naturalnews--2019-01-09--Left-wing lunacy invades the behavioral sciences as American Psychological Association labels mascul

Left-wing lunacy invades the behavioral sciences as American Psychological Association labels masculinity "harmful"

(Natural News) Traditional masculinity was the driving force behind the exploration of the Americas. The grit and determination of traditional masculinity established the first thirteen colonies on the North American continent. The toughness and aggressiveness of traditional masculinity paved a path into the unknown, fought for independence, and established founding principles for the greatest country in the world.  Yet, in the 21st century, the American Psychological Association (APA) has defined traditional masculinity as “harmful.” The APA opened up 2019 with an article that reads, “Men socialized in this way are less likely to engage in healthy behaviors.” The article postulates, “The main thrust of the subsequent research is that traditional masculinity—marked by stoicism, competitiveness, dominance and aggression—is, on the whole, harmful.”  The rule makers and behavioral science “experts” at the APA would fail to exist if it weren’t for the bold competitive nature that drove mankind to colonize North America and create the most prosperous and comfortable of societies. These APA intellectuals sit in heated corridors, with flick-of-the-switch lighting whilst the men of past centuries chopped firewood, skinned animals for food, and erected log shelters in a vast wilderness. Yet, limp-wristed APA intellectuals believe that mental health professionals should teach young men and boys that masculine behaviors and traits are on par with a mental disorder. It’s this kind of thinking that further suppresses man’s potential in modern society.  Mother Nature's micronutrient secret: Organic Broccoli Sprout Capsules now available, delivering 280mg of high-density nutrition, including the extraordinary "sulforaphane" and "glucosinolate" nutrients found only in cruciferous healing foods. Every lot laboratory tested. See availability here.  In order to cooperate in modern society, men are discouraged from competing, discouraged from striving to make themselves better, discouraged from becoming stronger, more independent, and more resilient people. The public school system chokes the life out of young boys from the start. Educational institutions now chastise masculinity and promote “gender fluidity,” a concept that promotes the feminization of men.  One of the authors of the new men’s guidelines, Ryon McDermott, Ph.D. asks the question, “What is gender in the 2010s?” The psychologist at the University of South Alabama says gender is “no longer just this male-female binary.” McDermott believes that boys should no longer feel pressure to meet the expectations of past masculine norms and should be free to identify as bisexual, gay, or transgender without question. The new guidelines instruct mental health professionals to look for and eliminate “dominant masculine ideals” and to identify “male privilege” and “male power” as harmful behaviors that trap men in “narrow roles.” (Related: However you “identify” there are only two types of brains: male and female.)  The guidelines instruct mental health professionals to fight “against homophobia, transphobia” but the guidelines openly discriminate against the innate masculine qualities of being male. No organization of limp-wristed psychologists should be dictating what healthy masculinity is and what it is not. Males should feel free to express themselves however they desire, but discouraging bold masculine traits and suppressing men from being all they can be is no way to help boys and young men. Young men should never be told to poison themselves with feminizing synthetic hormones that cause cancer and suppress their testosterone and innate purpose. This is child abuse and medical malpractice. The AMA is discouraging men from engaging in behaviors that are inherent to being a man. Traits such as decisiveness, commitment, courage, hard work, winning, and strong leadership should be freely expressed by men. Men should step up and open doors for women. More men should be masculine, step up and take the wheel. Men should feel free to compete, to be the best at what they do. They shouldn’t be ashamed for winning, dominating, and pushing one another to new heights. Men should desire respect, not to be coddled as submissive, superfluous pawns.  The American Psychological Association is harming the mental health of men by shaming their innate masculinity. Psychologists must rebuke left-wing lunacy and encourage men to be independent, kind, and unashamed to let their testosterone work to its advantage, to carry out the purpose of the individual male.  For more about how society is trying to redefine the genders, visit Gender.News.


naturalnews--2019-05-03--American Medical Association which pushes anti-gun agenda warns that media coverage of mass shooti

American Medical Association, which pushes anti-gun agenda, warns that media coverage of mass shootings causes MORE mass shootings to occur while boosting gun sales

(Natural News) To the brainiacs at the American Medical Association, pencils cause misspellings, forks and spoons cause obesity, and cars cause drunk driving.  That’s the only way to explain the AMA’s position regarding media coverage of mass shootings, based on the group’s conclusions from a recent study.  “Nearly 40% of major mass shootings were followed by a significant rise or fall in Americans buying guns, a new study says, with researchers concluding that understanding the mechanisms propelling these choices will be an important part of the public health community’s response to future gun violence,” the AMA said in a news release last week.  The AMA cited an analysis that was published in the JAMA Network Open which found that following mass shootings with a high number of deaths (five or more), a drop in handgun sales most often occurred.  Researchers examined data from 124 mass shootings from November 1998 to April 2016 and found that 18 percent of the time, according to a cross-sectional study of federal background check data, sales of handguns and long guns fell.  But, “handgun purchases rose after a mass shooting 21 percent of the time,” the AMA press release stated, a statistic that is associated “with mass shootings that received extensive media coverage defined as 1,000 or more articles being published about a shooting within a month.”  Researchers from Oxford University in the U.K. and the University of Pennsylvania hypothesize that Americans purchase guns, in many cases, out of fear they could become victims if they remain unarmed. Also, researchers say that people will buy guns following any actions they see being proposed or taken by lawmakers that restrict or could limit their access to a gun in the future.  Get CLEAN FOOD and help support our mission to keep you informed: The Health Ranger Store lab verifies everything we sell with accredited testing for heavy metals, microbiology and food safety. Certified organic facility, ISO-accredited on-site laboratory, no GMOs or synthetic ingredients. The world's #1 source of lab-verified clean foods and superfoods for nutritional healing. 600+ products available. Explore now.  New, additional gun control measures are go-to policy proposals for Democrats after all mass shootings, despite the fact that while horrific, they are statistically insignificant in terms of overall gun deaths in the U.S. annually — which are low considering that nearly 328 million people live in America.  Gun sales, researchers said, are driven post-shooting by outsized media coverage. (Related: Gun control advocates refuse to place ‘gun free zone’ signs in their own front yards.)  “As the media coverage that mass shootings receive is disproportionate and frequently sensationalized, it thus inspires fear and motivates gun purchases for self-defense,” wrote the authors, Gina Liu and Douglas J. Wiebe, Ph.D.  In addition, they wrote that “as the shooters race/ethnicity and ideological motivation are also associated with an increase in the extent of media coverage as well as with its content, media focus on the perpetrator rather than the victims may also contribute to increasing handgun purchases.”  Those findings, coincidentally, “buttress” an AMA policy that was adopted by the organization last year calling on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention “to develop recommendations or best practices for coverage of mass shootings.”  In other words, the AMA wants the government to limit the amount of coverage our supposedly free press can produce regarding mass shootings — all because researchers believe media coverage drives sales.  The fact is Democrat calls for more gun control following highly publicized mass shootings are more likely what produce additional gun sales. While some shootings are certainly hyped and overhyped, during the same news cycle the Left-wing establishment media also provides outsized coverage to any and all Democrats to give them a platform for spreading more anti-gun hype and calls for new gun control laws.  We have anecdotal evidence for that. Whenever a mass shooting occurred during President Obama’s reign of authoritarianism, he would obsessively discuss gun control and new measures aimed at restricting our Second Amendment rights. And sales would reach new records.  There is no mystery as to why gun sales rise following an overhyped mass shooting. It’s because the additional media coverage gives Democrats another opportunity to push for new gun control.  Read more about Democrats’ push to ban guns and subvert the Second Amendment at Guns.news and SecondAmendment.news.


wakingtimes--2019-02-16--California Brain Tumor Association Issues Warning On Dangers of 5G

At the center of the debate about 5G technology is the issue of whether or not 5G is safe. Already underway, though, the rapid rollout will deploy 20,000+ satellites, millions of small towers, and use the same range of EMF waves as a military crowd-control system. Proponents of the technology don’t seem to acknowledge the growing body of research and growing number of voices warning us of the coming catastrophe of a world blanketed in 5G radiation.  Most often, however, those who are negatively impacted by wireless technologies and electromagnetic pollution, are individuals whose voices aren’t heard outside of courtrooms and city halls. In Canada, for example, journalist Rodney Palmer spoke to local government about a “wi-fi disaster,” which actually hurt a number of school children, resulting in the removal of the school’s wireless network.  Interestingly, firefighters have for years opposed the placement of cell towers near fire stations, arguing that the effects of the towers disrupt living conditions for firemen and can cause neurological problems. A study was done for an incident occurred with a group of Los Angeles firefighters in 2016,  and is recounted in public testimony from veteran firefighter and Union president, David Gillotte.  Gillotte speaks on the need to protect firefighters and stations from cell towers.  Of interest in this conversation should also be the insight and opinions of closest to the victims of EMF pollution. In 2016, the California Brain Tumor Association (CBTA) condemned the passage of a bill that allowed for proliferation of small cell towers in California communities by requiring cities to lease land to telecom companies for 5G equipment and infrastructure.  Acknowledging the known concerns of firefighters, CBTA executive director Ellie Marks had remarks for then governor Jerry Brown:  Marks and the CBTA cited several key studies as the scientific and ethical foundation for opposing the bill and for opposing 5G in general.  CBTA, headed by executive director Ellen [sic] Marks, issued a press release that cited several studies pointing to the dangers of pulsed, electro-magnetic radiation. DNA damage in those living close to a cell tower was documented in a new study by Electromagnetic Biol Med. 2017 Aug 4:1-11: “Impact of radiofrequency radiation on DNA damage and antioxidants in peripheral blood lymphocytes of humans residing in the vicinity of mobile phone base stations.” “All of the recorded radiofrequency radiation (RFR) power density values in this study were well below the Federal Communication Commission’s maximum permissible exposure limits in the U.S. for the general population,” said Joel Moskowitz, Ph.D., University of Calif. Berkeley School of Public Health. The study, said CBTA, follows on the heels of the major $25 million study recently released by the U.S. National Toxicology Program of the National Institutes of Health that found increased incidences of brain cancer, malignant tumors of the heart and DNA damage in laboratory animals from exposure levels the FCC considers “safe.” The American Cancer Society’s statement on the significance of this new study was cited: “The NTP report linking radiofrequency radiation (RFR) to two types of cancer marks a paradigm shift in our understanding of radiation and cancer risk. The findings are unexpected; we wouldn’t reasonably expect non-ionizing radiation to cause these tumors.”  Limited Time Offer: Act now before they sell out. Berkey water filters offered at up to 31% discount.  According to their website, the CBTA was formed by Ellie Marks as an advocacy group after her husband was diagnosed with brain cancer which was believed to be the result of cell phone usage. More on the CBTA  Founded in 2008, the California Brain Tumor Association is a leading non-profit organization dedicated to safeguarding public health. We believe that it is inexcusable to allow technological advances invented to enrich our lives rob us of our lives instead. We have been researching the question of how the wireless radiation from cell phones, towers and wifi routers (all things wireless) has harmful effects on health. The wireless industry says the “jury is out” and that the studies to date are inconclusive or mixed, with about half saying yes and half saying no. We do not agree. Independent expert groups have looked at the same studies and determined that the industry-funded studies tend to find no harm and the independent studies tend to find there is harm. The science is far more settled than the industry claims. Our reading of the situation is that science has established enough proof of harm that regulations should be updated now and appropriate warnings issued. The “jury” actually is back and it has given its guilty verdict. In brief, we are convinced that the science, on a global basis, is far more definitive than the claims by industry and government agencies imply. I recognize that this position places us far out on a limb relative to most people, but our conviction level is very high. CABTA focuses on prevention as the cure and exposes environmental hazards. Currently, we continue to focus on prevention of primary brain tumors due to cell phone use and our government’s deployment of 4G and 5G technology with no apparent concern for peer reviewed published science documenting the health risks from wireless technology.  Here is director Ellie Marks speaking in opposition to SB 649:  In the following video, members of the wireless industry admit that there are no studies showing 5G is safe:  Alex Pietrowski is an artist and writer concerned with preserving good health and the basic freedom to enjoy a healthy lifestyle. He is a staff writer for WakingTimes.com. Alex is an avid student of Yoga and life.  This article (California Brain Tumor Association Issues Warning On Dangers of 5G) originally created and published by Waking Times and is published here under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Alex Pietrowski and WakingTimes.com.


sputnik--2019-08-11--Chinese Scholars Establish Own Academic Evaluation System Following IEEEs Huawei Ban

Chinese Scholars Establish Own Academic Evaluation System Following IEEE’s Huawei Ban

In order to bolster the confidence of Chinese researchers to participate in the peer-review process for international journals, China Academy of Social Sciences Evaluation Studies (CASSES) organized a Beijing-based training workshop for Chinese researchers on Friday together with International academic publisher Taylor & Francis Group.  "I don't think 'IEEE cases' will stop. It may happen again, probably with another institution in the near future… In the context of global competition, it is inevitable that China's academia will get a raw deal, even vicious encirclement and suppression, if it wants to have a say and occupy a particular position on the global stage," Jing Linbo, dean of CASSES, told the Global Times.  According to the latest data from China's National Bureau of Statistics, the number of research papers by Chinese included in the Science Citation Index (SCI), Engineering Index (EI) and Conference Proceedings Citation Index (CPCI) reached 418,000, 266,000 and 59,000 respectively. The Essential Science Indicators database shows that Chinese research papers ranked at No.2 on the list of the highest cited publications for 2018.  This achievement is closely tied to strong financial support from the government. In 2018, China spent 1.97 trillion yuan ($278.8 billion) on R&D - 138 times than the amount in 1991, putting it right behind the US.  In many ways, Chinese researchers are working hard to have their voices heard, including as peer reviewers.  "We were delighted to be able to partner with CASSES to offer training in how to be a peer reviewer for international academic journals. It has been shown by a number of studies that, although Chinese researchers are contributing to global research at a high level as authors, they currently represent a relatively low proportion of peer reviewers. Through this training, we are aiming to ensure more Chinese researchers are equipped to be peer reviewers for Taylor & Francis and Routledge journals, which is vital for global representation at every stage of the peer review process,"said Diana Marshall, head of reviewer programs at the Taylor & Francis Group.  One 25-year-old graduate student studying at a second-tier Chinese university talked to the Global Times about the challenges Chinese researchers face when it comes to the peer review system. Working on research 12 hours a day, six days a week, the student, who wished to remain anonymous, has been waiting for a reply to an article on mineral engineering he sent to a top SCI journal.  If his article is published, he will become a stronger candidate for his dream doctoral program at an Australian university.  He acknowledged that the language barrier is a great hindrance. Many Chinese students and researchers like him have to spend time and energy on reading English articles and improving their academic writing in English.  He told the Global Times that when it comes to mineral engineering research, China takes the lead globally. He noted that, for this reason, some Chinese researchers in the field would rather publish articles in domestic journals instead of foreign ones.  However, in China, promotions for researchers are closely related to the number of articles published on top international academic journals; it is also a key proof of one's scientific achievements. This pressure has brought about corruption and academic misconduct.  At the end of July, the misconduct of a female researcher in Shanghai was revealed on social media. The young researcher was able to get her name fraudulently added to five SCI published articles because she had a relationship with the author.  Jing said these issues stem from the problematic evaluation of academic journals.  "China's academia now has a misconception: As long as the impact factor of a journal is high, it must be a top journal," Jing said.  Impact factors are used to measure the importance of a journal by calculating the yearly average number of times selected articles are cited within the last few years.  Under these circumstances, Chinese researchers will choose to publish their new breakthroughs abroad first, instead of domestic journals, especially in natural science.  "We should now reflect on our evaluation system. Fortunately, we've seen systematic progress. I know in the field of natural science, doctoral students are required to publish two to three SCI articles and another Chinese article," Jing noted.  CASSES has made another step forward to improve this situation by establishing its own evaluation model for humanities and social science journals. The model is called AMI, which stands for attraction, management power and impact power.  Attraction, refers to a journal's awards, quality and peer review results. Management power covers any academic misconduct and adherence to institutional norms by the journal. Impact power refers to a journal's academic, social and international influence.  In Jing's opinion, this creates a multi-dimensional quantitative and qualitative evaluation system that can help evaluate academic journals and think tanks.  The Centre for Science and Technology Studies at Leiden University in the Netherlands and the Norway-based Nordic Institute for Studies in Innovation, Research and Education have shown great interest in the system, according to Jing, who is ready to promote China's evaluation system in Europe.  One of the purposes of the workshop is to familiarize Chinese researchers with the global peer review process and accelerating their entrance to global academia.  In the West, articles fall under the scrutiny of two to three often-anonymous experts in the same field to make sure the final work meets publishing requirements.  At Taylor & Francis, an associate editor finds two reviewers on the web using science and reviewer finder tools.  Jing told the Global Times that peer reviewers in the West usually work for free and only for a few times a year. By comparison, Chinese peer reviewers may be asked to review papers multiple times in a year, and hence are paid.  He said that a high number of peer reviewers can benefit a country in two ways: giving it more power to vote on international standards and putting it in a leading position of academic power.  "The more papers you publish and the more members in an institute, the higher your academic position. Talents decide a country's competitiveness," Jing said.  Regarding carrying out peer review for international journals, Marshall encourages Chinese researchers increase their profile with editors as much as possible.  "My suggestion is to get known by the journals," she advised.  Sienho Yee, editor-in-chief of the Chinese Journal of International Law, told the Global Times that the key to improving Chinese researchers' profile is to carry out high-quality research.  "An entire paragraph of my work was once quoted by a judge at the International Court of Justice, because my research and analysis could support the judge, not because I am Chinese," Yee said.  Jing echoed Yee, noting that a major challenge is that many Chinese academics lack the ability to explain or summarize China's achievements in different fields.  "Most people wear a pair of tinted spectacles to look at Chinese issues," Jing said.  "If we Chinese don't take the initiative to introduce our country, how can foreigners? No wonder their understanding is so one-sided."  Jing said that open and fair international exchanges in academic fields should continue even though the US is wary of Chinese researchers.  "It is obvious [US President Donald] Trump's policy [to suspect Chinese researchers] is not sustainable. The US is a country of immigrants. If the US does not open its doors, it will fade at a faster speed," Jing told the Global Times.  He encouraged Chinese researchers to make their voices heard among international academia and visit the US for academic exchanges, as "the US is the highland of global scientific research."  The mineral engineering graduate student is also looking forward to more Chinese voices being heard and Chinese researchers helping connect China and the world.  This article originally appeared on the Global Times website.


tass--2019-07-21--Russia may introduce PhD to complement its academic degree system minister

Russia may introduce PhD to complement its academic degree system — minister

SKOLKOVO, July 21. /TASS/. Russia’s Ministry of Science and Higher Education may introduce the Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) to complement its existing academic degree system, Science and Higher Education Minister Mikhail Kotyukov said on Saturday.  "Discussions are under way. However, if introduced, it [the PhD degree] will not replace it, it will be supplementary," he said.  "In other words, our traditional system will remain and, maybe, there will be an opportunity to get a PhD degree, too," the minister added.  Russia’s first-level academic degree is called 'Kandidat nauk' (that could be translated verbatim as a "Candidate of Sciences"). A higher doctoral degree, which may be earned after the Candidate of Sciences, is 'Doktor nauk', literally meaning Doctor of Sciences.


tass--2019-08-28--Sanya sets up its own Association of Academicians

HAIKOU, August 28. /TASS/. The Hainan authorities announced the creation of the Association of Academicians of Sanya, which will contribute to the promotion of various international scientific projects, especially in the fields of biology, space exploration and marine technologies, information portal www.hinews.cn reported.  The first 36 members of the new organization were elected at the World Sanya Laureate Forum. It is expected that the association will not only activate global research projects, but also ensure effective cooperation between academia, government and business circles. It is assumed that mailnly due to this, Sanya in the near future will turn into an innovative center. All key technologies will be patented, and intellectual property rights will be mentored by the island administration.  Most of the workings are planned to be put into practice, both in the field of production and with the aim of more efficient allocation of resources. One of the goals set by the central government in Beijing is to draw as many professionals to Hainan as possible, to provide them with conditions for living and working.  In April 2018, President Xi Jinping said that the Chinese authorities intend to actively involve Hainan in globalization and to draw foreign investors to the island province. By 2050, according to the authorities, the island should become a unique international cluster with an advanced economy, developed tourism, top-notch scientific, technical and financial potential, and modern medicine. The branches of the best universities and offices of the most powerful corporations in the world will be located on the Island of Hainan.


theblaze--2019-01-09--Professor who exposed biased academic left with fake studies is in trouble with his college over i

Professor who exposed 'biased academic left with fake studies' is in trouble with his college over it  Portland State University 'like many college campuses, is becoming an ideological community, and I've demonstrated that I don't fit the mold,' the prof said


tass--2019-09-10--France bestows Order of Academic Palms on three Russian scientists

ST. PETERSBURG, September 10. /TASS/. Counselor for Science and Technology at the Embassy of France in Russia Abdo Malac bestowed the Ordre des Palmes academiques (Order of Academic Palms) on three Russian scientists during the 21st Mendeleev Session, TASS reported.  The recipients of the award are Doctor of Chemistry, Director of the Nesmeyanov Institute of Organoelement Compounds of the Russian Academy of Sciences Alexander Trifonov; Doctor of Biology, Head of the Department of Animal Cell Biochemistry of the Belozersky Research Institute of Physico-Chemical Biology of the Moscow State University Vladimir Muronets; and Doctor of Physics and Mathematics, head of the International Scientific Laboratory of the Physics of Epitaxial Nanostructures of the ITMO University Vladimir Dubrovsky.  The Ordre des Palmes academiques was established in 1808 by Emperor Napoleon I for academicians and professors of the University of Paris and some lyceums. Presently, teachers and members of the academic community, individuals who made considerable contributions to national education, as well as foreign subjects and Frenchmen who live outside France and who actively support the spread of the French culture in other countries receive this award now.  The 21st Mendeleev Session on general and applied chemistry is being held on September 9-13 in St. Petersburg. It is one of the key events of the 2019 International Year of the Periodic Table of Chemical Elements declared by the UN General Assembly. The convention is dedicated to the 150th anniversary of the creation of the periodic table of chemical elements by Dmitri Mendeleev. The International Year of the Periodic Table of Chemical Elements is taking place in Russia, Germany, Spain, the US and Japan under the auspices of UNESCO and includes scientific conference, thematic exhibitions, contests for young scientists and other events.


thecollegefix--2019-12-30--UNC Charlotte seminar to help academic advisors avoid ‘maintenance of oppressive systems’

A coming “webinar” at the University of North Carolina Charlotte will assist academic advisors on becoming the “best possible allies” to students … which includes not contributing to the “maintenance of oppressive systems.”  The National Academic Advising Association’s “Academic Advising for Social Justice: Theory, Reflection, and Practice” takes place in mid-April of next year, and will add to previous events such as their 2015 webinar “Academic Advising and Social Justice: Privilege, Diversity, and Student Success.”  presenters will challenge participants to engage in critical reflection about themselves and the profession to better understand how we can hear our students lived experiences and work towards being the best possible allies for them. Are there ways in which we unwittingly contribute to the maintenance of oppressive systems that do not serve all students equitably? How can we process our discomfort as a participant in oppressive systems? The presenters will examine the role of emotionality for both advisors and students in this important dialogue, discuss contemporary advising approaches, and explore the concept of counternarratives as a means to work towards social justice in advising.  Call me old fashioned, but if I’m in the market for some academic advising, the possible preservation of “oppressive systems” and progressive notions of social justice are the least of my concerns. Perhaps this is a reason why students at larger universities tend to rate their advisors as “unsatisfactory,” among others.  Social justice and “intersectionalty” are big things with the webinar presenters; they’re both part of the research (and interests) of St. Thomas University’s Jayne Sommers and the University of Minnesota’s Quinn Nelson.  Meanwhile, fellow presenter Ariel Collatz of UC Davis “values collective action, self reflection, open communication, empowerment and the creation and sharing of knowledge.”  MORE: Prof: Game of dodgeball’s ‘hidden curriculum’: it ‘reinforces oppression’  Like The College Fix on Facebook / Follow us on Twitter


thecollegefix--2019-12-26--Diversity-minded academics: The sciences have a problem with ‘whiteness’

Here we go again: The mainstream media treats us to another fatuous piece about how an “incorrect” percentage of women and minorities working in the sciences is a “problem.”  Of course, most people, for some silly reason, couldn’t care less about the color or gender of those working in the hard sciences. But leave it to the New York Times to highlight several individuals who do care — who, coincidentally, have a background or employment in an academic “diversity” field.  For example, Assistant Director of Academic Affairs and Diversity Kuheli Dutt of Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory claims the “lack of diversity and inclusion is the single largest cultural problem facing the geosciences today.”  Unsurprisingly, Dutt’s research focuses on “gender issues, implicit bias, and diversity in the sciences.”  Dutt wrote a piece recently for the journal Nature titled “Race and racism in the geosciences” which hits many academic race fads, especially the belief that colorblindness is “racist,” and that racism itself is all about who holds “power.”  The diversity director says one thing white geoscientists should do to help increase a “sense of belonging” among marginalized groups is “separate their privilege as a White person from their identity as a good person.”  “Conflating the two,” she adds, “leads to feelings of anger, denial and defensiveness, because racism tends to be viewed as a character defect rather than the system of advantage and social conditioning that it really is.”  This “sense of belonging” was lacking for Columbia PhD student Arianna Varuolo-Clarke who, upon receiving an internship at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, “quickly realized […] her path as a woman of color would not be easy.”  Despite “walk[ing] through the halls” of Columbia and seeing “a lot of old white men,” Varuolo-Clarke says she nevertheless persevered. When her department was the target of an isolated racist email back in May, Varuolo-Clarke claims the message “brought to the surface what still needs to be done in the field.”  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. … “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.”  Columbia PhD student Lorelei Curtin added that earth science classes could be “enriched” by more Native American voices since “Indigenous people have a unique connection to the land.”  Curtin helped create a book club, aptly titled “Race Talk,” in which fellow geoscientists yak about “race and white privilege.”  MORE: Women, minorities show less interest in research faculty careers  MORE: Math prof who argues against ‘truths and knowledge’ hosts convocation  Like The College Fix on Facebook / Follow us on Twitter


thedailycaller--2019-04-05--Cambridge Academic Reflects On Interactions With Spygate Figure

Cambridge Academic Reflects On Interactions With ‘Spygate’ Figure

Svetlana Lokhova did not get along with Stefan Halper, which is what she says made a dinner invitation to the Cambridge University professor’s home in January 2016 all the more peculiar.  “Halper was a lurking presence with a horrible aura — I avoided him,” said Lokhova, a Cambridge post-graduate student who studies Soviet-era espionage.  Lokhova dodged the invitation to Halper’s home, which she said was sent to her by Christopher Andrew, a Cambridge professor and official historian for MI5, the British domestic intelligence service. But the past three years have revealed new details about Halper and other activities that went on at Cambridge that have caused Lokhova to question why she was asked to that dinner at Halper’s.  For one, a series of stories that appeared in the press in early 2017 heavily implied Lokhova was a Russian agent who tried to suborn Michael Flynn at a dinner hosted at Cambridge on Feb. 28, 2014. Flynn served at the time as director of the Defense Intelligence Agency. (RELATED: A London Meeting Before The Election Aroused Trump Adviser’s Suspicions)  A year after those stories appeared, The Daily Caller News Foundation reported Halper cozied to three Trump campaign advisers, Carter Page, Sam Clovis and George Papadopoulos. In May 2018, Halper was revealed as a longtime CIA and FBI informant, a revelation that led President Donald Trump to accuse the FBI of planting a spy in his campaign. The Republican coined the term “Spygate” to describe the alleged scandal.  After Halper’s links to American intelligence were revealed, The New York Times and The Washington Post reported he and another Cambridge luminary, former MI6 chief Richard Dearlove, raised concerns about Lokhova’s contacts with Flynn that were subsequently passed to American and British intelligence.  Lokhova blames Halper for distorting her brief interaction with Flynn into “an international espionage scandal” in which she wound up as collateral damage.  “What Halper staged is a textbook ‘black-op’ to dirty up the reputation of a political opponent. He needed an innocuous social event to place Flynn in a room with a woman who was ethnically Russian. I was unlucky he picked me,” Lokhova told TheDCNF.  Lokhova, a dual Russian and British citizen, has spoken out before about Halper and the allegations about her in the media. She accused Halper of making “false” and “absurd” claims about her in 2018 interviews with TheDCNF. She has also taken to Twitter to criticize reporters who published allegations about her and Flynn.  The Guardian’s Luke Harding is one target of Lokhova’s ire. She has criticized the British reporter for a March 31, 2017, story that contained thinly veiled allegations she tried to compromise Flynn.  According to the report, which was based on anonymous sources, American and British intelligence developed concerns about Lokhova’s interactions with Flynn at the February 2014 dinner, which was hosted by the Cambridge Intelligence Seminar. Halper, Dearlove and Andrew are co-conveners of the seminar, which hosts events for current and former spies.  The Wall Street Journal also published an innuendo-laden story March 18, 2017, about Flynn and Lokhova. The hook for the story was that Flynn had failed to report his contact with Lokhova to the Defense Intelligence Agency.  Lokhova, who has lived in the U.K. since 1998, vehemently denies the insinuations in the articles that she is a Russian agent or that she tried to seduce Flynn. She has provided emails and photographs to TheDCNF to help back up her case. She also notes that all of the allegations about her have been made anonymously.  Dan O’Brien, a Defense Intelligence Agency official who accompanied Flynn to the Cambridge event, told TheWSJ he saw nothing untoward involving Lokhova. Lokhova’s partner, David North, has told TheDCNF he picked Lokhova up after the event.  Since learning more about Halper, Lokhova has reflected back on the few interactions she had with him over the years at Cambridge.  A veteran of three Republican administrations, Halper joined Cambridge in 2001. From his perch at the stories university, Halper wrote books about American politics and the geopolitical threat that China poses to the West. He also received over $1 million in contracts from the Pentagon’s Office of Net Assessment to write studies on Russia, China and Afghanistan.  Lokhova says she first remembers seeing Halper in November 2013, when she gave a talk about her research on Soviet-era spy archives. The pair had few direct interactions over the next several years, even though they attended the same academic seminars. Lokhova recalls one interaction in 2014 or 2015 when Halper sat down at a table with her and North.  “The guy looks at us like we’re completely horrible people, and then gets up and sits across the room.”  Lokhova also said she learned from a Cambridge faculty member that Halper was spreading rumors that she was linked to Russian intelligence.  On March 25, 2018, TheDCNF reported on Halper’s contacts with the Trump campaign.  Halper, whose late father-in-law was legendary CIA official Ray Cline, made contact with Page at a political forum hosted at Cambridge on July 11, 2016, nearly three weeks before the FBI opened its investigation of the Trump campaign. Page attended the event after receiving an invitation in June 2016 from a Ph.D. student who studied under Halper.  Halper reached out to Papdopoulos in September 2016, and offered the young Trump aide $3,000 and a trip to London to write a policy paper on energy issues. (RELATED: Cambridge Prof With MI6, CIA Ties Met With Carter Page During Campaign, Beyond)  Two months after TheDCNF report, the Times and Post identified Halper as a longtime FBI and CIA informant sent to gather intelligence on the Trump campaign. The newspapers also reported Halper was one of those at Cambridge who had expressed concerns about Lokhova’s interaction with Flynn.  The Times reported May 18, 2018, that Halper “was alarmed by the general’s apparent closeness with a Russian woman who was also in attendance.”  “The concern was strong enough that it prompted another person to pass on a warning to the American authorities that Mr. Flynn could be compromised by Russian intelligence, according to two people familiar with the matter.”  The Post reported June 5, 2018, that Halper and Dearlove were “disconcerted” by Flynn and Lokhova’s interactions in 2014. Those concerns were provided to American and British intelligence, though it is unclear if Halper and Dearlove were direct sources for the government agencies. Dearlove met prior to the 2016 U.S. election with Christopher Steele, the former MI6 officer who authored the infamous anti-Trump dossier alleging a “well-developed conspiracy” between the Trump campaign and Kremlin.  Christopher Andrew’s Jan. 12, 2016, dinner invitation sticks out in Lokhova’s mind not just because of its randomness — “it came out of the blue,” she says — but also because of all of the other events that unfolded at that time.  Lokhova says Christopher Andrew emailed her asking her to keep Feb. 13 and Feb. 20, 2016, open on her calendar to attend a dinner for Halper’s wife.  Lokhova, who wrote her dissertation under Andrew’s direction, says she was caught off guard by the invitation, both because she had barely spoken to Halper and because she did not know Halper’s wife.  Lokhova has no proof that she was being lured to meet with Halper in order to gather dirt on Flynn, but she is now suspicious because of the timing of the invite.  In December 2015, a month before the invitation, Flynn attended a gala hosted by RT, the Russia-owned news agency. The Moscow visit is often cited as evidence of Flynn’s too-close links to Moscow. Flynn joined the Trump campaign as an informal adviser in February 2016.  The allegations about Flynn and Lokhova came out of nowhere.  In an essay at the London Times on Feb. 19, 2017, Christopher Andrew wrote of the “impulsive” former national security adviser he had met for the first time three years earlier.  Andrew’s essay was a response to Flynn’s firing as national security adviser. Flynn, a retired lieutenant general, was forced to resign Feb. 14, 2017, after allegedly lying to the White House about his contacts in December 2016 with then-Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak. Flynn would later plead guilty to lying to the FBI about those contacts.  Lokhova says she was taken aback by Andrew’s article. For one, Andrew had not told her that he would be writing the article even though they were in frequent contact. At the time, Lokhova and Andrew were working together on a book based on Lokhova’s research of Soviet intelligence archives. Andrew’s piece also contained clear sexual undertones, including the suggestion that a Russian student (Lokhova) had “charmed” Flynn.  Reporters came out of the woodworks following Andrew’s story, says Lokhova.  Emails seen by TheDCNF show she was contacted by Washington Post columnist David Ignatius, who said he had been in contact with Andrew and wanted to speak to her during his planned visit to Cambridge. Ignatius would write a column May 22, 2018, defending Halper after he was outed as a government informant. A source familiar with Halper’s contacts with the Trump campaign has told TheDCNF he suggested the Trump campaign establish a relationship with Ignatius, who did not publish a story on Lokhova.  The Times also contacted Lokhova to inquire about Flynn, but the newspaper did not run a story about her or Flynn.  TheWSJ and Guardian, however, did publish articles.  Both reports, published in March 2017, suggested Flynn had failed to report his encounter with Lokhova to the Defense Intelligence Agency. But the real meat of the story was that U.S. intelligence officials had “serious concerns” about Flynn’s interaction with Lokhova.  The reports do not say whether those concerns were raised in 2014 or years later, but the timeline is important.  If Halper was concerned about Lokhova as early as 2014, why was she invited to his home two years later for dinner? Lokhova speculates that Halper intended to do what he did with Page and Papadopoulos. But if Halper waited until 2016 or later to raise concerns, was he truly worried about her contacts with Flynn?  As for the core allegations of the 2014 Cambridge event, Lokhova calls them “preposterous.”  She points to an email Andrew sent her April 19, 2017, to say he had told a Guardian reporter she was not a Russian asset.  “This material is quite sufficient to dispose of conspiracy theories about SL somehow serving some Russian interest,” Andrew wrote Lokhova in the email, which she provided to TheDCNF.  Lokhova notes the dinner Flynn attended was a small event and that all of the attendees had been vetted by DIA. Photos Lokhova provided to TheDCNF show she did not sit next to Flynn at the dinner, as the Journal’s sources claimed. Lokhova says she interacted with Flynn, but that others, including Dearlove and Andrew were close by. And though Lokhova was the only Russian at the dinner, most others Flynn met with were non-American. No stories were published suggesting that he had failed to report his contacts with a group made up largely of Brits.  Lokhova has also provided TheDCNF an email which showed she was invited by Cambridge officials to meet with Flynn’s predecessor, Gen. Vincent Stewart, on May 1, 2015. If Lokhova was a threat to Flynn, why would she not have been a threat to his successor, she wonders.  Andrew, Dearlove and Halper have avoided comment. Cambridge reportedly instructed faculty to avoid discussing the topic because of its sensitive nature.  Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.


thedenverpost--2019-04-02--Ask Amy Dreams are dashed by academic abuse

Ask Amy: Dreams are dashed by academic abuse

Dear Amy: My dream is to be a medical researcher. I have devoted my life to this goal, entering a Ph.D. program straight out of college.  Unfortunately, my supervising professor abused me, and I felt I had no choice but to leave the program for my health and safety.  I tried a different career, but my heart is tied to my dream. Though my abuser tried hard to turn me away from the work I love, I am resilient and determined to make a difference.  I have been working entry-level positions in the field, but I need a Ph.D. for the roles I want most. Five years after leaving, I am applying to grad school again.  I have to address my previous Ph.D. program in the application. My history is suspicious and potentially disqualifying for admission if not addressed upfront. Departments do not want to risk offering admission to candidates with perceived personal issues.  If I don’t explain why I left the program, I look like I’m hiding something. If I say outright that I left because of the abuse, or even allude to leaving for safety reasons, it is off-putting and may negatively impact me.  In grad applications, both apparent omissions and oversharing beyond interpersonal boundaries can kill a candidate’s chances.  In an ideal world, I could say this was a personal matter. I’d rather ignore it, but my history is a red flag that detracts from my academic, professional and personal merits.  I have to explain it, but tactfully. How do I explain my past without scaring off schools or leaving them guessing?  — Damned if I Do — or Don’t  Dear Damned: You don’t mention what your professor did or what the consequences might have been for him.  I understand the tension in trying to re-enter academia — the very system that let you down before — where disclosing details might circle back to harm you.  I think an appropriate way to account for your years away is to disclose that you chose to leave your academic program (not that you were chased out): “My program was a bad fit, and I withdrew before completing my degree. I realized during my time away that I am determined and so passionate about this area of research. All of my choices point toward re-entering the field and completing my Ph.D.”  This accounts for your time away, and also cracks the door open for further explanation, if it is required. I agree with you that being circumspect is wisest.  Always pivot toward your strengths. You’ve gained a lot during your time away from the classroom — and now you need to convey that you are ready to return.  Dear Amy: When my husband and I stay at a hotel, I always leave a daily tip for the person who cleans our room; this includes on the day of our departure from the establishment.  My husband does not think that I should tip on the last day, because “the room is being cleaned for someone else.” I disagree, as the cleaning person is still tidying up after us even if we are leaving. To me, this only seems fair.  Is my husband correct on this?  Dear Fair Tipper: Your husband’s logic seems like a simple justification for shorting a service worker. A cleaner isn’t only cleaning up “for” someone else, but “after” you.  Think of it this way: You don’t tip the cleaning staff when you first check in, because they haven’t had the joy of cleaning up after you, yet.  You should leave a tip for the cleaning staff daily after each night of your stay, including your last day before you check out. Tipping each day ensures that the person who actually cleaned your room that day receives your thanks.  Any time cleaners have to clean up “after” you, their work should be recognized with gratitude. Hotel cleaners are very hard-working — usually women — and often first-generation immigrants. Hotel room cleaning is extremely physically demanding, and in many cases how your room is maintained is the first line of a guest’s review of the property.  Dear Amy: I felt you were way too lenient in your answer to “Co-Pilot,” whose husband insisted on driving and insisted on texting while driving.  You suggested that she refuse to ride with him on longer trips.  I suggest that she refuse to ride with him at all.  Dear Upset: Scores of readers responded: Nobody (including me) wants to share the road with this jerk.


newsweek--2019-01-16--After LHC CERN Reveals Plans For Even Bigger Atom-smashing Particle Collider

After LHC, CERN Reveals Plans For Even Bigger Atom-smashing Particle Collider

Particle accelerators are an extremely useful tool for scientists wishing to probe the fundamental open questions in physics. The largest and most powerful accelerator in the world—the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), which lies deep below the France-Switzerland border—has made several groundbreaking discoveries, including the confirmation of an elusive subatomic particle known as the Higgs Boson.  Now, officials at the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN)—which operates the LHC—has unveiled plans to build an even bigger successor accelerator, right next to it, to further probe the mysteries of matter and the universe.  Read more: Scientists are about to start hunting for the universe's hidden realm  Conceptual designs put together with the help of 150 universities, research institutions and industrial partners show that the proposed accelerator—currently referred to as the “Future Circular Collider” (FCC)—will reside in an underground tunnel with a circumference of 62 miles. This is significantly bigger than the 17-mile structure that houses the LHC.  “The FCC conceptual design report is a remarkable accomplishment,” said CERN Director-General Fabiola Gianotti in a statement. “It shows the tremendous potential of the FCC to improve our knowledge of fundamental physics and to advance many technologies with a broad impact on society.”  “While presenting new, daunting challenges, the FCC would greatly benefit from CERN’s expertise, accelerator complex and infrastructures, which have been developed over more than half a century,” he said.  According to officials, the FCC could begin operations by 2040 with an accelerator that collides electrons and positrons—the antimatter counterpart to the electron. The machine—which is estimated to cost around $10.25 billion—would have the capability to detect new, rare processes and measure known particles with currently unobtainable precision.  This could allow scientists to detect whether there are any holes in the Standard Model (SM) that would indicate a new kind of physics exists. The SM is our best description of the observable universe, outlining the four fundamental forces that govern nature and all the known elementary particles—those that are not composed of any others.  CERN also outlined plans to building another machine which will be incorporated into the same tunnel and is expected to come online in the late 2050s. This accelerator will use superconducting magnets to collide protons at an “order of magnitude more powerful than the LHC.”  The unprecedented energies that this collider will be capable of producing in its collisions will allow scientists to conduct investigations into a wide variety of phenomena, including how Higgs particles interact with one another.  “Proton colliders have been the tool-of-choice for generations to venture new physics at the smallest scale,” said CERN Director for Research and Computing, Eckhard Elsen in the statement. “A large proton collider would present a leap forward in this exploration and decisively extend the physics program beyond results provided by the LHC and a possible electron-positron collider.”  Over the next few years, the 22-member states of CERN will examine the proposals and come to a decision on whether they should be put into action, The Associated Press reported.  According to CERN, the benefits of a new collider are wide-ranging even if it is difficult to predict exactly what they will be. The organization says that the complex machinery required for the experiments will inspire new technologies and innovation, which will have an impact on the economy and society as a whole—just as the discovery of the electron in 1897 eventually led to the electronics industry which is now valued at an estimated $3 trillion, AP reported.


sottnet--2019-01-16--Pointless CERN lays out plans for even bigger 21-billion super-collider

Pointless? CERN lays out plans for even bigger €21-billion super-collider

CERN has unveiled its bold dream to build a new acceleratorThe European particle physics laboratory, outside Geneva, Switzerland, outlined the plan in a technical report on 15 January.The document offers several preliminary designs for a Future Circular Collider (FCC) - which would be the most powerful particle-smasher ever built - with different types of colliders ranging in cost from around €9 billion (US$10.2 billion) to €21 billion. It is the lab's opening bid in a priority-setting process over the next two years, called the European Strategy Update for Particle Physics, and it will affect the field's future well into the second half of the century."It's a huge leap, like planning a trip not to Mars, but to Uranus," says Gian Francesco Giudice, who heads CERN's theory department and represents CERN in the Physics Preparatory Group of the strategy exercise.This points to a need to push energies as high as possible, Giudice says. "Today, exploring the highest possible energies with bold projects is our best hope to crack some of the mysteries of nature at the most fundamental level."The potential for a machine such the FCC is "very exciting", says Halina Abramowicz, a physicist at Tel Aviv University who heads that European strategy process. She adds that the FCC's potential will be discussed in depth and compared to other proposed projects.The CERN Council, which includes scientists and government delegates from member countries, will then make the final decision on whether to fund the project.Not everyone is convinced the super collider is a good investment.says Sabine Hossenfelder, a theoretical physics at Frankfurt Institute for Advanced Studies in Germany. "That's the nightmare that everyone has on their mind but doesn't want to speak about."Hossenfelder says that the large sums involved, would be safer bets in terms of their return on science.But Michael Benedikt, a CERN physicist who led the FCC report, says that such a facility would be worth building regardless of the expected scientific outcome. "These kind of largest scale efforts and projects are huge starters for networking, connecting institutes across borders, countries. All these things together make up a very good argument for pushing such unique science projects."Though Hossenfelder says that a similar argument could be made of other big-science projects.The FCC study started in 2014 and involved more than 1,300 contributors, according to CERN, with a financial contribution from the European Commission's Horizon 2020 research-funding programme. Most of the scenarios it outlines involve a 100-km tunnel to be dug next to the existing Large Hadron Collider's tunnel. The cost for this and the related infrastructure on the surface would be around €5 billion, says CERN.A €4-billion machine built in such a tunnelSuch collisions would enable researchers to study known particles such as the Higgs boson with greater precision than is possible at a proton-proton collider such as the LHC. This new research programme would start only around 2040, after the LHC - including a planned upgraded version - has run its course.Physicists have long planned to build an International Linear Collider (ILC) after the LHC, which would also smash electrons and positrons. Japanese scientists pitched to host in 2012. ButThis is because the ILC would only reach energies sufficient to study the Higgs but not to discover any new particles that may exist at higher energies, as CERN's planned colliderThe Japanese government is set to decide whether it wants to host the ILC by 7 March.Another option outlined in the report is a €15-billion, 100-km proton-proton collider (also known as a hadron collider) built in the same tunnel that could reach energies of up to 100,000 GeV, much higher than the LHC's maximum capability of 16,000 GeV. But a more likely scenario would be to build the electron-positron machine first, and move on to the proton-proton collider later on, in the late 2050s. Either way, the higher-energy machine would look for entirely new particles, which could be more massive than the known ones and therefore require more energy to produce.But because of technological improvements, notably in the magnets that bend the protons' path around the ring, it would smash the particles at energies more than twice higher.Much research and development is still to be done, which is one reason why it might make sense to build the lower-energy machine first. "If we had a 100-km tunnel ready tomorrow, we could start building an electron-positron collider right away because the technology essentially exists already," says Giudice. "But more research and development is needed for the magnets required by a 100 teraelectronvolt collider."Wang Yifang, the director of China's Institute of High Energy Physics (IHEP) in Beijing, says that he does not doubt that the lab could pull off such a project. "CERN has a long history of success. It has the technological capabilities, the management skills and good relationships with governments," he says.Wang is leading a similar project in China, and he says that reassuringly, both efforts have come to essentially the same conclusion in terms of science goals and technical feasibility. In particular, it is a natural choice to do electron-positron collisions first and then move on to hadrons later, he says.Much of the added cost for a hadron collider would come from the need for powerful superconducting magnets and the huge helium cryogenic systems to keep them cold. The hadron-colliding FCC would aim at 16-tesla magnets based on the superconducting alloy Nb3Tn, which would be twice as powerful as the LHC while in principle requiring only slightly warmer temperatures.Even if particle physicists agree that the world needs a 100-km collider, it is unclear whether it needs two. Whichever side gets such a project going first will probably pre-empt efforts on the other side. Either collider would host experiments open to the broader international community, Wang says, so scientifically it will not make a difference which one ends up being built.


sputnik--2019-11-26--Why an Artificial Black Hole Won’t Swallow the World: Truth and Myths About CERN

To New Physics – Almost at the Speed of Light  With the advent of Einstein's theory of relativity in physics, an era that saw a variety of fundamental models began, which to this day cannot be combined into a single system. Today, it’s high-energy physics that provide the most accurate data about the structure of matter. CERN's collider studies the processes of production of fundamental particles using collisions of protons and nuclei, which are accelerated to speeds extremely close to the speed of light. This allows one to verify theoretical predictions and discover new physical states of particles.  The standard model, which had been created by the 1960s, is a system of particle physics theories that explain most, but not all, fundamental phenomena: for example, it doesn’t explain gravity. To clarify this model, the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) was created.  The LHC is a ring-shaped tunnel operating at a depth of a hundred-metres with a circumference of 27 km, inside which more than 1,200 superconducting magnets accelerate particles to collide at a speed of 0.99999999 the speed of light. Apart from the LHC, CERN has six more accelerators and a number of detectors that record the results of particle collisions.  The volume of information produced by the detectors is estimated to comprise tens of petabytes (tens of millions of gigabytes) per month, and sometimes it takes scientists more than one year to analyse this material. The data produced by the centre’s laboratories are processed using a multilevel network, the nodes of which are located in universities and research centres in 40 countries, including Russia.  The discovery of the Higgs boson in 2012 was the finale of the grandiose work to confirm the standard model. Today, a number of parallel experimental programmes have been launched on the basis of CERN, dedicated to both checking the accuracy of the standard model’s predictions and searching for manifestations of the “new physics”.  The further study of the Higgs boson will provide an opportunity to study phenomena beyond the scope of the standard model. Scientists are most interested in such phenomena as dark matter and dark energy, as well as the asymmetry of matter and anti-matter.  The Crucible of New Technologies  The need to process a huge amount of data has made the CERN one of the hotbeds of computer technology. In addition to the World Wide Web, which was created there in 1989 for convenience, the centre has also greatly influenced the distributed computing technology.  Scientists are especially proud of the work to reduce the physical dimensions of accelerators. Miniature accelerators are already actively used to scan the internal structure of objects: for example, in medicine or in the examination of art.  The associated visualisation technologies are also being developed at CERN. The Medipix Collaboration is adapting the technology used to monitor particle collisions for diagnostic applications. The fourth generation of chips is already being developed, which allows both receiving 3D scans of the human body and monitoring of various kinds, including in space conditions.  In addition, unique experimental conditions make it possible to study the effect of cosmic radiation on climate formation and to develop methods for protecting electronics from it for the aerospace sphere.  CERN has unique expertise both in a number of production competencies and in process management, which makes it an avant-garde hub of 4.0 industry, influencing knowledge-intensive business all over the world.  On the Brink of the Future  In total, CERN has several dozen collaborations or experimenters, who are pushing the horizons of science in different directions. The largest of them, ATLAS and CMS, are aimed at searching for new elementary particles, dark matter, and other new phenomena. LHCb studies antimatter and ALICE specialises in studying the state of matter during the first microseconds after the Big Bang.  Rumours and alarming theories often appear with regard to the work of the LHC, and, fortunately, they have all been refuted: neither microscopic black holes, which really can occur in the collider for a split second, nor the mysterious magnetic monopole can destroy the Earth. But there is always the possibility of making a discovery that will turn everything upside down – in a good way.  To improve the efficiency of observations at the LHC, a modernization project is being implemented, which will turn it into a “high luminosity” collider (HL-LHC). It’s believed that the upgrade will busy scientists with data until about 2035.  As scientists plan, the LHC will be replaced by either the Future Circular Collider, with the circumference of about 100 km, or the Linear Collider, an accelerator of a completely different type. These projects are aimed at a detailed study of the Higgs boson.  Today, about 2,600 scientists and engineers work at CERN. More than 12,000 physicists from 85 countries take part in the centre’s experiments, including more than a thousand Russians. Over the years the centre has expanded from 11 to 23 member states.  The material is based of the lecture “The Large Hadron Collider: The History and Future of CERN Research,” held at the MIA “Rossiya Segodnya,” and was prepared with the assistance of scientists from the National Research Nuclear University MEPhI.


tass--2019-04-16--Russia CERN sign new cooperation agreement

Russia, CERN sign new cooperation agreement

© AP Photo/Keystone, Martial Trezzini  MOSCOW, April 16. /TASS/. An agreement on scientific and technological cooperation in high energy physics and other areas of mutual interest between the Russian government and the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) was signed by the chief delegates to meeting of the Russia-CERN committee in Geneva on Tuesday, Russia’s Education and Science Ministry has told TASS.  "On April 15-16, 2019 the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN, Geneva, Switzerland) hosted another meeting of the Russia-CERN committee. The chief delegates put their signatures to an agreement on scientific- technological cooperation in the field of high energy physics and other areas of mutual interest between the government of Russia and CERN," the report says.  Russia’s Science and Higher Education Minister Grigory Trubnikov led the Russian delegation at the talks. The host party was represented by CERN leadership under the organization’s Director-General Fabiola Gianotti. The agreement is called to furnish a modern groundwork for wider cooperation between Russia and CERN. A new agreement had to be signed because the previous ones was outdated in some respects.  In other media


tass--2019-08-29--Russia interested in developing contacts with CERN says PM

Russia interested in developing contacts with CERN, says PM

MOSCOW, August 29. /TASS/. Russia is interested in developing contacts with the European Organization for Nuclear Research, known as CERN, Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev told a government meeting on Thursday before submitting a cooperation agreement with CERN for ratification by the Russian State Duma (lower parliament house).  "I have recently been there. I saw how work is organized, spoke with researchers. Of course, it is impressing," he told the government members. He noted that Russia had been successfully cooperating with CERN for decades.  "We are interested in continuing and developing these contacts," he stressed, adding that the agreement lays down a legal framework for that.  Established in 1954, the European Organization for Nuclear Research, or CERN, is a European scientific organization focusing on fundamental research in the sphere of particle physics. Headquartered in Geneva, the organization now has 23 member states. Russia enjoys the observer status.  In April 2019, the Russian government signed a cooperation agreement with CERN to upgrade the existing collaboration format between Russia and CERN. The agreement provides for Russia’s wider participation in the organization’s activities and CERN’s participation in projects in Russia.


theirishtimes--2019-11-14--Dark mysteries probed in Cern’s largest-ever machine

Astrophysicists puzzle over rotations of spiral galaxies and how light sometimes bends as it crosses the universe. It is as if there is something there, unseen, but causing a gravitational pull. The prime suspect is dark matter.  “It is nothing to do with the dark side of the force, from the Star Wars movies,” jokes physicist Prof Lucio Rossi. “It is dark because we are simply not able to see it.”  The answer to this galaxy-bending mystery may lie in particles smaller than an atom, which Rossi investigates using the largest machine ever built, the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at Cern, the European Organisation for Nuclear Research.  Here, beneath the Swiss-French border, two beams of subatomic protons are revved up to travel at 99.99999 per cent the speed of light around a 27km circuit, before smashing into one another. Famously, such collisions led to the discovery of the Higgs boson, announced in 2012, a particle first theorised to exist in the 1960s.  “This was the big hunt, like a grand safari. We built three accelerators. It took 50 years,” says Prof Rossi. “We finally got it because we had enough energy.”  Today, a visit to the collider circuit, taking a lift 100m below ground, can be made because it’s offline until 2020. It looks like a steel tube, with rigs on the outside that are superconducting magnets cooled to minus 271 degrees. An upgrade is under way to ramp up the number of protons in each beam, while using magnets that are 50 per cent more powerful to compact the beam. Rossi says, being Italian, it is like tweaking your Ferrari to go 600km/h.  “This should increase the collision by a factor of 10,” says Rossi, who leads the upgrade. He compares this to shining light into a dark room. “Today there may be particles there, but we cannot see them. If we produce 10 times more, we will.” He draws comfort from an instrument called LIGO, which detected gravitational waves in 2015 after an upgrade.  Cern scientists will be on the look out for supersymmetry particles. “We don’t know if they exist,” says Prof Rossi. They could be part of dark matter. “These particles would solve many questions that we have, but so far we have not seen them. Maybe they are just around the corner.”  A minority of scientists doubt dark matter exists. As Einstein said, if we knew what we were doing, we would not call it science, Rossi notes.  Souped-up proton beams is only half the story. Deep below ground lies a 14,000 tonne engineering leviathan wrapped in steel. This is the CMS (compact muon solenoid) detector, 21m high, 15m long. Also in a deep cavern is Atlas, a 7,000 tonne detector 46m long and 25 in diameter. The two detectors do a similar job, but are run by separate teams. Both are being upgraded.  “It is like a very fancy 3-D camera wrapped around this beam of particles as they collide,” says Prof Val O’Shea, a physicist at the University of Glasgow. “It takes pictures at 40 million frames per second and has got 100 million pixels.”  The Cork native has worked on Atlas since 1992, initially as part of an Italian research institute. Since Ireland is not a member of Cern, Irish researchers cannot become Cern staff and Irish institutes cannot take part in its experiments. “It precluded me getting a job at Cern,” adds O’Shea, matter of factly.  The detectors deploy powerful magnets to bend the trajectory of charged particles generated by the collisions to measure their mass, speed and energy. “It’s a very strong magnetic field. If you had a pacemaker in there you would die,” he notes.  The Atlas and CMS teams are in competition. “It is very important to have two teams working independently in order to produce results that are credible,” O’Shea says.  At the site of the CMS detector, as upgrades continued this summer, French physicist Dr Stephanie Beuaceron recalls that both teams detected the Higgs around the same time. “It was a rumour first. Plenty of physicists are married here,” she quips, and we share printers. “You started to feel the excitement [around the coffee areas].” Officially, only the director general knew the results of both teams.  Ireland would gain hugely from membership of Cern, says O’Shea, in terms of industry suppling equipment, including for big data and supercomputing, but also in training bright new students. “I am always surprised by the fact that Ireland is not part of Cern,” says Rossi. “Countries much poorer than Ireland have joined.”  The upgraded collider will switch on around 2024, and will operate until 2040. Cern hopes eventually to build a 100km next-generation collider, seven times more powerful.  Cern is not just shedding light on the nature of our universe – it has spin-offs for medicine. One is Hadron therapy, a new treatment for cancer, in which tumours are bombarded by protons. Essentially, this means installing a mini Hadron collider in Irish hospitals, notes Prof Ronan McNulty, particle physicist at University College Dublin.  Prof O’Shea has spent years working on a new imaging system sensitive to the energy (colour) of X-rays, which could be used for medical scanning but with far less radiation and more detail for diagnostics.  The particle physics community in Ireland is fairly small, and O’Shea notes it would need to grow (and be funded) to take full advantage of membership. Science Foundation Ireland is not set up to fund blue sky science, he adds.  “Funding agencies like this are changing their brief to short-term, high-impact projects. That’s all very well, but you need the fundamental research first just to have those high-impact projects.”


theirishtimes--2019-11-14--Ireland should join Cern, says Oireachtas committee

Ireland should join Cern, the European Organisation for Nuclear Research, if ambition to be a global leader in innovation is to be realised, the Oireachtas Committee on Business, Enterprise and Innovation has strongly recommended.  Based outside Geneva in Switzerland, Cern is one of the world’s leading scientific laboratories. Its primary focus is on particle physics but it also plays a vital role in developing the technology of tomorrow.  Breakthroughs there helped develop technologies in MRI scanners and radiation therapy in hospitals, touch-screens and the world wide web. It also built the Large Hadron Collider tunnel, the world’s largest machine, which has enabled groundbreaking research.  In a report issued on Wednesday, the committee recommended Ireland initially seek associate membership of Cern as soon as possible with the Department of Business, Enterprise and Innovation providing the funding.  Committee chairwoman Mary Butler said Ireland was one of only three European countries without any formal agreement with Cern. Membership was critical to becoming “a global innovation leader driving a strong sustainable economy and a better society”, she added.  It would bring scientific benefits at research level, and enable Ireland move to the forefront of innovation in a number of sectors, including manufacture of microelectronics, sensors and big data, she said.  Fianna Fáil science and technology spokesman James Lawless, who is a member of the committee, said the case for membership was clear-cut and joining it was now the endorsed position of the houses of the Oireachtas: “. . . it’s up to the Government to act on this,” he said.  While some had in the past expressed reservations about joining on cost grounds, there was an economic imperative to join, he said.  The cost of full membership of Cern, which is determined by a country’s GDP, would currently be in the region of €12.5 million per year with a once-off payment of €15.6 million. If Ireland were to join as an associate member, the minimum in the region of €1.25 million per year.  Prof Ronan McNulty of UCD, who was involved in Cern research that led to observation of the Higgs boson (known as “the God particle”) in 2012, said the organisation was “the greatest scientific collaboration in the world”.  Membership would bring benefits to education, training, research, international competitiveness and to create an environment for Irish companies to do business in. He did not think the cost was a large figure, “based on what we can get back”.


theguardianuk--2019-03-18--Academic at centre of Cambridge Analytica scandal sues Facebook

The academic at the centre of the Cambridge Analytica scandal is suing Facebook for defamation over the social network’s claims that he lied about why he was harvesting personal data from profiles on the site.  Aleksandr Kogan, a former psychology researcher at the University of Cambridge, was the developer of a personality quiz app that paired individual psychological profiles with personal data scraped from the Facebook pages of quiz-takers and their online friends. That data was used as the root of Cambridge Analytica’s “psychometric” approach to targeting users with political adverts tailored to their personalities.  Facebook has always claimed that it was misled by Kogan about how the data was used, and suspended his access to the platform in the wake of the Observer breaking the news about Cambridge Analytica’s data-harvesting operation.  The social network said that its rules banned such a reuse of data – but Kogan has always argued that the terms and conditions of his own app explicitly said the results would be used for more than just academic purposes.  Now, Kogan has sued, arguing that Facebook’s repeated attempts to pin the blame for the scandal on him are defamatory.  “Alex did not lie, Alex was not a fraud, Alex did not deceive them, this was not a scam,” Steve Cohen, Kogan’s lawyer, told the New York Times, which first reported the lawsuit. “Facebook knew exactly what this app was doing, or should have known. Facebook desperately needed a scapegoat, and Alex was their scapegoat.”  In a statement, a spokesperson for Facebook said Kogan’s case was a “a frivolous lawsuit from someone who recklessly violated our policies and put people’s data at risk”.  Almost since the scandal broke, Kogan has argued that he was a scapegoat in a war between larger players. “I’m being basically used as a scapegoat by both Facebook and Cambridge Analytica,” he said in March 2018, the week after the news broke. “Honestly we thought we were acting perfectly appropriately. We thought we were doing something that was really normal.”  The following month, Kogan appeared in front of British MPs, and said: “I think [Facebook] realise that their platform has been mined left and right by thousands of others and I was just the unlucky person that ended up somehow linked to the Trump campaign, and we are where we are.  “I think they realise all this, but PR is PR and they’re trying to manage the crisis, and it’s convenient to point the finger at a single entity and try to paint the picture this is a rogue agent.”  Steve Cohen, Kogan’s lawyer, told the Guardian: “Facebook knew, or should have known that what they said about Dr Kogan was not true. He didn’t lie to them and his work was not a ‘scam’.  “In fact, Facebook had collaborated on several academic papers about his work, and Dr Kogan told Facebook that the new version of the app would be used for commercial purposes. Just as he informed potential users. But facing growing criticism about its policies, Facebook went into PR overdrive and found a convenient scapegoat in Dr Kogan. They defamed him and we look forward to a jury deciding the proper remedy.”


theguardianuk--2019-05-14--Soas academic running for AfD wrongly listed as professor on ballot

A German “reader in law” at Soas University of London who is contesting a seat in the European parliamentary elections for the rightwing populist party Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) has been given the title of professor on the ballot paper, leading to accusations that his academic credentials have been exaggerated.  Dr Gunnar Beck is listed on Soas’s staff page as a reader in law who teaches courses on EU law and legal theory and undergraduate courses on legal methodology at the university. On the ballot paper for the European elections on 26 May, however, he was listed as “Prof Dr Gunnar Beck”.  A spokesperson for the German anti-immigration party told the Guardian it believed the title of “reader” at a British university to be equivalent to the rank of a professor in Germany.  Citing Oxford University’s definition of a “reader” as a “post at an intermediate level between that of full professor and associate professor”, the spokesperson said that translating the title into the German “professor”, “seemed and seems correct, because it was always clear that Dr Gunnar Beck works in Great Britain”.  However, the ministry for science in the state of North Rhine-Westphalia, where the ballot paper states Beck is based, has categorically rejected the claim that the two titles are equivalent.  “Irrespective of the weight of the English ‘reader’, carrying the title in the form ‘prof’ or even ‘professor’ is in this case out of the question,” the ministry said in response to a query from Deutschlandfunk radio.  Beck denies having exaggerated his academic credentials himself. In an email to the Guardian, he said: “I can’t imagine I ever used the prefix ‘Prof’ or ‘Prof Dr’ in writing, let alone in introducing myself, just as I practically never sign as ‘Dr’ or introduce myself as such. Others in Germany and possibly elsewhere must have taken it upon themselves to add those to my name, thinking this either appropriate in my case or customary in Britain too.”  Beck said he categorically denied filling in the form with anything other than his first name and surname.  According to a claim on his Wikipedia page, deleted on Saturday, Beck was “appointed professor of law at the University of Sussex in 2016”. But when approached by the Guardian a spokesperson for the university said it had not appointed the German academic as a professor.  “We can confirm that Gunnar Beck does not work, and has never worked, at the University of Sussex. In addition, he has never been appointed professor at the University of Sussex,” they said.  It is not known who included the information on the page or who deleted it.  Beck also introduced himself as a “professor” during his speech at a AfD party summit in Magdeburg last November.  Unauthorised use of an academic degree or an official title is a criminal offence in Germany according to paragraph 132a of the penal code.  The debate over Beck’s academic credentials was originally picked up by a post on the German legal blog verfassungsblog, in which the author Maximilian Steinbeis had pointed out that a factually incorrect ballot paper could potentially have an impact on the composition of the next European parliament and could therefore invite voters to legally contest the validity of the vote.  “In the strict sense of the law, the consequence would be that the European elections would be invalid throughout Germany and would have to be repeated,” Steinbeis wrote. “The EP [European parliament] and the entire EU would be paralysed for weeks or months.”  Recalling the ballot papers is not an option since they have already been printed, sent out and in some cases may have already been returned by voters.  As well as teaching law at British universities, Beck was a prolific commentator for British and German media on the debate over bailouts during the eurozone debt crisis, and more recently on the negotiations between Britain and the EU following the Brexit vote.  Before joining the AfD in spring 2014, Beck wrote two op-eds for the Guardian, arguing that the rescue fund for struggling eurozone countries violated EU law and would damage the German economy.  In an earlier statement Beck said: “I was and am opposed to the euro rescue policies of the German government which I believe to be unaffordable for the German population in the long run and to be socially divisive throughout the eurozone.”


theguardianuk--2019-05-21--Its cut-throat half of UK academics stressed and 40 thinking of leaving

‘It’s cut-throat’: half of UK academics stressed and 40% thinking of leaving

When Ed Harris, a management lecturer at a modern university, stopped sleeping and began having marriage problems, he realised he was no longer coping with the pressures of his job.  “Most of the time you handle it, but the anger and unhappiness build up,” says Harris (not his real name). “I was constantly stressed. There was a lot of micromanagement and setting of deadlines and I was always working late and checking emails at all hours.”  Harris says he went into an emotional “tailspin” after being turned down for a promotion he’d been encouraged to apply for – he was told his list of research publications wasn’t strong enough. He says that with a heavy teaching workload and many other administrative pressures, there simply hadn’t been time to do much of the research he loves.  “I felt whatever I put work into I would be blamed for what I wasn’t doing,” he says. “The system feels chaotic and you don’t understand how you’re being judged.”  Today, two new research reports on wellbeing in universities, from the charity Education Support Partnership, suggest Harris’s emotional struggle is commonplace.  One qualitative study found that academics are often isolated and anxious, in a system they feel is driven by financial targets and what one called a “treadmill of justification”.  A second survey, by the polling company YouGov for the charity, found that 55% of higher education professionals describe themselves as stressed, and nearly four in 10 had considered leaving the sector in the past two years as a result of health pressures.  One academic said: “I remember a time of camaraderie and collegiality. Now, the external pressures isolate and spotlight individuals.”  Another said: “One of the key skills in current times is working against isolation. If you can’t, then it can be a very lonely job.”  Dennis Guiney, educational psychologist and co-author of the research, explains: “Lack of collegiality was a big concern for the academics we spoke to. Rather than focusing solely on money, they felt university managers should be building this. Academics need to feel valued. Praise is important.”  His research found that academics felt under much more pressure to deliver within the competitive new market in higher education, and this meant a sense of loss of control over their job.  The report quotes one academic saying: “You have to do all you can to keep student numbers high. Otherwise, next year one of your colleagues might lose their job.”  Guiney was surprised to find that academics weren’t complaining about salaries or working conditions. “Instead they were talking about wellbeing being affected by a loss of autonomy. They minded that they weren’t treated as professionals who could input into developing their roles. Many felt that their time was accounted for on a spreadsheet: if you do this much teaching you can do this much research.”  Matthew Flinders, professor of politics at Sheffield University, says: “Academics are working longer and longer, and harder and harder, and they can’t reach that top bar because it keeps moving.”  Flinders, who suffers from depression, warns that academics are expected to excel at everything, which is neither realistic nor good for their mental health. “You must show excellence in teaching, in research, in research impact. We can’t all be excellent all the time. These pressures are causing some people to struggle or sink.”  Flinders worries, in particular, that universities aren’t preparing young people properly for working in higher education. He argues that early career researchers need to be taught resilience, because the level of failure and rejection can be brutal.  “Nine out of 10 of your journal papers will be rejected and the same will happen to your grant applications,” he says. “I say to students: you will get rejections and some will feel really horrible, but you must always know what your plan B is – and your plan C, D and E.”  Flinders recalls sidling up to a big-name academic at an event and whispering in his ear: “Does everything you write get published?”  “He told me he still got rejected,” Flinders says. “Hearing that was heaven. I could have cried. We academics aren’t good at sharing those experiences.”  Sally Le Page had planned to be an academic when she finished her PhD in biology at Oxford. She now makes science videos on YouTube, because she says the HE system isn’t good for young academics’ mental health.  Le Page started getting depression and anxiety while doing her PhD. “All of my friends in Oxford were PhD students and I struggle to think of a single one who hasn’t had depression or anxiety,” she says. “It is a bad cocktail of factors that lead to mental health problems.  “You are working independently a lot of the time, and it can be a lot of long hours in the lab on your own. Everything is so short term in terms of contracts, and you are under constant pressure to publish.”  Flinders thinks many academics feel unable to reach out for help. “Academia likes to be seen as soft and friendly but it is also incredibly cut-throat,” he says. “People want to get published, to win grants and get promoted. So admitting to weakness can feel like a real problem, especially if you aren’t on a permanent contract.”  Guiney’s research echoes this, with many academics saying they felt uncomfortable that, to get help, they had to get a referral from their manager to occupational health, with a report going back to the manager. Some feared that in the current climate this could go on their record and be used for negative purposes.  One academic said: “You are unsure who will get to know about it and if it will affect your job if people find out.”  Harris agrees: “I definitely didn’t think I could speak to anyone internally. You feel it won’t be viewed well if you aren’t coping. The university does offer help but I didn’t trust it to be confidential.”  In desperation he contacted a 24-hour helpline for academics and teachers run by the Education Support Partnership. He was initially sceptical – especially when they put him in touch with a therapist in Ontario, Canada – but quickly found that talking helped. “I was able to put things into perspective. The world wasn’t going to end because I didn’t get that promotion.”  He adds: “Now I can clearly see when people around me at work aren’t coping, and I have directed them towards getting help. I am less wrapped up in my own problems, so I remember to check others are OK.”  If you are working in education you can call the Education Support Partnership’s free and confidential helpline 24/7 on 08000 562 561


theguardianuk--2019-09-17--MIT scientist resigns over emails discussing academic linked to Epstein

The computer scientist Richard Stallman has resigned from MIT and the Free Software Foundation (FSF), which he founded and led, after leaked emails appeared to show him downplaying another academic’s alleged participation in the purported sex trafficking of minors by Jeffrey Epstein.  On his personal website, Stallman wrote: “I am resigning effective immediately from my position in [the Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, or CSail] at MIT. I am doing this due to pressure on MIT and me over a series of misunderstandings and mischaracterizations.”  The FSF announced Stallman’s resignation as president and from its board of directors.  MIT was already at the center of the Epstein storm, in the wake of revelations that its Media Lab accepted $7.5m in funding from the disgraced financier or a group of donors connected to him. Media lab director Joi Ito resigned.  Stallman’s emails came to light after an MIT graduate, Selam Jie Gano, published a Medium post calling for his removal.  According to the Medium post, Stallman wrote in response to a student’s message about an event protesting the acceptance of Epstein’s money. The emails, which were published by Vice were sent to a CSail mailing list.  Referring to Epstein accuser Virginia Giuffre, who alleged in court papers she was sent to have sex with the late MIT cognitive scientist Marvin Minsky, Stallman wrote: “We can imagine many scenarios, but the most plausible scenario is that she presented herself to him as entirely willing.  “Assuming she was being coerced by Epstein, he would have had every reason to tell her to conceal that from most of his associates.”  When a student on the email thread noted that Giuffre was allegedly forced into sex at 17, Stallman responded: “It is morally absurd to define ‘rape’ in a way that depends on minor details such as which country it was in or whether the victim was 18 years old or 17.”  Stallman added: “All I know [Giuffre] said about Minsky is that Epstein directed her to have sex with Minsky. That does not say whether Minsky knew that she was coerced.  “We know that Giuffre was being coerced into sex – by Epstein. She was being harmed. But the details do affect whether, and to what extent, Minsky was responsible for that.”  Stallman, 66, has contributed to the Guardian. On Monday he posted a statement to his website before his resignations were made public. Reports about his views on Epstein were “misleading”, he said.  “The coverage totally mischaracterised my statement. Headlines say that I defended Epstein. Nothing could be further from the truth.  “I’ve called him a ‘serial rapist’, and said he deserved to be imprisoned. But many people now believe I defended him – and other inaccurate claims – and feel a real hurt because of what they believe I said.  “I’m sorry for that hurt. I wish I could have prevented the misunderstanding.”  On Monday MIT Media Lab academic Neri Oxman apologised for “having received funds from Epstein, and deeply apologize to my students for their inadvertent involvement in this mess”.  In a statement to magazine Dezeen, Oxman said she had been told to keep the $125,000 2015 donation confidential, “so as not to enhance [Epstein’s] reputation by association with MIT”.  Harvard received $9m from Epstein prior to his 2008 guilty plea to state-level prostitution charges in Florida.  Epstein, a registered sex offender, killed himself in jail last month while awaiting federal sex trafficking charge.  Prosecutors alleged that some of his victims were as young as 14.