Re: Most do not. They used to.

Poll: 75% of Scientists Consider Leaving U.S.

fitch® · 2025-05-23T22:06:52.045Z

When scientists and academics, including historians, who recognize exactly what is happening because they've seen it before, start leaving the U.S. for political reasons, what's coming couldn't be darker or more ominous. Message was edited by: fitch®

I mean, what are you guys trying to do here? Redefine what the model is? Roughly half of all medical research in the US is done on university campuses, and a VERY significant portion of that is funded by federal research grants. Remove that funding, and see what happens. Private enterprises aren't the big R&D spenders you imagine them to be. Take all of the innovation that is being developed over the next 5-10 year timeline, whether through government-funded research or private enterprise funding, and all of the commercialization and IP and manufacturing and jobs that flow from that research....and remove half of it.

Now extrapolate that out to, say, weapons development. The US funds like $125B/year in weapons development R&D that goes to the Northrup Grummans and the Lockheed Martins--private companies, much like a significant portion of the universities in the US. Does throwing money at missile development make you more tingly than money for medical research? Because they're the same effin' thing.

How do you reckon the US will stack up next to China and the EU in 2035 if you run off a huge swath of the acumen and intellect that currently resides in this country?

RememberTheDanny

Clemson Conqueror [11597]

TigerPulse: 98%

Posts: 14189

Joined: 2021

Re: Have you ever attended a university?***

May 23, 2025, 9:39 PM

I accidentally exposed the Clemson professor overseeing my senior research project of attempted fraud.

He was mad that my work, in which a new method for determining a particular characteristic of a new substance was proven by my data (obtained from following his proposed test method protocol) proved that his theory was invalid.

He wanted me to use a simple averaging of the data points to identify the point of inflection (that would have identified the conditions in which a special change in the materials characteristics would take place); I presented the data with error bars.

(The new method was proven to properly measure the characteristics of a dissimilar substance [which was the ‘control] that, via another test method, had definitively corroborated the control substance’s characteristics. In other words, ‘New Test Method’ was proven to work nearly the same as ‘Old [Control] Test Method’ … when the ‘old [control] substance’ was being tested.)

However, the ‘New Test Method’ yielded unsatisfactorily inconsistent results when the ‘new substance’ was measured. Thus, the ‘large’ error bars were applicable for the data that was obtained via the New Test Method when measuring the New Substance. BTW, the data obtained from the ‘New Test Nethod’ when testing the ‘Old (Control) Substance’ had small error bars.

(*). My Clemson education taught me about the use of error bars as a measure of precision when measuring the characteristics of a substance. My professor hid the error bars and insisted that I use a large scale when presenting my data and conclusions so as to ‘prove’ that the ‘New Test Method’ was a valid way to measure a key characteristic of a ‘New Substance’ for which the ‘Old Test Method’ could not be used.

BTW, both of the Ph.D students that were working on the same ‘New Substance’ (but doing a different type of work on it) told me that the professor wascwrong and that his theory (about the ‘New Test Method’ as used in the ‘New Substance’ was thoroughly disproved. Future grant money (one part from the Federal Govt and the other part from a private entity) would be at risk for the professor’s future grant proposals.

(***). That, my friend, is an example of how university scientists will engage in fraud in order to keep,the grant money flowing.

flag link

military_tech

thumb_down

thumb_up

Poll: 75% of Scientists Consider Leaving U.S.

Their gubment grants getting cut??

Do you have this impression that universities don't innovate or produce anything

Re: Do you have this impression that universities don't innovate or produce anything

Most do not. They used to.

This is a really, really dumb take.

A medical researcher is still a fkn doctor, da***

Sure is, and where do medical researchers typically do their work, genius?

I just told 2 professor and a director from MUSC that Tnet said they were

Re: This is a really, really dumb take.

Research IS done in the private sector in partnership with universities.

Re: Research IS done in the private sector in partnership with universities.

Ironic to make that argument using something invented through Univ/govt model

Re: Research IS done in the private sector in partnership with universities.

Re: This is a really, really dumb take.

Re: This is a really, really dumb take.

Re: This is a really, really dumb take.

Re: This is a really, really dumb take.