If you’ve been paying any attention to the scientific journal Nature over the past few years, you may have noticed a trend to the Left. Which is odd, because science isn’t really supposed to be partisan.
In case you missed it:
- Science journal Nature finds assigning gender by the genitals one is born with ‘has no foundation in science’
- Science journal Nature is claiming that research on differences between the sexes is ‘rife with bias’
- Science journal Nature’s commitment to diversity and inclusion has it looking for a black intern
- Check out Nature if you want to learn more about ‘decoloniality and anti-oppressive practices for a more ethical ecology’
- Science journal Nature says ultraconservative supermajority on Supreme Court is waging war on science
Do you find that sort of thing off-putting? Well, you’re in good company. Apparently a pretty significant amount of good company. Just ask Nature:
In 2020, Nature endorsed Joe Biden in the US presidential election. A survey finds that viewing the endorsement did not change people’s views of the candidates, but caused some to lose confidence in Nature and in US scientists generally https://t.co/lvrgXmsrl5
— nature (@Nature) March 20, 2023
The article’s behind a paywall, but the headline and subhed should be enough:
Recommended
It took them three years to figure this out. These are esteemed members of the scientific community, and it took them three years to figure this out.
You needed a survey to tell you that?
— McComb Writing (@McCombWriting) March 21, 2023
At least it suggests that they still care about hard data …
— Bob Jeffers (@bobjeffers559) March 21, 2023
Gee, you think?
— Steven Kane (@stevenkane) March 21, 2023
Ya don’t say
— CanLen 🕙 (@CandiceLen) March 21, 2023
Crazy!
You know most of us could have told you that and we don’t need a science degree to do so.
— 1967mustangman (@1967mustangman) March 21, 2023
Huh.
So… why did you do that? https://t.co/lWeRnzdG4J
— jimtreacher.substack.com (@jtLOL) March 21, 2023
Why, indeed? And, perhaps even more importantly, why did they think they could get away with it?
BREAKING:
Scientists endorsing one of the worst presidents in 40 years had a negative effect on the public's view of scientists.In other news: Swimming in water tends to make one wet.
Developing…
— Sensurround (@BBC_dip) March 21, 2023
Scientists: we are noble & true
Politicians: here’s some $
Scientists A: yes please
Scientists B: no thanks
Sc-A: Pols is right because science
Sc-B: actually..
Public: shut up B you’re hacks
Pol: More $
Sc-A: 👍
Pub: you’re all hacks
Sc-A: why does Pub distrust us?
— Razor (@hale_razor) March 21, 2023
I majored in biology, but I never became a scientist myself (TL;DR: I hate spending all day in a lab and get frustrated when stuff doesn’t work). Still, I read a lot of articles from a lot of scientific publications and back in those days, journals like Nature were really good about sticking to, you know, science. Perhaps the folks at Nature should consider going back to that format. It really worked for them.
So tell us what @Nature learned from that shameful debacle? Anything?
— Geoffrey Miller (@primalpoly) March 21, 2023
It was a major f*ck up. Have you implemented a policy to ensure that never happens again?
— Colin Wright (@SwipeWright) March 21, 2023
Stay tuned to find out!
https://t.co/e3oapGKmu4 pic.twitter.com/4hJbvBFWdo
— Stephen L. Miller (@redsteeze) March 21, 2023
***
Related:
***
Do you enjoy Twitchy’s conservative reporting taking on the radical left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth. Join Twitchy VIP and use the promo code SAVEAMERICA to get 40% off your VIP membership!
