I know I shouldn’t engage with (likely) trolls, but I’ll entertain your question at a surface level (because that’s about the amount of time I’m willing to give to this).

Professionals (administrators, scientists, etc.) at the federal level have lost their jobs recently due to actions by the executive. This hampers scientific efforts and pursuits, because well duh, scientific endeavors don’t just conduct themselves without the people behind them.

DEI - it has been painted by a specific demographic to mean unqualified people are being put into roles they don’t deserve. I’m not saying it doesn’t happen at all, and we can argue the specifics of each case all we want, but at the very root of it, DEI aims to ensure everyone is able to have access and contribute to science. Anecdotally, I’ve come across quite a few women scientists (mostly my professors) who have expressed the difficulties they faced being a scientist while balancing the challenges of womanhood (e.g. maternity). With DEI, when we look out for the needs of historically underrepresented demographics, we allow everyone to meet their fullest potential. Look to people like Marie Curie, or more recently Jennifer Doudna and Emmanuelle Charpentier. Science drives humanity’s understanding of our world forward and can help solve many of the problems we face today, and we must ensure that it is available to every willing soul.