And there's the lamentation and the grinding of teeth again. Our national media have not dealt with the subject, commenting at this time on the closer heart of election fighting, but in the US, prominent researchers woe that Trump's actions will not consequence in discipline being the same as it has been so far. What caused them to be horrified and terrified?
Well, the fact that the time of unconditionalness is now passing Faith in Science and in force Scientific consensus, or concepts that have nothing to do with science, or even conflict with it. You can either have discipline or faith. You can have discipline or consensus. You can't have them together. So possibly we should not be overly afraid about what happened unless we like religion and a compatible chorus of its priests to study.
The origin of the confusion is fresh (23 May 2025) president Trump's executive regulation entitled Restoring the Golden Standard of Science. You can read all of this at the following link:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/05/restoring-gold-standard-science/
The introduction to the regulation indicated that the national government had previously been guilty of corrupting discipline or utilizing it for political purposes. respective cases of government decision-making were mentioned. There have besides been cases of violations of the rules and bad learning as a consequence of actions by the national government and custom-made researchers of sponsors and politicians in order to accomplish the desired effect.
The regulation then rather reasonably states that, in order to be financed by the government or to become a reliable basis for decisions issued by government agencies, investigation should meet the fundamental requirements for the pursuit of discipline set out in the regulation. Here is the key passage:
For the purposes of this Regulation, the Golden technological Standard shall mean discipline which is:
( i ) repeated;
(ii) transparent;
(iii) communicating errors and uncertainty;
(iv) cooperating and interdisciplinary;
(v) skeptical of its findings and assumptions;
(vi) structured to let falseness of hypotheses;
(vii) subject to an impartial expert review;
(viii) accepting negative results as a test result; and
(ix) without conflicts of interest.
At first, I was going to make these points, but after a short thought, I considered them obvious. In an effort to explain, I could obscure, for example, the conflict of interests of researchers financed by pharmaceutical companies. It is apparent that they will not find any harmful effects of the investigational drug seeking authorisation.
Having been in contact with discipline and technological investigation for more than half a century, I consider the above requirements as unmistakable. Something that doesn't meet these conditions is not science. Any even insignificant deviation from the rules shall at least consequence in a deterioration in the quality of the tests or their presentation.
Years ago, violations of rules occurred little frequently, at least in Poland you could have the luxury of technological work without looking at sponsors. Currently, the force of the grant backing strategy for discipline inevitably increases the number of specified cases. In order to get funding, you gotta conform to the pattern, that is to say, choose the right subject, make custom, sometimes bend the rules, suck up, and that's it.
There are delicate areas and topics where, in obtaining results contrary to the authoritative narrative, researchers must be rather skimming to hide them well in the fresh York City and the thicket of data. Otherwise, the work will not be published, the task will not be settled, and the chances of further grants will be lost.
As it happens in Poland and in the surrounding area, I described it earlier.
Studying the checkbook
I late described the panic reaction of technological institutions, it would seem that serious, to the message of 1 of the professors who dares to question the authoritative climate narrative. As the main reason for the presented servillism and the lies of scholars, I have given the current strategy of backing research.
In consequence to the executive regulation, a large group of American scholars woe that discipline is besieged and the latest regulation gives the government a tool for attacking technological independence.
Guardian print the alarming text of six scholars, according to which, for example, the request for re-examination, this time carried out in accordance with the principles of the discipline of safety and efficacy of vaccines, is unscientific and unethical. There are besides non-scientific attempts to verify another "fixed results" of science, for example in the field of climate, CO2 impacts and so on.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/may/29/trump-American-science
Published in The Guardian the text entitled ‘New Golden Standard Trump will destruct the American discipline we know” He operates in a colorful language, speaking to the imagination. For example, it contains specified a flower:
The consequences of discipline imposed by the state can be disastrous. erstwhile Trofim Lysenko, a investigator who denied the reality of genetic inheritance and natural selection, gained the favour of Joseph Stalin and took control of agriculture in the russian Union, thousands of scientists who disagreed with him were released, imprisoned or killed. His catastrophic agricultural prescriptions yet led to famine, which killed millions of people in the USSR and China.
It's not over due to the fact that 1 of the authors collects signatures under an open letter, in which he writes:
https://actionnetwork.org/competitions/open-letter-in-support-of-science
The communicative illustrates, in a clear manner of doubt, the danger of state-imposed “scientific truths”. Anti-scientific interpretations of Lysenko genetics in the russian Union led to hunger that killed millions of people. The state-sponsored programs in Nazi Germany based on “science” eugenics led to the genocide of millions of Jews, people with disabilities and people identified as LGBTQ+ who were considered to have “life unworthy of life”.
So president Trump is Stalin and Hitler at the same time. It's something that Putin couldn't do. All this Trump became for recalling the request of reliability and transparency of technological research, the request to guarantee their verification and open debate on results. This, according to protestors, poses a large threat to discipline as 1 that will never be the same again.
Of course, for many years earlier, no of them had bothered to make results on order of sponsors, to keep the data secret for 75 years by Pfizer, the request for tiny conclusions of investigation on religion and slavery to them. The censorship and gag of sceptics did not interfere at all.
It is clear that these excellent scholars compose about themselves in quoted passages. The old rule of propaganda works here:
Blame your opponent for what you do.
It is not visible where and how the government imposes technological truths and content under the current regulation, due to the fact that it is all about controlling compliance with the rules of conduct, not choosing the subject substance or telling the correct results of research. Principles gold standard establish a general framework for the conduct of research. They're like traffic regulations laying down rules of appropriate movement that don't control where we go.
So far we've been dealing with custom-made. Science climate, pandemic, vaccines, cholesterol, etc. with which there was no discussion. Let us realize and remember this rule of propaganda, for it is applied highly often. I'll repeat it again:
Blame your opponent for what you do.
And the title of context, 1 of the authors Michael E. Mann quotes in the text in The Guardian his earlier six months press release, in which he had already warned that Science is under siege.
In this text, Michael E. Mann together with the large lawyer inoculating everyone on everything Peter J. Hotezem warns against threats to humanity: A triple threat to humanity: climate change, pandemics and anti-science. Fear, all of you, unless you give us power over your lives.
The celebrated hockey stick illustration by Mann, Bradley and Hughes (1999)
Michael Mann is known for his infamous hockey stick chart, which is the Earth's temperature illustration as a function of time, which has allegedly started to grow abruptly in fresh years. There is no discipline in this chart, but, which has been repeatedly pointed out by many researchers, it is simply a product of a reasonably free choice of data so that it fits the preset thesis. However, the author after a 4th of a century without being embarrassed republished his chart, which now becomes a symbol of persecuted and threatened actual science. The earth is on fire. Fear, all of you.
By decently torturing the data, you can make them confess to everything.
The second author, a long-standing beneficiary of multimillion-dollar vaccine grants, is known mainly for not changing his position even erstwhile his own daughter was seemingly severely damaged by vaccination. He went into denial, publishing a book Vaccines Did Not origin Rachel’s Autism. Cheers.
Soon Progressive The media in Poland will come to their senses after another defeat of Trzaskowski and will again present the misery of America groaning under Trump's yoke. Then we should know what they're talking about and not be fooled.
I can bet all deposits of rare-earth elements of Ukraine that media outlets of Poland and the EU will quote for The Guardian and a letter of open opinions on the discipline of the United States and they will tell us how this primitive nonuk Donald Trump decided to destruct discipline by subjecting it to executive authority. But we should know better.
Thank you for reading Substack Jack! Subscribe for free to receive fresh posts and support my work.
Let's get that gold standard back on track.
