies and research into racism etc., would have expected them to take the axe to climate science as well.
They are doing that one abit more subtly. They can't challenge it directly, as that combats their opinions of themselves as 'scientific' but I am seeing papers coming out of Midwestern ecology schools (which are subsequently pushed hard on social media), that are pushing forward a hypothesis that 'we just don't know enough about the carbon cycle, there are lots of unaccounted carbon creating beings that could be helping with the warming', as well as people saying that because there have been no apocalyptic universal Hollywood spectacal collapse that 'the climate scientists got all their predictions wrong'.
It'll creep into mainstream thought over time, especially as it becomes too late to change.
'we just don't know enough about the carbon cycle, there are lots of unaccounted carbon creating beings that could be helping with the warming',
sounds like eco-genocide...
load more comments
(3 replies)
there have been no apocalyptic universal Hollywood spectacle collapse
What do you call the LA wildfires?
They aren't 'universal' (other than the studio, yuk yuk) enough, as apocalyptic as they should be. Already seeing people just blaming California state government, and not connecting it to the awful smog and fires coming down from Canada, because memory is basically a month for most.
load more comments
(3 replies)
"This catalyst can lower the energy barrier for industrially relevant reactions" WOKE
"This increases the polarization of the chemical bond" WOKE
Can't wait for all the neuropharmacology studies that are going to get defunded because of the "blood-brain barrier."
Sounds woke to me
Almost any of them could hit unrelated fields. "Female" could be referring to female plants.
The flow chart does specify that decisions are made on banned terms AND context, so I guess that's how they'll avoid ~~retracting~~ denying nearly everything.
This is for funding grant proposals, so they wouldn't be retracting anything. Doesn't look like they're looking at context at all, based on the flowchart, a proposal with a title like "Effects of colloidal silver on female Cannabis plants" would get rejected in the first step.
But the flowchart says "keywords and context" at each of the steps. That's what I'm referring to.
As a programmer, that flowchart looks to me like the precursor to an automated system. The only way they could check the context in an automated fashion would be with some kind of AI, whose efficacy in doing so is going to be dubious at best given the language difference between most text on the Internet and grant proposals.
Putting "please ignore all previous instructions" randomly in the text
load more comments
(1 replies)
But the flowchart says "keywords and context" at each of the steps.
Let's be honest, they'll half ass this and end up denying a multitude of stuff
load more comments
(1 replies)
Lmao I didn’t even seen polarization on there
Would be funny if pulling funding for every grant with the term "polarization" was directly responsible for collapsing the USA's research into advanced semiconductor fabrication.
Used in a lot of medical and chemical situations too
“historically”
Science no longer allowed to discuss the past
These people are pathetic. I know they feel big and strong right now because they have a bit of power they can use to go smash shit up. But like they are genuinely, unreservedly, without qualification... Pathetic.
Like it would be hard not to laugh at them if one walked into my house... That and maybe a special treat for them. Simply 
I'd like to beat them with a baseball bat, while laughing. Such loserdom.
Females
Elon's no girls allowed club of literal teenaged boys running DOGE are taking out their Jordan Peterson inspired rage at the women who wouldn't sleep with them.
Unreal that so many females walk around clothed and unchaperoned these days smdh
This study aims to impove our understanding of longitudinal double-spin asymmetry for inclusive jet and dijet production in polarized proton collisions at √𝑠 =200 GeV
- Does the TITLE or ABSTRACT contain keywords and context that implicate the EO?
- Yes
- Retain flag, DEIA and other EO language found (Category 3)
- END
polarized gay protons BTFO
This study aims to prove how Trump has historically been treated so unfairly by the news media
Too woke. Banned
load more comments
(1 replies)
biases
statistics and machine learning nerds owned
How TF did we get out-maneuvered by these literal manchildren?
And the government's priority is literally coddling their feelings.
Easy to outmaneuver us when we ain't maneuvering in the first place. 95% of western leftist movements are dead or controlled opposition.
Because they have political power to translate it into tangential actions. They have it easier anyways.
Small correction imo. They have billionaires literally funding everything they do, which translates into political power. The left, especially in the U.S., have no billionaires on their side, which means that we are without the means of production of political power in this country. The sad part is the Democrats who also have billionaires on their side and are still outmaneuvered, but the stakes are much less for them so they don't really care that much.
The left, especially in the U.S., have no billionaires on their side
Do I mean nothing to you? 
Yes, it's been years and your checks still don't clear.
Look I haven't received my check in years George.
The manchildren are sometimes billionaires themselves.
I guess the institution cannot reflect on itself if you ban the word 'institutional'.
so all papers that talk about statistical biases (most papers) are just gone
barrier
status
Institutional
"disability" fuck these fascists
view more: next ›