I haven't replied yet. I also would like to know who they selected/gender/ethnicity, and why they don't commission proper expert article.
Show this thread
-
On one hand, if they wanted scientific dialogue on racist monuments, they should have commissioned experts. Other hand, racism is not debate
To recast as debate reaffirms that there's two equally valid scholarly sides to racism. There isn't. We don't accept this for climate change
-
-
Underhanded way of trying to reestablish their editorial as one side of many. Not the spirit of editorial which takes unequivocal stance
-
Editors chose to use significant power of their platform to draw their official stance on scientific racism. This is not inconsequential.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I'm learning so much from this dialogue - my heartfelt appreciation for your time & wisdom; my sorrow we still have to deal with this @#*$
-
Yes, same here.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.