you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (8 children)

Have you ever been to a niche scientific community conference? It's always been 90% politics.

The Magellanic Cloud community collectively decided that they didn't want to study objects named after someone who had subjugated the ancestors of the communities studying it, so they agreed to call them the Milky Clouds. A pop science article went out about it and people complained that it wasn't science, it was politics. But unless you're a part of that community, you don't get to decide on the names of the objects that these people understand better than literally anyone else alive or dead. They're doing more science regarding these objects than anyone else has ever tried, they get to decide what's best, even if it appears political.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    And that's how you end up with Gulf of America

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

    I see it as the exact opposite. If we let the professionals like cartographers and historians hold the reigns rather than people who don't have anything to do with it, eg. some pedophile politicians, nothing would have been changed.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Wtf are you going on about? I'm talking about changing the name of a plant because it's discoverer was a racist. Nothing about politicians or pedophiles. Ffs, some of you have brain rot as bad as the MAGA. I'm literally saying that history should remain accurate and not try to whitewash away the negatives.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments