No, Lee, Rick Scott & Ron Johnson all voted together; the tally is 59-40

I wonder what she is basing the claim on then. Could she have got a letter from Stanford’s equivalent of CTY/TIP at that time and misunderstood it as undergrad admissions? Or did she radically misunderstand a Questbridge letter?

My money is that she got a letter from Stanford’s equivalent of CTY/TIP at that time and misunderstood it. That or she got a letter from Questbridge & radically misunderstood that letter.

I feel like another under appreciated fact is that there is a reasonable chance that the current pope knows and enjoys Lehrer’s work (or at least N.I. Lobachevsky & New Math) and thus may add The Vatican Rag to the set of secular music permitted in the liturgy.

Oops, all fajita strips!

The Bell Riots episodes

Disclaimer: Above is opinion of some random pre-MD/PhD undergrad at an R1 American Uni. I’m almost certainly wrong in some way.

*good above incl. qualities of safe & responsible).
…and balancing it in peril a bad idea. Plus if any ppl wanted to do this, they could donate to their fav. R1/R2 uni today & direct the funds to support research. They don’t do it in enough amounts. & you can’t expect ppl to just start. 9/9 Fin

… persuading the avg. Joe scrolling on FB or BSky to click this link & donate to my kickstarter so all my students & techs & I have jobs this year & also so that the safety infra in my building is maintained this year & also can do science. It takes a vast system to support good science… 8/n

.. most persuasive ppl & their ideas; not to the best ideas. Persuasion is admittedly part of all writing, including grant-writing, but persuading fellow scientists w/written argument & preliminary data is leagues away from … 7/n

Ultimately, not every psych prof can be telegenic like A. Huberman nor every physicist like N. dG. Tyson. Nor should telegenic ppl get every $ for those fields. They are a vital portion, but aren’t the end-all of science leaders. If a crwdfund system were used, money would distribute to the … 6/n

Expecting any random prof to explain their proposals & what they **hope to** uncover well enough to convince 1 million people to give them $1 is bananas. Expecting every prof to do it is a recipe for disaster. Most academics don’t have writer’s room’s to write their jokes like Big Bang Theory 5/n

Then Remember that researchers stress & struggle to explain their science proposals to other scientists & thus grant-writing is a huge recent addition to grad school curricula. Any given NIH grant application (kinda) has a 10% of being filled & professors already stress out about them. 4/n

Now imagine that you can’t fulfill any one of those costs b/c you didn’t get picked up by the site’s algo & shown to enough people who want to donate. If you cut group staff, it’ll either be the end of their degree program (doctoral or masters), or their time in academic science (no more pubs) … 3/n

(Cont. 2/2=>2/n) + so-called “overhead” or indirect costs which when summed by the institution across all research grants covers: Maintenance, EHS (including maintenance of physical EHS systems!), HR, Security, IRB staff, Research Animal Welfare, Deans, and admin & clerks for grad programs, 2/n

Awarded NIH Grant Funds = Grad student stipends, % PI salary not paid by Uni for their teaching load, UG hourly wage, Technician wage, Staff scientist salary + all reagents, cells, small-cost equipment/parts (big-costs like cryo-electron microscopes get their own separate grants) + … 1/2

Already exists: experiment.com. Can’t use it to reliably generate 100,000s per research group (I.e per research prof) per year. Tenure-track & grad school doesn’t work if you get defunded year to year because you didn’t get enough donors to your kickstarter this year. You need some stability.