Dear all (and definitely to those in the USA), As a follow-up from my previous mentions of support from France, I would like to communicate to you all the new initiative launched by the French National Center for Scientific Research (CNRS), which is the main national employer of researchers in France. Following the “Make the Planet Great Again” initiative launched in 2017 when the USA pulled out of the Paris Climate Accord where positions were opened for foreign research to work on the battle again global warming, the CNRS has now launched the #ChooseCNRS program to support foreign researchers of *all disciplines* in coming to France for stays of several years. Positions span post-doc to “renowned researcher” level, with financial conditions and details varying between levels. More information can be found at : https://carrieres.cnrs.fr/actualites/international-researchers-jointhecnrs/ Similar systems may be in the process of being put into place in other European countries, or by the EU directly. Best regards, -Brian -- Brian FG Katz, Research Director, CNRS Groupe Lutheries - Acoustique – Musique Sorbonne Université, CNRS, UMR 7190, Institut Jean Le Rond ∂'Alembert De : AUDITORY - Research in Auditory Perception <AUDITORY@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> De la part de Brian FG Katz Hello Terry, I am not going to continue this back and forth without objective or further generalisations. We have shown solidarity as individuals and as a community, many of our countries have made bold statements and are showing support (see for example this French senator’s speech https://youtu.be/wmDVrV7QRrU and this call by the French Minister for Higher Education and Research to welcome US researchers in France, written up in Le Monde: https://www.lemonde.fr/en/united-states/article/2025/03/09/french-research-groups-urged-to-welcome-scientists-fleeing-us_6738976_133.html). While we are not ignoring the US situation, we are also not the community who elected them into power and have a true voice in affecting the situation. The anti-science movement is a strongly US issue (with its creep into other countries being more or less constrained by a general respect for knowledge), and much like funding, is founded on where the local society decides to put its money and resources. Like your cited Dr. Ardem Patapoutian, my career also spans various countries and I am surely the better for it. What would interest me here actually (and maybe others) who are outside the US, is to know how the current actions are actually affecting “our” research fields in the US. I know of colleagues who have lost whole NEA grant calls, affecting historical acoustic research projects, as Arts and Humanities are easy targets. Are there major cuts to research at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center and the U.S. Army Institute of Public Health directly affecting you or colleagues, and if so how are they presented? Thematic (DEI) or brute cost cutting (DOGE)? Do you see going abroad as a solution for researchers being impacted? Another 2-cents… -- Brian FG Katz, Research Director, CNRS Groupe Lutheries - Acoustique – Musique Sorbonne Université, CNRS, UMR 7190, Institut Jean Le Rond ∂'Alembert http://www.dalembert.upmc.fr/home/katz De : AUDITORY - Research in Auditory Perception <AUDITORY@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> De la part de T. T. Perry Hi Brian, Thank you for addressing my question so directly. I ask questions when I don't know the answer, and now I have a clearer understanding of what motivates beliefs about Auditory List and why some object to discussion of anti-science attacks by politicians and ideological movements, like anti-vaxxers. To summarize my understanding from reading your emails, it seems that some view such discussion as irrelevant to auditory science due to differences in geography, power, and/or interest among List subscribers. I am left contemplating the way these same differences are ignored when it comes to other topics on the List, but at least the reasons have been enumerated. I personally do not agree with foreclosing the possibility of transnational solidarity among scientists in advance, and in fact because American scientists largely ignored what was happening in Hungary, American scientists now find themselves facing a similar fight at home, unprepared. I'd also like to acknowledge that the threat and scope of the anti-science movement is qualitatively different from debates about relative funding level differences between labs in France, and makes for a poor point of comparison. I have no more questions to ask, as the picture is now clear to me as to why things are the way they are and how we got here. I will instead leave the list with two bits of reading. One is a CNN editorial by Nobel Laureate Dr. Ardem Patapoutian, who points out that his scientific career crosses nation-state boundaries, complicating simple narratives about what's "local" and what's "global" (and highlighting how borders can be weaponized against science, something that will always be invisible in a balkanized framework of scientific collaboration). He says, " These actions against science are indiscriminate and risk doing real, long-lasting harm," and " Now is the time for all of us to speak up" https://www.cnn.com/2025/04/09/health/nobel-laureate-research-funding-patapoutian/index.html I also want to share the advice of Christina Pagel, professor of operational research: "Those of us in the rest of the world also face choices, and history will judge us too on what we decide. First, we must support our US colleagues and their institutions." https://www.bmj.com/content/387/bmj.q2654 Clearly not everyone in academia shares the same narrow vision of what constitutes mutual interest and solidarity between scientists. Sincerely, Perry they/them On Fri, Apr 11, 2025 at 9:22 PM Brian FG Katz <brian.katz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
|