this post was submitted on 03 May 2025
128 points (98.5% liked)

science

19955 readers
565 users here now

A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.

rule #1: be kind

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 12 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world 41 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Here’s the thing about journals, they show their data and methods. If you disagree with the findings, go re run the study. That’s how science works.

[–] Alexstarfire@lemmy.world 12 points 2 months ago

Only if you live in reality. Too many in the US don't seem to, including the POTUS.

[–] wiase@discuss.online 24 points 2 months ago (1 children)

If science is too woke for you you better check your reality.

[–] Ptsf@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

Or start burning books.... /s

[–] cabron_offsets@lemmy.world 19 points 2 months ago (1 children)

This is why we should all do our best to marginalize republicans.

[–] kalkulat@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

They are marginalizing themselves daily, but yeah, they deserve our help with that.

[–] FenrirIII@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

They aren't marginalized, they're seizing power. They need to be stopped through other methods

[–] MNByChoice@midwest.social 15 points 2 months ago

Justice department tries to bully journals for presenting science.

Terrible

[–] kalkulat@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

The first amendment guarantees freedom of the press. The journals should completely ignore nut-job's obvious attempts to imtimidate them into buying into his perverted world-view. (Not 'ideology' so much as 'spasmology'.)

No doubt the journals belong to organizations who will help them defend themselves against cretinist arm-twisting. The demented bonobos will bully their way out a job soon enough.

[–] Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

“And we spend a lot of time choosing the right articles to publish and trying to get the message right. We think we're an antidote for misinformation.”

Indeed, but maybe these journals define misinformation in the conventional way, not the MAGA way. That could be the problem here. If you publish anything too “woke”, it could attract threats like these.

[–] haui_lemmy@lemmy.giftedmc.com 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Sounds suspiciously uncritical of the situation.

[–] Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz 1 points 2 months ago

Maybe it would have clarified if I had added some negative expressions such as “misguided MAGA notion” or “authoritarian dictator”.