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
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
Comments
We need to have the PC Awards and I would nominate Laura.
In reality she perceives we are stupid.
But Iran better be careful. More ICBM tests and they are liable to get a "Gulf of Tonken" shoved down their throats !
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 speaks for what is right and ethical. Shame on you for supporting fascist polices.
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.
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.
Let me repeat myself:
If you don't like it, go vote for someone else.
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?
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.
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?
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.
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.
Read a little in your spare time, it helps understand what's going on.