PEN Canada concerned by silencing of publicly funded scientists
- Thread starter mentalfloss
- Start date
Most people hate scientists - for good reason
Scientists have been bought and paid for just like everybody else. Who gives a damn what they say or publish. Not until they are out in front of Monsanto protesting GMO's will they gain any respect. Science has brought about all kinds of new ways to poison and kill people. What good are they. They have no morals.
Here in the Okanagan there is study and study of the water quality. Never to publish anything. Might scare away the tourists. What good are scientists without a spine. Boo science and Scientists. They are all working for that evil Witch...
We all need to be kissed awake
Scientists have been bought and paid for just like everybody else. Who gives a damn what they say or publish. Not until they are out in front of Monsanto protesting GMO's will they gain any respect. Science has brought about all kinds of new ways to poison and kill people. What good are they. They have no morals.
Here in the Okanagan there is study and study of the water quality. Never to publish anything. Might scare away the tourists. What good are scientists without a spine. Boo science and Scientists. They are all working for that evil Witch...
We all need to be kissed awake
You were made the dichotomy between evil and good corporations. The charity did not make any blanket statement that corporations are bad, regardless of who they lobby against.
Nice try. They took Corporate money to work in opposite of what they claim they stand for solely for the purpose of profit.
It must be nice to collect from both sides using the illusion of being "green".
It must be nice to collect from both sides using the illusion of being "green".
That still doesn't make sense.
You haven't proven what they "stand for" nor that the money they took goes against it.
Remember, your original assertion was that they make blanket criticism of corporations while taking corporate money.
Some data is proprietary, some is not. What we were discussing back in 2009 was weather services; in some countries the meteorological/climate departments produce commercial products, and the information is proprietary. In other countries it's not. When the stolen emails were in the news, wannabe auditors were demanding access to the data, but much of the global data doesn't actually belong to the UK Met Office. So obviously they can't simply hand it over. There are chain of custody agreements in place, and as a user, and not the owner, the UK Met Office doesn't have the liberty of just handing over the data that doesn't belong to them.
Dexter was right, it's ridiculous in the extreme, one might say naive, for someone to assert that a company like the one I work for should have similar open access to data to that produced for tax payers, and paid for by tax payers. There are many, many more realms than just science where the rules are different for private enterprise than they are for crown/government entities. CBC and Quebecor is a good example.
It's especially ironic to me that people who were for open access to data are now backing government blackouts of the interpretation of our data. Scientists don't just produce data, they explain the data in context. Scientists paid by the government of Canada should be available for Canadians. We deserve to know what they are producing on our behalf, of course with the legitimate caveat of sensitive information relating to national security and the like.