Depends somewhat on the particular negative. We can claim with certainty that dinosaurs are not alive today, even though there are theoretically places that are not sufficiently explored where, in principle, a dinosaur might live. We are well aware that the fossil record is globally consistent and demonstrates the timing of their extinction, as well as the lack of any fossils of dinosaurs since then.

Similarly, I can claim with confidence that a force does not exist in the universe that would allow me to teleport from place to place instantaneously, because such a force would violate many of the known laws of physics.

There are various types of god-beings that cannot exist because of a logical contradiction. An omnipresent entity, for instance, would be always detectable if it had any measurable effect on the world, but no such measurable effect can be observed. If it is not capable of a measurable effect, then it is indistinguishable from not existing.

Other types of negatives are not easily proven. That is why scientists will say things like, “Based on 3478 measurements, there is currently no evidence to support the existence of higher values than those reported here.”

It is pretty standard practice. For one, it helps people who read or review your work know who they are dealing with. For another, it helps the general public understand who scientists are. Part of the mission is to make sure that the next generation carries the work on, and by emphasizing the human aspect of the science, young people can actually imagine themselves getting to that point some day.

I was a YEC before going to university. I studied geology. After two years, I accepted that evolution happened. After four years, I was an atheist. I went on to get a doctorate, and I have published quite a few papers about rocks that are >2 billion years old.

As a kid, there were literally 0 authority figures in my life that accepted that evolution happened. It was taken as a given that it was ridiculous. My biology teacher skipped the chapter on evolution, saying, “this is controversial.”

Patience, love, and making critical information available gives kids like I was a chance.

I wasn’t sure if this was true or a weird misunderstanding or conspiracy type thing. Seems to be true. Here is an accessible writeup: https://www.bbc.com/travel/article/20231127-brazils-mysterious-tunnels-made-by-giant-sloths

Simply put, it’s not that simple.

My wife made this joke during a presentation that was part of a job interview. Nobody laughed. Clear sign of a toxic environment.

Depends on the program you are in. The view from being a doctoral student to being a postdoc to being research/lecturing staff is very different. Not all advisors expose their students to the realities of higher levels of academia. And when a woman or minority is being mentored by a white man, they may not be aware of biases that can affect the student’s later career.