Genetics and the Soviet Union

[B0LSHEVIK]

I just read that Mendelian theories and genetics itself was considered 'counter-revolutionary' in the Soviet Union, adding that several prominent geneticists were purged by Stalin during the purges of the thirties. Is this true? Its not a history book, its a science book but has historical 'footnotes' throughout.

Any help?

[Salyut]

Here you go. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suppressed_research_in_the_Soviet_Union)

[B0LSHEVIK]

Thanks for that link, holy shit that wiki has quite a bit of information. So Stalin declared resonance theory 'bourgeois pseudoscience' too? Being a scientist must've been dangerous back then fuck!

[pranabjyoti]

Thanks for that link, holy shit that wiki has quite a bit of information. So Stalin declared resonance theory 'bourgeois pseudoscience' too? Being a scientist must've been dangerous back then fuck!
Ya and that's why they quickly become one of the most industrialized nation of the world and defeated highly advanced Nazi Germany in WWII!
IMO, only bloody f***ers can rely on wikipedia regarding the history, specially regarding USSR and more specially USSR under Stalin.

[Salyut]

Ya and that's why they quickly become one of the most industrialized nation of the world and defeated highly advanced Nazi Germany in WWII!
IMO, only bloody f***ers can rely on wikipedia regarding the history, specially regarding USSR and more specially USSR under Stalin.

oh ok

[Q]

Ya and that's why they quickly become one of the most industrialized nation of the world and defeated highly advanced Nazi Germany in WWII!
What does the T34 have to do with genetics exactly?

IMO, only bloody f***ers can rely on wikipedia regarding the history, specially regarding USSR and more specially USSR under Stalin.

You did of course notice how well referenced that article is, as opposed to your generalised accusation, and what a fool you're making out of yourself, right?

[pranabjyoti]

You did of course notice how well referenced that article is, as opposed to your generalised accusation, and what a fool you're making out of yourself, right?
Well, how much reliable those sources are?

[Sir Comradical]

Ya and that's why they quickly become one of the most industrialized nation of the world and defeated highly advanced Nazi Germany in WWII!
IMO, only bloody f***ers can rely on wikipedia regarding the history, specially regarding USSR and more specially USSR under Stalin.

Making tanks, bullets and guns has nothing to do with genetics. You'd be better off arguing that mendelian genetics wasn't a priority, or that genetics sounded too much like eugenics which confused the Politburo into declaring it to be a bourgeois pseudo-science. It's okay to criticise Stalin once in a while.

[Salyut]

I think Cockshott has a nice piece on cybernetics and GOSPLAN in his Towards a New Socialism actually. pranabjyoti you might want to check that book out.

[pranabjyoti]

Making tanks, bullets and guns has nothing to do with genetics. You'd be better off arguing that mendelian genetics wasn't a priority, or that genetics sounded too much like eugenics which confused the Politburo into declaring it to be a bourgeois pseudo-science. It's okay to criticise Stalin once in a while.

Being a scientist must've been dangerous back then fuck!
That kind of remarks makes me angry. Does this man knows that even today, evolution hasn't taught in many schools of USA?

[Rooster]

That kind of remarks makes me angry. Does this man knows that even today, evolution hasn't taught in many schools of USA?

What has that got to do with anything? We're discussing the USSR and how a certain idea of genetics was suppressed.

[Robespierre Richard]

The USSR actually had some interesting first advances in cybernetics like the ternary computer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Setun) and the OGAS system that was intended to be an alternative for the Kosygin reforms.

Also it would be weird if cybernetics was made illegal "and the taboo remained for a few years after Stalin's death" as the wiki says that the first Soviet computer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_computer_hardware_in_Soviet_Bloc_countr ies#MESM) was finished in 1950, 3 years before Stalin died. I guess it must have run based on principles of dialectical materialism and not computer science.

[TC]

Thanks for that link, holy shit that wiki has quite a bit of information. So Stalin declared resonance theory 'bourgeois pseudoscience' too? Being a scientist must've been dangerous back then fuck!

Almost none of it has any references to credible sources making it 100% worthless and likely made up - made up by people who can't even find a source.

[Kléber]

That kind of remarks makes me angry. Does this man knows that even today, evolution hasn't taught in many schools of USA?
Slavery still exists in many parts of the world, would it be okay for slavery to exist in a socialist society?


Almost none of it has any references to credible sources making it 100% worthless and likely made up - made up by people who can't even find a source.
That comment is "100% worthless" because you don't know what you are talking about. Soviet scientists like Nikolai Vavilov (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolai_Vavilov), Nikolai Koltsov (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolai_Koltsov), Georgii Karpachenko (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgii_Karpechenko), and the repression they suffered was not "made up."

Stalin and co. knew that the Lysenkoist campaigns were bad for research and development, but used them as a cover to crush political opponents within the scientific community and establish the hegemony of their apparatus throughout the academic system. Scientists and researchers were generously rewarded by the Soviet state during this time, provided they towed the "general line." The irrational positions advanced by Lysenko and his imitators were basically a test of political loyalty. Note that nuclear physicists were unique among Soviet scientists in being almost untouched by the repressions, and Stalin personally intervened to stop the Lysenkoization of linguistics which was important for espionage and diplomacy.

[bailey_187]

Stalin and co. knew that the Lysenkoist campaigns were bad for research and development, but used them as a cover to crush political opponents within the scientific community and establish the hegemony of their apparatus throughout the academic system.

how do u know this is what Stalin and his allies were thinking?

[TC]

Slavery still exists in many parts of the world, would it be okay for slavery to exist in a socialist society?


That comment is "100% worthless" because you don't know what you are talking about. Soviet scientists like Nikolai Vavilov (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolai_Vavilov), Nikolai Koltsov (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolai_Koltsov), Georgii Karpachenko (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgii_Karpechenko), and the repression they suffered was not "made up."

Stalin and co. knew that the Lysenkoist campaigns were bad for research and development, but used them as a cover to crush political opponents within the scientific community and establish the hegemony of their apparatus throughout the academic system. Scientists and researchers were generously rewarded by the Soviet state during this time, provided they towed the "general line." The irrational positions advanced by Lysenko and his imitators were basically a test of political loyalty. Note that nuclear physicists were unique among Soviet scientists in being almost untouched by the repressions, and Stalin personally intervened to stop the Lysenkoization of linguistics which was important for espionage and diplomacy.

Then why not add some credible sources here and to wikipedia? The fact remains that the wikipedia article was largely unsourced and so are your comments which just repeat the unsourced claims some random person wrote on wikipedia.

[black magick hustla]

Stalin and co. knew that the Lysenkoist campaigns were bad for research and development, but used them as a cover to crush political opponents within the scientific community and establish the hegemony of their apparatus throughout the academic system. Scientists and researchers were generously rewarded by the Soviet state during this time, provided they towed the "general line." The irrational positions advanced by Lysenko and his imitators were basically a test of political loyalty. Note that nuclear physicists were unique among Soviet scientists in being almost untouched by the repressions, and Stalin personally intervened to stop the Lysenkoization of linguistics which was important for espionage and diplomacy.

They almost murdered Lev Landau, which was a famous nuclear physicist, for trotskyism and writing a manifesto that called workers to overthrow Stalin. Haha Landau is my hero both in science and politics. What happened is that a scientist who was a party member vouched for Landau and he was able to avoid having his head chopped off.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lev_Landau

[black magick hustla]

"Comrades!
The great cause of the October Revolution is being despicably betrayed. The country is inundated with torrents of blood and filth. Millions of innocent people are being thrown into prisons and no one can tell when his own turn will come.
It is clear, comrades, that the Stalinist clique has carried out a fascist coup. Socialism has remained only on the pages of the habitually lying newspapers. In his rabid hatred of genuine socialism, Stalin is no different from Hitler and Mussolini. Destroying the country for the sake of his own power, Stalin is turning it into an easy prey for the brutal German fascism.
The only way out for the working class and for all toilers of our country is a struggle against Stalinism and Hitlerist fascism, a struggle for socialism."

- Lev Landau and co.


Fuck the stalinist murderous state

[Robespierre Richard]

Go Martyrdom Communism.

[Kléber]

how do u know this is what Stalin and his allies were thinking?
They couldn't have been that stupid, and they didn't touch scientists who were involved in nuclear weapons research.

[Kléber]

Then why not add some credible sources here and to wikipedia? The fact remains that the wikipedia article was largely unsourced and so are your comments which just repeat the unsourced claims some random person wrote on wikipedia.Actually, there has been quite a bit written on this subject and there were intense debates over it in the European Communist intellectual milieu for decades. I'm not an expert on science, if you have such a problem with the article, why don't you go add [citation needed] thingies everywhere? I don't even get what your deal is - are you denying what happened to Vavilov, Koltsov and others, or that those people even existed? Do you want someone to post a giant list of every single book (http://books.google.com/search?q=lysenko&btnG=Search+Books&tbm=bks&tbo=1) and academic article (http://muse.jhu.edu/search/results?search_id=1519443147&action=reload) ever written about Lysenkoism and the politicization of science in the USSR? I'm impressed that you can manage to be so ignorant and arrogant at the same time.

[Sir Comradical]

That kind of remarks makes me angry. Does this man knows that even today, evolution hasn't taught in many schools of USA?

But you haven't actually responded to my post, yaar.

[Agent Ducky]

I read in a National Geographic article that Stalin had genetic scientists sent to labor camps due to a ban on Mendelian genetics (with a specific case being cited in the article regarding a scientist who was doing experiments with wolves' temperaments...)... So as far as I know it's true at least to some extent.

[pranabjyoti]

The USSR actually had some interesting first advances in cybernetics like the ternary computer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Setun) and the OGAS system that was intended to be an alternative for the Kosygin reforms.

Also it would be weird if cybernetics was made illegal "and the taboo remained for a few years after Stalin's death" as the wiki says that the first Soviet computer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_computer_hardware_in_Soviet_Bloc_countr ies#MESM) was finished in 1950, 3 years before Stalin died. I guess it must have run based on principles of dialectical materialism and not computer science.
So as per you, DM and computer science (probably all science) are directly opposite to each other!

[ZeroNowhere]

So as per you, DM and computer science (probably all science) are directly opposite to each other!You do not seem to have grasped the negation inherent in the quoted statement.

[Paul Cockshott]

I just read that Mendelian theories and genetics itself was considered 'counter-revolutionary' in the Soviet Union, adding that several prominent geneticists were purged by Stalin during the purges of the thirties. Is this true? Its not a history book, its a science book but has historical 'footnotes' throughout.

Any help?

A good source on this is Lecourt's book Une Crise et son Enjeu, more recently material that deals with the interplay of ideology and science in the USSR in the 50s is Gerovitch's work
articles like Stalin's Rocket Designers’ Leap into Space: The Technical Intelligentsia Faces the Thaw Osiris 23 (2008)



Mathematical Machines of the Cold War: Soviet Computing, American Cybernetics and Ideological Disputes in the Early 1950s Social Studies of Science 31 (2001)

[pranabjyoti]

Regarding that matter, I want to remind everybody about Ivan Michurin. Now, probably he is mostly forgotten by world community, but by searching google with "Ivan Michurin", a great lot of website can be found. It has been taught in most books of zoology that the experiments of Lysenko and Michurin when repeated, didn't produced the same results as they have told. But I am curious how much true it is?
Probably "anti-genetics" feeling in USSR is a result of how Gene and genetics has been depicted in that time. It has been displayed that Gene is something like God and we must not forget that even upto some few years ago, how Genetics has been used to racism, class difference in some kind of "scientific" shape. Modern genetics is much different than the theories of genetics of that time. I think we should consider this matter in the light of that fact.

[Imposter Marxist]

"... the Stalinist clique has carried out a fascist coup..."

:laugh: Oh man.

[black magick hustla]

:laugh: Oh man.
Yet, the "stalinist clique" probably murdered more communist militants than fascism.

[black magick hustla]

Here is an article about Landau's politics:

http://academic.evergreen.edu/z/zita/articles/History/landau.pdf

[gorillafuck]

Ya and that's why they quickly become one of the most industrialized nation of the world and defeated highly advanced Nazi Germany in WWII!Why is that relevant? Science is not equivalent to industrializing and military strategy....

[pranabjyoti]

Why is that relevant? Science is not equivalent to industrializing and military strategy....
Do you think that industrialization on its own can be possible without proper understanding of science and technology?

[Nolan]

Stalin did stupid things like so. Then again, one idea floating around in Soviet thought was that Darwinism was related to eugenics and later fascism.

But, uh, yeah.

http://images-mediawiki-sites.thefullwiki.org/04/1/1/9/16447043443009802.jpg

[gorillafuck]

Do you think that industrialization on its own can be possible without proper understanding of science and technology?It is completely possible without any understanding of certain sciences, yes. Genetics being one of them.

[Rooster]

Do you think that industrialization on its own can be possible without proper understanding of science and technology?

What is industrialisation?

[pranabjyoti]

It is completely possible without any understanding of certain sciences, yes. Genetics being one of them.
That means Genetics at that time was so less developed that its potential application is almost nil. Another problem (which you and others) are avoiding, is that fact that SCIENCE IS NEUTRAL, BUT SCIENTISTS AREN'T. Their own class background, social-ideology comes into play when they describe their theories. For a long time, Darwinism (better say its distorted version) was a tool of social fascists. Even today, men Like Mani Bhowmick (Indian born US citizen scientist and inventor of eximer laser) and other want to establish that the uncertainty of quantum physics and by the measure of universal constants THAT GOD SET THOSE FACTORS IN A SUCH A WAY THAT INTELLIGENT BEING CAN BE POSSIBLE IN THIS UNIVERSE.
Throughout history, science and scientific theories had been tool of oppression, discrimination. Fighting against that kind of mentality doesn't mean "fighting against science".

[Rooster]

That means Genetics at that time was so less developed that its potential application is almost nil.

So, because a science is not developed and has no practical application, then it should be ignored or suppressed?


Another problem (which you and others) are avoiding, is that fact that SCIENCE IS NEUTRAL, BUT SCIENTISTS AREN'T. Their own class background, social-ideology comes into play when they describe their theories. For a long time, Darwinism (better say its distorted version) was a tool of social fascists. Even today, men Like Mani Bhowmick (Indian born US citizen scientist and inventor of eximer laser) and other want to establish that the uncertainty of quantum physics and by the measure of universal constants THAT GOD SET THOSE FACTORS IN A SUCH A WAY THAT INTELLIGENT BEING CAN BE POSSIBLE IN THIS UNIVERSE. Throughout history, science and scientific theories had been tool of oppression, discrimination. Fighting against that kind of mentality doesn't mean "fighting against science".


I fail to see how that applies to industrialisation, which was the main point of your last argument. Are we talking about genetics now or the suppression of genetics?

[Salyut]

Do you think that industrialization on its own can be possible without proper understanding of science and technology?

A successful agricultural base is needed to feed the workers who do the actual industrializing. Lysenkoism didn't help with this.

I'm not knocking the achievements of the USSR - but putting ideology before science isn't really a good idea.

[B0LSHEVIK]

That means Genetics at that time was so less developed that its potential application is almost nil. Another problem (which you and others) are avoiding, is that fact that SCIENCE IS NEUTRAL, BUT SCIENTISTS AREN'T. Their own class background, social-ideology comes into play when they describe their theories. For a long time, Darwinism (better say its distorted version) was a tool of social fascists. Even today, men Like Mani Bhowmick (Indian born US citizen scientist and inventor of eximer laser) and other want to establish that the uncertainty of quantum physics and by the measure of universal constants THAT GOD SET THOSE FACTORS IN A SUCH A WAY THAT INTELLIGENT BEING CAN BE POSSIBLE IN THIS UNIVERSE.
Throughout history, science and scientific theories had been tool of oppression, discrimination. Fighting against that kind of mentality doesn't mean "fighting against science".

Any legitimate (keyword kiddo) scientist will not blindly advocate something for which experiments, tests and other procedures have consistently proven false, you just set up a straw man argument. Sure there are politicized scientists on both sides of the spectrum, but the general consensus and acceptance comes after long long long hours of peer review and scrutiny from other scientists who may envy the fact that someone else had the bright idea and will do EVERYTHING in their power to prove you wrong. Those in the science community are not all in bed with each other, as a matter of fact, its actually very tribal and competitive. Social Darwinism is NOT A SCIENTIFIC THEORY. And never was. If anything, it was a political concept not a physical science one. So using this as proof to collaborate your narrative is another straw man. And science was used to oppress? Yea, like burning so-called witches on a stake for believing that our little planet was not the center of the universe.

Dont get me wrong, science can be both a tool for good and evil, if you believe in such childish terms.

[pranabjyoti]

A successful agricultural base is needed to feed the workers who do the actual industrializing. Lysenkoism didn't help with this.

I'm not knocking the achievements of the USSR - but putting ideology before science isn't really a good idea.
So, as per you, ideology, specially DM and science and just opposite to each other!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivan_Vladimirovich_Michurin
http://evolutionwiki.org/wiki/Ivan_Michurin
Even wikipedia accepted that Michurin's method had been widely used around the world. Can you explain what do you want to mean by Lysenkoism and do you think that it has no connection with Michurin's work?

[pranabjyoti]

Any legitimate (keyword kiddo) scientist will not blindly advocate something for which experiments, tests and other procedures have consistently proven false, you just set up a straw man argument. Sure there are politicized scientists on both sides of the spectrum, but the general consensus and acceptance comes after long long long hours of peer review and scrutiny from other scientists who may envy the fact that someone else had the bright idea and will do EVERYTHING in their power to prove you wrong. Those in the science community are not all in bed with each other, as a matter of fact, its actually very tribal and competitive. Social Darwinism is NOT A SCIENTIFIC THEORY. And never was. If anything, it was a political concept not a physical science one. So using this as proof to collaborate your narrative is another straw man. And science was used to oppress? Yea, like burning so-called witches on a stake for believing that our little planet was not the center of the universe.

Dont get me wrong, science can be both a tool for good and evil, if you believe in such childish terms.
Well, in that case, I want to inform you about the latest developments of genetics. As per which "switching on and off" of genes plays a very crucial role in evolution of new species. As per this theory, birds have almost same gene as dinosaurs and they can be turned into dinosaurs by "switch on" of some genes.
Man, genetics has proceeded far ahead from the times of Morgan-Mendel and the latest results isn't something that says the activities of genes can not be altered by external environment.
Actually, the problem of Morgan-Mendel school is the fact that it says "genes are something divine and external environment can not affect it". The way you are portraying is something like "words of messiah" and just forget that our understanding of nature is ever changing. If anything, that contradicts you is "straw-man argument" then you better stay close to religion, not science.

[B0LSHEVIK]

Well, in that case, I want to inform you about the latest developments of genetics. As per which "switching on and off" of genes plays a very crucial role in evolution of new species. As per this theory, birds have almost same gene as dinosaurs and they can be turned into dinosaurs by "switch on" of some genes.
Man, genetics has proceeded far ahead from the times of Morgan-Mendel and the latest results isn't something that says the activities of genes can not be altered by external environment.
Actually, the problem of Morgan-Mendel school is the fact that it says "genes are something divine and external environment can not affect it". The way you are portraying is something like "words of messiah" and just forget that our understanding of nature is ever changing. If anything, that contradicts you is "straw-man argument" then you better stay close to religion, not science.

I know you saw that thing on birds into dinos on the History channel, cause Ive seen that ^ too.

I get it, your attaching yourself to the 'science is another religion' group right? Too bad 'religion' hasnt give us life saving technologies, or advanced the human race out of throwing and leaving our feces on our front yards like people did centuries ago huh? Like I said before, science can both serve humanity, and it can destroy us. Being able to someday grow in petri dishes individual organs from the person's own DNA to me sounds great. Gaining the knowhow to create atomic weapons, on the other, not so positive.

And yes, our biosphere is always changing. Which makes Stalin's crime against science even more heinous since he set us back a few years from achieving that knowledge.

[El Chuncho]

Genetics has always been very connected to eugenics, so I am not going to cry my eyes out about Stalin not liking in it. Purging scientists might be harsh, but geneticists were, and still are in some cases, some of the biggest racists around.

[pranabjyoti]

I know you saw that thing on birds into dinos on the History channel, cause Ive seen that ^ too.

I get it, your attaching yourself to the 'science is another religion' group right? Too bad 'religion' hasnt give us life saving technologies, or advanced the human race out of throwing and leaving our feces on our front yards like people did centuries ago huh? Like I said before, science can both serve humanity, and it can destroy us. Being able to someday grow in petri dishes individual organs from the person's own DNA to me sounds great. Gaining the knowhow to create atomic weapons, on the other, not so positive.

And yes, our biosphere is always changing. Which makes Stalin's crime against science even more heinous since he set us back a few years from achieving that knowledge.
Well, I want to say that science isn't a single entity all that time and SCIENCE AND SCIENTISTS AREN'T EQUAL. The problem is about using science as a weapon to spread ideology (not only left but right too). Electronics and lasers doesn't give the right to anyone with a PhD in science to spread the bloody idea of existence of God and putting the theories of Quantum mechanics as proof.
Actually your argument is childish like "science is great and EVIL Stalin had killed scientists" kind of f***ing imperialist BS. The sources are very much doubtful and it's nothing but another addition to imperialist anti-Stalin BS.

[Salyut]

Actually your argument is childish like "science is great and EVIL Stalin had killed scientists" kind of f***ing imperialist BS. The sources are very much doubtful and it's nothing but another addition to imperialist anti-Stalin BS.

How is critiquing Stalin-era science policy in the USSR imperialist? I'm not really understanding your argument here. :confused:

[Rooster]

Well, I want to say that science isn't a single entity all that time and SCIENCE AND SCIENTISTS AREN'T EQUAL.

Look, I get what you're saying. But you're saying it in such a silly way. SCIENCE AND SCIENTSTS AREN'T EQUAL! Well, no shit. Maths and mathematics aren't equal! Bicycles and bicyclists aren't equal! Science is a method of investigation employed by people, usually specialists, to find out the inner workings of nature. You can't compare the two in the crude way you just did.


The problem is about using science as a weapon to spread ideology (not only left but right too).

Ideology is much more than just a couple of scientists just saying "hey! There might be some genetic differences between people! And here is the evidence!" You can't use "science" as a weapon. You can use propaganda as a weapon, using selected readings of scientific investigations.


Electronics and lasers doesn't give the right to anyone with a PhD in science to spread the bloody idea of existence of God and putting the theories of Quantum mechanics as proof.

So what if he believes in God? His method of reasoning isn't that insane. Many scientists believed in God. Darwin, Newton, Cavendish, Maxwell. That doesn't make their investigations illegitimate. The same way that Marx used the research of bourgeois economists.


Actually your argument is childish like "science is great and EVIL Stalin had killed scientists" kind of f***ing imperialist BS. The sources are very much doubtful and it's nothing but another addition to imperialist anti-Stalin BS.

See, this just shows your position straight off. Rejecting everything just because it's "imperialist" and not within your "idealogical vision". Marx wouldn't have gotten far just dismissing every bourgeois economists insights as "imperialist lies". Your view on life, on research, on investigation, on ideology is the childish one.

[black magick hustla]

Genetics has always been very connected to eugenics, so I am not going to cry my eyes out about Stalin not liking in it. Purging scientists might be harsh, but geneticists were, and still are in some cases, some of the biggest racists around.
it wasn't only geneticists, lots of scientists got murdered for not towing the line.

[B0LSHEVIK]

The sources are very much doubtful and it's nothing but another addition to imperialist anti-Stalin BS.

And if I may, what sources have you provided?

[pranabjyoti]

Look, I get what you're saying. But you're saying it in such a silly way. SCIENCE AND SCIENTSTS AREN'T EQUAL! Well, no shit. Maths and mathematics aren't equal! Bicycles and bicyclists aren't equal! Science is a method of investigation employed by people, usually specialists, to find out the inner workings of nature. You can't compare the two in the crude way you just did.
Well, the main problem you can not understand that scientists are human being and THEY TOO HAVE CLASS AND/OR CLASS ORIENTATION. Which can distort their view of science.

Ideology is much more than just a couple of scientists just saying "hey! There might be some genetic differences between people! And here is the evidence!" You can't use "science" as a weapon. You can use propaganda as a weapon, using selected readings of scientific investigations.
Problem is most can not differentiate between "propaganda" and "fact" and people often fall into the trap. In this case, you and Bolshevik(!) are two examples. You have started the thread and posting with "The Evil Stalin" mindset.

So what if he believes in God? His method of reasoning isn't that insane. Many scientists believed in God. Darwin, Newton, Cavendish, Maxwell. That doesn't make their investigations illegitimate. The same way that Marx used the research of bourgeois economists.
The question isn't what a scientist "believes" or not. The question is whether he/she is using his/her fame as scientist to propagate his reactionary view. None of examples you sited above never try to preach their "believe". And about Einstein, who is a follower of Spinoza philosophy, as per which God just makes the rules during the creation and later just become inactive. This philosophy comes closest to Agnosticism.

See, this just shows your position straight off. Rejecting everything just because it's "imperialist" and not within your "idealogical vision". Marx wouldn't have gotten far just dismissing every bourgeois economists insights as "imperialist lies". Your view on life, on research, on investigation, on ideology is the childish one.
At least I have little idea about imperialist "propaganda" and how they can distort facts. That's why I always want to take them with a handful of salt, not just want to gobble them and vomit on revleft.

And if I may, what sources have you provided?
What kind of source do you want? Proofs that geneticists weren't harassed during the "Evil Stalin Era" etc. kind of sources? I want to focus on whether they were harassed as "scientist" or for other reason. Being scientist doesn't mean you are above the class interest of proletariat.

[gorillafuck]

That means Genetics at that time was so less developed that its potential application is almost nil. Another problem (which you and others) are avoiding, is that fact that SCIENCE IS NEUTRAL, BUT SCIENTISTS AREN'T. Their own class background, social-ideology comes into play when they describe their theories. For a long time, Darwinism (better say its distorted version) was a tool of social fascists. Even today, men Like Mani Bhowmick (Indian born US citizen scientist and inventor of eximer laser) and other want to establish that the uncertainty of quantum physics and by the measure of universal constants THAT GOD SET THOSE FACTORS IN A SUCH A WAY THAT INTELLIGENT BEING CAN BE POSSIBLE IN THIS UNIVERSE.
Throughout history, science and scientific theories had been tool of oppression, discrimination. Fighting against that kind of mentality doesn't mean "fighting against science".Why does that relate to industrialization and the relevance of genetic science to it?

[pranabjyoti]

Why does that relate to industrialization and the relevance of genetic science to it?
This thread isn't about genetics but rather regarding the history of genetics in fUSSR. This started with "during the STALIN-ERA, genetics has been observed with doubt and its researched had been banned by 'party and state' and genticists were murdered for now bowing to STALIN" etc kind of BS. Basically, it's an attempt to show that EVIL STALIN was ANTI-SCIENCE etc.
In contrary, I want to show that in USSR, a different approach has been taken due to its need of quick applicable technology in fields and genetics at that time was not so developed to hand over such technology. Moreover, the research and development of genetics had been conducted in imperialist countries and the scientists from those countries often like to paint genetics with reactionary colors. Genetics had become an weapon to "scientify" racism, sexual discrimination and above all IMPERIALISM. In such a scenario, it's very much obvious that a newborn workers state will see this section of science with doubt.

[Lord Testicles]

Genetics has always been very connected to eugenics, so I am not going to cry my eyes out about Stalin not liking in it. Purging scientists might be harsh, but geneticists were, and still are in some cases, some of the biggest racists around.

Care to try and actually prove that?