Slashdot Mirror
Romanian Science In Freefall
ananyo writes "In 2011, Romania took a step towards changing its cronyism-ridden research landscape by allocating government grants for science solely on the basis of performance. In 2012, a new government eliminated those rules, then slashed science funding — and since then things have gotten a whole lot worse. The entire National Research Council, Romania's main research-funding agency, has resigned in protest and 900 scientists signed a petition addressed to Prime Minister Victor Ponta, demanding that the research budget and quality control be restored. Ponta himself unfortunately has been accused of academic plagiarism so seems an unlikely figure to address corruption in the scientific establishment. The new science minister, Ecaterina Andronescu, is experienced — she's held the post twice before and is a rector at the Polytechnic University of Bucharest. But she's already reversed conflict of interest rules brought in by the previous government that were designed to end cronyism. And no wonder — they would have meant that she couldn't be science minister and run a university at the same time. Oh, she has also been accused of plagiarism."
So, it has come to this.
You're a temporary arrangement of matter sliding towards oblivion in a cold, uncaring universe
I can't say that I've ever read a paper published by Romanian researchers. China, yes. Pakistan, yes. Ireland, yes. Switzerland, yes. Romania? Never.
It sucks that they are not improving science, basic science is the best investment a country can make. But it's not like they're falling from a great height.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
They're still the world champion producer of hottest pornstars. Who the hell needs more pasty-faced geeks?
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
Wasn't there a game called Freefall? I'm not sure what science was involved in it...
This is a worldwide issue - when budgets get tight, science and research programs are always the first to go, despite the fact that it's been shown that increased funds to research and basic technology development benefits the economy much more than financial investments, and even more than education programs.
It's always confirmation bias!
Didn't we spend a lot of money on a space station to allow just that?
(Sorry, couldn't resist).
What they need is a national anthem that would inspire their people!
I don't think you need a presidential pardon for a stupid thing you did in college. Heck, Plagiarism is not even illegal, just wrong.
Are you telling me you did not do worse in college?
Not in Romania.
Politicians in Romania need the big mass of population uneducated. The voters must be many and easy to fool. The majority rules in a democracy and Romania now it's ruled by the low quality one and it's getting worst every 4-5 years at elections.
I don't understand why a science, high level professional would want to live there since it is getting worst every year since 1989.
Anyway, no surprise for me, i'm moving along.
It's really no different here in the US. It's rare to find a high level government scientist who doesn't have some arrangement with a university. At the very least, we all have our personal networks which help drive our citation counts.
This isn't a problem. Every time I've been on a funding review committee, people abstain from reviewing proposals which even look like a conflict of interest. My impression is that within US scientific culture, overt cronyism is not tolerated, while assistance in putting together the best plan and the best teams is seen as a good thing (subtle, but important distinction there).
I think we're much better off admitting that good scientists will have multiple roles in the community and we'll just try to make the best use of them we can.
This post is a bit off topic but uses this article to bring into light certain phenomenons that appear when fractured countries fall and crumble...bringing into question would they have done better keeping themselves as part of the whole (other country they left prior).
If the US currently said to any world government, join us as another one of our states, and allow us to manage you, although you keep certain laws and policies in place, thereby strengthening the fabric of government that might be fragile, they could then also help continue to mine that counrtie's (or new state's) resources whatever they might be. They would both profit as the new state would have less hardships with such polices that could just be adopting, and the US would become even stronger, but we are fracturing smaller and smaller, but to what end?
This fracturing to say you are "this label" or "that label" just to say you want to keep your culture alive is pure crap. I live in Quebec and deal with stupidity all the time concerning such issues and find any government that forces their people to the brink of bankruptcy just to say they are keeping their culture alive is wrong. The culture will remain alive no matter what country you live in as the Jews have clearly demonstrated up to today. Unfortunately they have bought into the fractured point of view by now bying their land back so to speak....
In the end, remove all borders and barriers, we are left with a language we speak and a heritage we choose to either accept and maintain or do away with. Neither is right or wrong, but atleast it is the people deciding for themselves, instead of the government deciding for them at the cost of tax payer dollars.
In this case we could see a reintegration into academic excellence and have a level of standards adopted from the US.
By the way, by no means do I think the US is the only country that could do this, as any country with a level of excellence could be considered as a viable source to "GROW" the united one world nation!.
I don't think you need a presidential pardon for a stupid thing you did in college.
Biden has plagiarized far more recently than that. During his 1988 presidential campaign, we was caught plagiarizing his speeches from Neil Kinnock. Biden has been in politics his entire adult life. He is sort of like a replicant in Blade Runner that has to steal other people's dreams and memories in order to look like a real person.
speaking as a romanian national [and still living here]: Summary is right on the dime. Basically the old minister was a young chemist-intellectual that had fled communism at age 18 by himself. He was/is forward thinking and had a lot of personal achievements in his field before coming into politics. His name was Daniel Funeriu. He made a lot of enemies in the system because he made changes that changed the educational/research system. And not changes that dont change anything like we like it here. What happend was that the guy's party lost the elections and the old neo-communists came back to power (under the name of socialists). And Caty Andronescu is *the* archtype of old communist aparatchik that has zero achievement in her actual field of work but huge "achievements" in her party. This means changing something visible that has absolutely no practical result whatsoever and we can all siphon public money undisturbed. Basically young-and-result-oriented vs old-communist-the-party-is-my-wholelife-peon.
in romania, science plagarizes you!
I completely agree with what the article states - romanian science is in free fall. But it is wrong about some facts.
In charge of Romanian education and research are two gentlemen - Mihnea Costoiu (Ministry of Research, close to Ecaterina Andronescu - and according to his resume he got his PhD in 6 months - CV and more info at http://www.hotnews.ro/stiri-esential-13845257-cine-este-mihnea-costoiu-propus-ministru-cercetarii.htm ) and Remus Pricopie (Ministry of Education, former rector at SNSPA, National School for Political and Administrative Science).
Before that, we had The Ministry of Education and Research as a single entity - and in the past 10 years we had over 12 different ministers in charge. Every one of them tried to radically change everything while actually changing nothing. Ecaterina Andorenscu was the longest lasting and did the most harm.
The only real change was through a law in 2011, passed by Daniel Funeriu - which got obliterated indeed during the short reign of Ecaterina Andronescu in 2012.
There are many things to tell - but the conclusion is this: we are in deep sh*t and sinking.
Does he write his own speeches or was this his speech writer plagiarizing?
You should read the Wiki article. He wasn't just plagiarizing the content of his speech, but even offhand remarks, and recollections of his own childhood. The guy needs to be subjected to the Voight-Kampff Machine to find out if he is even a real human.
Wow, still blaming Bush for everything. When will people grow up.
Damn, I think you might be right.
The question is can a sentient machine made in America be elected president?
It would be really easy to go for the cheap shot and say the euphemism most global climate change advocates are rooting for when speaking of "Deniers" is not "Heretic", but "Deluded". That said , I think there's an important place for deniers, they keep the scientific majority honest, pressure them to dot 'I's and cross 'T's. The problem has never been deniers, but corporate interests who use the denier's debate no matter it's validity, to justify continuing full steam ahead in crashing the environment in the name of quarterly profits.
Scholarly debate is essential to good science. Cherry picking conversations, data, and spending millions on promoting FUD, is bad social policy, economics and global resource management.
Just because the "scientific facts" bear out a round earth, evolution, relativity and anthropic global climate change, doesn't make these things either a religion, or a conspiracy. Consider instead that the huge, network of supporting research simply means that the probability of these things not being so, is now vanishingly small. Sorry if the truth isn't convenient. The good news is that there are solutions to current problems that open opportunities even for deniers, so we can all still walk away winners.
Sadly, human beings desperately want the world to fit their orthodoxies. The fallacy is that the world is bigger and more complex than any orthodoxy, and that trying to put the world in an ideological box, whether it be religious, geopolitical or sociological demands that people heavily filter reality to see only the part that fit's in their grand scheme of things.
The brave mind starts with nothing, and let's the world inform them. This demands rigor, patience and brutal honesty. You have to be willing to discover yourself completely mistaken, forced to go back to the drawing board as soon as the facts say as much. People love their world views more than the truth, and that is the down side of magical thinking.
Bringing GWB into this discussion makes exactly as much sense as bringing in Biden.
If you say so. But we've been circling the drain ever since President Buchanan let the South get out of hand.
The thing is that none of these "skeptics" ever find errors or present relevant data. They just say "nuh uh, 98% of climate scientists are all wrong because Rush Limbaugh said so".
Truth is, hardly any self-proclaimed AGW 'sceptic' is actually a sceptic. Most of them are True Believers, repeating oft-debunked nonsense in hope of making it stick.
That must be why anyone expressing skepticism towards global warming/climate change is labelled a "denier. Might as well be truthful and call them "heretic".".
I know I shouldn't feed the climate trolls, but here are some obvious facts
All climate scientists are skeptics.
Not all skeptics are climate scientists.
There are many politically powerful pseudo-skeptics in the field (AKA deniers) who deliberately misinform via various front groups and no-think tanks.
The only way to find the "truth" in all this is to stop talking in hyperbole and start studying the science of climate. Personally I've had an interest in the subject for almost 30yrs, very interesting stuff. It's based on the "hard sciences" and is an excellent example of how "the big picture" of Science has practically rewritten our understanding of our planet in my own lifetime. I was literally born before the term Earth sciences was coined.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
You shouldn't have to present your own data, you should be able to argue the merits of the published data, right?
Not when it is all that you do. The Denier methodology is the same as Creationists or Tobacco industry lawyers. False dillemmas, character assasinations, and out and out lies. In your system, complete ignorance is the equivalent of complete competence. The schizophrenic homless guy living under the bridge gets equal time with Einstein
And he has no place arguing the merits of the research. If you want to declare a researchers work false, you have to understand what you are judging. And one of the best ways to argue the merits of science is to present your own data.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Capitalism's just continuing to do what it does best: exploiting the hard work of others.
The Romanian education system - and, indeed, the entire (legacy of the) Soviet/satellite education system - was heavily biased toward excellence in mathematics and engineering. So much so that a Western school mathematics course looks remedial.
Having beneftted from this, philosophically empty and socially incompetent graduates are seduced by dreams of power and money in the West. The exploitation continues, nothing improves, but a few clever people get rich.