Parastoo Amiri / AP
There’s Tobias Warnecke of Imperial College London. On a website where researchers offer help to colleagues who may be in limbo after the ban, he’s one of 787 (at last count) who have offered help and, sometimes, sympathy.
Warnecke offers “lab and desk space; temporary accommodation; free coffee; and a shared sense of outrage” at his molecular evolution lab.
News of the site, operated by the German-based research network EMBO, has spread on social media using the hashtag #ScienceShelters.
Wolfgang Hammerschmidt of the Helmholtz Center in Munich is offering “temporary bench and/or desk space with a focus on cell biology and virology, accommodation in our guest house is possible assuming availability.”
He hasn’t had any takers yet.
“We are a cosmopolitan lab and used to take care of colleagues from many parts of the world,” Hammerschmidt said by email.
Cell biologist Ariane Abrieu at the Center for Macromolecular Biochemistry Research in Montpellier, France can provide lab and office space and equipment as well as “tea, coffee, and empathy.”
And it goes the other way, also.
“I am happy to offer space to anyone who is unable to leave the U.S. and needs space to work. I can’t offer financial support, just a welcoming environment,” says John Quackenbush of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston.
Doctors, Scientists, Denounce Trump Immigration Order
Nazanin Zinouri, an Iranian citizen who earned an engineering Ph.D. at Clemson University last year, was taken off her flight to Dubai while trying to get back to South Carolina from Tehran last week. Her employer, a Clemson-based firm that makes wearable tech, is raising money and lobbying for her visa to be restored.
South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, a Republican, has said he is also working for her to be allowed to come back to her job.
Science organizations have banded together to condemn the immigration order.
“The January 27, 2017 White House executive order on visas and immigration will discourage many of the best and brightest international students, scholars, and scientists from studying and working in the United States, or attending academic and scientific conferences,” said Rush Holt, a former Congressman who’s now CEO of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
“Implementation of this policy compromises the United States’ ability to attract international scientific talent and maintain scientific and economic leadership,” he added.
Then there’s the #ActualLivingScientist campaign where cancer researchers post next to paleontologists about their work.
A former National Park Service staff member hijacked a Twitter account for the Badlands National Park, tweeting out climate facts before they were stopped. The apparent protest spawned a cornocupia of spoof accounts from @alt_FDA to the @AltNatParkSer and @RogueNASA.
signed by 27,000 people, topped by 51 Nobel prizewinners, denounces the immigration ban.
“The EO [executive order] unfairly targets a large group of immigrants and non-immigrants on the basis of their countries of origin, all of which are nations with a majority Muslim population,” it says.
“This is a major step towards implementing the stringent racial and religious profiling promised on the campaign trail. This Executive Order is detrimental to the national interests of the United States. The EO significantly damages American leadership in higher education and research.”
Perhaps most surprising is the
March for Science, organized on social media by science writer Carolyn Weinberg and Jonathan Berman, a postdoctoral fellow at the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio.
The march is meant to echo the Jan. 21 women’s marches that attracted more than a million women around the world.
“Our plans for policy change and community outreach will start with marches worldwide and a teach-in at the National Mall, but it is imperative that we continue to celebrate and defend science at all levels — from local schools to federal agencies — throughout the world,” the organizers say in a statement.
Not everyone interested in science is on board.
“While a march to support science sounds like a good idea, given the agenda, this scientist will not be attending,” wrote Alex Berezow of the
American Council on Science and Health, an industry-funded organization that weighs in on issues such as nutrition
“I wrote previously of my concern that the Science March would be hijacked by the kind of political partisanship it should instead be concerned about — and that has indeed come true,” he wrote.