APS sticks its nose into partisan politics once again!
Dear APS Member,
We share the concerns expressed by many APS members about recent U.S. government actions that will harm the open environment that is essential for a successful global scientific enterprise. The recent executive order regarding immigration, and in particular, its implementation, would reduce participation of international scientists and students in U.S. research, industry, education, and conference activities, and sends a chilling message to scientists internationally.
As stated in the mission of the APS, we are committed to being a leading voice for physics and international cooperation, for the advancement of physics and the benefit of humanity. Fulfilling this mission includes supporting both the mobility of scientists and a culture of unfettered communications. The values that advance science necessarily include open scientific discourse, free from discrimination and harassment, and consideration of diverse points of view.
APS undertakes a variety of activities in support of our mission. These include engaging our leadership, staff, and members in communicating with Congress on both sides of the aisle; holding symposia at meetings to assist our members in understanding and discussing our goals; and working closely with other scientific societies to amplify our voices.
Finally, APS has a history of issuing statements, some of which are very relevant to recent events. It is worth rereading these statements, including one titled Visa Rules and Government Procedures Hampering U.S. Science and Technology, adopted by the APS Council on June 06, 2003. In that statement we said, “National security and economic vitality critically depend on science and technology and strongly profit from contributions of foreign-born scientists and engineers. The American Physical Society calls on the United States Administration and Congress to implement appropriate and effective visa rules and government procedures that sustain science and technology. The rules and procedures must protect the nation against terrorism. They must also promote continuing international scientific and technological cooperation and ensure the flow of people and knowledge needed to guarantee economic strength and national security.”
APS will continue to monitor this situation closely, as we work to identify opportunities to take impactful action to protect our scientific community and the principle of open scientific exchange.
Yours sincerely,
Laura H. Greene
2017 APS President
Kate P. Kirby
APS Chief Executive Officer
22 comments:
How many scientific exchanges go on between the US and any of the countries on the temporary ban list? Lots of physicists in Somalia? Yemen? This is pure posturing by liberal academics.
Give me a break. PC at it's best.
We need to have the PC Awards and I would nominate Laura.
In reality she perceives we are stupid.
Sorry to say, that since the Shah was overthrown, I've personally thought it a bad idea to be educating Iranians in ME, EE, Chem, and Phys at our top American universities. We should take "Death to America" seriously. But as a member of the OSA, I understand that these organizations (OSA, AIP, IEEE, etc..) have a large international following, so it's understandable that they would come out against any ban, even temporary.
But Iran better be careful. More ICBM tests and they are liable to get a "Gulf of Tonken" shoved down their throats !
February 4, 2017 at 7:49 PM
Of the countries on the list Iran would be the one with most people coming to the US with a connection to the APS. I would say that one should be careful with having a complete ban since Iran has a wide range of different cultures and religions which are not threats to the US. Many of these people groups came to the US or Europe around the time the Shaw fell, which includes Christians, Jews, Bahai, various minority Muslim sects, Pharsees, secular groups and many moderates. There are still many people like that in Iran today.
I am all for being stern with Iran but I would say just have some strong vetting rather than a complete ban.
Syria is another complex situation as it again has wide variety of different cultures and religions.
In any case the ban right now is for 90 days with room for exceptions on a case by case issue and judges keep lifting it so this whole thing be all for nothing.
Laura, you do not speak for APS members. Shame on you for this misuse of authority.
Laura, you do not speak for APS members.
Laura speaks for what is right and ethical. Shame on you for supporting fascist polices.
9:21 AM seems to think he owns the definitions of "right" and "ethical", and those who disagree are "fascists". How embarrassing.
It is also embarrassing (or should be to him) that he doesn't know the definition of "fascist" either.
Laura, you do not speak for APS members. Shame on you for this misuse of authority.
February 5, 2017 at 8:55 AM
Interesting: She has been elected the president of the APS. That makes her the representative of the APS. If you don't like it, go vote for someone else.
It's called democracy.
You miss the main point, APS is not a political action organization. If you are happy with her politicizing physics, well, fine, but she's acting like a liberal Trump, a Queen. Democracy also promotes and tolerates discussion of different points of view.
February 6, 2017 at 7:59 AM
It seems to me that APS should "promote and tolerate" political discussion when the political issue has the potential to affect funding for science or other government actions regarding science. In that regard, the President of APS is as entitled to her opinion as any other member, provided she allows dissenting views to be heard, and published, by APS.
February 6, 2017 at 7:59 AM
Let me repeat myself:
If you don't like it, go vote for someone else.
It is interesting that there is no obvious link to the statement on the APS web site. Was this just for the internal benefit (or derision) of APS members?
Let me repeat myself:
If you don't like it, go vote for someone else.
February 6, 2017 at 10:21 AM
They will, just like you did, and once again, you won't like the result. Is this really how you want the country to work?
And when she loses, he'll scream and protest and carry signs and vandalize property and assault innocent women.
Go ahead, assume your side has won for good. Four (or eight if you are lucky) years from now you'll be losing EVERYTHING again. Is that your idea of how this should work? Isn't this a great country? Why don't we all act like it? Go ahead and ridicule the opposite party and treat them like enemies, instead of what they really are, political opposition, not deserving ridicule and hatred, but respect and strong, principled opposition and respect. Is that beyond the scope of your humanity? It is how the Framers wanted our country to work. Look it up. If you claim to respect the Constitution, then live by it.
Anonymous said...
February 6, 2017 at 7:59 AM
Let me repeat myself:
If you don't like it, go vote for someone else.
February 6, 2017 at 10:21 AM
Lets just be honest on this. No one votes for the APS president, at least to first order because no cares and the APS presidents has no power, so she can say anything she wants. If you doubt me than can you even name the last or any other person who has been an APS president? APS is good for organizing a few conferences and a few journals but has been losing ground even on those fronts. Also just be be clear I doubt Laura Green herself cares about these issues but she sees that it could be in her benefit to say these thing so she does. I have no problem with that and none of this will hurt the APS so why bother even thinking about it.
This Trumpf victory really sticks in the craw of some people.
No one votes for the APS president, at least to first order..
So my vote was a second order effect?
Do you usually have second order relationships? or maybe third order? How does a first order vote look?
No one votes for the APS president, at least to first order..
So my vote was a second order effect?
Do you usually have second order relationships? or maybe third order? How does a first order vote look?
Who was the last APS president, and don't cheat by googling it.
It would be best if the scientific organizations (AIP, OSA, IEEE, ....) stayed above politics. They lose all credibility on big science projects and national/international initiatives if they start taking positions.
Just look at the climate mess at NOAA (2/7/17). Lead scientist purposely selecting temperature data to skew conclusions on Artic/Antarctic warming. Makes the entire organization lose credibility.
Sorry to say that the NIC failure on NIF did the same to LLNL. Better to be balanced and honest. Target design did not work at the laboratory scale and target physics was poorly understood.
Same thing about constantly "slamming" the Russians (Clinton losers, Dems, Pelosi, Graham, McCain, ...). Political and dishonest.
Do we really believe that we (US) are going into space (back to Moon, Mars, Titan,...) without the Russians ? Who the heck else except the Russians have necessary engineering and flight experience along with us.
The Chinese.
Read a little in your spare time, it helps understand what's going on.
Post a Comment