I was a bit surprised this morning when I was catching up on my reading to find an article in Scientific American that added a bit to my previous blot. I found a highly correlated version on-line [Link] and I quote from it:
“Smith’s actions send a clear message to scientists that we should produce results which are convenient to political narratives, rather than which accurately reflect reality. “
Smith, incidentally, is a politician and the quote is to be taken either satirically or as galgenhumor. The reality referred is physical reality, not social.
I think part of the message is also that politicians who annoy scientists tend to lose either body parts or mana points, both of which are detrimental to their continued reign. Hence either attacking or ignoring science and scientists, depending on their personal ignorances and their partisanship.
This is also why they pick on scientists who work for the Yankee government because they can intimidate that organization’s political appointees and thereby abuse the scientists without self-damage.
The question out of all this is whether Scientific American really has gotten this much better?