Now, this doesn't mean that the notion of replicability is bunk. It means that standpoint matters, and context, and power and privilege. All of these factor into the biases and warrants and inferences that come with data collection and analysis.
The @Nature journals keep getting this wrong. They keep allowing colonizers to tell the stories of Indigenous peoples.
We need editors and peer reviewers to not tolerate this anymore.
The third response in the above linked article is 🔥
A tenet of western science has long been that it doesn't matter who does the science, as long as it's done right it's replicable by anyone.
But doing research the 'right' way actually means involving and allowing the right people to lead. sciencemediacentre.co.nz/2021/10/07/stu…
Let's not throw out the net-zero baby with the greenwashing bathwater.
- Near-term targets to reduce emissions in 5-10 years in line w/ 1.5°C
- Long-term emissions reduction >90% by 2050
- Limited carbon removals to neutralize the rest
In a nutshell, access to, and ability to contribute to, data, is not always equitable. We frequently encounter stake- and rights-holders who feel they need to appeal to data to achieve standing in the eyes of management institutions.
We argue this is problematic.
Registration is now open for the fourth annual Arrell Food Summit. The one-day event will be held online on Oct. 28 due to pandemic restrictions & a commitment to safety for presenters & attendees. foodincanada.com/food-trends/re…. @ArrellFoodInst
To be clear, I am a huge proponent of ethics boards and their role in making our research better
But many boards already delegate review to faculty for course-based research. Doing so with (most) masters projects isnt that much of a stretch from there IMO
So there is this great mug in the place we're staying for the year. "Tick Tock Diner." I like to use it for a bit of whisky in the evening. Whenever I pull it out of the cabinet I hear @SamuelLJackson yelling at @VancityReynolds.