2019年12月末，国际自然指数网站发布了2018年度最新的自然指数排名，该排名是对各国在“化学”、“地球与环境科学”、“生命科学”以及“物理学”四类研究性论文的数量及质量进行计算和统计，最终得出各国在这四个领域中的高质量论文产出的排名情况。
其中在化学领域，中国的“自然指数”为6183.75，同比上一年增长了17.9%，首次超过美国位居世界首位，产出等同于日韩印三国的总和。
有必要注意一下的是，曾经美国连续三年盘踞化学榜首，但这次的数值只有5371.32，同比下降了6.2%，日本则同比下降了12.6%，日本在化学领域的下降速度令人吃惊，成为了化学强国中下降速度最快的国家。
此排行榜发布后，受到了西方各国的关注，化学作为西方国家的传统强项，如今被中国超越，令人震惊，让我们看看各国网友在这件事情上是如何看待的吧。
中国提交的高质量论文中，得分最高的大学是北大清华南京以及中国科学技术大学
各国网友评论：
1、If we look back at US history we see the same pattern that saw the US grow from a disgruntled British colonial outpost to the dominant world power, being adopted by China.
The US stopped doing science for the sake of science back in the 1970's. That hurts innovation and allows other countries to catch up and surpass the US.
如果我们回顾美国历史，我们会看到美国从一个心怀不满的英国殖民地前哨成长为占主导地位的世界强国，而这种模式正在被中国采用。
早在20世纪70年代，美国就停止了以科学名义而进行的科学研究。这损害了创新，让其他几个国家得以赶上并超越美国。
2、US science was always driven by money.
Our most iconic inventor, Thomas Edison, basically invented the concept of the corporate lab.
美国的科学一直是由金钱驱动的。
我们最具代表性的发明家，托马斯·爱迪生，绝大多数都是他发明了企业实验室的概念。
3、Call it money if you want, I prefer enlightened self-interest but functionally they are equivalent.
The US funded its universities very generously and that allowed these institutions to be at the forefront of the latest and greatest research and that, as it always does, attracted the best and the brightest researchers. It isn't an accident that MIT anchored the mini computer computer revolution or Caltech launched micro computers.
The US gave up on big science after starving the superconducting super collider project out of existence. Which is why the web came out of CERN and not a US research lab.
China was always going to overtake the US, it has 3 times the population which means a 3 times bigger talent pool. China is now rich enough to enjoy that natural advantage. The same thing applies to India but a decade later.
回复2楼：如果你愿意，可以称之为金钱驱动，我更喜欢称之为开明的利己主义，但在功能上它们是等同的。
美国非常慷慨地资助它的大学，这使得这些机构一如既往地在最新和最伟大的研究中处于前沿，并吸引了最优秀和最聪明的研究人员。麻省理工学院掀起了微型计算机革命，加州理工学院推出了微型计算机，这并非偶然。
在扼杀了超导超级对撞机项目后，美国放弃了大型科学研究。这就是怎么回事万维网出自欧洲核子研究中心，而不是美国的研究实验室。
中国总是会超过美国，它的人口是美国的3倍，这在某种程度上预示着它的人才库是美国的3倍。中国现在足够富裕，能够轻松的享受这种天然的优势。同样的事情也会发生在印度，但是那是在十年之后。
4、Nope. China spends about 5 times as much on R&D as the US does. And in pharma, specifically in the US, private industry spends about ten times as much as government spending. The percentage of our budget we have spent on science is plummeting.
不。中国在研发上的投入大约是美国的5倍。在制药行业，尤其是在美国，私营企业的支出大约是国家支出的10倍。我们用于科学的预算比例正在直线下降。
5、The US stopped doing science for the sake of science back in the 1970's.
Wait what? How did that happen?
早在20世纪70年代，美国就停止了为了科学而进行的科学研究。
他们在等什么？为何会这样？
6、And this trend is expected to continue
这一趋势预计将持续下去。
7、Anyway we should agree it's great that there's another superpower contributing to tech and science development.
无论如何，我们该同意，有另一个超级大国对科技发展做出贡献是件好事。
8、Lets not do the Cold War again.
Just try to take the cup next season, America!
This is exactelly what Cold War is. "To catch up and overtake".
我们不要再冷战了。
美国，争取下个赛季的冠军吧！
这就是冷战的结果，“追上并超车”。
9、Say what you like about the Cold War, but no matter what you can't say it was great. Lets not do that again.
Just try to take the cup next season, America! There'll be lots of British scientists looking for jobs soon...
回复8楼：关于冷战，你喜欢说什么都行，但不管怎样，你都不能说它是伟大的。别再这样了。
美国，争取下个赛季的冠军吧！很快就会有很多英国科学家找工作……
10、The cold war wasn't great, but many great things happen because of it. For one, we got people to the moon and the space race did great things for mankind
回复8楼：冷战并不伟大，但许多伟大的事情却因此而发生。首先，我们把人类送上月球，太空竞赛为人类做出了伟大的贡献。
11、There is a brilliant comic, "the Manhattan projects" in which the cold war os a ruse put up by scientists from both countries to get funding for their real pet projects.
有一部精彩的喜剧《曼哈顿计划》（the Manhattan projects），讲述的是冷战时期，两国科学家为自己真正喜欢的项目筹集资金的计谋。
12、Eliminating chemistry from US schools because they're afraid someone might make explosives: priceless.
取消美国学校的化学课程，因为他们担心有人会制造炸药：这是无价的。
13、Great. I'm can buy carbon nanotube fibers in bulk form AliExpress next year.
太好了。我明年可以从全球速卖通买到大量的碳纳米管纤维。
14、as long as they share their research we all win, just have to make sure everything is fair.
只要他们分享他们的研究成果，我们都是赢家，只要确保一切都是公平的。
15、I don't think any nation shares their high quality research, at least not freely.
我认为没有一点国家会分享他们的高质量研究，至少不是免费的。
16、There's a lot of things wrong with that statement. First and foremost, China isn't really known for being fair or sharing. Second of all, there's nothing 'we', aka the rest of the world can do to ensure fairness. Last but not least, I have qualms about the results of their research because I've read that a lot of China's scientific results haven't been able to be duplicated.
这种说法有很多错误之处。首先，中国并不以公平和分享著称。其次，“我们”，也就是世界其他地方，在确保公平方面无能为力。最后但并非最不重要的是，我对他们的研究结果感到不安，因为我了解到许多中国的科研成果无法重现。
17、Isn't a published paper in a peer reviewed journal the very definition both "fair" and "sharing"?
回复16楼：发表在同行评审期刊上的论文，不正是“公平”和“分享”的定义吗？
18、And its been true for a long time. My first project as a doctoral student was to replicate a piece of Chinese research that turned out to be utter BS. It was not a complicated experiment, but after 20 or so attempts to reproduce it, I came to the firm conclusion that they had lied about either the methodology or the outcome, or both.
回复16楼：很长一段时间都是如此。作为一名博士生，我的第一个项目是重现一份中国的研究报告，结果证明它完全是胡扯。这不是一个复杂的实验，但在尝试了20多次之后，我得出了一个坚定的结论：他们要么在方法上撒了谎，要么在结论上撒了谎，要么两者都撒了谎。
19、Ya'd think that'd be enough for "fair" and "sharing" but it's not. I can't count the number of times I've tried to replicate chemistry experiments (to build something novel with the products of those experiments), only to not have the experiment work.
Then you run into the author at a conference, ask about the paper, and get "ah, psh, that didn't work. We left out x, y and z steps". Why? Keeping ahead of others in your domain. Publish or perish.
回复16楼：你可能认为“公平”和“分享”就足够了，但事实并非如此。我数不清有多少次我试图重现化学实验，结果却没有成功。
然后你在一次学术会议上碰到了作者，问他关于论文的问题，得到的回答是“啊，那样做是没用的。我们省略了x、y和z步骤”。为何会这样？在你的领域保持领先，毫无保留的发布就是自取灭亡。
20、I don't think this is like an award kinda thing, it's just a measure of a countries chemical development. So it wouldn't make sense to exclude people.
我不认为这是一个奖项之类的东西，它只是一个国家化学发展的衡量标准。所以把人的因素排除在外是没有意义的。
21、China should be disqualified from just about everything, so yeah
中国应该被取消所有比赛资格。
22、This thread is gonna be fun, here comes the propaganda already. Americans can't handle being told they're #2.
这个帖子会很有趣，宣传慢慢的开始了。美国人无法接受别人说他们是老二。
小编：中国虽然本次在化学方面取得了不错的成绩，但在其他三个领域还有较长的路要走。各位朋友，你们是如何看待这件事的？请在下方评论区留言，记得关注我们，每日更新，带你了解老外眼中的中国与世界。
