Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
United Kingdom

Brexit Row Could Prompt Exodus of Senior Scientists From UK (theguardian.com) 152

The UK is facing an exodus of star scientists, with at least 16 recipients of prestigious European grants making plans to move their labs abroad as the UK remains frozen out of the EU's flagship science programme. From a report: Britain's participation in Horizon Europe has been caught in the crosshairs of the dispute over Brexit in Northern Ireland, meaning that 143 UK-based recipients of European Research Council fellowships this week faced a deadline of either relinquishing their grant or transferring it to an institute in an eligible country. The UK government has promised to underwrite the funding, totalling about 250m pound ($307m), but a growing number of scientists appear likely to reject the offer and instead relocate, along with entire teams of researchers.

The ERC said 16 academics had recently informed it that they intend to move their lab abroad or are in negotiations about doing so. These researchers, and some others, have been given an extension before their grants are terminated. Moritz Treeck, a group leader at the Francis Crick Institute in London who is due to receive $2.1m over five years from the ERC to study the malaria pathogen, is among those contemplating a move. He said a major downside of the UK offer was the lack of flexibility about moving the funding internationally.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Brexit Row Could Prompt Exodus of Senior Scientists From UK

Comments Filter:
  • by Immerman ( 2627577 ) on Saturday June 11, 2022 @12:44AM (#62610962)

    the UK remains frozen out of the EU's flagship science programme

    Frozen out? Really? So I assume there are a number of other non-EU countries that are participating?

    Knowing nothing about it, I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that, no, there aren't. Oddly enough big political spending projects tend to focus on buying good will from populations that can influence the politicians' power.

    Which would mean that the UK isn't "frozen out" - it *opted* out.

    Now maybe I'm wrong about that in this case, but it seems like every few days I see a new story slanted towards how the mean old EU is bullying the poor UK by not continuing to extend them the benefits of EU membership. "Oh no, we're having to deal with all the shit that everyone warned us about" gets really old.

    • Re: (Score:2, Troll)

      Which would mean that the UK isn't "frozen out" - it *opted* out.

      I'm inclined to avoid characterizing it as either. I'm guessing that "unintended consequences of the decision" would be a better description.
      Few that promoted for or voted for "Brexit" had a clue just how it would unfold and how wide ranging the effects would be.

      • by jd ( 1658 ) <imipakNO@SPAMyahoo.com> on Saturday June 11, 2022 @03:19AM (#62611088) Homepage Journal

        It was a consequence that was debated intensely before Brexit and the Brexit lobby claimed it would all work out. So it was an ancicipated (by 48%) but unintended (by 52%) of voters.

      • by jenningsthecat ( 1525947 ) on Saturday June 11, 2022 @07:23AM (#62611298)

        Few that promoted for or voted for "Brexit" had a clue just how it would unfold and how wide ranging the effects would be.

        Nobody needed to know the details of "how it would unfold or how wide ranging the effects would be". Anybody with a modicum of life experience should know that such big moves almost always have unforeseen and undesirable consequences. And I don't recall Britain launching years-long studies to make even an educated guess at what the fallout might be. They got pissy and full of bravado, and they loaded and fired a gun without checking whether or not it was pointed at their foot. Now they're limping. How badly and for how long remains to be seen.

        • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

          Britain didn't even stick to what the official Vote Leave campaign advertised brexit to be. We were not supposed to lave the Single Market at all.

      • >Few that promoted for or voted for "Brexit" had a clue just how it would unfold and how wide ranging the effects would be.

        I'll maybe believe that of a lot of the "voted for" crowd - though they have no excuse since they were roundly warned of the consequences but chose to ignore them. Wilful ignorance never an acceptable excuse.

        Those promoting it though? I'm fairly certain they knew perfectly - you don't get into the halls of power without being reasonably well-informed about politics. Just because t

      • by ceoyoyo ( 59147 )

        I suppose Joe Average voter might not have realized the consequences, but anybody who was paying attention did. There were a lot of articles in the years leading up to the referendum on this exact topic.

        I'm kind of surprised it took so long actually. I thought all this had already shaken out.

      • Comment removed based on user account deletion
      • Sixteen scientists found better funding in another country and are considering moving.

      • Werenâ(TM)t Brits promised a big payout by Nigel Farage and after the vote he said âoeoopsâ?
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      It is just the same pattern as before the brexit. Things go bad? Blame the EU. These kinds of people are experts in externalizing responsibility, even when it is undeniable. The interesting part is that they do not realise this themselves.
      But it is not only a UK problem. They are everywhere. I do have the impression though that Brexit and Trump increased awareness. The more moderate people are realizing this is not the way. Fingers crossed...
      • Yep.

        Before Brexit: Blame the EU for everything you don't like.

        After Brexit: Blame the EU for everything you don't like.

    • by Sesostris III ( 730910 ) on Saturday June 11, 2022 @01:52AM (#62611002)
      Its a consequence of the row over the Northern Ireland Protocol.

      EU exit and the Northern Ireland Protocol [nidirect.gov.uk]

      It was signed and agreed as part of the main Withdrawal Agreement. It has the status of an international treaty. However, now that the UK has left the EU, the government (that signed the Protocol) have decided they don't like it, and unilaterally want to change it. This hasn't gone down well with the EU (which is understandable), and one of the consequences has been that the UK's participation in the EU's "Horizon Europe" program has been delayed until the issue is resolved. I would imagine that if the UK Government decide to proceed with their unilateral action, the UK's participation in the Horizon program will be terminated.

      I suppose the simple message is; if you sign an international agreement, it may be best to keep to it if you want to maintain good relationships!
      • by blugalf ( 7063499 ) on Saturday June 11, 2022 @05:05AM (#62611176)

        What's worse, it's painfully obvious that the UK government never had any intention of upholding their end of the deal WRT the NI protocol.

        The plan was obviously to sign up to it in order to get the Brexit deal out of the door, and then immediately rip up the NI protocol. Not amend or improve it, rip it up. Completely.

        Of course they're claiming now that it doesn't work at all, yada yada. Maybe if they hadn't started to whine before the ink was dry on the signatures, and maybe if they had left the portions of the protocol alone that clearly have negligible practical implications (the ECJ role mostly), they'd have a shred of credibility left.

        But the ideologists couldn't wait. The UK has acted in rottenly bad faith here.

        • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) on Saturday June 11, 2022 @10:14AM (#62611560) Homepage Journal

          A Sky News journalist had the balls to ask Boris Johnson if he was furious with Boris Johnson for signing this terrible, unworkable deal.

          Our reputation is in the toilet now. It's clear that the Withdrawal Agreement was made in bad faith, with no intention of keeping it. It's not the only example, the government recently lied in court that the UN Human Rights Commission said that their deal with Rwanda to accept people claiming asylum in the UK was fine, when in fact the UN told them it was illegal.

          The only trade deals we have managed to do have been one sided. The Australians could hardly believe what we signed up to. Of course we might not have been serious about actually sticking to it. Who is going to want to do a deal with us now though, when we quite openly and brazenly break treaties we signed just months prior.

          • In fairness to the guy, once Brexit was passed by voters, there was no good option.

            • by jabuzz ( 182671 )

              Then he should not have lied about how good it was going to be and the 350GBP million a week we where going to save and spend on the NHS instead. Boris campaigned for Brexit, on the basis that it was going to be fantastic for the UK, so the fact that is not is in part at least his fault.

      • by Lucidus ( 681639 )
        A comment on NY Times article about this quipped, "Brittania waives the rules."
    • by Shimbo ( 100005 ) on Saturday June 11, 2022 @02:32AM (#62611040)

      the UK remains frozen out of the EU's flagship science programme

      Frozen out? Really? So I assume there are a number of other non-EU countries that are participating?

      Yes: Armenia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Faroe Islands, Georgia, Iceland, Israel, Kosovo*, Moldova, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Norway, Serbia and Turkey. https://ec.europa.eu/info/news... [europa.eu]

      Associate membership is a thing: https://ec.europa.eu/info/site... [europa.eu]
      However, these things have to be negotiated and whilst the UK is trying to pull a Vader over the Northern Ireland Agreement ("I have altered the deal"), it's pretty hard to get any new agreements signed (who would have thought).

    • Yes, there are many other non-EU countries participating. The UK has agreed as part of the Brexit negotiation to become an associate country, which would allow them to take part in Horizon, in return for paying in.

      Unfortunately, this was all agreed at the last minute in principle. From the UK side it was never clear where the money was going to come from (i.e. existing science budgets or previous EU budgets) which obviously makes a difference to UK science. In addition, it was an agreement in principle. Sin

    • ... it seems like every few days I see a new story slanted towards how the mean old EU is bullying the poor UK by not continuing to extend them the benefits of EU membership.

      Perhaps it's because I thought Brexit was stupid and short-sighted - just like its main architect BoJo - but I didn't read the story as painting "the mean old EU" as a villain. I read it as "Britain surrendered their membership in the EU so they no longer enjoy membership benefits". If anything, this is a cautionary tale about the dangers of trying to eat your cake and have it too.

    • Frozen out? Really? So I assume there are a number of other non-EU countries that are participating?
      Knowing nothing about it, I'm going to

      ...say something provably ignorant and wrong, which you could have avoided trivially with a quick google search. Are you new?

      Now maybe I'm wrong about that in this case, but it seems like every few days I see a new story slanted towards how the mean old EU is bullying the poor UK by not continuing to extend them the benefits of EU membership.

      That's how you're reading it. As I read it, the UK fucked themselves. And while we know you didn't RTFA (you were too lazy to google, you certainly didn't read the article) the article itself doesn't give the UK a free pass.

      A third senior scientist, who plans to transfer a â2m ERC grant to study the response of animals to climate change to an institute outside the UK, said:

      • Like I'm going to bother digging around for details on internal politics on the other side of the world. This is Slashdot, be glad I read the summary.

        I did clearly state the ignorance of my opinion - I figures that makes me far more honest than most, and would hopefully

        >That's how you're reading it.

        Oh? Does "frozen out" not carry malicious overtones where you're from?

  • but a handful of nasty old coots and some rich assholes that want to isolate Britain from the bargaining power of the EU and pick at it's bones, but they can't do fuck all about it for the same reason us yanks can't fix our politics: Too many old folks who don't have a stake in the economy anymore.

    Assuming their democracy survives they'll rejoin in 10-15 years when those old coots die off. Assuming it does.

    America's pretty touch and go. The more I learn about Jan 6th the more I understand we came a
    • by Sesostris III ( 730910 ) on Saturday June 11, 2022 @01:37AM (#62610990)
      The problem was that at the time of the vote what "Brexit" meant was never fully explained to the voters. There were various options, from "soft" to "hard". Indeed some form of "soft" Brexit was indicated (as in we could join the European Free Trade Association along with Norway, or at least remain in the EU Single Market or Customs Union).

      However, once the vote had taken place, "Brexit" was taken by many in the governing party and others to mean the hardest Brexit possible, which in the end was what they went for but was not necessarily what everyone voting for Brexit voted for. (It also didn't take into account the sizeable minority who - like me - voted to remain in the EU).

      We are now facing the consequences of this. Caveat Emptor applies, I'm afraid!
      • The problem was that at the time of the vote what "Brexit" meant was never fully explained to the voters.

        If you don't understand something, you vote against it. Unless, that is, you're an easily led simpleton.

        But the problem wasn't that it wasn't fully explained to voters, the problem is that the pro-brexit crew willfully and deliberately lied to voters again and again.

        • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

          Unfortunately the British electorate didn't understand the Alternative Vote either. While far from perfect, it is a lot better than what we have now.

          Sometimes it's a good idea to listen to experts, but as we know, idiots had had enough of them and thought they knew best.

          • Sometimes it's a good idea to listen to experts, but as we know, idiots had had enough of them and thought they knew best.

            I just don't get why anyone still listens to BJ. That guy has conclusively proven that he is on the wrong side of every issue. I get Trump, because he's a good manipulator of crowds of idiots, but BJ can't even do crowd work. His followers have to manipulate themselves.

        • I disagree that Brexit was not fully explained as much as the pro Brexit side lied about the benefits while omitting or minimizing the disadvantages. For example the pro Brexit side has tried to paint poor UK as being under the thumb of "Brussels" when it came to EU regulations while omitting the fact that as a member of the EU, the UK always had a hand in drafting those regulations. While it is true than leaving the EU meant the UK never had to follow EU regulations again, the pro Brexit side downplayed th

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by gtall ( 79522 )

      The Brits decided to leave, the EU wished they wouldn't but the Brits listened to dolts like the former alleged president. He hates anything with adult oversight like NATO and the EU because he cannot pick off stragglers and declare astounding victories over stupid small-ball. The Yank's police are currently being modified, it takes time. Unlike what you and your moron hero believe, "fixes" do not come overnight so that one can crow about what a great bigly victory they've achieved.

      The U.S. didn't come wit

      • by sfcat ( 872532 )

        it (the US) came within a hair's breath of civil war

        Um, no. Not even close despite what some would have you believe. The majority of the Republican party abandon that idea and Trump before Jan 6 and many of those that didn't abandon him on Jan 6. The only reason that politicians still think Trump has the ability to change an election is because they use Twitter where only the crazies talk politics. Only in close primaries does Trump have any sway. Trump's support hasn't been very helpful during the current primary season.

    • Assuming their democracy survives they'll rejoin in 10-15 years when those old coots die off. Assuming it does.

      Whether it will or not is an open question, but I guarantee you they're not getting to keep the UKP next time if they do...

  • Don't you just love them. Obviously not understood by the brexiters at the time of voting, learning the reality of its meaning now though.
    • The funniest scenario is the Brexit voting idiots with houses in France or Spain who are complaining because they now cannot visit their houses except 3 months at a time and no more than 6 months in 1 year.
      • But that's OK because in the 6 months back home they'll be able to have crown marks on pint glasses and buy stuff in pounds and ounces. Oh you say that was in fact never banned?

        huh.

    • Re:Consequences.. (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Generic User Account ( 6782004 ) on Saturday June 11, 2022 @04:33AM (#62611154)

      Nobody is learning anything. Learning requires admitting that the decision was wrong. Cognitive dissonance is the strongest force in the universe. When people experience it, they double down.

    • Obviously not understood by the brexiters at the time of voting, learning the reality of its meaning now though.

      Project fear you mean?

      More like project reality in hindsight to everyone and foresight to remainers.

  • by nextTimeIsTheLast ( 6188328 ) on Saturday June 11, 2022 @02:18AM (#62611034)

    If you study the EU, its structure, formation and development, you find that the whole campaign to leave was a pack of lies or at best misrepresentations of the truth:

    Claim: "Wahhh whaaa we are being subject to laws from those horrible Jonny foreigner" truth "The UK was THE leading contributor/protagonist in the development of the EU laws"

    Claim: the EU is undemocratic", truth: The EU structures were set up specifically to retain the primacy of the member states democracies

    Claim: All those 'orrible types from Eastern Europe are coming here and getting benefits for free. Truth: Free movement is only available to those who can either support themselves or have a job - the problem was the UK didn't apply the rules to remove people falling outside those categories, also, government WANTS immigration (immigrants pay taxes after all)

    Summary conclusion: main rationale for Brexit, presented by the idiots clamouring for it, was an illusion.

    • by nagora ( 177841 )

      Claim: the EU is undemocratic", truth: The EU structures were set up specifically to retain the primacy of the member states democracies

      That's a flat out lie.

      • You're right, EU laws have primacy. However, it's also democratic by the usual standard, it's a representative democracy. Frankly I don't think that's particularly democratic, but few agree with me. Today we have the tech to let literally everyone vote individually. Not doing that isn't democracy, IMO.

        However, since almost everyone disagrees with me, most people would assert that the EU is democratic.

        • EU laws have primacy and the nationall deomcracies have primacy over the EU (national vetos etc). Otherwise it would be the case that the EU is undemocratic. Ironically the UK leaving the EU demonstrated that the EU was and is subject to the control of the national democracies and therefore is ultimately a democratic construct.
      • Really not sure why I even bother replying to a poster who didn't take even 1 second to think before posting a clearly ignorant answer.

        Do me a favor and don't post again prior to engagding neurons.

    • by Ecuador ( 740021 )

      A couple of other gems:

      - Red London busses were painted with the slogan "350 million GBP per week to NHS with Brexit" (NHS = National Health Service), Just a single day after the referendum, the leader of the Brexit party was asked about it and he said it was not something that he himself say and it was a mistake!

      - The cries about foreigners "taking our jobs" or "our benefits" were also ludicrous for an additional reason: the majority of immigrants in the UK were not from Europe, but from Commonwealth count

  • by aepervius ( 535155 ) on Saturday June 11, 2022 @03:28AM (#62611100)
    They should be wary of the young scientist exodus, which is a far more likely silent killer for any future research and growth.
  • European scientists wishing to escape the socialist dogma of the EU can now escape to Britain... The Guardian is an extreme socialist rag and should not be taken seriously.
  • The EU is a (highly bureaucratic) political organisation first, and a trade organisation (read: protection racket) second. Its policy makers (EU council) have zero electoral accountability. In other words, the EU is a literal dictatorship. Freedom from foreign control is what Brexit is about, and which was democratically voted for by the British public. Academics should respect democracy, instead of attacking it, I think.
    • What are you talking about the EU council is just Government ministers from each EU country, according to the policy area to be discussed.
  • by bb_matt ( 5705262 ) on Saturday June 11, 2022 @06:16AM (#62611220)

    ... /me thinks ... hmm. Dum di dum, la la laa.
    A few minutes passes...
    Nope, I've got nothing.

    What I find so exasperating, is that as an ideological move Brexit is akin to shooting yourself in the foot or lopping of your nose to spite your face.
    The _only_ possible even slightly rational explanation I can find for this incredible act of self-harm, is a few people got extremely rich off the back of it - or rather, even richer.

    The other explanations beggar belief and clearly exist within some alternative reality, where the British Empire is alive and well and the entire world is knocking on our door for trade.

    So, here's the deal - or the lack thereof - we give up our seat at the head table of a trading block that collectively has one of the highest GDP's globally, in the hope that countries outside of the EU will flock to us with trade opportunities.
    I believe it was hoped that the biggest of them all, the USA, would welcome us with open arms and setup favourable trading deals left, right and centre.

    Clearly, US business is thinking "Oh, gee, looks like our favoured entry point into that huge EU market, the UK, now has excessive tariffs and regulations - sorry guys, love you and all our Atlantic cousins, but business is business..."

    Seriously, why would any US business or any other large economy outside of the EU, want to deal with a market of 70 million when there's a market of 500 million and you don't need to jump through extra hoops by going via the UK.

    And trade is just part of it - a very big part - but there's so many other factors.

    Young people in the UK once had free access to study and work in all of the members of the EU - that's 27 countries.
    We once had a healthy student exchange, a healthy back and forth of people seeking work, with ideas and different cultures and all that exciting stuff.
    Now we find ourselves back in the days before 1972 - and the late 60's and early 70's in the UK were bleak and dire.

    Brexit has erected huge barriers of red tape and bureaucracy for not only trade, but free movement of people - it's a disaster in the making.

    And is it any wonder that senior scientists are wanting to leave? - it's a no-brainer, when all that red tape and bullshit bureaucracy gets in the way of science, there's only one thing for it - move somewhere where there's less of it.

    The UK is in a slow death spiral.
    There are only a few key things keeping our heads above water:

    1. London is still a global financial capital - a very dodgy one, with some very dirty money, but a key player globally - for how long though?
    2. The UK is still amongst global leaders in providing higher education and research - but how many of those educated here stay and provide services for the UK? - very few, they all come and study here and take those skills back home.
    3. The UK is still a reasonably popular tourist destination, despite being ridiculously expensive - but tourism is a fraction of our GDP.

    There's only one solution.

    Re-negotiate and rejoin the EU single market. We will most likely get massive penalties for it, billions of pounds, because whilst the EU would welcome us back, it would come with a hefty price.

    That's it - the only solution is to admit the folly, admit Brexit was a huge mistake.

    It needs to happen in the next few years before the depth of damage cripples the UK economy for decades - it may already be too late.
    And whilst we have the Tories with their stupid moronic "Brexiteer" brigade still calling the shots, there's no chance.

    So, I watch as my country slowly returns to the dark days of the 1970's - sure, the rest of the world is heading down the same path, but this country has a double whammy to deal with.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by kenh ( 9056 )

      Seriously, why would any US business or any other large economy outside of the EU, want to deal with a market of 70 million when there's a market of 500 million and you don't need to jump through extra hoops by going via the UK.

      The EU is nothing more than a huge collection of "hoops" outside companies must jump thru to do trade inside the EU. The most recent example is Apple being forced to redesign the charger port on their iPhones or to treat Dating apps in the Netherlands different than any other apps anywhere else in the world.

      The EU market has many hurdles to entry, and has a propensity to impose huge penalties on outside companies.

      • by gweihir ( 88907 )

        That is called "copium"...

      • Seriously, why would any US business or any other large economy outside of the EU, want to deal with a market of 70 million when there's a market of 500 million and you don't need to jump through extra hoops by going via the UK.

        The EU is nothing more than a huge collection of "hoops" outside companies must jump thru to do trade inside the EU. The most recent example is Apple being forced to redesign the charger port on their iPhones or to treat Dating apps in the Netherlands different than any other apps anywhere else in the world.

        The EU market has many hurdles to entry, and has a propensity to impose huge penalties on outside companies.

        My point is simply about the size of the market and that the UK is better inside, than outside.

        You TOTALLY missed my point about "jumping through hoops" - it had NOTHING to do with what you have stated.
        Do some research - it's to do with the fact that a US company that once went via the UK into the EU now has blockers - extra tariffs etc. - it's not a direct connection.

        The UK _was_ a preferred entry into the EU market for the US, because, you know, we're buddies, same language, similar culture, if you are de

    • It's watching which of Italy and Illinois will go bankrupt first from their massive unfunded pension liabilities. When the day comes that the taxpayers of Germany finally realise they've been subsidising Italy for too long, the effect will be nasty. Of course the present generation of leaders will have retired by then, having kicked the ball down the road during their time in office - and found themselves comfortable boltholes for their retirement.

    • by gweihir ( 88907 )

      There's only one solution.

      Re-negotiate and rejoin the EU single market. We will most likely get massive penalties for it, billions of pounds, because whilst the EU would welcome us back, it would come with a hefty price.

      That's it - the only solution is to admit the folly, admit Brexit was a huge mistake.

      It needs to happen in the next few years before the depth of damage cripples the UK economy for decades - it may already be too late.
      And whilst we have the Tories with their stupid moronic "Brexiteer" brigade still calling the shots, there's no chance.

      So, I watch as my country slowly returns to the dark days of the 1970's - sure, the rest of the world is heading down the same path, but this country has a double whammy to deal with.

      It needs to happen and it will happen. But the UK first needs to get rid of all the extremely self-absorbed rich morons that were voted into power and that will take time and it will need for things to get much worse. The last thing a stupid person (voter in this case) is willing to admit that they made a gross mistake. So when the UK rejoins the EU, it will be as a beggar and there will be no special conditions or rights for it, unlike what it had before.

      What I am wondering is whether the Scots (that seem

  • Academics - who live primarily by sucking funding from cash cows like the government to do what they do - are following the biggest cash cow.

    Even an academic could have predicted that.

  • In the US we fund countless research around the world (for example, virology studies in Wuhan, China),I find it interesting that other "more enlightened", "more sophisticated" nations like the EU members and UK place residency restrictions on funding scientific research.

    It is interesting to note that the UK was willing to match the lost funding for researchers, but the researchers apparent want the flexibility to relocate their laboratories in other countries as they see fit:

    Moritz Treeck, a group leader at the Francis Crick Institute in London who is due to receive $2.1m over five years from the ERC to study the malaria pathogen, is among those contemplating a move. He said a major downside of the UK offer was the lack of flexibility about moving the funding internationally.

  • It's all just propaganda. How could anybody not see that by now?

  • After the majority of the UK voters decided that doing it to themselves with a wire-brush was a good idea, of course anybody sane that can is leaving. It is an expected, well-known effect.

  • Most commenters here don't seem to understand the nature of the EU. Its confusing because it has some elements which are considered liberal-left in the Anglosphere, and others which are considered right wing neo-conservative.

    Its evolution is towards a United States of Europe. But its not now, and will not be if it ever gets there, a democratic entity on the Anglo Saxon model. Direct elections are to a powerless Parliament, a Parliament in name only, which cannot initiate legislation, which cannot even de

The truth of a proposition has nothing to do with its credibility. And vice versa.

Working...