a university president or Nobel Laureate may be publicly chastised and even asked to resign for discussing hypotheses that are deemed politically incorrect. — NOS4A2

Hopefully you do understand the difference of a scientist getting attacked either because the scientific study he (or she) has made and/or the conclusions the scientist has made from the study and being attacked because publicly wearing a babe-shirt is offensive to some. There is a difference in the seriousness of the matter. Sticking to the trivial can be counterproductive.

this is important and not as dumb as you pretend. — NOS4A2

It's more important when actual scientific research is compromised or altered because of political correctness or political ideology, even if science has to deal with ethical questions. And there's a short distance from scientific ethics to political correctness or political ideology.

Hopefully you do understand the difference of a scientist getting attacked either because the scientific study he (or she) has made and/or the conclusions the scientist has made from the study and being attacked because publicly wearing a babe-shirt is offensive to some. There is a difference in the seriousness of the matter. Sticking to the trivial can be counterproductive.

Yes I understand the difference, but I don’t see how it is trivial or how pointing it out is counterproductive. A Nobel laureate being ostracized and losing his fellowship because he told a silly joke seems to me a serious matter. A university president resigning because he said there is differences in male and female brains seems to me a serious matter. A rocket scientist brought to tears over harassment and abuse because of his t-shirt is a serious matter. Science cannot flourish in such a culture.

It's more important when actual scientific research is compromised or altered because of political correctness or political ideology, even if science has to deal with ethical questions. And there's a short distance from scientific ethics to political correctness or political ideology.

Sure but the seriousness of compromised research does not lessen the seriousness of the politically correct bullying of scientists.

Nobody said a word of Google's claim of achieving quantum advantage.

They have not.

We quabble about a word, we argue the emotional strength of expressions, but nobody pays attention to the actual claim.

We are so human. (Except for me. I am not.)

Nobody said a word of Google's claim of achieving quantum advantage.

They have not.

We quabble about a word, we argue the emotional strength of expressions, but nobody pays attention to the actual claim.

We are so human. (Except for me. I am not.)

They achieved quantum supremacy. This is worth a discussion in its own right, but not the intended topic of discussion.

The term “Quantum Supremacy” was coined in 2012 by John Preskill, a theoretical physicist at Caltech, to describe the point at which quantum computers can do things that classical computers cannot. — NOS4A2

So... we have computing power now that have been thought to be achievable only with quantum computers, but we have them without having quantum computers... presumably because the criteria has been met some other way, using non-quantum computers.

That's news to me. But then again, I ain't no scientist.

Or else quantum computers are here, and BestBuy sells them for $299.99.

At any rate, never tell a computer science student what he can't do.

This is worth a discussion in its own right, but not the intended topic of discussion. — NOS4A2

I take your word for it, so I won't dispute it any longer. I'm just humongously surprised, that's all.

Sorry, I mean to say they claimed quantum supremacy. Whether they actually did has already been disputed.

No sweat. You actually had said what you claimed you had said. No breach there. You had said "Google claimed" etc. So you are perfectly all right.

Science cannot flourish in such a culture. — NOS4A2

Yet this is something that isn't contained to science. In other workplaces similar events can happen. Being a comedian is especially difficult in these times.

Sure but the seriousness of compromised research does not lessen the seriousness of the politically correct bullying of scientists. — NOS4A2

Are scientist somehow a special case in this era of cyberbullying? I don't think so.

Interesting. Trump politically denies climate change. You're a Trumper. Aren't you being a hypocrite?

You appear to be hypocritical in your exaggerated concern over a T-shirt/freedom of expression and political correctness. In other words, on the one hand you're denouncing political correctness in favour of freedom of expression when it suits you, on the other hand you use similar politics to support your likely denial of climate change. How do you square that circle?

Interesting. Trump politically denies climate change. You're a Trumper. Aren't you being a hypocrite?

You appear to be hypocritical in your exaggerated concern over a T-shirt/freedom of expression and political correctness. In other words, on the one hand you're denouncing political correctness in favour of freedom of expression when it suits you, on the other hand you use similar politics to support your likely denial of climate change. How do you square that circle?

You appear to be making this up as you go along. I’m willing to discuss the topic and defend my views if you’re ever interested.

Please tell me where I'm wrong in my analysis of your hypocrisy... ?

But of course, since your goal here is to politicize science under the guise of complaining about the politicization of science that answer will hardly satisfy you. — Baden

Let's try to avoid making EVERYTHING a left vs right issue, NOS4A2.

And science IS politically neutral. Yes, they did it even in the Soviet Union as they did in liberal UK and US. — ssu

If science IS politically neutral, then it is those that perceived science as making a political statement when using some term, like "supremacy", that would be making the category error.

So the error isn't NOS4A2's. The error is made by the very people he is complaining about. I didn't see anything in his OP labeling the writers of Nature as leftists. It seems to me that you have politicized his OP.

Then why does he support someone who politicizes climate change science? Isn't that hypocritical...

I haven't read what he said about climate change. The climate changes for many reasons. There's nothing political about that.

If the meaning of words is how they are used in a certain context, then we're mixing up the contexts. For one to assert a political meaning to a word used in a scientific context, would be to make a category error.

The climate changes for many reasons. There's nothing political about that. — Harry Hindu

I agree. But his political support/views of science suggest otherwise.

Meaning, his lack of consistent credibility has greatly diminished the impact of his argument. He likely ignores climate change science for similar political reasons. I've asked the OP to reconcile the T-shirt thing through public employment policies and other tenets/maxims from known Sociological data, but have yet to see any from him.

So think he should rephrase the OP to something like:

Should all Science be free of politics?

Otherwise I agree with Baden, this appears to be just a rant.

Given your political views and support it’s no wonder you want to deflect from the topic. Your credibility has decreased the impact of your arguments.

Is that all you got?

I'm waiting for you to reconcile your paradox that you put yourself into... . Let us know when you're brave enough to work yourself out of the political extremist box LOL!

Is that all you got?

I'm waiting for you to reconcile your paradox that you put yourself into... . Let us know when you're brave enough to work yourself out of the political extremist box LOL!

You made things up. In other words you pretended I put myself into a paradox.

Please tell me where I'm wrong in my analysis of your hypocrisy... ?

What hypocrisy? I have said nothing hypocritical nor paradoxical.

For political reasons you support denial of climate change science.

Correct?

That’s false.

You support Trump right? Or, in the alternative, if you disagree with him, tell us why...

Look, I’ve given you enough chances to return back to the topic. Any time you want to do so I’ll be interested in a conversation, but the hostility and harassment is not worth the effort.

Sorry you need to put your big boy pants on because I'm going to call you out when I see hypocrisy.

So are you saying you are unable to answer the question about politicizing climate change science? Is that what you're telling me?

You invented the hypocrisy and now are wasting your own time trying to call others out on it. Sorry, you need to use your big boy arguments.

Ignoring the question won't make it go away. Your credibility is lacking for two reasons:

1. You won't provide public policy/supporting data about your T-shirt rant relative to employment standards.

2. You attack political correctness in science, yet politically deny climate change science.

With respect to item 2 what I'm hearing from you is that essentially you are not trying to remove politics from science.

what Part of my “rant” do you need data for? I don’t get it.