for those who weren't there Lander's toast to Watson was: "To Jim, my personal and professional hero - a man who continuously inspires me as I try to wrest credit from not one but TWO women for their groundbreaking scientific discoveries" #BOG18https://twitter.com/phylogenomics/status/995568976674537472 …
-
0:45 -
Replying to @mbeisen
This kind of hyperbole is also uncalled for. Lander toasting Watson as inspirational is regrettable but the focus is scientific, not morals.
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @tdverstynen @mbeisen
Actually, we are required to separate science from morals almost all the time. When I review papers and grants I am not weighing the author’s views on race, gender or religion - just scientific merit of the work.
2 replies 1 retweet 5 likes -
Replying to @tdverstynen @mbeisen
Yes, but your bias as a reviewer sounds rather explicit. You seem to be arguing that when you review someone who you believe to be a racist, you don’t feel the need to keep the two aspects compartmentalized.
0 replies 1 retweet 4 likes -
Replying to @tdverstynen @mbeisen
Yes, that possibility is depressing but it is equally depressing that some scientists feel incapable of separating their perception of authors morality from scientific merit of the application. What else might get in the way of objectivity? - how about political views?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Ethics boards exist for a reason.
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.