Culture Earth Science Has a Whiteness Problem - Dr White (not white) says too many whites

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Status
Not open for further replies.
Earth Science Has a Whiteness Problem
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/23/science/earth-science-diversity-education.html (http://archive.vn/MAFDL)

Barely 10 percent of doctoral degrees in the geosciences go to recipients of color. The lack of diversity limits the quality of research, many scientists say.

When Arianna Varuolo-Clarke was growing up, her favorite evenings were spent watching the Weather Channel with her grandfather. She wanted to “chase thunderstorms” and understand where tornadoes came from, she said. She decided to become an atmospheric scientist. In 2014, she landed an internship at the National Center for Atmospheric Research as a college sophomore, and quickly realized that her path as a woman of color would not be easy.

“You’d walk through the halls and it’s a lot of old white men,” Ms. Varuolo-Clarke said. Still, she pushed forward and began her Ph.D. in atmospheric science at Columbia University last year.

The field’s lack of diversity gained new urgency in May when her graduate student cohort was targeted with a series of racist emails. The messages, sent to affiliates of the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory at Columbia by a person outside the community, said that black people were genetically inferior and did not belong in academia. It was “hurtful and invalidating” to be told that she didn’t belong in the world that had drawn her in since childhood, Ms. Varuolo-Clarke said. “It was an isolated incident. But it brought to the surface what still needs to be done in the field.”

In a commentary last week in Nature Geoscience, Kuheli Dutt, Lamont-Doherty’s assistant director for academic affairs and diversity, wrote that “a lack of diversity and inclusion is the single largest cultural problem facing the geosciences today.”

The geosciences — which include the study of planet Earth, its oceans, its atmosphere and its interactions with human society — are among the least diverse across all fields of science. Nearly 90 percent of doctoral-degree recipients are white. In the country’s top 100 geoscience departments, people of color hold under 4 percent of tenured or tenure-track positions. A 2016 survey from the National Science Foundation showed that representation of people of color in geosciences has barely budged in the past four decades, although significant gains have been made in terms of gender balance.

Asian-Americans are better represented than other people of color, according to Dr. Dutt, accounting for 6 percent of those earning geoscience doctorates in 2016. Between 1973 and 2016, just 20 Native American women, 69 black women and 241 Hispanic women earned Ph.D.s in the field, of some 22,600 total.

The field’s lack of diversity begins with a pipeline problem, geoscientists say. National surveys have shown that black people are less likely than white people to participate in outdoor activities. One survey, conducted in 2009, queried 4,103 respondents and found that African-Americans accounted for just 7 percent of national park visitors, and another survey found that they were more likely to report receiving poor service by park employees. Robert Stanton, the first black director of the National Park Service, has said that the idea that “black folks don’t like parks” has become a “self-fulfilling prophecy.”

Lisa White, a micropaleontologist at University of California, Berkeley, said most public high schools, especially those in urban environments, did not have the resources to organize outdoor field trips introducing students to the earth sciences. As the assistant director of education and outreach at the U.C. Museum of Paleontology, Dr. White has noticed that students of color tend to be more familiar with medicine, engineering, computer science and other STEM fields that lead directly to job opportunities.

Compounding the pipeline problem is one of stereotypes. The typical earth scientist is often seen as a rugged white male.

“You think of a bearded guy on top of a mountain wearing flannel and hiking boots,” said Jonathan Nichols, an associate research professor at Lamont-Doherty. “We just had our big fall conference and there were 20,000-plus geologists, and you look around and it’s all old bearded guys.”

That stereotype, Dr. Nichols said, can make the field feel unwelcoming to people of color, who don’t see themselves represented at conferences and among faculty members. Dr. White concurred that the geosciences had an “image problem” that prevents young people of color from applying for research opportunities.

That lack of representation in turn affects the quality and focus of earth science research, especially on climate change.

“It’s not rich white people who will be impacted first and most by climate change,” Dr. Nichols said. “It’s the people in marginalized communities. And if you forget that this work isn’t just an academic pursuit, then why are you even doing it? You have to keep in mind the real impact.”

Lorelei Curtin, a fifth-year Ph.D. student at Columbia University, said her earth science classes could be enriched by a greater focus on nonwhite and Indigenous histories and voices, given that “Indigenous people have a unique connection to the land.”

Ms. Curtin helped start a book club at Lamont-Doherty called Race Talk, which brings together geoscientists for discussions on race and white privilege. The group has read “Race Talk and the Conspiracy of Silence,” by Derald Wing Sue, as well as “Home,” by Toni Morrison. Ms. Curtin said that scientists were not accustomed to conversations that center on individual stories and experiences rather than data, so sensitive discussion of racism presented a challenge.

Dr. Dutt, Lamont-Doherty’s diversity director, joined the Observatory 11 years ago as its only person of color in a leadership role. Since then she has led trainings for geoscientists on recognizing their implicit biases to foster a more racially inclusive environment.

Her article in Nature Geoscience last week, titled “Race and Racism in the Geosciences,” was so popular that the journal’s editors removed its pay wall. The article called on geoscientists to take personal responsibility for ridding their field of prejudice.

“I wanted to write the piece to address the disconnect between the way white people and people of color view topics of racism,” Dr. Dutt said. “Most of the people I’ve worked with in my role as diversity officer are nice people and well-intentioned people. But privilege tends to be invisible to the person who has it.”

After the discriminatory email messages in May, Dr. Dutt organized a forum to discuss diversity, and the lack of it, in geoscience; the event was standing room only. Ms. Varuolo-Clarke was moved by how many of her classmates attended, realizing that the emails had brought to the surface racial challenges that the earth scientist community must confront.

“Sometimes it’s an elephant in the room that I’m a woman of color,” Ms. Varuolo-Clarke said. “I’d rather we talk about it versus tiptoeing around it.”
 
You can save yourself the trouble of reading this just by looking at the first paragraph.

Barely 10 percent of doctoral degrees in the geosciences go to recipients of color. The lack of diversity limits the quality of research, many scientists say.

How, exactly? And in what way is a diverse cast of characters more important than the work ethics of the people involved?
Y'all are lucky to get who you get as it is, nigger. It's not like you have throngs of people beating down the door to get into that particular science.
 
These people are lucky enough to be accepted at a doctorate level, and get to study in the field of their dreams doing research that only a few people in the world get to undertake, and they spend their time whining trying to victimise themselves. If its so bad step down and give it to someone who will appreciate the opportunity.

At that level you should be worrying about validating your research not playing childish skin colour games.
 
I can see how lack of diversity might affect sociological research into like, the impact on people. And the biological sciences, sure, since men and women, and different races, have different needs. And STEM fields like engineering where all sorts of different humans will need to interact with the design.

But I cannot figure out how in the world it would impact research in the physical sciences. Does the hurricane model give a shit who’s loading the data?
It's quantum bigotry. The earth's climate changes depending on how much moral melanin the observer has.
 
I wonder how many people realize just how insidious this push for "diversity" really is. On its face it looks like some sort of endless quest for equality (Well, more like equity) but it goes a lot deeper than that. And no, I don't mean in the sense that I believe that they want to replace the entire "white" population and all of that other crap that people typically spout off when they see stuff like this. I mean in the sense that at its core, this entire branch of politics is designed to sow division.

Oh there's people who believe it whole-cloth, absolutely--That was the entire point--but at the very root of it is an explicit intent to drive a wedge between these two populations in order to keep them from working together, and that's escalated now that significant portions of the minority populations in the U.S. have been looking to the Left and going, "Wait, what exactly have you done for me?"

I don't believe that the intended goal is exclusively that they just want to push unqualified people into these different positions based purely on the colour of their skin, I believe the intention is actually to garner the expected side-effect, which is to cause white people to come out and start insulting the minority populations. From there, the minority populations will wander into these stories seeing nothing but a bunch of white people going, "What a stupid bunch of niggers." and there you have it, division is sowed.

These types of articles are written with a tacit intent to "farm" angry, racist responses out of people so that the media can turn around and spin new stories and accusations from those responses, driving people further and further apart based on nothing more than the colour of their skin.

It's clever, but it's disturbingly evil.
 
Instead on focusing on diversity, focus on student debt instead. Quality is better than quantity. Student debt affects everybody and undermines scientific progress because people are worrying about their debts and discourages potential scientists from going to college.

Also, there's a replication crisis in science right now. Throw these people out. They don't do anything.
 
I wonder how many people realize just how insidious this push for "diversity" really is. On its face it looks like some sort of endless quest for equality (Well, more like equity) but it goes a lot deeper than that. And no, I don't mean in the sense that I believe that they want to replace the entire "white" population and all of that other crap that people typically spout off when they see stuff like this. I mean in the sense that at its core, this entire branch of politics is designed to sow division.

Oh there's people who believe it whole-cloth, absolutely--That was the entire point--but at the very root of it is an explicit intent to drive a wedge between these two populations in order to keep them from working together, and that's escalated now that significant portions of the minority populations in the U.S. have been looking to the Left and going, "Wait, what exactly have you done for me?"

I don't believe that the intended goal is exclusively that they just want to push unqualified people into these different positions based purely on the colour of their skin, I believe the intention is actually to garner the expected side-effect, which is to cause white people to come out and start insulting the minority populations. From there, the minority populations will wander into these stories seeing nothing but a bunch of white people going, "What a stupid bunch of niggers." and there you have it, division is sowed.

These types of articles are written with a tacit intent to "farm" angry, racist responses out of people so that the media can turn around and spin new stories and accusations from those responses, driving people further and further apart based on nothing more than the colour of their skin.

It's clever, but it's disturbingly evil.
Serious Socialists from the 60's era New Left actually set out to radicalize people into following them, it was the reason they quietly supported Richard Nixon over JFK, as Kennedy was more likely to make people happy, and they saw a better chance to radicalize people if Nixon was president. There goal was to create more of themselves, to the point where the whole goal of Socialism was put to the side for the true goal of increasing radicalization. They wanted a war that would never end, they wanted to NEVER stop protesting, they wanted to NEVER lose the sense of moral self-righteousness they were getting, I really think that they didn't even really want Socialism, they wanted to FIGHT for socialism, the endless war, eternally on the right side, and never ever having to question there choices.

Nixon killed them all when he ended the draft, all of a sudden, all of their allies were gone, and they were alone, a small group of intensely devoted Socialists, who now sounded more and more like screwballs. Most would die of drug overdoses or just sink into total Anonymity, which was the worst possible thing that could happen to them. Once Trump is gone, these current SJW's will die to, I think. Without him they have nothing, just like the New Left never really got over Nixon stepping down. He was there enemy, and the bastard took away there entire reason to fight when he ended the draft, and stepped down. They never forgave him for giving them what they said they wanted.
 
They're not just picking people out of a crowd to bestow doctorates upon. People of color are roughly 30% of the population in The US, so yeah that number could be higher, but it's not like 80% of the population is peoples of color and Whitey is just scheming his way into 90% of all of the sweet Earth Science gigs.


If these people can't exist within (or even enter) a competitive hard-science field without getting their feels rankled then they absolutely don't belong in it at all.

Wouldn't it be better to check the ratio by community then? How many people of color in their given communities who strive for earth science degrees actually get them? If not what are the reasons why they don't succeed and how can this be fixed.

But no. Blame whitey. Especially Satan himself: Old White Men.
 
When you see these articles, keep in mind who is writing them...

signal-2018-11-30-080523.jpg


By Emma Goldberg

EVERY.SINGLE.TIME.
 
You people know it's all old white men who came up with the material used to argue for global warming right? Give up global warming as your precious hot button before complaining about how white males do science wrong just because they're white males.
That's what always gets me, if white man bad, why do all these people drive cars, use airplanes, cell phones or the internet etc? Whitey invented all that shit... from penicillin, to electricity and pasteurization, to space travel and western civilization... Why use Whitey's shit, if whitey bad? Kind of seems hypocritical for all of these anti-white cunts.
 
It's too white, they say, but where are the POCs pursuing earth science degrees? Science doesn't give a damn about skin color. If you want more color in the earth sciences put in the fucking work and get the degree for fuck's sake. Same old story.

The field’s lack of diversity gained new urgency in May when her graduate student cohort was targeted with a series of racist emails. The messages, sent to affiliates of the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory at Columbia by a person outside the community, said that black people were genetically inferior and did not belong in academia.

1. If you let some spergy email deter you from pursuing a career then you're not ready for that career.
2. "Outside the community". Calling it now that this email is fake as fuck, either nonexistent or conveniently sent by someone who wants to "start a conversation".
 
"I don't see anyone who looks like me doing this whole 'philosophy' thing, so why even bother?"

- not Socrates

"I don't see anyone who looks like me trying to solve general relativity so what's the point?"

- not Einstein

Every pursuit was started by somebody who had nobody to look up to and these people are complaining that their way was paved by the wrong set of boots. This shit used to bother me but now it's just comical.
 
Lol. Any time you read "X needs less whites" you can very safely substitute it with "I am seethingly jealous that I'm not getting what I want", or, for the fairer skinned, "I hate myself".
 
"I don't see anyone who looks like me doing this whole 'philosophy' thing, so why even bother?"

- not Socrates

"I don't see anyone who looks like me trying to solve general relativity so what's the point?"

- not Einstein

Every pursuit was started by somebody who had nobody to look up to and these people are complaining that their way was paved by the wrong set of boots. This shit used to bother me but now it's just comical.

Eh, the Einstein one doesn't really work because physics especially at the theoretical level has always been absurdly Jewish but your overall point is valid.
 
"I don't see anyone who looks like me doing this whole 'philosophy' thing, so why even bother?"

- not Socrates

"I don't see anyone who looks like me trying to solve general relativity so what's the point?"

- not Einstein

Every pursuit was started by somebody who had nobody to look up to and these people are complaining that their way was paved by the wrong set of boots. This shit used to bother me but now it's just comical.
It would be probably easier just to compare the amount of Asians in universities in the last decades to show how this whole argument is bullshit and you don't need other people like you to advance or be motivated (just need a mother that will murder you if you fail).
Though in general, at least where I live, people go to university for hard sciences to get hitech jobs. Besides the more autistic students, no one says "let's burn 4+ years of my life because I know a guy that was really famous for doing this shit".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom