For the most part, scientists do not tend to make a fuss.
They work away diligently, under the radar, increasing knowledge, unlocking secrets, solving problems.
It is an indication, therefore, of how concerned they are by the initial moves of the Trump administration, that they are planning to take to the streets.
Plans are progressing for a large march or series of marches by scientists in the US, at which they will express their concern and opposition to the Trump administration's attitude towards them and their work.
They are particularly concerned, like their colleagues in the tech industry, about the immigration rule changes.
Measures that have the potential capacity to damage research, stifle the flow of knowledge and ideas, and prevent top scientific talent from getting into the US.
It is estimated that there are around 17,000 students from the seven countries that are immediately impacted by the ban studying at American universities.
Students who are likely to be bright and intelligent, whose future research careers are now in doubt, particularly if they were unfortunate enough to have been outside the US when the ban came in.
The implications are potentially much wider though, because around a fifth of the 29 million US based scientists and engineers are from overseas.
Scientists, like the knowledge they grow, are highly mobile. They rely on movement to be able to collaborate, share ideas, attend conferences.
Any clamp down on that movement has the potential, therefore, to be very damaging.
"Scientific progress depends on openness, transparency, and the free flow of ideas," wrote Rush Holt, the CEO of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) – the world’s largest general science society – in a statement denouncing the administration's actions.
"The United States has always attracted and benefited from international scientific talent because of these principles”
"The AAAS has consistently encouraged international cooperation between scientists. We know that fostering safe and responsible conduct of research is essential for scientific advancement, national prosperity, and international security.
"Therefore, the detaining of students and scientists that have already been screened, processed, and approved to receive a visa to visit the United States is contrary to the spirit of science to pursue scholarly and professional interests.
"In order for science and the economy to prosper, students and scientists must be free to study and work with colleagues in other countries.
"The January 27, 2017 White House executive order on visas and immigration will discourage many of the best and brightest international students, scholars, and scientists from studying and working in the United States, or attending academic and scientific conferences."
These sentiments are also reflected in a statement from the International Council for Science, a global science non-governmental organisation representing 122 national scientific bodies and 31 scientific unions.
"As the world's leading non-governmental international scientific organization, the Council promotes the Universality of Science on the basis that science is a common human endeavor that transcends national boundaries and is to be shared by all people," it said.
"It believes that scientific progress results from global exchange of ideas, data, research materials and understanding of the work of others."
But it is not just the immigration rule changes that have given cause for alarm among the scientific community in the US and beyond. As has been widely reported by now, Trump’s team has also moved swiftly to control the information flow around publicly funded scientific research.
The new White House website dropped all references to the biggest global scientific challenge of our time – climate change.
At the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Agriculture, staff were instructed by officials not to communicate research with those outside of the organisation, including the media. (The diktat to the Agricultural Research Service was later rescinded).
Press releases and external communications about taxpayer funded research have also been stopped until further notice.
There were even reports that the EPA was coming under pressure to take down its climate change pages from its website, from a government littered with global warming sceptics – a plan that was reportedly later dropped.
Federal contracts and grants at the EPA have also been frozen, while there are signs that the Trump administration is eyeing up a significant cut in research budgets in several agencies, including at the Department of Energy and EPA.
To be fair, it is not the first time such an incoming administration in the US has looked to put its stamp on the publicly funded science system, both directly and indirectly. But the nature and speed of the action is reminiscent of the period following the coming to power of Stephen Harper as prime minister of Canada in 2006.
For the following decade, state funded Canadian scientists struggled with cutbacks and closures, and were prevented from speaking publicly about a range of research issues.
A survey in 2013 found a quarter of government scientists had been asked to exclude or alter scientific information for non-science related reasons, and 90% felt they were not allowed to speak freely to the media about the work they do.
That same year scientists in Canada donned their lab coats and took the streets to protest outside the parliament in Ottawa about the impact the restrictions were having on their work and their lives.
It is no great surprise, therefore, that in the face of similar threats US based scientists are now considering a similar course of action, except in their case they do not plan on waiting seven years to do it.
The date of the march(es) has yet to be announced, but they are likely to be soon. And plans are afoot to have a satellite demonstration here in Ireland where Irish scientists will protest in solidarity with their colleagues and collaborators across the Atlantic.
A front has also been opened on social media, with a range of "rogue" or "alt" accounts set up purporting to anonymously reflect the views of staff in agencies including NASA, the EPA, National Park Service and US Forest Service.
Not a bad idea, you would have to say, because after all if US scientists need as they do to make themselves heard, where better a place to get the President’s ear, than on his beloved Twitter machine?
Comments welcome via Twitter to @willgoodbody
