Actual post from Dec. 15 from one of the streams. This is a real topic. As far as promoting women and minorities even if their qualifications are not as good as the white male scientists, I am all for it. We need diversity at the lab and if that is what it takes, so be it. Quit your whining. Look around the lab, what do you see? White male geezers. How many African Americans do you see at the lab? Virtually none. LLNL is one of the MOST undiverse places you will see. Face it folks, LLNL is an institution of white male privilege and they don't want to give up their privileged positions. California, a state of majority Hispanics has the "crown jewel" LLNL nestled in the middle of it with very FEW Hispanics at all!
Comments
These critical theories are like universal solvents they destroy everything they touch.
By the way "queering" anything is now trend in certain humanities. I would not call it social science since there is no science in this at all, there is no theory, no way to falsify anything, and no mathematical analysis. These types of studies are generally useless and just a play on words or they take thousands of words to say something beyond trivial. In these cases it is argued that having more diverse opinions will be useful for understanding nuclear weapons or policies. There that took one sentence but even this is useless because on the face of it without more information it is not worth anything. What kind of diversity, do you need experts in dogs and cats, tick tock and Paris Hilton, sure that is diverse but in no way useful. Do you need computer scientists, physics, and climate expertise, that is diverse but useful. How could "queer" offer a useful perspective since (1) there is no unique queer perspective, (2) even if there was one how on earth could it be relevant? Take Alan Turining, who was very relevant to the war effect but it is difficult to see how being gay was relevant to his approach to math. Now the fact that that he was arrested was relevant and we lost a great talent so arguing that any kind of restriction on human diversity means you lose part your talent pool but everyone understands this already
I have theory that that much of these critical studies are just ways to so humanities and social science professors can say they are doing soothing. The reality is they only exist but 75% of people do not belong in college but need to go and get a degree in non-STEM or non-rigorous field. I had some discussion with some faculty about if ChatGPU could replace them. The sense was not right now for STEM faculty but rather easily for big chunks of the social sciences. ChatGPU is very good at mimicking this kind of empty soulless meaningless wordplay you find in these fields. In the end nothing is said and ChatGPU actually seems better at this than these professors.
You can ask ChatGPU to to write such as "Queering the Aquarium" about how to bring in the queer prospective to public Aquariums. "Queering the Ski Slope" about critical queer theory analysis of ski slopes designs. "Queering the semiconductor chip" and so on. It is just a formulaic approach of words thrown together that makes no sense, so instead of hiring a professor in Critical studies with a Ph.D that took 14 years to get from the University of Nebraska to teach about how to "Queer Farms" (Yes this is real look it up), you get ChatGPU to do with being voiced over a adult companion robot and get more bang for you buck.
Logic and reason isn't going to work. Trying is a waste of your time.
6/24/2023 6:41 PM
I agree but the general public seems to think that these kinds works are legit studies using a scientific method, reason and logic. They will cite these works as "peer reviewed" and consider just to have as much rigor as STEM studies. Yet these works do not seem to have any kind of methodology that resembles science, you cannot debate these people because they simply say they are coming from some other way of looking at the world. By the way faculty at universities have almost no interaction across fields. A chem professor will tell you they never interact with the humanities or social science types unless it is to be on a committee and from these it is very clear that there is no point in trying to speak or reason with them.
6/24/2023 11:39 PM
Determining how the W-78 identifies could be very power in informing how and if we should employ it. If we assume the W-78 is a white male of English decent we would be more comfortable with using in the name colonialism if the conflict is directed at nations that have been previously colonized. On the other hand if it identifies a member of a marginalized group it is going to be against fascisim or member of antifa therefore they should be comfortable being used against domestic terror from the right wing or in a war with Europeans. This is exactly how we should start thinking about the stockpile and this will strengthen are ability to use nuclear weapons in equitable way that promotes diversity and social justice.