UPDATE: As is typical with alarmism, some people with a dislike for me and WUWT are spreading rumors on other blogs that these are my words, not of a commenter. And that I’m calling people on those blogs “cockroaches”. Not true. Of course they don’t take time to read the comments, they only run off and spread what they perceive at first, so I’m elevating yet another comment. In my response in comments here, I made it clear what this comment from Alexander Feht is about:
Anthony reply: It is an apt metaphor, one that caught attention of a lot of people prior to it being elevated, and you are reading way too much into it. He sees the USSR politics and Socialism as that. Do I think cockroaches accurately describes people I and many other here disagree with, no. Is it a metaphor for the instruments and actions that oppose freedom, tolerance, and open discourse, yes. Of course it doesn’t matter what I answer, some people will happily run off and distort it. In fact they already are.
===========================================================
This may or may not become a new weekly feature, but I thought this comment was worth elevating to post status:
Alexander Feht says:
July 14, 2010 at 11:18 pm
I completely understand, why Christopher Monckton felt a need to make an example of a typical reprehensible representative of modern Academia. People like Christopher Monckton make me hope again that not everything is lost yet under the Moon.
And yet… I spent first half of my life battling liars and cockroaches in the former USSR. I would win against any individual liar or cockroach, no sweat. But year after year after year, I was getting more and more convinced that I didn’t want to die in this battle, overwhelmed by the sheer numbers of my enemies.
So. I live in a quiet valley now, in Colorado Rockies. Grass is green, air is fresh, sky is huge. But what is this constant swish and rustle coming from the East Coast and from the Left Coast? I know this sound well! There is no escape from the battle: cockroaches are coming.
He adds in comments:
I am completely embarrassed by all this attention.
My heartfelt thanks to Mr. Watts and all the commentators.
The only thing I would like to add:
I’ve noticed that many comments on WUWT (and in other places) are based on the unshaken assumption that the existing framework of democracy, including the established peer-review and other mechanisms in Academia, would somehow, even if only in a long run, fix our worst problems, and extricate the good name of science from the rotten mire it has found itself in today.
The question is obvious:
How the same framework and the same mechanisms that resulted in today’s lamentable situation, are going to have a healing effect?
In other words, are you sure that we have at hand something to populate the house with, after we would have “cleaned the house”? Where are Mozarts, Darwins, Teslas and Rembrandts in our cherished established institutions? And, most importantly, what fundamental (and, preferably, bloodless) changes in our society are necessary to bring Mozarts, Darwins, Teslas and Rembrandts up, and to bring Bushes, Obamas, Blairs and Prince-Charleses down into oblivion? That is the question.
This is an argument between human beings. It is not taking place in a dictatorship, or in a place with secret police. An academic and a non-academic have had a public exchange of disagreement. The discourse, in fact, has been reasonably civilised, the worst term I have read is “creep”. No one has died, no one has been tortured, no one has gone to jail. Get a grip, people.
For one side to call the other “cockroaches” is to bring the debate to a new low. It is even sadder to see such terms of abuse being given promenance and applause. This cotinually heightening of the rhetoric of hatred will not come to a good end.
Let me remind you of an other country where one side called the other “cockroaches”. It is still called Rwanda.
Jeff M says June 15 “Never surrender”. Movie Galaxy Quest dates to 1999. A much better inspiration follows:
Sir Winston Churchill
Speech before Commons (June 4, 1940)
“We shall not flag nor fail. We shall go on to the end. We shall fight in France and on the seas and oceans; we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air. We shall defend our island whatever the cost may be; we shall fight on beaches, landing grounds, in fields, in streets and on the hills. We shall never surrender and even if, which I do not for the moment believe, this island or a large part of it were subjugated and starving, then our empire beyond the seas, armed and guarded by the British Fleet, will carry on the struggle until in God’s good time the New World with all its power and might, sets forth to the liberation and rescue of the Old.”
Richard: July 15, 2010 at 11:04 am
No news value, nothing to debate. Just the personal story of one of the readers. I’ve read some OT comments here that are much quotewurthier / food for thought.
No news value, but worth it as a reminder. Infinitely worth it as a reminder.
A friend of mine once said, “…at least, when I was in the Soviet Union, I had a choice and a hope – work hard to get myself into the States. What do I do now?? ”
We need to insure her question has a *good* answer…
@ur momisugly nofate July 15, 2010 at 1:34 pm
Offcourse i know what happened during WOII, my father survived a prisoncamp ( two actually ) But my point was why select a Godwinn as a quote of the week.
Like i said earlier take something that adds a novum to this forum, a new insight, some fuel for the fire. My point that there is nothing to debate about this post i allready lost by now but still my idea of a post that gives new information on current themes or a OT that brings new interesting arguments to light would had my preference. But like i said: I’m only one of the commentators. Or like Harold said : Just one voice in thousands.
Excuse me for not commenting further untill tomorrow but its 23:59 here and i’m going to bed. Expect any ( if wanted ) comments tomorrow.
I wish you all goodnight.
Liars and Cockroaches do seem to be everywhere. Where do they come from? I think “they” are the root of The Problem. Where do they come from? Perhaps the Body Snatchers have invaded the world?
“David A. Evans says:
July 15, 2010 at 11:24 am
I have noted that the most outspoken critics of the way this debate has developed have lived under dictatorial regimes & they have highlighted the similarities between those regimes & the way green politics is headed in that direction”
What are you talking about, “headed in that direction?” Green politics is COMING from that direction; it’s ALWAYS been just a thinly disguised Marxism.
When I first read Akexander’s comment in the original thread, I was reminded of a comment I had been audience to, during a conversation between two of my work colleagues in the pub, prior to the relatively recent UK elections. Up to that point they had barely met, and didn’t know each other well. One of them, a lovely girl but completely sold on Green ideology, casually suggested to the other colleague that she should vote Green. The response: “I’d rather stab myself than vote Green.” This was a gut response, said abruptly, without consideration for appropriate decorum, and was of course not to be taken literally. But I understood where she was coming from, because I knew where she came from: the former East German Democratic Republic.
Alexander, apologies for exporting roaches your way, but here in California we’re already knee deep in ’em and running out of room (and money to throw away)…
Many moons ago, living in a city merely 180 miles north of the “Mason Dixon” line, a land not quite “southern”, but possessed of the dark soil completely loved by the “German Cockroach”, I was told by my “exterminator” (like the sound of that) to go out in the early spring…walking very carefully in the early morning (3 or 4 AM) with a powerful flashlight in my hand. To walk close to my house on the sidewalk, and then SUDDENLY turn on the flashlight.
I did, my exterminator was quite correct. The ground (grass) was BLACK, completely covered in COCKROACHES! (Ugh.)
But within SECONDS they burrowed away and dissappeared. ALAS, it is the “Light of Day” (info, truth, debate, information) which makes “Human Cockroaches” do the same thing. Unfortunately, unless something “exterminates” them (can be a term for a variety of means, even using a Ray-gun on them..of the Ronald brand!), they too merely “burrow under the sand” to come out later when they feel they can do their dirty work, unopposed!
Max
Theo Goodwin says:
July 15, 2010 at 12:37 pm:
“That is total corruption or ‘merde,’ as the Portuguese so poetically say.” The Portugese say “merda.” The French who, btw, get approximately 80% of their electric power from nuclear, say “merde.”
Anthony
Of all the hundreds of comments on your blog and the one you consider worth elevating to post status compares people with whom you disagree, with cockroaches. I disagree with many of the views expressed on you website although I read it regularly, does this make me a cockroach in your view?
REPLY: Puhleeze. Does the fact that I elevate an interesting comment that many people liked make your twist of logic true? Does the fact that I allow dissenting comments make me in agreement with them? It was getting a lot of external web traction at other blogs before I elevated it. Given that, I felt it worth elevating it. If it offends you, confounds you, irritates you or causes you to make great illogical leaps of logic, so be it. BTW according to the counter, we have 390,331 comments on WUWT as of this writing. If I worried about them all, and their ramifications for what people might think about me I’d go insane. -A
Speaking of cockroaches, communism, roads to serfdom and so on…
Investors.com has been running a very interesting series, Perspectives Of A Russian Immigrant. The author lived in the Soviet Union until 1980.
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/SpecialReport.aspx?id=512665
I have a lot of faith in the American people and come November- out comes the raid and perhaps the beginning of the end of “cockroaches.” And , I agree with a previous comment about the coast thing. There is an infestation just about everywhere-not just on the coasts.
KenB writes:
“Scientists have the choice to make a difference and stand up and be counted and if some scientists have slipped on their ethics in this generation, I am sure that the next will demand different expectations and stricter standards, in that thought, yes I am optimistic.”
Do you really believe that someone will stand up to the feminist studies departments? If so, why haven’t they stood up. There is not one article out of a feminist studies department that has been published in a serious academic journal. All of their work is in newly created journals edited by radical feminists. Yet the president of Harvard is a radical feminist. Why did no one stand up? Who will stand up? Why has academia permitted the creation of universities within universities? Why are there rogue departments and institutes that answer to no one but themselves?
I take feminist studies department as my example because that case is so very clear. But much of the same goes on elsewhere. CRU/UEA is just one among many such “research units,” or whatever you want to call them, that answer to no one and spend their time in advocacy rather than science. And that is a good thing for them because their attempts at science are dreadful. Before discovering CRU/UEA, I would never have believed that a science professor would assert that model runs count as evidence or data in science. I believe that only a fool would make such an assertion. Yet Climategaters have just been given a thorough whitewash and continue to control the IPCC process. Aren’t you scared?
@KenB
I appreciate your comments and agree with much of what you said. I think one of the most important issues you raise is this: “Fortunately I have the wonderful thought, that humans have the ability to overcome anything when they are well informed.”
If a person is referring to those they believe to be uninformed as ‘cockroaches’, than that person is part of the problem.
[not interested in drawing out the argument – A]
Alexander asks:
“How the same framework and the same mechanisms that resulted in today’s lamentable situation, are going to have a healing effect?”
In academia generally, remove all policies based on Affirmative Action and Diversity Initiatives. Fire all Diversity Deans. Permit academic departments to sink or swim on the basis of their graduates. If feminist studies departments were required to justify their existence by appeal to the number of their majors and graduates, they would vanish, except of course from the hard core enclaves of the coasts.
As regards science in academia, require that all applications for promotion, research grants, and all other items be accompanied with a description of the scientist’s research and a description of the particular theories that guide his research. Require that research and theories be submitted for review to other scientists who have been critical of the research or theories. Require that all reviews be managed by the Dean of Faculty rather than the reviewee’s department.
The thrust of these two proposals is to peal away the accretions from the radicalism of the Sixties and the Careerism of the Eighties. Once these accretions are stripped away, academic science and academia at large might return to first rate scholarship and research.
Contrary to Pennsylvania State University, grant funds brought to the university by the applicant are not to be considered in applications for promotion.
What matters is the integrity of the scholarship, not its popularity or appeal to funding agencies.
Fred windsorAnthony says:July 15, 2010 at 3:33 pm
BTW according to the counter, we have 390,331 comments on WUWT as of this writing.
Which counter is that? The URL for this comment is http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/07/15/comment-of-the-week/#comment-431338 so I figured WUWT must have 431338 comments. Should we start a search for them? Are they traipsing around the net having a grand time of a tour? Do comments decrement as they disappear when you clean Tips & Notes?
REPLY: Total comments – SPAM (and we get thousands for Viagra, MLM’s, etc) = total approved comments The indexer only knows pings, not ping quality.
Alexander Feht with his familiarity with cockroaches see them more clearly than most in North America.
The sound of the cockroaches:
“A massive campaign must be launched to de-develop the United States.” – written by Obama’s Science Adviser, Holden with Paul Ehrlich (1973)
“Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class – involving high meat intake, use of fossil fuels, appliances, air-conditioning, and suburban housing – are not sustainable.” – Maurice Strong, Rio Earth Summit
“Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?” Maurice Strong
Make no mistake the economic collapse we are now seeing was planned years ago.
You Americans are so gullible! We don’t have to invade you! We will destroy you from within without firing a shot! We will bury you by the billions! We spoon feed you socialism until your Communists and don’t even know it! We assist your elected leaders in giving you small doses of Socialism until you suddenly awake to find you have Communism. the day will come when your grandchildren will live under communism! Nikita Khrushchev
Lucy Skywalker ( @ur momisugly July 15, 2010 at 12:54 pm) has introduced two quotations. I recognise them both. The first was:
“They came for the Jews and because I was not a Jew I did not speak up…”
This quotation contains the hidden logic sequence: ‘I saw them come for the Jews; I knew that it was wrong for them take the Jews; but because of a fear for my own life and liberty, I did nothing; so, I remained silent; but in remaining silent I also knew that it was wrong for me to remain silent as I watched them take the Jews.’
Hence, Lucy’s second quotation:
“All it takes for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing”
This begs the question: in the face of risk to life and liberty (or, as in the case of AGW, a less onerous risk to reputation and income) why logic propels one to swim against the tide, to speak up at all? For ego? Surely not! To fight in a holy crusade against AGW protagonists? No, such thinking is not proper.
Siding with Socrates, the only rational reason why I can think of as to why anyone should wish to stand up and protest against the taking of the Jews (and thereby put life and liberty at risk) – or to enter into the fray in the AGW debate (and put mere reputation and income at risk) – is simply this: having thought for oneself, one knows such a thing to be wrong; and one cannot live with oneself if one says and does nothing.
Ric Werme says:
July 15, 2010 at 6:14 pm
==================
Are you complaining?
Without your hit it would be one less.
u.k.(us) says:
July 15, 2010 at 8:34 pm
Not at all – mostly curious, partly researching. While I haven’t done anything about collecting or indexing comments yet, I might. So far I’ve only been working with titles, months, categories, and web page markup. See http://home.comcast.net/~ewerme/wuwt/
just a suggestion:
please remove Darwin from the list and replace it with a name much kinder toward humanity, say, Einstein.
“Siding with Socrates, the only rational reason why I can think of as to why anyone should wish to stand up and protest against the taking of the Jews (and thereby put life and liberty at risk) – or to enter into the fray in the AGW debate (and put mere reputation and income at risk) – is simply this: having thought for oneself, one knows such a thing to be wrong; and one cannot live with oneself if one says and does nothing.”
You can get a lot more direct than that-
The practice of good mental hygeine is very like brushing and flossing your teeth.
Do you want to keep your teeth from rotting out?
Charmed you found a Russian to identify an “example of a typical reprehensible representative of modern Academia.” and ask “Where are Mozarts, Darwins, Teslas and Rembrandts in our cherished established institutions?” and wonder “How the same framework and the same mechanisms that resulted in today’s lamentable situation, are going to have a healing effect?”
Newtons, Darwins, and Einsteins seem to come along every couple hundred years or so. Mozarts, perhaps, every 500 years or so. Teslas every 50 years or so. Rembrandts whenever a productive artist is identified and promoted through a market. Are we overdue?
What is today’s lamentable situation? What needs to be healed? Science is still discovering new relationships in the world. As Newton, Darwin, and Einstein all noticed, not all were happy at the time they presented their views. Such is life.
Reprehensible academia? LOL. Nice try.
The “mechanism” is the scientific method. If you have another method in mind, please identify it. I sympathize if the scientific method does not produce what you wanted or expected. I have been in that situation, myself.
Eudoxus,
In a face-to-face conversation you would never make such comments, or, if you were careless enough to make them, you would be apologizing in two minutes. In anonymous safety of electronic communication any fool can make any statement (as in “What is today’s lamentable situation? What needs to be healed?”), and get away with it.
I could analyze every sentence of your comment and show, where and how you are inexcusably wrong. But would it be worth my time? I have been working 12 hours today, and must work at least 3 or 4 hours. Nah, I don’t think so. Good night.