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.”
 
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?
Well, there's probably some argument to be made for geographic diversity. If you bring in people who grew up studying rocks in a geologically interesting place that Whitey McWhiterson never goes to, they could bring in some new ideas. The Earth is big enough that there are surely lots of places that are "under-researched" even in the Current Year.

Of course, that's not the kind of diversity these people are talking about. Instead, we're going to replace a white guy from California with a black guy from California.
 
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.

That's where the narrative of "Whitey stole it all from the Kangz" comes from. And "White people have no culture" , to reduce them to automotons who just exist to oppress you, therefore, partaking of "Their" stuff isn't a contradiction, ti's not really "THEIRS", they may have created it, but they were only doing it to make money or use it as a tool to suppress, there was no great white enlightening ideal behind it, so it was never a white thing.... they can't HAVE ideals beyond being hateful little bigots.

Using whitey's stuff is therefore not only not bad, it's GOOD, you are bravely RECLAIMING science for the POC masses and giving it meaning it never had!

That's why they can't just up and say "according to my data" when they study something, they have to say, "according to data gathered by me, a black non-binary helicopterkin, " because they have to make it clear this is THEIR science, not "white" science.
 
"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.
what these idiots don't get is:
sure, there may not be someone as DARK as you
but there might be someone who thinks like you, who likes what you like
maybe someone with the same handedness or something?
same religion? come from the same city?
 
what these idiots don't get is:
sure, there may not be someone as DARK as you
but there might be someone who thinks like you, who likes what you like
maybe someone with the same handedness or something?
same religion? come from the same city?
That would require judging people based on their character and not the color of their skin.
 
That's where the narrative of "Whitey stole it all from the Kangz" comes from. And "White people have no culture" , to reduce them to automotons who just exist to oppress you, therefore, partaking of "Their" stuff isn't a contradiction, ti's not really "THEIRS", they may have created it, but they were only doing it to make money or use it as a tool to suppress, there was no great white enlightening ideal behind it, so it was never a white thing.... they can't HAVE ideals beyond being hateful little bigots.

Using whitey's stuff is therefore not only not bad, it's GOOD, you are bravely RECLAIMING science for the POC masses and giving it meaning it never had!

That's why they can't just up and say "according to my data" when they study something, they have to say, "according to data gathered by me, a black non-binary helicopterkin, " because they have to make it clear this is THEIR science, not "white" science.
You are right. This dovetails with the Grievance Studies Affair stuff where they found out that all it took to get published was to crank out some postmodern word salad and add "I feel" at the beginning of the conclusion statement. In their little world science is entirely subjective and who is correct is just a matter of who has the power in the system.

This broad isn't just saying "I wish there were greater opportunities for people like me in the field" she is also saying "so everything I do professionally is correct and valid by stacking the field with people who will agree with me and my conclusions simply because we are the same color".
 
The thing about sciences, maths, the pure, empirical, scientific fields in general, is that they are just that. Empirical. Objective. Measurable. Rational. They don’t give a shit either way what sex you are or what colour you are. If you want to study volcanos, or M theory, or fiddle about with mass spectrometers or particle colliders, your sex is irrelevant, your race is irrelevant, your creed is irrelevant. Your intellect plus training is very relevant.

Stop dumbing down science in schools, stop watering down maths in public schools with social justice, encourage kids outside and to look at how amazing science is.
Pipeline problem? Yes Ok, I can see that. Bursaries for poorer schools to have field trips then. Funding for school trips to places that can spark kids’ imaginations. Good, rigorous teaching for everyone. But you dont solve a pipeline problem at the end of the pipeline, you can only solve it at the start.

Earth science doesn’t have a whiteness problem. Public school education has a poor quality problem. But that’s a poverty/class issue and somehow that’s the one thing we aren’t allowed to talk about...
 
This is an egregious case of black erasure; they're ignoring the foremost pioneer of black geoscience.
71CpvJWLy8L._RI_.jpg
 
Earth science doesn’t have a whiteness problem. Public school education has a poor quality problem. But that’s a poverty/class issue and somehow that’s the one thing we aren’t allowed to talk about...
A lot of that would probably be solved by bouncing the kids who don't want to be there. That's what the more well off school districts do. This turns the schools in low income areas into dumping grounds for malcontents who disrupt the whole system. If little Johnny is dressing in gang colors and selling dope, he has made up his mind so stop trying to save him. All you are doing is wasting resources that could be better spent on the kids willing to learn and grow.
 
It’s a new decade, can we please leave this bullshit behind so society can move forward and we can solve class issues?

Or at the least blast these idiots into the sun?
 
You are right. This dovetails with the Grievance Studies Affair stuff where they found out that all it took to get published was to crank out some postmodern word salad and add "I feel" at the beginning of the conclusion statement. In their little world science is entirely subjective and who is correct is just a matter of who has the power in the system.

This broad isn't just saying "I wish there were greater opportunities for people like me in the field" she is also saying "so everything I do professionally is correct and valid by stacking the field with people who will agree with me and my conclusions simply because we are the same color".

The Grievance Studies field is probably the most insipid thing that has ever come out of the academic sphere.

It's already a corrupted field, because of the lack of quality control as it is, but then with the flexibility that came of out of feminist and black studies, you started having what was once a small obscure cadre of academics push themselves out into other universities and start teaching these subjects.

The real rub comes from the fact that as long as you follow the academic format and write what your professor wants you to write, then you will get your PHD in your Gender Studies. The real danger here comes from the fact that the term PHD is weighted the same regardless of the academic vigor, so you could have someone who is a psychologist and actually had to put some work into their thesis to get their PHD or a history major, and they are weighted in societies eyes as the same to a person who gets a PHD in basket weaving.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom