5 women from different continents talk about their path in science

[SciCom]

As of 2020, women represent less than 30% of researchers worldwide, with well-documented bias built-in to a STEM career, top positions often beyond their reach and manifest pay gaps, particularly for women of colour. Women have won only 5.4% of Nobel Prizes in physiology or medicine, 3.8% in chemistry, and 1.9% in physics. Even in fields with greater gender-balance, the pipeline leaks as women leave and more men reach the top.

 

[exchemist]

As of 2020, women represent less than 30% of researchers worldwide, with well-documented bias built-in to a STEM career, top positions often beyond their reach and manifest pay gaps, particularly for women of colour. Women have won only 5.4% of Nobel Prizes in physiology or medicine, 3.8% in chemistry, and 1.9% in physics. Even in fields with greater gender-balance, the pipeline leaks as women leave and more men reach the top.

Still spamming your advertising videos, I see.

 

[RainbowSingularity]

the pipeline leaks as women leave and more men reach the top

i se a lot of young women studying sport and fitness
but professional massive free cash with millionaire sports people playing their personal hobbies while being paid ridiculously huge amounts of money

professional soccer is a good example
all the players you see on TV playing are millionaires
all men

men cant get pregnant
men cant breast feed

the pipeline leaks as women leave and more men reach the top

how long can a women stay out of sport to have a baby & then get back into sport ?

1 year ? 2 years ?

the pipeline leaks as women leave and more men reach the top

so who is controlling womens access to return to the work force

there MUST be a road back in that forces access
otherwise profit just cycles through the young fresh 20yo who doesn't want to get pregnant and trades them off against each other

look at fitness as a good example of science
why do soo many cultures not allow women to exercise among men ?
why is there such a huge mental illness problem with these cultures preventing women from interacting equally ?

what are the driving moral hypocrisy's preventing advancement ?

https://www.americanprogress.org/is...tance-sports-participation-transgender-youth/

inclusive non gender aligned ideology as a social culture directive for education and science education and participation

reminds me of a conversation i was having with a 20 year old male mechanical engineering student a few days ago
he believed that freedom of speech should be 100% absolute to enable an adult to engage in conversation with a child of any nature
i asked
what about an adult talking sexually to a child ?
does that change any right to freedom ?
should that be regulated ?
he said no!
he said the speaker should be legally accountable if anything happens
but freedom of speech should be 100%

he had a lot of half baked ideas that i think he had been indoctrinated with
i opened his mind almost to the point of it collapsing(intentional)
he thanked me a few hours later for the enlightening discussion
he said it really made some great points on things he had never really considered before

either science comes 1st
or cult-like superstition comes 1st
you cant have both equally as core principals of an open society

 

[RainbowSingularity]

As of 2020,

terrible quality video
terrible quality audio
not great connection
made terrible content by editing program i suspect

you should not force your interviewees into a cadence
it makes it sound like some type of mind control attempt

add on top what sounds like editing softare problems
overt hyper critical editing making it stop & start
add on internet poor connection
add on graphics lag

add on accent changes
add on forced cadence
add on cadence interpretation

very very VERY annoying
i was switched to single pass 100% data
but you have made only around 50% data

cutting out
digital re-verb (how you get that?)[international line connection drop out goes digital reverb]

yall ladies need me to edijamicate you on audio delivery of public communication
& you need to find a good isp channel so you get a good connection
possibly the video finishing editor computer is clipping on RAM
thats why you want separate audio & separate video feeds

if you use the video editing software to then re-connect audio back with video
though it may be expensive
it may not be so good as single channel audio
and alternate single channel video

the line signal is changing between high quality
and then bad packet compression
when you start to talk faster the audio starts to get too compressed you lose word sounds
and the compression software doesn't care
it just mashes it together, probably then mashes it together AGAIN in the editing software

not uncommon for throttling AI software to do this type of thing

 

[RainbowSingularity]

are men forced to choose a job location based o best safest life for a baby and growing small child ?

is there a conflict of survival absolutes

suicidal male
verses
risk averse new mother

does society cater for that to give balance ?

you cant cage pregnant women and children and just lock them up for convenience to service the fragile egg shell ego of the male not being capable of making such complex emotional decisions and compromises


noting
conservative dogma indoctrination to force emotional self qualifiers as virtue signals. f_ck them !

 

[SciCom]

terrible quality video
terrible quality audio
not great connection
made terrible content by editing program i suspect

you should not force your interviewees into a cadence
it makes it sound like some type of mind control attempt

add on top what sounds like editing softare problems
overt hyper critical editing making it stop & start
add on internet poor connection
add on graphics lag

add on accent changes
add on forced cadence
add on cadence interpretation

very very VERY annoying
i was switched to single pass 100% data
but you have made only around 50% data

cutting out
digital re-verb (how you get that?)[international line connection drop out goes digital reverb]

yall ladies need me to edijamicate you on audio delivery of public communication
& you need to find a good isp channel so you get a good connection
possibly the video finishing editor computer is clipping on RAM
thats why you want separate audio & separate video feeds

if you use the video editing software to then re-connect audio back with video
though it may be expensive
it may not be so good as single channel audio
and alternate single channel video

the line signal is changing between high quality
and then bad packet compression
when you start to talk faster the audio starts to get too compressed you lose word sounds
and the compression software doesn't care
it just mashes it together, probably then mashes it together AGAIN in the editing software

not uncommon for throttling AI software to do this type of thing

Thank you for your advice and for your deep knowledge of video and audio technologies.
Perhaps everything that you suggested can be done in the Zoom-session, when all the participants are on different sides of the planet and with different Internet signals, but we did not succeed. Excuse me.
These women are scientists from South Africa, Argentina, Canada, Lithuania and Belarus. Everyone has different conditions.
And yes, we had problems with the video, and with the audio, and with the Internet signal.
BUT it is a pity that you saw only technical problems in this panel discussion and did not hear the main thing.

 

[SciCom]

Still spamming your advertising videos, I see.

I don't agree with you at all. Where did you see the ad?
What exactly do you think we are advertising in this video?
The truth is that our company participates in the largest scientific forums in different parts of the world, we interact with the largest scientists, organize panel discussions and we share our discussions with the scientific community. Including here, on this site. Please explain to me why you call this spam? Why can't I share my scientific work here?

 

[SciCom]

Still spamming your advertising videos, I see.

if you are interested, you can find out about our activities here https://www.sci-com.eu/main/ . Perhaps this will change your attitude to our publications.

 

[Beer w/Straw]

I don't agree with you at all. Where did you see the ad?
What exactly do you think we are advertising in this video?
The truth is that our company participates in the largest scientific forums in different parts of the world, we interact with the largest scientists, organize panel discussions and we share our discussions with the scientific community. Including here, on this site. Please explain to me why you call this spam? Why can't I share my scientific work here?

It's hurtful to pretend you're about women's rights, as a platform, just to promote your "company."

Am I wrong in my judgement?

 

[exchemist]

I don't agree with you at all. Where did you see the ad?
What exactly do you think we are advertising in this video?
The truth is that our company participates in the largest scientific forums in different parts of the world, we interact with the largest scientists, organize panel discussions and we share our discussions with the scientific community. Including here, on this site. Please explain to me why you call this spam? Why can't I share my scientific work here?

You are promoting Scicom in that video. You are promoting Scicom in this very post I am replying to now. Scicom is a commercial consultancy. So it's spam.

Who, pray, are you? Scicom is a company, not a person. What "scientific work" have you done?

The video, by the way is lousy. All that has been done is a poor quality skype call, in broken English, between 5 people.

You say you "interact with the largest scientists". This comment indicates either that your mother tongue is not English, or that that you are incapable of communicating in English.

 

[exchemist]

if you are interested, you can find out about our activities here https://www.sci-com.eu/main/ . Perhaps this will change your attitude to our publications.

But I'm not interested, obviously. Why would I be? You have no science to share, it seems.

If I'm wrong and you do have a science topic to discuss, please do so and I will pay attention. But don't just post more videos. This is a discussion forum and videos are not discussion.

 

[exchemist]

Thank you for your advice and for your deep knowledge of video and audio technologies.
Perhaps everything that you suggested can be done in the Zoom-session, when all the participants are on different sides of the planet and with different Internet signals, but we did not succeed. Excuse me.
These women are scientists from South Africa, Argentina, Canada, Lithuania and Belarus. Everyone has different conditions.
And yes, we had problems with the video, and with the audio, and with the Internet signal.
BUT it is a pity that you saw only technical problems in this panel discussion and did not hear the main thing.

What is the "main thing", then? Can you summarise?

 

[SciCom]

It's hurtful to pretend you're about women's rights, as a platform, just to promote your "company."

Am I wrong in my judgement?

Yes and no.
It's absolutely true that we don't deal with women's rights as they do in the charitable, political, or social sectors, but we have launched a great discussion in academia about women's careers in science. And we plan to draw attention to this discussion in the future. We have now started this conversation at the forum in Buenos Aires, and in December we will continue this conversation at the World Science Forum in Cape Town.
And I continue to insist - my publication is intended primarily to draw attention to our topic, and only then to our company. By the way, SciCom has been a co-organizer of the world's largest scientific forums and symposia for more than 10 years. We help scientists be heard. To be honest, it is strange that we have met such a misunderstanding here with you.

 

[SciCom]

You are promoting Scicom in that video. You are promoting Scicom in this very post I am replying to now. Scicom is a commercial consultancy. So it's spam.

Who, pray, are you? Scicom is a company, not a person. What "scientific work" have you done?

The video, by the way is lousy. All that has been done is a poor quality skype call, in broken English, between 5 people.

You say you "interact with the largest scientists". This comment indicates either that your mother tongue is not English, or that that you are incapable of communicating in English.

First of all, yes-English is not my native language. I hope that at least the fact that I try to speak a language that is not my native language will not be the subject of your criticism. Secondly - you say that we just called 5 women. Yes, it is. But where you see only 5 women-I see 5 women with fantastic careers in science. For example, Dr. Lilia Brito was born and raised in Mozambique , a country with high poverty and a low level of education. This woman has made sure that Mozambique is once again the head of UNESCO in Latin America and the Caribbean. Yes, she speaks English with an accent. And in a dozen different languages. And she is one of the most cited scientists in the Latin American world. That's what we wanted to say, not promote our company. Go to our website, see how many years we have been engaged in educational activities in different parts of the world and stop accusing us of some cheap spam. This is at least not fair.
And.. This video is not a documentary. This is not a video production product at all. This is a panel discussion that took place a few days ago at the Foro CILAC 2021 forum in Argentina. I'm sorry for the sound and video quality. We will try to do better

 

[SciCom]

What is the "main thing", then? Can you summarise?

we have launched a discussion in academia about women's careers in science. And we plan to draw attention to this discussion in the future. We have now started this conversation at the forum in Buenos Aires, and in December we will continue this conversation at the World Science Forum in Cape Town.
And I continue to insist - my publication is intended primarily to draw attention to our topic, and only then to our company. By the way, SciCom has been a co-organizer of the world's largest scientific forums and symposia for more than 10 years. We help scientists be heard. To be honest, it is strange that we have met such a misunderstanding here with you.

 

[exchemist]

we have launched a discussion in academia about women's careers in science. And we plan to draw attention to this discussion in the future. We have now started this conversation at the forum in Buenos Aires, and in December we will continue this conversation at the World Science Forum in Cape Town.
And I continue to insist - my publication is intended primarily to draw attention to our topic, and only then to our company. By the way, SciCom has been a co-organizer of the world's largest scientific forums and symposia for more than 10 years. We help scientists be heard. To be honest, it is strange that we have met such a misunderstanding here with you.

So no summary, then, of what this video shows. No conclusions. No key points that emerged from the discussion. Nothing. I wish I was surprised. So all this video is is 45 minutes of 5 women speaking, with no analysis. What use is that to anybody? And this is now "your" personal publication, I notice. So Scicom has now become a one-man operation, apparently.

 

[exchemist]

First of all, yes-English is not my native language. I hope that at least the fact that I try to speak a language that is not my native language will not be the subject of your criticism. Secondly - you say that we just called 5 women. Yes, it is. But where you see only 5 women-I see 5 women with fantastic careers in science. For example, Dr. Lilia Brito was born and raised in Mozambique , a country with high poverty and a low level of education. This woman has made sure that Mozambique is once again the head of UNESCO in Latin America and the Caribbean. Yes, she speaks English with an accent. And in a dozen different languages. And she is one of the most cited scientists in the Latin American world. That's what we wanted to say, not promote our company. Go to our website, see how many years we have been engaged in educational activities in different parts of the world and stop accusing us of some cheap spam. This is at least not fair.

What points does this woman make, then? And how does what she says compare with the experiences of the others? What are the common threads? And what are the points of difference? And what can we learn from it all?

If you can't even attempt to answer such questions you are just not adding any value.

I've looked at your website and it is full of the usual empty, pious-sounding cliches, with no apparent substance. I remember parasitic outfits from my time working in industry. They were always trying to get us to sign up for newsletters, or pay them fees tor register for poxy conferences, or virtual "webinars", and stuff. Utter waste of time of time and money. Scicom looks rather like this to me.

And I see you list a number of "publications" on your website, without indicating where they were published. Not by Scicom, apparently. At least, I can find no trace of a science journal with that name.

All rather scammy.

 

[SciCom]

So no summary, then, of what this video shows. No conclusions. No key points that emerged from the discussion. Nothing. I wish I was surprised. So all this video is is 45 minutes of 5 women speaking, with no analysis. What use is that to anybody? And this is now "your" personal publication, I notice. So Scicom has now become a one-man operation, apparently.

A discussion doesn't always have a definitive summary. Sometimes this is just the first step to thinking. We are very sorry if you are being aggressive towards this publication.

 

[exchemist]

A discussion doesn't always have a definitive summary. Sometimes this is just the first step to thinking. We are very sorry if you are being aggressive towards this publication.

So you seriously expect people to spend 45 minutes listening to a discussion, with no introduction, no summary, no analysis, no conclusions and no points to take away? Dream on.

 

[Bells]

Mod Note

A discussion doesn't always have a definitive summary. Sometimes this is just the first step to thinking. We are very sorry if you are being aggressive towards this publication.

Unfortunately, currently, you are merely promoting your website. You are posting on sciforums as an organisation.

You refer to yourself as "we" and commenting about people being aggressive towards your publication.

Which brings me to my next point. Earlier in this thread you linked you website and suggested people view your publications:

The truth is that our company participates in the largest scientific forums in different parts of the world, we interact with the largest scientists, organize panel discussions and we share our discussions with the scientific community. Including here, on this site. Please explain to me why you call this spam? Why can't I share my scientific work here?

if you are interested, you can find out about our activities here https://www.sci-com.eu/main/ . Perhaps this will change your attitude to our publications.

Your publications are eyebrow raising..

For example: "Scientific Integrity: What Does Industry Need To Do?" Is one such publication on your site. Co-authored by someone from the tobacco industry, commenting about the bigger push for the supposedly safer option of E-cigarettes as an example of ethical behaviour and integrity in science or industries. And it is so insidious and frankly immoral. The irony is that the publication, if one could call it that, starts discussing conflict of interest and ethics.. If there was no conflict of interest, the so called publication would also detail the risks of tobacco and vaping. But it does not. Instead, it throws little examples about how the tobacco industry has apparently admitted that tobacco is addictive and the dangers of smoking, and then commenting about how the push is now E-Cigarettes which is described as supposedly less dangerous.. In the midst of a short paper about scientific integrity and ethics.. I was disgusted and appalled. Some of the dangers of vaping and E-Cigarettes:

The recent tragic and alarming cases of severe lung disease are clearly cause for concern. A number of other health effects are also worrisome:

• Nicotine is highly addictive and can affect the developing brain, potentially harming teens and young adults. Even some “nicotine-free” e-cigarettes have been found to contain nicotine.
• Some substances found in e-cigarette vapor have been linked to an increased risk of cancer.
• Teens who vape are more likely to begin smoking cigarettes.
• Explosions and burns have been reported with e-cigarettes while recharging the devices, due to defective batteries.
• Accidental exposure to liquid from e-cigarettes has caused acute nicotine poisoning in children and adults.
• Vaping during pregnancy could harm a developing fetus.

​

Your site is not a scientific site. It's basically a pay to publish website in a lot of ways. You are publishing short documents and basically advertisements for people from certain industries.

And you are trying to advertise it on this site.

Normally, I'd just classify you as a spammer and ban you. But I wanted to take the time to explain to you (whether you are an individual or organisation - you seem to switch between "I" and "we" constantly!), so that you would not do this to other websites as well.

At the end of the day, you aren't here to discuss. You are simply here to promote your wares.