Teardrops at the National Science Foundation – Watts Up With That?

Guest “DOGE, baby, DOGE!” by David Middleton,

I receive daily emails from the American Association of Science of America (News From Science), listing some of their latest headlines. I subject myself to this torture because it’s a great source of material for me to mock and ridicule in WUWT posts. This morning’s News From Science was a treasure trove of ridicule-worthy material.

1. Male chimps ask for sex in different ‘dialects’
2. Earth’s inner core might harbor volcanoes and landslides
3. Spacecraft probing cosmic evolution spies an ‘Einstein ring’
4. Alzheimer’s scientist resigns after university finds ‘data integrity concerns’ in papers
5. How a cancer researcher lost a gender-related grant to Trump’s executive orders
6. ‘My boss was crying.’ NSF confronts potentially massive layoffs and budget cuts
7. NIH slashes overhead payments for research, sparking outrage and lawsuit
8. Congress could soon erase Biden rules on archaeology, climate, and the environment
9. ‘Madness’: Trump freeze on global HIV prevention efforts sparks disbelief, anger
10. New journal co-founded by NIH nominee raises eyebrows, misinformation fears

Since I am too cheap to actually subscribe, I can only get access to a few articles per month. So I zeroed in on headlines 5 and 6, because 5 seemed to really justify 6.

Science Insider: Science and Policy

‘My boss was crying.’ NSF confronts potentially massive layoffs and budget cuts

Trump could propose slashing agency’s budget by two-thirds
7 Feb 2025

Two major political bombshells hit the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) this week. The first was an official communication from the White House Office of Personnel Management (OPM): Prepare for the possible layoff of half of your 1600-member staff as soon as this spring. The second, still a rumor, is equally shocking: President Donald Trump may ask Congress to cut your $9 billion budget by two-thirds.

The potential double whammy came as NSF has suspended business as usual to find out whether any research it is already funding clashes with a series of executive orders issued by Trump, including one to stop efforts to increase workforce diversity. And it has sparked anxious discussion of what such massive cuts would mean for the second-leading government funder of U.S. academic research behind the National Institutes of Health.

[…]

“My boss was crying when she told us,” says one NSF employee who requested anonymity for fear of reprisal. “This is not something NSF wants to be doing,” the employee says. “But they weren’t given a choice.”

[…]

The White House is floating a $3 billion number for NSF, sources tell Science. By comparison, the agency’s current budget is $9.1 billion, and former President Joe Biden’s 2025 request, submitted in March 2024, was for $10.2 billion.

[…]

Such cuts would likely force NSF to eliminate large portions of its broad portfolio, which ranges from operating one-of-a-kind telescopes at the South Pole to supporting elementary school science and math education. And it would almost certainly reduce a researcher’s chance of winning an NSF grant—currently one in four—to the point that researchers might look elsewhere for support.

“I mean, if the success rate drops to 10%, why bother even applying?” says one higher education lobbyist. “Researchers may decide to leave the United States if they can’t get funding here.”

[…]

Science!

Having worked in the private sector since 1981 and having paid a buttload of income tax over the past 44 years, I don’t have a lot of sympathy for these people because…

That said, this quote probably irked me the most:

“I mean, if the success rate drops to 10%, why bother even applying?” says one higher education lobbyist.

WTF is a “higher education lobbyist?” And who pays his or her salary? Taxpayers? If it’s already so easy to win a National Science Foundation grant, that 25% of applicants win awards, it’s way too easy for these people to win a taxpayer-funded lottery. Dropping the success rate to 10% seems like a good start. It would force more competition for funding. It might actually lead to research projects that deliver tangible results, like we have to deliver in the private sector. And, hopefully, it would weed out useless crap like this:

Science Insider: Science and Policy

How a cancer researcher lost a gender-related grant to Trump’s executive orders

“Unethical, unlawful, inhumane”: NIH-backed scientist decries termination of study collecting data on sexual orientation and gender identity of cancer patients
7 Feb 2025

Late last week, George Washington University (GWU) cancer researcher Mandi Pratt-Chapman received a shocking phone call. Because of an executive order by President Donald Trump that has widely disrupted research related to gender or diversity being done by federal workers or U.S.-funded scientists, she and her colleagues had been ordered to immediately stop work on a large-scale cancer study funded by the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH). The project, which explores the best ways to collect information on sexual orientation and gender identity of cancer patients, was already one-third of the way through data collection.

[…]

Science Advisor

Yes, I know that the NIH is not the NSF. However, they are both funded by taxpayers and they both spend our money on frivolous projects.

I have lost family members to cancer. My wife survived a brain tumor 20 years ago and is currently battling lymphoma. I am a huge supporter of cancer research… Provided the research is targeted at treating, if not curing cancer. According to her LinkedIn profile Mandi Pratt-Chapman has a BA, MA and PhD in English and a PhD in… wait for it… “Translational Health Sciences”… WTF?

Every dollar spent on crap like this, is a dollar not spent on trying to cure or even treat cancer…

More than ever before, today’s health care leaders are faced with complex challenges to translating evidence to practice that require navigating geographical, organizational, economic, cultural, and professional barriers. These challenges are formidable and multifaceted, so the solutions must be robust, comprehensive, and draw on cross-disciplinary knowledge representative of multiple and novel perspectives.  Effective leaders who can close the gap between evidence generation and implementation are needed in every aspect of the healthcare arena, including research laboratories, clinics, community settings, classrooms, boardrooms, and both government and non-government organizations.

Conducting research in our challenging health care environment requires a basis in translational research, a cross cutting approach that connects basic biomedical discovery to global population health impact.

The PhD in Translational Health Sciences program draws on Implementation Science, which investigates the processes and strategies influencing the distribution of evidence-based health care from the clinical research stage into effective treatment options.

Are you a mentor seeking to educate the next generation of health care professionals? Are you a change agent seeking to make meaningful contributions to widespread implementation of evidence-based care for complex health issues? 

GW School of Medicine & Health Sciences

Mrs. Middleton gets irate every time a medical form asks about her “sexual orientation” and she goes postal when they ask about her gender, particularly if there are more than two choices. The fact that the money I earned and the government confiscated is being spent on a project “which explores the best ways to collect information on sexual orientation and gender identity of cancer patients” makes me want to go dump a cargo of tea into the harbor!

It is high time to DOGE the NSF!

27% Of National Science Foundation Grants Went To DEI Projects, Study Finds

‘Congress must end the politicization of NSF funding and restore integrity to scientific research,’ Sen. Ted Cruz says

By  Luke Rosiak

Feb 10, 2025

The National Science Foundation spent more than $2 billion funding “science” projects that were often more about activism and critical race theory than science, the Senate Commerce Committee found.

The committee found that one in 10 grants awarded between January 2021 and April 2024 had to do with oppression, social or environmental justice, gender, or race. The figure was dramatically higher in grants issued more recently, as what counted as “science” transformed dramatically under the Biden administration.

“While only 0.29% of all grants with start-dates in 2021 centered on DEI initiatives, by 2024, more than a quarter (27%) of new grants pushed far-left perspectives,” the Commerce Committee said in a report released Monday.

[…]

Cruz said that wasn’t the only way DEI activism masquerading as research was harming real scientists, saying it also reduced the public’s confidence in the field as a whole. 

[…]

Some papers from left-wing academics have said that the scientific method, the written word, and hard work are all racist, making it all the more surprising that mainstream scientists have failed to condemn it.

[…]

In 2022, NSF gave a $4.4 million grant to Columbia University to “decolonize geoscience.” Another million dollars went to a project that says that physics is racist. 

[…]

The Daily Wire

As a geologist I just had to explore the project to “decolonize geoscience.”

THE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK

08/30/2022 – 10/31/2027 $4,421,998

Implementation grant: implementing novel solutions for promoting cultural change in geoscience research and education (inspire) -implementing novel solutions for promoting cultural change in geoscience research & education (inspire) program delivers a multi-faceted solution for transforming culture, shifting power, and authentically engaging underserved communities within the transdisciplinary earth and environmental sciences. Inspire will mentor, train, and develop early-career researchers and professionals historically underrepresented in the geosciences. By strengthening relationships between research institutions and minority serving institutions (msis), inspire will decolonize geoscience, prioritize engagement of communities through co-design of research programs, and promote the equitable sharing of geoscientific knowledge broadly across our nation. Inspire will foster a just, equitable , and inclusive geoscience research community that reflects the diversity of the nation and is rooted in multi-directional listening and knowledge transfer. Inspire will focus on two cohort populations of future geoscience leaders at the transition points where they are often lost: 1) prior to graduate school; and, 2) prior to tenure. Bridge scholars (post-baccalaureates) will be supported and trained through a climate-focused bridge-to-phd program that will include enrolling in graduate-level classes, participating in research, and launching an evidence-based self-affirmation component, the armor project. Visiting fellows (early career faculty/researchers at msis) will gain skills and experience for developing community-focused geoscience research through their home institutions with collaborative support from – and partnerships with – columbia university scientists. Reciprocal visits from columbia hosts/mentors to the visiting fellow home institutions will be an integral part of their collaboration and will strengthen institutional partnerships. Participants from both cohorts will engage with communities in new york city to gain experience with community-focused co-design of geoscience research. The columbia geoscience community, including its alumni, will participate in coordinated action of mentoring and support, and will offer networking opportunities to members of both cohorts. A council of cultural advisors of scientists and scholars from msis and bipoc leaders in stem will provide guidance and feedback on program directions through communications and biannual meetings. Together with their mentors, host and collaborators, inspire?s 14 visiting fellows and 16 bridge scholars will become agents of change who will propagate aspects of this novel research and education ecosystem into multiple institutions. Inspire will deliver novel solutions for systemic change and cultural transformation long overdue in the geosciences. It will support and sustain diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (deia)-centered programs, and will create resources and opportunities for new programs to flourish. The envisioned cultural transformation will increase the creativity, equity, relevance, and impact of geoscience. This award reflects nsf’s statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the foundation’s intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.

The Daily Wire

I now need a shot of vodka and a BC Powder. While, there’s room to debate how much taxpayer money should be spent on complying with meaningful regulations, protecting the environment and tangibly useful scientific research, we shouldn’t be spending a penny on DEI and other social engineering efforts!

“For far too long, the United States has minted pennies which literally cost us more than 2 cents,” Trump wrote on Truth Social on Sunday. “This is so wasteful! I have instructed my Secretary of the US Treasury to stop producing new pennies.”

Fox News

It’s time to DOGE, DOGE with “extreme prejudice”!

Related