The recent annual conference of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), held from February 12-14 in Phoenix, has raised significant eyebrows. Critics point to a heavy dose of progressive messaging, political critiques, and a focus on “woke” ideals that seemed to overshadow scientific discourse. Attendees were met with registration stickers featuring various gender pronouns, a move some argue diverts from discussions rooted in science and biology.
Dr. Sudip Parikh, CEO of AAAS, opened the conference by discussing the challenges faced by scientists in recent times. He characterized the past year as “hard” and “tough,” attributing damage to scientific agencies to budget cuts and a lack of support. “Too much damage has been done, too much has changed,” Parikh stated, highlighting a sense of dismay within the scientific community. He suggested that the current climate has left a “scar” on a generation of scientists—a scar that may contribute to resilience but also signals a troubling trend in the field.
The conference featured a series of workshops that emphasized diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) themes, including sessions like “Mao-Mei Liu: Nurturing Diversity in Science is Resistance.” One attendee remarked on the tone of the event, saying it felt more like a “funeral” than a celebration of scientific achievements, a stark contrast to previous conferences. The shift in focus to political themes, they felt, detracted from the spirit of scientific inquiry.
Dr. Theresa A. Maldonado, a prominent figure in electrical engineering, used her platform to reflect on what she termed a “difficult year for science,” suggesting climate change as a factor behind the devastating wildfires in Southern California. Her comments were echoed by other speakers who leveraged their time at the conference to discuss contemporary social issues rather than the scientific accomplishments traditionally celebrated at such events.
Among the workshops was a session on the historical impact of colonialism on climate crises, with “climate justice scholar” Jola Ajibade suggesting that climate solutions often favor wealthy individuals while neglecting low-income communities. This kind of rhetoric indicates a growing trend within scientific circles to blend scientific discussion with social justice narratives, a shift that many attendees found disconcerting.
A distinctive aspect of the conference was the presence of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, which drew attention due to its governmental ties and previous controversies involving collaboration linked to U.S. research funding. This decision to host an organization associated with the Chinese government raised questions about the AAAS’s commitment to national integrity amid rising concerns about Chinese influence in American institutions.
Critics, including Johnathan Butcher from the Heritage Foundation, expressed concern about the implications of promoting racial and ethnic considerations within scientific discourse. “These are the very same kind of racist ideas inspired by DEI that have been prohibited in universities,” he stated. This perspective underscores a growing tension between promoting diversity and maintaining a merit-based approach in scientific endeavors.
The AAAS defended its agenda, claiming broad representation of scientific disciplines and asserting that sessions reflect the proposals of attending scientists. However, the sentiment among several attendees suggests a rift between traditional scientific values and the burgeoning trend of political activism within the scientific community. With dwindling attendance compared to pre-COVID years, it remains to be seen how the AAAS will navigate these treacherous waters in future gatherings.
This conference may signal a pivotal moment for the organization, raising critical questions about the future of science in America and whether it will prioritize objective inquiry or succumb to the pressures of political correctness and ideology.
"*" indicates required fields
