#astroSH Haslitudes

Once upon a time, there was a valiant Prince who lived in a Castle, far far away. His penthouse dominated the highest tower, and his facilities covered the newly revised hierarchy of needs:

hierarchy-of-needs

In the comfort of his tower, our prince was therefore free to pursue quests to demonstrate his allegiance to the compact code of his knighthood:

  1. Thou shalt believe all that teh Freedom teaches and thou shalt observe all its directions.
  2. Thou shalt defend teh Freedom.
  3. Thou shalt exploit all weaknesses, and shalt freely constitute thyself the attacker of them.

Freedom has been under severe assaults lately, whether it’s in serious business like gaming or trivial pursuits like climate change.  Philosophy was the worst. Until now.

And then there was astrophysics.

The Prince monitored nefarious activities in the country of #astroSH. An ominous agent running under the name of Michael Brown was brooding a witch hunt. The barbarism was too inept: witch hunts should be reserved to indecorous women.

But what is #astroSH? According to Brown (pers. comm.):

The starting point is discussion by astronomers, journalists and science organisations of the well documents harassment cases. Some astronomers have also discussed their harassment where the perpetrator is not identified  […] There is legitimate discussion of whether current policy is effectively implemented, how it can be improved and if punishments under current policy are reasonable.

Our Freedom Fighter swiftly called to arms to vanquish the Social Justice Warriors (SJW):
hey

He flew with his virtual blue dragon to #astroSH and threw himself into haslitudes worth fighting for, come what may – better to die for freedom than to endure tynanny. His valor shined so brilliantly that at one point he declared himself the winner.

After more haslitudes, something suddenly changed – our merciless freedom fighter became enchanted by Love and Light. The windmills of his mind stopped overclocking, and he courageouly flew away to the castle he never left. He lived happily ever after the next morning, until another quest would break his solitary peace.

The end.

For now.

Brace yourselves, more haslitudes are coming.

 

Advertisements

About Willard

neverendingaudit.tumblr.com
This entry was posted in ClimateBall, Satire and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

60 Responses to #astroSH Haslitudes

  1. Raff says:

    Am I the only one who has no idea what this is about? Mind, Willard often leaves me feeling that way…

  2. In case this isn’t obvious, this is a post by Willard, not by me. The post is about the astroSH issue (astronomy Sexual Harassment). If you’re not aware of the issue, Google Geoff Marcy. There are also others. However, the post is not – if I read it right – about this issue specifically, but about those who see themselves as defending due process but criticising those who choose to speak out about this.

    In case people don’t yet know, I am an astronomer and I work in the same field as, and know some of, those involved. My general view is that this is a serious issue and what Michael Brown says sums it up well; we should be willing to consider this issue and work out if we are dealing with it effectively.

    However, that isn’t necessarily what this post is aimed at; it’s more about – I think – the whole issue of how people engage in such discussions, than about the issue itself specifically. I may not quite have that right. Willard can clarify 🙂

  3. Willard says:

    Start here, Raff:

    View story at Medium.com

    And then there’s the hashtag:

    https://twitter.com/search?q=%23astrosh&src=typd

    You know what’s an hashtag, right?

  4. Jim Hunt says:

    Prompted by a message in my inbox, I just dropped by to say that:

    I (heart) Willard.

    I assume.

    For now.

    The “satire” tag.

    Is accurate?

  5. Willard says:

    I suppose it’s satire, Jim. However, Princes stories can lead to more than that:

    Gamergate refers to the controversy around a harassment campaign orchestrated primarily through the use of the Twitter hashtag #Gamergate, concerning issues of sexism and progressivism in video game culture. ‘Gamergate’ has come to be used as a blanket term for the controversy, the harassment campaign, as well as actions by those perpetrating the harassment. Beginning in August 2014, Gamergate targeted several women in the video game industry, including game developers Zoë Quinn and Brianna Wu, and cultural critic Anita Sarkeesian.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamergate_controversy

  6. Willard says:

    Interesting:

  7. dikranmarsupial says:

    I have to say I wouldn’t immediately associate twitter with “respect of and by others”, but perhaps that is part of the problem (and electronic forms of communication in general).

    It is a pity that initiatives such as Athena SWAN are necessary, but they clearly are.

  8. The Very Reverend Jebediah Hypotenuse says:

    Tupinaire
    While frequently referred to by contemporary sources, and included (separately) in various prohibitions and declarations over the medieval period, little is known about the nature of the tupinaire. It is clearly a hastilude, or wargame, of some kind, and distinct from the other types, but there seems to be no clear description of its rules

    Climateball est la Tupinaire du jour.

  9. izen says:

    SJW’s are privileged (economically and educationally) white media studies types who use spurious claims of victimhood to try and close down free speech on the basis that it is discriminatory and hurts the feelies of wimmin.

    The target of their ire and campaigning seems to be white males of high education and status. They conspicuously do not target the rank misogyny of religions or other ethnic groups. Which led to the farcical situation where they objected to the identification of arab/african muslims as the prime suspects in the sexual assault incidents in Germany because they were showing solidarity with another ‘oppressed’ group, brown muslim men.

    Pointing out this hypocrisy is what got Richard dawkins dis-invited to an atheism conference.

    In defense of the criticism that Anita Sarkissian ‘cultural critic’ has endured some of the movement recently tried to get a scientist dismissed by sending letters to the university, police and papers claiming he was a Nazi.
    This backfired spectacularly when those involved accidently revealed their own real identities and got attacked for their duplicity. (gogle Thunderfoot and karmi is a bitch)

    The SJW ‘movement’ has been a toxic influence within atheist circles for a couple of years, largely destroying the US organisation in favour of their agenda of ‘safe spaces’ and the avoidance of ‘trigger words’. It is depressing to hear it is infiltrating astrophysics, or any other part of academia.

    There are many complex reasons why women are a minority in Maths, Music and Science. But the Agenda of the SJWs is least likely to provide any change in this. They are not encouraging women to engage in these subjects at the academic level that exists at present, but advocating negative discrimination against male students and researchers and the reduction in the criteria of judgement used to select entrants to those subjects to allow women priority.

    Its enough to make any misanthrope react with a gender bias.

  10. Willard says:

    Agendas. Fascinating.

    The truth is out there, izen.

  11. guthrie says:

    Oddly enough plenty of others have views opposing to that of Izen re. “SJW’s” and the best ways of dealing with ongoing sexism in the sciences.

  12. Willard says:

    I’d rather prefer if we’d stick to freedom fighters.

    After all, FFs are the heroes of their own princes’ tales.

  13. izen says:

    @-Willard
    “Agendas. Fascinating.”

    Indeed.
    I wonder why you pluralised it?
    Do you think they have more than one, perhaps a ‘hidden’ or covert agenda other than the publically declared list of items.

    Anita Sarkeesian most recent contribution to the gamergate debate resulting from the half a million $ donated by her supporters is a 7min video complaining that ‘Freedom Fighter’ Batmans butt is hidden by a cape in the game.

  14. Willard says:

    Thank you for your concerns, izen.

    Now, please go peddle your war stories elsewhere.

  15. izen says:

    @-guthrie
    “… the best ways of dealing with ongoing sexism in the sciences.”

    The exact nature of this ongoing sexism is often revealed by the solutions by those who advocate to tackle the issue and the end state desired.

  16. Willard says:

    > The exact nature of this ongoing sexism is often revealed […]

    Fighting for freedom often reveals stories about “the exact nature,” and sometimes come with a deflection away from FFs and toward their foes.

    I won’t ask thrice, izen.

  17. Raff says:

    Okay, I’ve now read the text again and many of the links but although I see the theme of SH, I still have no idea what you are talking about.

    OT (sorry):
    ATTP, could you tell me whether the second para of my comment at BH here is really nuts, as people there seem to think. Specifically:

    There is so much research into climate going on that there is certain to be rubbish research out there. That will be common knowledge in university departments. Scientists they will know who is doing good research, which papers are essential reading and which can be binned. You and I and everyone else here are not privy to that information and never will be …

    I got this impression from listening to Harry Woods, a sociologist of science.

  18. mjibrown says:

    The #astroSH Twitter hashtag is a consequence of several high profile sexual harassment cases in astronomy (Ott, Slater, Marcy). The hashtag includes discussion of individual cases, statements of support for the targets of harassment, demands for more rapid/fair/effective policy and sharing of information/data on harassment.

    Much of the discussion has been by astronomers, science organisations and science journalists. For example, the highest profile tweet on the hashtag was a statement by NASA administrator Charlie Bolden. More recently there have been some contributions from people outside of the astronomical community, as noted in the above article. In many cases they don’t share the concerns of astronomers, science organisations and science journalists.

  19. The Very Reverend Jebediah Hypotenuse says:

    Raff:
    If I may presume to answer your off-topic but timely question to ATTP…
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeon's_law
    Sturgeon was an optimist.

  20. Michael,
    Thanks for the comment. I agree. My impression is that the astronomy community is genuinely concerned about this. As far as Geoff Marcy is concerned, I think all bar 2 of his Departmental colleagues signed a letter that suggested that he was no longer capable of carrying out his duties as a faculty member and, the last time I looked, there were more than 2000 signatories supporting those who’d been harassed.

    Raff,
    Let me give it some thought. In some sense you’re right, but there are always subtleties

  21. Willard says:

    Raff,

    Sorry to hear. I hope you get that the post is structured like a fairy tale, and that it features the onslaught of a Freedom Fighter against a Twitter #hashtag. Me and that FF had two jousts, and he went away, or rather he observes from afar and applauds the skirmishes of a second FF. I now reached Level 2, so to speak.

    I could explain the jousts, but they involve silly things like modus tollens, torture, computer science, and relevance. It’s better for you to just go read them. They’re at the end of one of the links.

    Hope this helps.

  22. verytallguy says:

    Raff

    whether the second para of my comment at BH here is really nuts, as people there seem to think.

    People at BH are thinking ?

    The end times are surely upon us.

  23. Raff,
    I should probably have added that what you say isn’t nuts 🙂 . I think, in general, those involved can distinguish between what is clearly nonsense and what has merit. What can happen is that plausible, but probably wrong, ideas can survive for a while if it’s sufficiently complex that you need quite a good understanding of the details in order to assess it. Eventually it will probably become clear that it’s wrong, or unlikely, but it might take a while for it to be accepted. However, this will normally be the case when the evidence isn’t conclusive, rather than because there is some desire to hold onto an idea despite the evidence against it.

  24. Willard says:

    For what it’s worth, I think Sturgeon’s law is too conservative. Perhaps it’s a sign of our times. I not only contend that science is crappy, but that it should seek and embrace crappiness.

    Since I haven’t succeeded in convicing MT yet, and that I can’t even tell a fairy tale without people not understanding it, I may need to work on my pitch a bit more.

  25. Raff says:

    ATTP, thanks. I don’t think I expressed very well what I understood from Collins. Trying again, it was that a lay person who reads a scientific paper has no idea how the paper is really judged by those in the same scientific field. My assumption was that this inside knowledge (for want of a better term) would be shared between academics and new entrants (PhD student perhaps) would become party to it. But I’m told that a supervisor giving advice on what was worth reading isn’t doing his or her job properly (that being “developing [the student’s] ability in the key research skill of tracking down and making an independent critical appraisal of the literature”). Personally I’d be a bit miffed if my supervisor didn’t give me some guidance as to which of the thousands of papers I should read and which I could skip, but then I am fundamentally lazy and also know nothing about the academic world.

    Willard, ah yes, once upon a time… I missed that bit. I often skip the first paragraph of articles. And with your synopsis it is now much clearer. Thanks 🙂

  26. Willard says:

    Seems that our Prince has returned to dauntlessly quell freedom moats:

  27. Raff,

    My assumption was that this inside knowledge (for want of a better term) would be shared between academics and new entrants (PhD student perhaps) would become party to it.

    Absolutely. I regularly discuss these kind of things with my students and postdocs. Admittedly, sometimes they’re the ones with the inside knowledge, as happened recently when I came up with an idea from a paper and was told that, actually, the paper hadn’t been all that well received by the scientific community.

  28. Stephen Marshall says:

    My understanding of gamergate is that Ms Sarkesian told the “lie with the ounce of truth” and by dint of her vehemence provoked a equally vehement response from people who, in other circumstances might have been open to more gentle persuasion. This led to an increasing levels of response and counter response whereby opposing comment and evidence made on either side garnered accusations of sexism, harassment and threats to Ms Sarkesian and her supporters and accusations of witch hunts and false accusations against those who opposed her aimed at getting them sacked from academic institutions, if they worked in them, for expressing non work related opinions about Ms Sarkesian and her proponents. This positive feedback system continues with every utterance on one side leading to a response from the other equivalent to a nuclear strike the like of which we didn’t see but feared during the good old days of the Cold War. Unfortunately there is no desire for detente from either side nor are there any mechanisms to take the heat out of the situation, and so all likelihood of genuine progress is lost to both sides.

    As for the new hashtag, it looks as if it is a response to the rather startling findings within the sphere of astrophysics. The danger of the response is that it seems to be based on the assertion that the findings are over the top and must be opposed at all costs rather than in beginning and carrying out a balanced and open minded debate. The proponents of the new hashtag seem to be responding to the findings in a knee-jerk way, revealing, to my mind, a disappointing confirmation bias motivated by fear that the measures that will be taken within astrophysics will lead to injustices inflicted on well established and respected scientists.

    I am not an academic, scientist or indeed employed in any line of work. So my perspective on both matters is skewed by my ignorance of both spheres (indeed I have never played a video game in my life). I do urge both sides in this arguement to calm down and indulge in reasoned debate with balanced argument based in evidence and to listen to the others point of view. Upping the ante in response to the other side upping the ante will lead nowhere.

  29. The proponents of the new hashtag seem to be responding to the findings in a knee-jerk way, revealing, to my mind, a disappointing confirmation bias motivated by fear that the measures that will be taken within astrophysics will lead to injustices inflicted on well established and respected scientists.

    Maybe I misunderstand you here, but the origins of the #astroSH hashtag was those who were appalled by the harassment in astrophysics. It’s not being promoted by those who fear that the measures will lead to injustices. Most people (myself included) think that the real injustice is that some people have suffered harassment and those carrying out the harassment have been getting away with doing so.

  30. I do urge both sides in this arguement to calm down and indulge in reasoned debate with balanced argument based in evidence and to listen to the others point of view.

    Given that this seems related to the topic of the post, I thought I would add a further comment. In the #astroSH issue, the “two sides” are roughly astronomers on Twitter discussing sexual harassment in astronomy/astrophysics and others who have no obvious association with astronomy/astrophysics appearing to object to some of what is said/proposed. I guess anyone can engage in a discussion, or comment on, a topic on social media. However, it’s not obvious what role those outside astronomy/astrophysics should have in determining how to deal with something like this. I’ve seen nothing to suggest that there’s any real desire for a witchhunt. Most of what I’ve seen suggests – as Michael Brown said – this is something we have to be willing to discuss and we should be trying to determine if current policies are suitable.

  31. Stephen Marshall says:

    Ah, there you are, I got the intent of the hashtag completely wrong and stand corrected. This despite reading the original post, the comments and many of the linked articles. Good job on this issue I’m not inclined to knee jerk reactions of my own. I feel foolish but don’t consider that to be as a result of having the facts pointed out to me.

    It is interesting to speculate as to why astronomy and associated spheres of study seem to be suffused with high levels of harrassment. Are the levels of harrassment higher than background? If they are why? Is it a result of the people who become involved or down the environment in which they work? If I were a social scientist I’d see some interesting potential studies.

  32. Stephen,
    I don’t know if the levels are higher than the background, or not. Athene Donald tried to get some idea of this in a recent post. The comments are worth a read.

    My own view is that this doesn’t matter from an astronomy/astrophysics community perspective. We should be addressing this whether or not it is higher than the background level of harassment.

  33. Stephen Marshall says:

    I agree that it must be dealt with, being ex-military I know that good cultural change can happen when well led from the top and includes structured training and education in promoting equality and diversity. The army I joined in 1980 was very different to the one I left in 2012 and is much better for it because it tries to get the best out of everybody. The idiot I was in 1980, like most of my peers, was sexist, racist and homophobic, today I’m not and I’m much better for it. I am often asked by young men and women if a career in the army is as good as it is cracked up to be. My answer is that it can be if you work hard and that there is no reason why you won’t go as far as your abilities will let you. But you are expected to be mentally and physically tough. You are expected to complain if you are bullied or harassed initially to the bully or harasser themselves. All formal complaints to the chain of command must be taken seriously, properly investigated and action taken if warranted.

    I wonder if academia needs to look outside its institutions for ways to improve in this respect.

  34. I wonder if academia needs to look outside its institutions for ways to improve in this respect.

    I’m sure it could, but some of it seems obvious; don’t harass colleagues or other members of staff. I’m sure academia could from learn from other organisations, but it also has a somewhat unique structure, for good reason.

  35. Willard says:

    > My understanding of gamergate is that Ms Sarkesian told the “lie with the ounce of truth” and by dint of her vehemence provoked a equally vehement response from people who, in other circumstances might have been open to more gentle persuasion.

    SJWs Made FFs Do It.

  36. Willard says:

    > In the #astroSH issue, the “two sides” are roughly astronomers on Twitter discussing sexual harassment in astronomy/astrophysics and others who have no obvious association with astronomy/astrophysics appearing to object to some of what is said/proposed.

    If only it was that simple:

  37. Stephen Marshall says:

    SJWs Made FFs Do It.

    Sorry Willard but I don’t understand.

  38. Stephen Marshall says:

    Ah, well I lurk on Twitter but don’t post as, for me, it seems not to be where proper discussions can be held, particularly as it is too fertile for trolls. Anyway, 6Ns about to kick off in Paris, so I’m orf.

  39. I wonder if academia needs to look outside its institutions for ways to improve in this respect.

    That is why I do think it is interesting to learn whether sexual harassment is more prevalent in astronomy than in the rest of science or more prevalent in science than in the rest of society. I only know my little corner of science and may not hear everything as male, but I would expect that there is less harassment in science. Knowing these differences helps to find solutions.

    If it were worse in astronomy you would have a study what went wrong with that culture. If it is worse in society at large you can start with strategies that work everywhere and adapt them to the the values and organization of science.

    If it were especially a problem in science and especially bad in the last decade, you probably need to have a look at the too large power differences we nowadays have due to project science. Project based funding has produced a large segment of science on temporary contracts without job security, who work in organizations with tenured scientists who have the strongest job security. This difference in power is not good for science and I could imagine that it promotes harassment.

  40. numerobis says:

    Stephen Marshall: there are two sides is not a good indication that the truth lies in between.

    Sarkeesian’s data is open and replicable: just play the game. Most game developers I know appreciate her critique — in part because you know your art form is taken seriously if it’s getting critiqued seriously.

    The GamerGate opposition to Sarkeesian is sending her death threats. Other women in video games are getting death threats, being SWATted, etc.

    Where’s the symmetry?

    In academia, there’s a long-standing tradition of hushing up about sexual harassment and general sexism, and not really believing it exists. This is just starting to get addressed meaningfully — not just in astrophysics, though there’s a lot of movement there right now.

    There is no symmetry between saying we should deal with the problem, and proclaiming that the problem is made up and it’s a witch hunt and science won’t be able to advance if we stop harassment.

  41. Jim Hunt says:

    I realise that this news is completely off topic, but I just dropped by to say:

    The water,

    From my tap,

    Has turned brown.

  42. dikranmarsupial says:

    Raff I tell my students not to trust anything just because it appears in a journal. Getting published is the first step to acceptance by the scientific community, not the last, which means it is a pity in some ways that papers only get press releases when they are first published, and hence get all the media interest before the research community has properly evaluated them (and if necessary comments papers published – of course they don’t get media interest…). HOWEVER, sometimes a paper takes a long time before the scientific community properly appreciates them, so just because a paper is not widely read or cited now, doesn’t mean that will always be the case (sometimes it is because someone else has the same idea at a more propitious time and their paper gets published, and it is only later that the first paper comes to light again). At the end of the day, to really know whether a paper is any good, you need to actually understand it (and be aware that you can be subject to Dunning-Kruger just like everybody else).

    In short, your comment was not “nuts”, but rather just skepticism (of the right sort) – IMHO.

  43. Willard says:

    > I don’t understand.

    Sorry, Stephen – “You Made Me Do It” is a line in a type of game that is often encountered in situations where A would blame B for his or her own actions. The main problem with that even if true, responsibility is non-transferrable in most relevant cases. Another important problem is the switch from responsibility to some kind of causal analysis, with the potential effect of creating what we usually call victim blaming:

    Victim blaming occurs when the victim of a crime or any wrongful act is held entirely or partially responsible for the harm that befell them. The study of victimology seeks to mitigate the perception of victims as responsible. There is a greater tendency to blame victims of rape than victims of robbery in cases where victims and perpetrators know one another.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victim_blaming

    Nothing justifies the doxing, the threats, and the harassment.

  44. Long comment in moderation.

    [It was, and now it’s in the trash. -W]

  45. Stephen Marshall says:

    You won’t find me disagreeing with what you say, if Ms Sarkesian’s views led to virtual and physical threats then that is wrong and should be both reported to and investigated by the police. Such behaviour is simply wrong and must be treated seriously. However, given the nature of the Internet, it is likely that alongside the irresponsible, objectionable and possibly criminal traffic there might be reasoned and reasonable objections to her position. Do such people deserve to be tarred with the same brush? The danger is that, under the cover of justified concern of threats from some, others who wish to engage in debate are not only sclienced, but are threatened themselves.

    I don’t have a position on how women are portrayed in video games and do not intend to develop one. But however justified Ms Sarkesian position is, it should be open to criticism.

  46. Willard says:

    > You won’t find me disagreeing with what you say, […]

    That’s the “yes” part.

    ***

    > However, given the nature of the Internet […]

    That’s the “but” part.

    ***

    > [H]owever justified Ms Sarkesian position is, it should be open to criticism.

    This presumes it’s not, which may not be exactly true given the nature of the Internet.

    ***

    This post features Freedom Fighters (FFs), not Ms. Sarkesian. However fascinating it can be to see anyone use the “SJW” epithet, please take that crusade elsewhere.

    Thank you for your concerns.

  47. Willard says:

    There are worse platforms than Twitter, BTW:

  48. Andrew dodds says:

    Jim –

    Just measured 47mm rain in the last 24 hours (10 miles south of Bath). Almost a month’s worth. Beat the forecasts by a lot, quite a lot of local flooding. Including a new housing estate.

  49. Jim Hunt says:

    Hi Andrew – Quite so!

    I braved the wind and rain and headed in your direction to investigate further. My preliminary findings:

    Flood warnings across the region have now increased to 44. I haven’t heard back from Andrew Neil yet though!

  50. Andrew dodds says:

    Yes, don’t even try Radstock/midsomer Norton right now…

  51. Vox day..

    my old friend.
    ha, I was executive producer on his first game

  52. izen says:

    [Playing the ref. -W]

  53. Jim Hunt says:

    [One drive-by (or is it already two?) is enough, Jim. -W]

  54. anoilman says:

    Andrew, Jim, Its been so hot here in Canada, that I thought I do some renovations. I need to remove some asbestos from my attic, so they seal up my house, and vaccum out all the nasty stuff. My wife then wants to get a new bathroom. (Honestly.. what wife doesn’t?)

    That means I’ll have zero insulation during what is normally the coldest time of the year. I don’t think it’ll be an issue this year.

  55. Willard says:

    The second bot blocked me after this KO:

  56. Marco says:

    And another scientific field is now forced to address sexual harassment:
    http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/02/sexual-misconduct-case-has-rocked-anthropology

  57. Willard says:

  58. Eli Rabett says:

    Raff take a look at Eli’s comment on the Good Diplom Beck http://rabett.blogspot.com/2006/10/amateur-night.html

    “Uncle Eli has always admired astronomy, botany, and zoology as sciences with important amateur participation. By nurturing the large community of those interested in the science these fields have built important support groups, and amateurs have made important contributions. Many amateurs become obsessed with relatively narrow and previously trodden areas. Within those areas their knowledge often exceeds that of professionals. To Eli the most important thing is that people get to experience the joy of science. The smartest thing NASA ever did was reserve time on the Hubble for amateurs and some good science has resulted.

    What amateurs lack as a group is perspective, an understanding of how everything fits together and a sense of proportion. Graduate training is designed to pass lore from advisors to students. You learn much about things that didn’t work and therefore were never published [hey Prof. I have a great idea!…Well actually son, we did that back in 06 and wasted two years on it], whose papers to trust, and which to be suspicious of [Hey Prof. here’s a great new paper!… Son, don’t trust that clown.] In short the kind of local knowledge that allows one to cut through the published literature thicket.

    But this lack makes amateurs prone to get caught in the traps that entangled the professionals’ grandfathers, and it can be difficult to disabuse them of their discoveries. Especially problematical are those who want science to validate preconceived political notions, and those willing to believe they are Einstein and the professionals are fools. Put these two types together and you get a witches brew of ignorance and attitude.

    Unfortuantely climate science is as sugar to flies for those types.”

  59. Pingback: Freedom Fighters | …and Then There's Physics

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s