#academia

Oh, the sanctimony squad strikes again

Oh, the sanctimony. 88 faculty colleagues at Notre Dame co-signed a letter requesting Judge Amy Coney Barrett halt her confirmation process and step aside til after the election.

It would have helped if among those 88 erudite academics, that one might be from the law faculty. Alas, among those who signed the letter criticizing Barrett, 4 were gender studies professors, 4 were peace studies professors, 9 specialized in English and another 7 were librarians. None from the Notre Dame Law School.

This follows a pattern we have reported on before where left leaning academics/activists pass off high numbers of co-signatories as a sort of validation process. Closer analysis reveals how often the very people who would make these letters credible are often conspicuously absent.

We list some of them here:

1) Remember 11,000 cosignatories to a non-peer reviewed paper on climate change that included Mickey Mouse and Albus Dumbledore?

2) Or the Feb 2020 Safe Climate Declaration which hosted 100 speakers of which less than 5% were climate scientists. Most were from academia, media and high schools.

3) Or the 268 cosignatories of an open letter in support of Extinction Rebellion (XR). Perhaps the most hilarious signatory to the letter was Matthew Flinders. Our esteemed explorer seemed to have navigated his way back to life after 200 years.

4) Or the the sanctimonious video made by the World Mental Health Coalition (WMHC) where all members co-signed the case for Trump’s lack of mental capacity. Sounds impressive using “world”, doesn’t it? Given the World Psychiatric Association represents 200,000 members worldwide, WHMC’s 37 members seems rather pathetic by comparison. Be sure to read how they were prepared to ditch their Hippocratic oath to smear Trump.

5) The liberal artists who caved so soon after signing a letter condemning cancel culture.

Declaring a Climate Emergency without many scientists

タイトルなし

On Feb 14-15, the likes of Dr Keryn Phelps, John Hewson, Peter Garrett, Michael Mann, Adam Bandt, Jane Caro and others assembled in Melbourne to pontificate at the National Climate Emergency (NCE) Summit where they slammed the table and demanded we hold politicians accountable under a new democracy!

While we vigorously defend their right to free speech, we question the glaring lack of scientists that wanted to participate as speakers at this event. This was the breakdown of the 100 speakers.

NCE

That is right, there were as many high school student activists as people who could profess to be legitimate professional climate scientists. There were even more lawyers present. In fact, media (the majority who have worked or work at the ABC), activist/lobby groups and politicians made up 67% of the total. Therefore one can work out quickly enough that there were precious little scientific-based facts behind the agenda.

At the very least, several poets were invited to speak to add to diversity. Many academics who spoke weren’t actually from climate fields.

Here are a few speaker profiles in no particular order:

Recently elected Darebin councillor, Trent McCarthy, had written in his profile, “Trent is the proud parent of two primary school student strikers.

Another panellist, Costa Georgiadis was referred to as “a TV personality and landscape architect. Since 2012, he has hosted the ABC’s Gardening Australia

Bernie Hobbs is an award-winning science writer and presenter at the ABC.”

“[Paddy] Manning has more than a decade of experience as a journalist for the ABC, Crikey, The Sydney Morning Herald, The Age, The Australian Financial Review and The Australian.”

“Natasha Mitchell is a multi-award winning science journalist, presenter, and podcaster with the ABC.”

“Leigh Ewbank is the current Act on Climate coordinator at Friends of the Earth.”

Precious little diversity of thought among the 100 speakers.

Yet we have seen this type of shallow content activism before. Remember when we reported that 268 Australian academics cosigned an open letter supporting the Extinction Rebellion.

While the content was predictable, the statistics were anything but convincing. We noted,

Perhaps the most hilarious signatory to the letter was Matthew Flinders of Flinders University. Unless the university website has another Matthew Flinders listed as an active member, our esteemed explorer seems to have navigated his way back to life…simply adding to the total lack of credibility of the cabal of 268 academics who believe they have some sort of intellectual superiority over us. If one ever wanted proof of our judiciary leaning hard left, 12% of the people that signed this document were in law-related fields.

“…Many of the woke academia come from fields such as stand up comedy, poetry, arts/education, sports management, archaeology, LatAm studies, sex, health and society, social services, veterinary biology, culture, gender, racism…are you catching the drift of those supporting XR? Even Monash University’s Campus Operations Manager and Telephony Application Administrator signed it! Wonderful individuals but should we hold our educators to such high standards when anyone’s opinion will do?”

“…Eerily, over 90% of the signatories do not appear to be renowned experts in teaching science, much less climate science. Which means, why weren’t the scientists in these universities willing to commit their names to a cause that fits their ideology? Who needs them when one faculty member from Monash University deals with ‘Imaginative Education‘?…”

“61% of the signatories were from universities situated in the Democratic People’s Republic of Victoria. Within that, 65 (more than all those that signed from NSW universities = 63) of those 164 names from Victoria were from RMIT, the school where the lecturer offered bonus points for sending selfies from the school climate strike. Precious little free thought one imagines.  Monash had 44. So two universities in Melbourne made up 109 of the 268 Add La Trobe University and half of the signatories are from Victoria. Premier Dan Andrews must be proud.

Tinonee Pym, a research assistant at the Swinburne University of Technology in NSW helped pen,

C’mon, no one wants a dick pic’: exploring the cultural framings of the ‘dick pic’ in contemporary online publics

Undoubtedly this research has only certified climate science credentials at Swinburne University to convince sceptics of the validity of XR.”

Once again, the force of numbers means absolutely nothing. We are often told by climate activists that we should listen to the climate scientists. We would most gladly do so provided events like this managed to herd a much larger representation of such expertise, including those with dissenting opinions. As it stands when only four scientists attend, including those with very contentious records, there is little hope for sensible debate.

As it stands, the NCE Summit was nothing more than a confirmation bias gathering of activists trying to swing policy to suit their crony capitalist desires.

The NCE forum only wanted to indoctrinate, not educate. Is it any wonder FNF Media was blocked from XR Australia. Identical mentality.

Literally taking the piss

CM met with an American professor this evening who said he recently attended a seminar at his old alma mater. His astonishment when using the rest rooms was two all gender bathrooms, one with urinals and the other without. Presumably this is just male and female in the real world. He said that the female academics were none too pleased with the arrangement (for understandable hygiene reasons no doubt), despite the Marxist nature of many attendees.

While not paying constant attention to those entering either bathroom he said when he visited the all gender bathroom with urinals it was 100% male. Period. What a surprise?

Grievance Studies hoax

What a surprise in today’s academia. Three scholars—James Lindsay, Helen Pluckrose, and Peter Boghossian—wrote 20 fake papers using fashionable politically correct jargon (wrt gender equality, white supremacy, LGBTQI) and developed ridiculous conclusions with the aim of placing these ‘peer-reviewed’ pieces in high-profile journals. At the time of exposing the hoax 7 journals succeeded in being published, 7 were in the approvals process and only 6 were rejected.

Just goes to show that some journalists are happy to publish anything provided it fits a narrative, no matter how ridiculous the content. For instance;

Some of the papers accepted included, Western astrology was viewed as imperialist and sexist. It argued female astrology be implemented by science faculties.

Another paper titled, Human Reaction to Rape Culture and Queer Performativity at Urban Dog Parks in Portland, Oregon‘ which postured whether dogs suffered from oppression based upon perceived gender.

Yet another paper, ‘Rubbing One Out: Defining Metasexual Violence of Objectification Through Nonconsensual Masturbation‘ argued that men objectifying women during the act without her consent were perpetrators of sexual violence.

As Yascha Mounk correctly pointed out,

[this] doesn’t just expose the low standards of the journals that publish this kind of dreck, though. It also demonstrates the extent to which many of them are willing to license discrimination if it serves ostensibly progressive goals. This tendency becomes most evident in an article that advocates extreme measures to redress the “privilege” of white students.

Grievance is an industry underpinned by political correctness. Forget rational thought and debate. Just publish whatever fuels the grievance that rationalizes the irrational. Some of these hoax pieces (unsurprisingly) have been taken down. Just proves activism for what it is – as long as they don’t find out we can keep banging the drum of perpetual victimhood.