Image 01 Image 03

Brown University President Looking for Ways to Cut Ties With ‘Science Disinformation’ Spreaders

Brown University President Looking for Ways to Cut Ties With ‘Science Disinformation’ Spreaders

“the University will not conduct business with individuals and organizations that directly support the creation and dissemination of science disinformation.”

This is essentially about climate change. The left is proclaiming that you can no longer disagree with them and if you do, you’re denying science.

The College Fix reports:

Brown University president wants to cut ties with ‘science disinformation’ spreaders

The president of Brown University announced recently that she is looking into how to end relationships with “individuals and organizations that promote science disinformation.”

President Christina Paxson (picturedannounced on April 23 the review of gift and grant policies and “business ethics practices.” She has established two new committees to review the university’s practices as they relate to working with people and groups that potentially spread “science disinformation.”

She stated that “science disinformation is contrary to our mission of advancing knowledge and understanding” and as a result “the University will not conduct business with individuals and organizations that directly support the creation and dissemination of science disinformation.”

She defined this “as knowingly spreading false information with the intent to deceive or mislead.”

Paxson had previously “gave a tentative response” to the recommendations of the Advisory Committee on University Resources Management, according to the Brown Daily Herald.

The College Fix contacted President Paxson’s office twice in the past two weeks, and asked the names of specific companies that are problematic and comment on the proposals.

Scholars at Brown for Climate Action thanks president for taking action

The recommendations came from the Scholars at Brown for Climate Action group, which, along with the Advisory Committee on University Resources Management, has created proposals since at least November 2021.

“We applaud the President for her leadership and support her efforts to rein in the influence of disinformation at Brown!” SBCA stated on Friday in a news release.

ACURM previously recommended that Brown modify its Gift and Funding policy, based on proposals brought forward by the academic group.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


As we all know, the science is whatever the political winds of the moment call for.

    Dimsdale in reply to irv. | April 28, 2022 at 11:19 pm

    According to her Brown bio, “Christina Hull Paxson is an American economist and public health expert serving as the 19th president of Brown University. Previously, she was the Hughes Rogers Professor of Economics & Public Affairs at Princeton University as well as the dean of Princeton School of Public and International Affairs.”

    She isn’t a scientist, so what would she know about “science disinformation?”

    Why, she isn’t even qualified to tell a man from woman!!

The Gentle Grizzly | April 27, 2022 at 10:56 am

The science I want clarification on: power outlets have two prongs. The power comes from one and is returned through the other. Soul. If the electricity comes from the power company and then goes right back to the power company, why do I have to pay for it?

/For the humor-impaired, it’s intended as a joke.

    I hope you are feeling better. At least your spirits are up. Unless you’re in a loop and they go back to whereever they came from.

    Albigensian in reply to The Gentle Grizzly. | April 27, 2022 at 10:09 pm

    Umm, really, it doesn’t just come out one prong and go back into the other one: it’s AC, so it just sorta sloshes back and forth between those prongs. So long as the utility “pumps” it, of course.

    If you want “free” you should try “net metering.” That’s when the utility has to buy whatever power you wish to sell, whenever you wish to sell it. And it, must pay full retail for it whether it wants or needs it or not. Yet it can never demand power from you even if you have some but wish to use it rather than sell it.

    On the other side of the equation, you can demand power from the utility whenever you want it and the utility must supply it, but you are never obligated to buy it.

    Net Metering is almost a perpetual-motion machine: what could go wrong?

      randian in reply to Albigensian. | April 28, 2022 at 12:29 am

      The left has an insane obsession with “local”, to the point of advocating for “urban farms” and single-house power generation. The fact that such things are extremely expensive for what they produce, worse for the environment than centralized farming and power generation, and are on the wrong side of physics (efficiency of power generation significantly improves with scale) doesn’t seem to enter their minds.

    henrybowman in reply to The Gentle Grizzly. | April 27, 2022 at 11:24 pm

    Power is like the pizza delivery driver. He comes from the pizza shop and goes right back to the pizza shop, but you have to pay for the trip.

Trust the science:

1. Take a medical book from one hundred years ago and compare it with one today. Note the changes. Quite a bit different, right?

2. In one hundred years take a medical book from today and compare with knowledge at that time. See! Nothing changed! Settled science.

    henrybowman in reply to Peabody. | April 27, 2022 at 11:36 pm

    Most of the debunked science came from the government in the first place.
    The Food Pyramid.
    Salt causes high blood pressure.
    Pot is dangerous and causes manic criminal behavior.
    Any level of cancer-causing material in anything is unacceptably dangerous.
    DDT and PCBs have a negative cost/benefit ratio.
    I’m not even going to belabor today’s toxic phony gender bullshit.

      Milhouse in reply to henrybowman. | April 28, 2022 at 10:55 am

      As I understand it, salt does cause high blood pressure, in some people. Government propaganda convinced most people that it does that in everyone. Which is like saying that peanuts cause anaphylactic shock in everyone.

    MajorWood in reply to Peabody. | April 28, 2022 at 12:06 am

    All principals of infectious disease that were known before 2020 are invalid. The cold and flu season is now year round.

    Dimsdale in reply to Peabody. | April 28, 2022 at 11:22 pm

    “Call for Mr. Galileo! Mr. Galileo di Vincenzo Bonaiuti de’ Galilei! Your services are needed!”

JackinSilverSpring | April 27, 2022 at 11:27 am

The disinformation on climate science is only from “scientists” advocating for fossil fuel elimination because of “climate change.” The catch here is that the climate is always changing, so they can never be wrong. That though is not science. It is a tautology pretending to be science.

Antifundamentalist | April 27, 2022 at 11:51 am

Asking questions. Questioning previous studies. Challenging conclusions of studies….that’s all legitimate science. The only thing that is “science disinformation” is deciding that anything at all is “settled science.” because then you are a propagandist, not a scientist.

Dolce Far Niente | April 27, 2022 at 1:13 pm

“…the creation and dissemination of science disinformation.”

“Science disinformation” is Marxist code for any old thing which runs counter to the ruling class preferred progressive narrative of the moment, whether it has to do with ivermectin, climate data or the immutability of sex.

We have always been at war with Eastasia.

You are smack dab in the middle and a huge part more right than wrong.

Browm would certainly have to cancel EO Wilson, who is probably the best biologist of the 20th century, for his politically incorrect (but later proven scientifically correct) explanations of sociobiology. A bunch of self-proclaimed Marxists, including colleagues in the Harvard biology department, soaked him with water before his speech at a panel discussion. They made idiotic childish accusations like:
“Wilson, Wilson, you can’t hide.
We charge you with genocide.”
(Yes, I was there, and yes, the protesters said they were Marxists.)

Brown would also have to cancel Richard Herrnstein, one of the best psychologists of the 20th century. In the early 1970s, Marxist students repeatedly disrupted his lectures with catchy juvenile chants. (Yes, I was there, but I don’t remember the specific chants. Generally “racist” nonsense accusations.)

Brown would also have to cancel all the scientists who refused, due to lack of evidence, to eliminate a lab accident as a possible cause of the coronavirus pandemic. Any mention of such a possibility was labeled “disinformation,” and was quickly eliminated from social media. Also, Brown would likely have to fire anyone who signed the Great Barrington Declaration.