Login

Register

Member List

RSS Feed

Amanda | Contact

Auguste | Contact

Jesse | Contact

Pam | Contact

Next entry: Wingnuts just don’t change that quickly Previous entry: CSA Week #4: How many uses for purslane yogurt can we find?

Getting someone fired: the most fun wingnuts can have while avoiding prison

Wingnuts have a lot of tactics: lying, screeching, saying racist things and then taking umbrage when you point out that they’re racist, fantasizing out loud about “second amendment remedies”.  But getting someone fired is by far their favorite tactic, bar none.  It accomplishes so much, if you’re successful!  It reinforces the idea that you’re above criticism (gearing you up for the next time someone is targeted for harassment for having the nerve to criticize you), is scares would-be critics into silence, and above all, it fucks someone’s life up tremendously.  Actual “second amendment remedies” are dangerous and get you thrown in jail.  Getting someone fired, however, is something you can do without any repercussions for yourself.  It’s the perfect strategy for the cowardly sadist, and therefore the favorite of wingnuts. 

The latest example (though, to be fair, there’s always half a dozen in process with the wingnutteria) is this harassment campaign against John Abraham, Associate Professor at the University of St. Thomas.  Abraham’s Crime Against Wingnuttery is being right about global warming, and as we all know, being right is one of the major ways you can bring down the army of flying wingnut monkeys onto your head.  Specifically, Abraham thoroughly and devastatingly debunked the ravings of global warming denialist Christopher Monckton.  He discovered that Monckton’s impressive-sounding “evidence” is, as you can imagine, a pile of lies and misrepresentations

So naturally, someone who approaches science with such passion and accuracy cannot actually hold a job as a scientist.  Or, that’s the position of the flying monkeys, who have decided to start a harassment campaign against Abraham’s employer, the University of St. Thomas.  They’ve been flooding the president’s email box.  They do like the logic of torture, those wingnuts!  “Give us what we want and the pain will go away.  You do want the pain to go away, don’t you?  Here’s another round of emails making it impossible for you to go about your daily business.  Just hand us the professor, and the pain will stop.”  (There was also an attempt at extorting money!) 

Of course, targeting academia is a much different game than targeting politicians and mainstream media outlets, who love giving in to bullies like it was ice cream that gives you orgasms.  The University’s response to a bunch of charlatans calling for the head of a professor because he had the nerve to be right was exactly what it should be:

    We received your email response to our June 25, 2010 letter. The University of St Thomas respects your right to disagree with Professor Abraham, just as the University respects Professor Abraham’s right to disagree with you. What we object to are your personal attacks against Father Dease, and Professor Abraham, your inflammatory language, and your decision to disparage Professor Abraham, Father Dease and The University of St Thomas.

  Please be advised that neither we nor the University of St Thomas will communicate with you any further about your decision to sully the University of St. Thomas, Professor Abraham, and others rather than to focus on the scholarly differences between you and Professor Abraham.

  Signed: Phyllis Karasov, Moore Costellow and Hart, P.L.L.P.

I wish that the politicians who caved on the ACORN thing or the Washington Post that caved on the Dave Weigel thing would take notes—-when you’re being inundated with bullshit, remember that it’s bullshit.  Bullshit doesn’t stop being bullshit because it’s loud bullshit.  Bullshit doesn’t stop being bullshit because a lot of people want to believe it.  Bullshit certainly doesn’t stop being bullshit because bullshit supporters, realizing they’re full of shit, revert to bullying to get their way because they can’t win on the facts.  And every time you give in to bullshit, you embolden the purveyors of bullshit.  You may think you’re getting the flying monkeys off you by giving in, but all you’ve done is show them that their tactics work, and next time they want something from you, they’re going to come about you with twice the number of flying monkeys.  That’s how it works.  Look what happened with James O’Keefe.  Did he take his bullshit victory over ACORN and go home satisfied?  Hell no!  Being able to get Congress and the mainstream media to play along with his bullshit made him think he was The Man, and the result was that he started picking bigger fish to fry with his usual tactics of lying and being smug.  You don’t get rid of them by giving them what they want.

Of course, my main concern now is that I’m seeing climate scientists starting to get the kind of targeting that you see against abortion providers.  As much as I’d like to believe that standing firm against bullies is enough to scare them off, I know that’s not true.  The level of obsession that global warming denialists have is downright scary, and I hope that the FBI and other law enforcement are at least monitoring the situation, because I really do fear it’s in line after abortion and general anti-federal government sentiment in terms of attracting the unhinged right wing elements.

 

------

Registration is now required! We're still in the process of getting it all squared away, so for the moment don't forget to Login or Register using the links in the upper left menu before starting to write your comment.

Posted by Amanda Marcotte on 11:27 AM • (49) Comments

“And every time you give in to bullshit, you embolden the purveyors of bullshit.”

Fecal matters ... indeed. We need more shovels.

Comment #1: John Danley  on  07/18  at  12:45 PM

when you’re being inundated with bullshit, remember that it’s bullshit.  Bullshit doesn’t stop being bullshit because it’s loud bullshit.  Bullshit doesn’t stop being bullshit because a lot of people want to believe it.  Bullshit certainly doesn’t stop being bullshit because bullshit supporters, realizing they’re full of shit, revert to bullying to get their way because they can’t win on the facts.  And every time you give in to bullshit, you embolden the purveyors of bullshit.  You may think you’re getting the flying monkeys off you by giving in, but all you’ve done is show them that their tactics work, and next time they want something from you, they’re going to come about you with twice the number of flying monkeys.


Well said, Amanda. Excellent allegory. Seriously, this is akin to Toddler Parenting/Disciplining 101, which is horrendously draining and strains one to the edge of sanity. Which is a large part of the reason why I refuse to be a parent, in addition to my refusal to replicate. In the short run, the “easy” way out is to simply capitulate to the demanding brat, but if the parent caves to this impulse (easy to do, what with the sleep deprivation and all), then this behavior and subsequent hell will only exponentially increase and be an even more catastrophic evil. It can be effectively remedied by a tribal effort, but we live in a nuclear family society, so it requires many individuals of iron will, determination, wisdom and stamina to effect…


The Low Road is just so much easier to navigate, understandably, for the vast majority of us…:/

Comment #2: BJ Survivor  on  07/18  at  12:52 PM

Standing firm against bullies only makes them escalate. You must trounce them, and trounce them thoroughly, to get your momentary peace. Of course, they will then come back in larger numbers and beat you to a pulp.

Giving in? Kipling said it best.
It is always a temptation to a rich and lazy nation,
To puff and look important and to say:
“Though we know we should defeat you, we have not the time to meet you.
We will therefore pay you cash to go away.”

And that is called paying the Dane-geld;
But we’ve proved it again and again,
That if once you have paid him the Dane-geld
You never get rid of the Dane.

Comment #3: Angelia Sparrow  on  07/18  at  12:57 PM

check out the latest in climate science campaigning against this sort of bullshit: www.ucsusa.org

The Union of Concerned Scientists is directly targeting the anti climate science attacks with not just an education campaign, but support for scientists.

Comment #4: Ms Kate  on  07/18  at  12:58 PM

I really do fear it’s in line after abortion and general anti-federal government sentiment in terms of attracting the unhinged right wing elements.

Can you say “Kristalnacht II”?  I really do think that the wingnuts (and not just the fringe, but extending considerably toward the “mainstream” conservatives) are working themselves up to a violent eliminationist attack on those they see as their enemies (i.e., the sane and rational portion of the population)

Comment #5: DrDick  on  07/18  at  01:12 PM

This is just like working with kids.  You give in when they’re throwing temper tantrums, you lose in the long run.  It just makes them worse.

Comment #6: BrianD  on  07/18  at  02:16 PM

Dr. Dick, since you have already broken the Godwin’s hymen on this thread, I will point out that _The Turner Diaries_, the neo-Nazi book which inspired the Order, Timothy McVeigh and probably other right-wing terrorists, includes a charming episode called “the Day of the Rope”, in which the victorious Nazis lynch Jews, non-whites, white women who’ve had sex with non-whites…and academics, who are thoughtfully dressed in their robes to make clear what their crime against decency was.

Comment #7: Dr. Psycho  on  07/18  at  02:37 PM

“Bullshit doesn’t stop being bullshit because it’s loud bullshit.”

True, but to those so inclined, loudness bring an aura of truthiness they find appealing…

“Bullshit doesn’t stop being bullshit because a lot of people want to believe it.”

...and when you add loud, vigorous, vicious attacks to something some people want to believe so badly, you’ve pretty much built an impenetrable fortress around the bullshit.  True Believers are immune to reason at that point.

An analogy that seems to me to fit is the very slow and drawn out death of cigarettes in America.  It took decades just to get the majority of the medical establishment to agree that smoking was a major cause of disease.  Then it took decades to get the politicians (at least enough of them) on board.  All the while the forces of big tobacco fought tooth-and-nail each step of the way, denying everything, doing their own “scientific” research to support their denial of tobacco’s harmful nature. 

All along there were any number of people who, without any real understanding of the science or the issues, would side with the Tobacco Co’s, come hell or high water.  There still is a hardcore bunch who continue to deny that tobacco is inherently harmful in any way.  Every one of them seems to have an aunt or uncle, grandmother or grandfather who has been smoking three packs a day since birth and have lived (or did live) to be 105-years old, or some such bullshit.  This “justifies” their belief that there is nothing behind the scientific condemnation of tobacco.

And there are indeed some people who have managed to beat the odds and smoked a trainload of butts while living to some advanced age.  But for every one of them, there are hundreds who died much younger than necessary because of their habit.  It’s the equivalent of knowing that there are actual lottery winners, and deciding as a result that you don’t need to work because you ticket is gonna win.

Likewise, when it gets cold and/or snows somewhere, that’s proof to the denialists that there’s nothing to global climate change, regardless of how asinine and unscientific they are behaving.  They will cling to this belief with all their might until they die, or until (only some of them) finally figure out things are fucked up.  And I don’t think there’s any effective way to combat it…

Regarding destroying lives as a way to keep score against the Left, it seems to just be in their nature.  The kind of authority worshiper who is attracted to these politics-as-sports games is just an asshole who needs to tear some people down in order to build themselves up.  People like that have always been with us, and will probably never go away…

Comment #8: MikeEss  on  07/18  at  02:45 PM

No real need to break Godwin’s Law; authoritarians have existed in many nations in many points in history, and yes, they have eliminated enemies in violent ways in many different ways.

Comment #9: Amanda Marcotte  on  07/18  at  02:46 PM

In fact, I’d say that our neo-fascists seem more like the heirs of South American juntas, especially when you consider the relationship of neo-conservatives to folks like Pinochet.

Comment #10: Amanda Marcotte  on  07/18  at  02:54 PM

In fact, I’d say that our neo-fascists seem more like the heirs of South American juntas, especially when you consider the relationship of neo-conservatives to folks like Pinochet.

Most of those Latin American despots are in fact generally regarded as fascist or cryptofascist.  I did not necessarily mean to imply that the right are actual fascists (though I do think they are rapidly edging that way), only that they show a similar propensity for violently attacking those they blame for their problems.  In this case, it would include LGBTs, feminists, people of color, immigrants, academics, and anyone to the left of John Birch and Barry Goldwater.

Comment #11: DrDick  on  07/18  at  03:58 PM

Interesting, a complete content-free comment.  Even the guy who rants about atheists has something to say.

Comment #12: Amanda Marcotte  on  07/18  at  05:05 PM

DrDick, I don’t know if you’ve read David Neiwert’s work, but it’s well worth it.  He has a lot of interesting things to say about the proto-fascist leanings on the American right.

Comment #13: Amanda Marcotte  on  07/18  at  05:06 PM

Ohhh… Jesse the Atheist. Good moniker, makes him sound like a sexy action hero. Now all he needs is a tagline. Suggestions?

Comment #14: shakahi  on  07/18  at  05:13 PM

Most of those Latin American despots are in fact generally regarded as fascist or cryptofascist.

Back during the 2008 campaign, I had an interesting discussion with a naturalized citizen of Argentine birth about Latin American fascism and how it might be a stronger model for comparison than European fascism.  The upshot, IIRC, was that the biggest difference between our neighbors to the south and what’s being cultivated here was the involvement of unions—unions are incredibly weak here, and therefore don’t seek political power on the same scale.  But he agreed that the American right wing is treading closer to fascism than he had ever anticipated when he moved here.

Comment #15: latts  on  07/18  at  05:15 PM

Cleanup on Aisle 12 - bring the pet stain remover.

I second the mention of Dave Neiwert & Sara Robinison - and add in a dash of Rick Perlstein for the historical roots.

These attacks fit nicely in with the discussion of the last week regarding the NAACP’s condemnation of the Tea Party for it’s racist elements, and the immediate sideshow the defenders opened up to derail the discussion.

Comment #16: idiosynchronic  on  07/18  at  05:18 PM

But getting someone fired is by far their favorite tactic, bar none.  It accomplishes so much, if you’re successful!  It reinforces the idea that you’re above criticism (gearing you up for the next time someone is targeted for harassment for having the nerve to criticize you), is scares would-be critics into silence, and above all, it fucks someone’s life up tremendously.  Actual “second amendment remedies” are dangerous and get you thrown in jail.  Getting someone fired, however, is something you can do without any repercussions for yourself.

I don’t know they all seemed pretty smug when Dr. Tiller was murdered. There were no repercussions for the inciters, the stalkers, the leaders; essentially the providers of means, motive and opportunity. O’Reilly who lied and lied about Dr. Tiller and repeatedly called him a baby killer couldn’t even get through his “I don’t approve of killing doctors” bullshit speech without looking completely self-satisfied.

I think being instrumental in a perceived enemy’s murder is their favorite tactic. Isn’t that the ultimate intimidation? “Look at Dr. Tiller. We can kill you and nothing will happen to us.”

Comment #17: shakahi  on  07/18  at  05:34 PM

In fact, I’d say that our neo-fascists seem more like the heirs of South American juntas, especially when you consider the relationship of neo-conservatives to folks like Pinochet.

And isn’t it interesting that wealth inequality in the US has crept up to similiar levels?...

Comment #18: Phoenician in a time of Romans  on  07/18  at  05:38 PM

Hard to take anything from you as credible, Amanda, given your short-lived job on the Edwards campaign.

Yes, Amanda. Getting fired by Edwards because he was wetting his pants about the Catholics’ fee-fees being hurt by this meanie-face lady who said bad words completely erases all of the other work you’ve ever done on every topic. How on Earth can I believe what you say about abortion rights when you’ve said the f-word so many times???

Comment #19: Alison  on  07/18  at  05:42 PM

Amanda -

I am very familiar with Dave’s work and have been reading him for years, which has definitely helped shape my thinking on this topic.  It is probably the best and most comprehensive analysis we have of the current rightwing fringe and their articulation with movement conservatism.  I also teach race and ethnicity, so I follow that literature, which overlaps with this, as well.

Comment #20: DrDick  on  07/18  at  06:34 PM

hmmm. KDogg bot or actual human. It basically tosses out right-wing word stew, same nonsensical bullshit, just a different order. There’s obviously no intelligence behind it.

Comment #21: MAJeff, the God of Biscuits  on  07/18  at  06:53 PM

This is why most professors sign clauses into their hiring contracts that gives them the right to not be fired for cause.  Most of the public universities have it written in in the form of tenure and it carries over to the private sector, so even if the university leadership did side with the right-wing letter writers, it wouldn’t make a difference.  Though it is nice to see a university supporting their faculty for once. 

Folks over here in England think your president is a twat, an idiot.

Not to feed the trolls, but if you’re saying you’re English, then what does it matter?  You’ve elected Thatcher 2.0 who intends to truly cut grandma’s life support.  Pray you aren’t that old, lest the NHS come and take away your medication in your new ultra-conservative England.

Comment #22: Xeranar  on  07/18  at  06:54 PM

Englishwoman resident in England here.

I think poor KDogg is confusing the average Brit’s opinion on poor, brain-fucked Dubya with Obama. Obama is fairly well respected as foreign leaders go. I’ve heard a couple of the racists I work with make the odd jab (by which I mean idiotic racist joke), but that’s to be expected of bitter, dumb white folks.

Comment #23: killerrobot  on  07/18  at  07:07 PM

Okay, if you insist, asshole, we’ll ban you.

Comment #24: Amanda Marcotte  on  07/18  at  07:10 PM

::looks around::  I guess I got here after the ban-hammer pulped him.

Comment #25: Eric_RoM  on  07/18  at  07:17 PM

Sometimes it doesn’t matter how hard you work, how many promotions you have received or how good your work is.

The work places are filled with hard core Tea Baggers and fanatical right wing Christians.

I should know.  I was just fired for the most bogus of reasons after having put in a couple of months of above and beyond the call of duty 50+ hour weeks.

I had let it be known over the period of my employment at this place that I didn’t want to hear racist comments.  It was also known that I am a lesbian, a non-believer and progressive Democrat.

In Texas those are a combination of reasons for termination.

I was accused of something that was a minor infraction.

I was berated and verbally abused then terminated.

It was as though they were looking for the slightest reason to terminate me especially since I had demonstrated the ability to do the job that they had just denied me a promotion to, hiring someone from the outside instead.

Now living in a state where the truly Orwellian new speak rule called “The Right to Work Law” (really the fire at will law) is in effect workers have no rights.  The companies can and do treat us like dirt.

Ironically when I was in a position where I could have used the same power to discriminate based on politics I didn’t and rather took the position of, “We have a job to do.  When it comes to politic we will agree to disagree.”

Comment #26: Suzan  on  07/18  at  07:27 PM

I’d argue that the rightist dictators of Latin America were generally Traditional Authoritarians rather than Fascists. The Latin American dictators just wanted their people to do what they were told and not criticize them in public. They didn’t actually care if people agreed with them as long as they didn’t go against the regime. Fascists actually need and want the people to agree with them and tend to be more into social engineering to get this. The Latin American dictators weren’t that into social engineering.

The misuse of the term fascist to mean any sort of rightist thought or regime is a pet peeve of mine. Just because conservatives confuse everything on the Left with Marxism, doesn’t give us the same luxury. Intellectual honesty requires that we differentiate the different forms of rightist thought even though they all suck.

Comment #27: Lee  on  07/18  at  08:37 PM

Having done a few click-thrus, I’m not going to worry about this guy Monckton. He not only refers to himself in the third person, he calls himself His Lordship. For real. This guy is shithouse-rat crazy. He’s half a step ahead of the dude who sits in the bus station talking to himself all day. St. Thomas just sent him a fuck-off-or-we’ll-call-the-cops letter. I highly doubt they’re going to fire anyone based on his say-so.

Comment #28: Bitter Scribe  on  07/18  at  10:43 PM

Suzan, you should absolutely file a complaint against them with the EEOC, because at least two of those three “reasons” are forbidden by federal law (sadly, sexual orientation isn’t one of them):  religion (or lack thereof) and political affiliation.  Even if you don’t want to sue, they will still be investigated and have to come up with some answers for their illegal actions.  You can easily nail them for retaliation if you documented your complaints about racist comments at the time.

I had a friend who filed an EEOC complaint against a former employer just to get it on the record what they were up to since she didn’t actually want to work for them anymore after being told to her face that they never promote women.

Comment #29: Mnemosyne  on  07/18  at  11:00 PM

It’s funny because if one professor in the country should be fired for their viewpoint, it should be Mike Adams.  Of course there’s a difference between Abraham and Adams, one is correct based on sound science and the other borders on hate speech and incitement.  But you would never see a campaign to get Adams fired, because the second you do, Adams would become an instant martyr.  You would never stop hearing the phrase “reverse McCarthyism.”  The more Adams hates, the more afraid liberals are of standing up to him.  Ironically, Adams has himself tried to get liberal professors in trouble for their viewpoint, go figure.

Comment #30: Albert Cirrus  on  07/18  at  11:49 PM

“Of course, my main concern now is that I’m seeing climate scientists starting to get the kind of targeting that you see against abortion providers.”

I think the reason for this Amanda is that the right has convinced themselves that the GW issue is a religious issue and not a science issue.  They have convinced themselves that GW is a liberal religion after constant brainwashing by fucks on the right.  Because of this, they see the truth behind GW as anti-Christian and we know that many Christians believe the ends justify the means, so the jihad against scientists has become cult-like.

Comment #31: Albert Cirrus  on  07/18  at  11:53 PM

Xeranar - do you mind giving the COMPLETE picture of tenure? RUn up to first, there’s usually the time spent as an adjunct, working for a couple of universities/colleges at poverty level wages if you have a family, then, officially, first there’s the hire, and the competition is usually 200 candidates for one position in my field, last I heard. Then there’s the relocation upheaval, often cross-country, then the time spent teaching AND publishing AND administration, for much less pay than the private sector and after five or six years, facing a tenure committee, often to be rejected, especially at more prestigious universities.  In the private sector, not getting the promotion still means one is employed, while at the university, tenure denial comes at the end of contract, which is usually not renewed if one doesn’t get tenure.  And try getting any but an adjuncts job after tenure rejection!  SO after all the student loans, it’s time to change careers - the lottery starts to look like more secure, stable career planning.

Your post made it sound as if the prof walked in and simply negotiated to get his/her contract with self- beneficial clauses - hardly the case.

Comment #32: phylosopher  on  07/18  at  11:54 PM

Mike Adams should be fired for his professional incompetence.  Full stop.  His opinions are not what is important - his complete inability to perform as a scholar is.

Comment #33: Ms Kate  on  07/18  at  11:54 PM

Your post made it sound as if the prof walked in and simply negotiated to get his/her contract with self- beneficial clauses - hardly the case.

I could have taken the time to explain all that but it wasn’t by any stretch of the context it was pointless to mention.  Basically it was an irrelevant matter because in many cases by the time a professor is going out there and being a visible figure they’re tenured so it is far safer.  I would relay a personal tale, but it is again a pointless matter.  Though I can vouch the average university I dealt with had less than 30 applicants for a position in my field, not nearly 200.

Comment #34: Xeranar  on  07/19  at  01:41 AM

# of applicants - Depends on the field, depends on the university the tier and the location.  But the idea that it is pointless, is simply false.  You misrepresented the reality of most academics and reinforced the prevalent misconception that academics are lazy, wield far more power than they do, write their own ticket, and simply waltz into jobs that are always there.  You are not doing your colleagues, employed or not, any favors with you cavalier attitude.

Comment #35: phylosopher  on  07/19  at  02:41 AM

And for soem perspective Xer:
http://chronicle.com/forums/index.php?topic=70111.0

Comment #36: phylosopher  on  07/19  at  02:44 AM

Mnem@30—I think federal law allows an employer to discriminate against an employee based on the employee’s political affiliation.  (But I’ve been wrong before when I’ve questioned you! wink)

Comment #37: Unree  on  07/19  at  03:54 AM

Mnem@30—I think federal law allows an employer to discriminate against an employee based on the employee’s political affiliation.  (But I’ve been wrong before when I’ve questioned you! )

As far as I can tell, it falls under a different part of the law because it’s actually the employer interfering with your First Amendment rights.  So it looks like it may be illegal but not because political affiliation is a protected category like race or religion.

IANAL (I am not a lawyer), but that’s why I said that Suzan could potentially file a complaint based on retaliation, because it is definitely against federal law to fire someone who’s complained about harassment, even if they’re not the ones who were specifically harassed.  Suzan could be a white woman complaining about racist jokes against Latino and African-American men and it’s still illegal to fire her for complaining about them.

Comment #38: Mnemosyne  on  07/19  at  04:14 AM

In re: Feeding the Trolls (uh, Bullies)
One of my favorite quotes comes to mind: You don’t quell ambition by feeding it any more than you can quench a fire the same way. (read “Bullies” for “Ambition”) Bullies only understand bullies. If THEY gave in it’d be because they’re weak and can’t defend their position. Your giving in makes ‘em think they’ve got you on the ropes so they come back harder. Only by standing up to them can you back them off. Of course if they’re committed to your downfall, they’ll try a different route, but at least you can get some breathing room while they regroup. Oh, and don’t forget: Reality has a known liberal bias…

Comment #39: JoeBuddha  on  07/19  at  09:59 AM

@23 Xeranar

This is why most professors sign clauses into their hiring contracts that gives them the right to not be fired for cause.

Not sure what you mean by “cause.” Tenured professors generally can not be fired for political beliefs or scholarly opinion, but they can certainly be fired for never showing up for work, embezzling funds, shooting someone on the quad, etc., which is what I’ve always heard “cause” referring to, as in, things we can actually be fired for. We can also be fired for “financial exigency,” a very real possibility these days.

As for negotiating contracts, I signed the contract they put in front of me, no negotiating involved. That’s what happens when you are at the wrong end of a supply-and-demand relationship.

Comment #40: Theron  on  07/19  at  11:29 AM

The screeching monkeys of GW denialism have been going after Skeptical Inquirer magazine as well. SI doesn’t seem to be backing down. They are printing the letters from the denialists, but have written their own replies.

The UK scientists who were under investigation for possible wrongdoing due to ‘climategate’ were cleared of any accusations. My personal belief is that this will just embolden the denialists, who will claim that the university was in on the conspiracy.

Comment #41: BlackBloc  on  07/19  at  12:14 PM

As a onetime scientist and general follower of science, what gobsmacks me is how badly the deniers do their job. Back when the science was only slightly less confirmed, there were a lot of “climate skeptics” who just played up the existing uncertainties, cites out-of-date work, found gaps or inconsistencies in the mainstream work and so forth. But I guess that as things have progressed, all the sane deniers have pretty much gotten weeded out, as with the “adult conservatives”.  All you have left is the dead-enders.

Which is either heartening or scary.

Comment #42: paul  on  07/19  at  12:53 PM

I’m a UST undergrad alum and current assistant professor who works on energy and environmental issues, and I absolutely applaud UST’s support for their faculty.  I should also note that UST is not some bastion of liberalism, but rather is considered one of the more conservative private schools in Minnesota (though less conservative than Bethel, a fundie baptist school where Monckton apparently gave the initial presentation that Abraham demolished).  The joke was that rich conservatives in the Twin Cities sent their kids to St. Thomas while rich liberals sent their kids to Macallaster (campuses are separated by a mile or so on Summit Ave).  Despite the grief I gave the administration as a columnist in the newspaper, there are lot of good people there (many of them clergy) who wholeheartedly embrace the scientific method and open inquiry.  Real proud of them for standing up to this bullshit.

Comment #43: TF79  on  07/19  at  01:25 PM

BlackBloc:

They’re assuming their conclusion, and therefore anything that contradicts it is a whitewash. It’s the same way we got the meme that microwaves = cancer, except with more crazy involved.

paul:

Have you read any of Eric Raymond’s blog lately? He’s been curiously silent since the Climate"gate” scientists were exonerated, but he was crowing about how bad it looked for the “conspiracy” while it was going on, to the point of blatantly quote-mining some of the analysis code they were using to prove they were cheating (ironically, the code in question was commented out and was only used for analyzing counterfactuals to begin with). He also has a spectacular, raving, over-the-top hatred for the iPhone (he seems to be spending an awful lot of time typing with one hand when discussing the antenna issue on the iPhone 4), he’s an HIV denier, and has attitudes about race and gender that come straight out of late 19th-early 20th century scientific racism. (One is inclined to think that he might decide research into drapetomania might be warranted under certain circumstances.)

Comment #44: BrianX  on  07/19  at  01:35 PM

But the idea that it is pointless, is simply false.  You misrepresented the reality of most academics and reinforced the prevalent misconception that academics are lazy, wield far more power than they do, write their own ticket, and simply waltz into jobs that are always there.  You are not doing your colleagues, employed or not, any favors with you cavalier attitude.

Clearly my cavalier attitude was misinterpreted.  I’ve always had this attitude but I worked extremely hard to get where I am today.  Yes, I did have to fight only about 30 applicants at my current position but I opted for a smaller super-regional college (colloquially a Tier 3 by most standards working towards a Tier 2) outside of a 2nd class city.  I could have taken the hour to write down a long three or four paragraph explanation but I popped on my computer, wrote up a quick statement, and went on with my day.  I understand the hardships and if you opt for the prestigious Tier 1 route, expect to be beaten senseless for any gains.  I went back to the University I graduated Undergrad from because I had friends on the faculty and I filled a needed gap in their system.  There has been a dramatic drop in the humanities sector in PhDs because most schools aren’t subsidizing anymore and I needed to pay for my MS then fought to my doctoral school by sheer willpower. 

See, took me fifteen minutes of my day to rebuttal what was just a quick three minute comment meant to point out a well established academic is protected when they’re right.  Most Universities stand by their professors as well.

Comment #45: Xeranar  on  07/19  at  04:32 PM

The curious thing about the now-erased comment from Mister Ban-me-pants was how perfectly incorrect it was: Amanda’s experience with Donahue makes her more qualified to analyze this phenomenon.  Most of us witness wingnut scalp-hunting from the outside; she’s been directly exposed to it, in the worst way.

Comment #46: Cris  on  07/19  at  07:56 PM

Ohhh… Jesse the Atheist. Good moniker, makes him sound like a sexy action hero. Now all he needs is a tagline. Suggestions?

“Don’t cross him!”

XP

Comment #47: Bagelsan  on  07/19  at  10:18 PM

AngelaSparrow@3:
Have you ever heard Leslie Fish’s filk version of that poem.  It makes for a wonderful, sarcastic song.  I bought 2 of her tapes when she was at a SF con in Tacoma; long since eaten up and gone, but well remembered.  The Engineer’s Hymn was already a favorite poem, but she really made it even more memorable.  (I’m not certain I spelled her name correctly)

Comment #48: helen w. h.  on  07/20  at  05:11 PM

Поскольку мы твердо вознамерились попасть-таки в музей Пикассо, с утра вновь поехали в Антиб. Торопились на вокзал к электричке в 9-11, а она задержалась аж на 35 минут 70-290. Так что в Антиб мы попали уже в 10 утра и, по случаю хорошей погоды, совершенно по-французски выпили по чашечке кофе с круассаном на площади Массена (таковая в Антибе тоже есть, этот наполеоновский маршал «наследил» буквально везде) E20-322.

Солнце сияло, пригревало и радовало все окружающее. Пошли в музей Пикассо, от которого получили несказанное удовольствие. Экспозиция не так уж велика (конечно, музей Пикассо в Париже, который описан в 1Y0-A08 соответствующих заметках, несравнимо больше), но состоит из замечательных вещей периода 1945-1949 гг. Интересные картины, бесподобная керамика (эти кувшины и вазы хочется гладить, как кошек), стильные скульптуры на открытой террасе и совершенно очаровательные рисунки танцующих и музицирующих фавнов и кентавров F50-521.

Любопытно, что даже самые, на первый взгляд, малопонятные работы Пикассо почему-то несут мощный «позитивный» заряд. Из его музеев мы всегда выходим в приподнятом настроении.

Comment #49: riyanjason  on  07/23  at  09:28 AM
Page 1 of 1 pages
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.