 | mobile - desktop |
|
| mobile - desktop |
|
 |
 Contact Sales! |
News & Events:
|
Posted by K.E. on September 21, 2002 at 09:13:07:
In Reply to: Ok, let\'s go ahead and make this a topic of discussion... posted by Gerry Binczik on September 20, 2002 at 17:58:53:
:I realize this is all off-topic discussion for the Ratsnake Forum, and I have no desire to hold it here (or anywhere else, for that matter). But here is where it seems determined to be. My apologies to those who are bothered by it, but I hope you can understand why I am continuing.
:> ... You sort of accused me of the same things as K.E. when I amde a statement about some proffessionals laughing at non-sense in the hobby...
:You might see what K.E. did and what you did as being the same, Brian, but I don't by a long shot. They are related, certainly, but they are most decidedly not the same.
:What you did - suggesting that scientists/academics routinely laugh at or otherwise demean laypeople - is actually a much more common and seemingly benign rumor about these professionals. It IS a widespread and unjust characterization of them as a group, though, and it certainly HAS the potential to do harm by prejudicing people against them, which is why I called you on it. I never denied that there are some few scientists who act that way, but I emphasized that such idiots can be found in every profession, the sciences being no exception. Nor did I discount the possibility of it having ever happened to you. (I don't think I just shrugged off your unpleasant personal experiences as you suggest I did, either; I've certainly been pondering them still.) But neither such idiots' existence in the sciences nor your personal experience of them entitle you to portray scientists as a group that way. You've apparently run into some Grade "A" a$$holes, no doubt about it, but all my experience - and which of us do you suppose has known more scientists? - says they are fortunately as rare in my profession as they are in any other. It was my belief that you in fact understood and even agreed with me on this, that suggesting otherwise was not your intent and you regretted it if it nonetheless had that effect, in our earlier discussion. Am I mistaken?
:What K.E. did was FAR worse. Check out his original post again, and you'll see that he made serious accusations of scientific misconduct, and that he implied such misconduct is pervasive in the profession. Such misconduct as he described may quite likely be illegal (depending on the exact circumstances) and would most certainly result in the perpetrators losing their jobs and any other funding sources, as well as their professional standing. As I said, he made it sound common, but kept the details vague - mighty big of him, huh? I pointed out that the unsubstantiated charges he was making were serious, and essentially told him to put up or shut up; really the time for him to have spoken out was when he supposedly witnessed the misconduct (would he keep silent while watching a neighbor's house be burgled, too?), but better late than never. What was his response? He noted I reside in FL, and then enlarged upon his malicious rumors just enough to say that FL was where he witnessed some such misconduct - bigger still of him, eh? Am I saying no scientist has ever been guilty of misconduct such as K.E. describes? Of course not. Maybe, just maybe, he even witnessed what he said he did (though I very much doubt it). But there's no way I believe such misconduct is anything but extremely rare - and as I said, the way to deal with it is to expose it, preferably when it is happening, not use it as a source for generating malicious rumors about the profession in general forever after. Do you disagree, Brian?
:> Now I know you are not going to like any of this Gerry, but truth is truth...
:No need to worry about what I might like, Brian, I ALWAYS respect the truth. If K.E. identifies himself as well as the people he is accusing of serious scientific misconduct, and he is willing and able to come up with any concrete evidence in support of his claim (not for my pleasure, but for an official proceeding), I'll even personally help as best I can to see to it that his complaint reaches the proper authorities, at least here at my own institution. I can assure you that IF there really are any such scientists as he describes here, I want them removed as much as anyone.
:> ... To say that there is a proffession where every person there is wonderful and would never ever do anything untoward is naive'. It is also not true...
:Which I guess is why I've never said it, nor implied it. I've always been upfront that there are "bad apples" in the sciences just as there are everywhere else. So why are you bringing it up? Have you been persuaded by K.E. that I said something I plainly didn't? Maybe you need to revisit earlier posts in this thread to gain a clearer understanding of what exactly people have said...
:> ... You know from the kingsnake forum that I have alot of respect for you...
:And I you, Brian, despite whatever angry tone might come through in this post. I'm sure I could even find plenty of reason to respect K.E., too, whom I know virtually not at all at this point, after all. Perhaps his rumor mongering is even the low point of an otherwise exemplary life; I'm willing to believe it. But I cannot and will not have any respect for what he did. Only disgust.
:Gerry
:gbin@zoo.ufl.edu
Gerry,
I guess we will just have to disagree with each others actions. I can see where you are coming from with your points about my accusations with out evidence. I am sorry that I am not in a position to disclose info. I have made the decision not to because I have faith in the scientific process. Peer review will take care of the problem. I am sorry that you feel that I am a coward, but that is o.k. When the argument over whether my snake was from where I said it was broke out, I thought that everyone involved in the discussion was interested in the rat snakes because this was the rat snake forum. I made a statement to you asking that you come off your high horse and you asked me what horse I meant. The one I meant was this one: You are on the rat snake forum and you will not discuss rat snakes. Instead you talk about people's behavior. You continue to complain about my behavior and have yet to talk about rat snakes. This forum has a guy(I think his name is Jeff Baringer, but could be mistaken) who monitors what is going on and what is being sad here. Whoever it is, they do a good job. You appear to just click on forums and complain about people's conduct. This is the horse I was referring to. I do not need another person to complain about how I behave. I have a wife, a mother-in-law, a dad, etc, that do more than enough of this and it is not why I write in this forum. I write in this forum to exchange information about herps. You have done very little of this. It is as if you are on a crusade to save science. Science does not need you in this capacity and neither do I. If you want to talk about herpetology, I am very, very interested in your life expierience but noone needs you to tell them how to act. You previously said you were done with this topic and I hope that at this point we both are. I think your opinion of my behavior is justified as you have amply described, but I disagree. I know that you will disagree with what I have just stated and that is o.k. I just hope that you don't come back with some kind of line about more of my misconduct.
