system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
postdoc fellow - bad supervision and no mentoring

Hi. I came into the lab (which I chose) with a grant for one year  and scored another 2 years of fellowship. Ive been in the lab for a year and my fellowship just started. 

After being 'nice' for a year my PI flat out told me that my project is not within his interests, and in general he was very pessimistic. Granted, its preliminary data and it's not in his expertise. However it's not the first thing that is 'wrong' in this lab. Virtually all the phds that finished quit academia or considering to quit and had very bad supervision - and in my opinion bad quality of research. I know that I need a good mentor in order to become a good PI and I can take my fellowship somewhere else if I have a good explanation. I feel like I'm wasting my time and I could be doing so much better in a supportive environment. Im passionate about MY hypothesis and I don't want to give it up because he isn't. I'm thinking when it's time to publish I would have to try 10x harder to convince him and without proper supervision I won't develop intellectually or scientifically. I'm still young (below 30) and have time to do another postdoc before pursuing for PI. However I don't want to burn bridges because he is an important person in the field and it might be a good experience to become more assertive and independent. Is it worth sticking around for 2 years? Anyone with a similar experience?
gpt
I agree with acidfast.

The important thing is that you have funding, a hypothesis, and a place to work. You will learn as much if not more by pushing the project forward yourself than sitting back hoping a PI is going to do a Yoda on you.

As a postdoc you've proven you can run a project by passing your PhD. You have a fellowship. Now get at it.