stevestory Posts: 13407 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 14 2013,21:48    I heard a few vague things about this shermer/myers/whoever dustup, but I can't find a quick rundown of what happened. Soembody help a brother out.

Richardthughes Posts: 11178 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 14 2013,22:02    Quote (stevestory @ Aug. 14 2013,21:48) I heard a few vague things about this shermer/myers/whoever dustup, but I can't find a quick rundown of what happened. Soembody help a brother out. http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyng....grenade -------------- "Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield "You magnificent bastard! " : Louis "ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard "I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932 "...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

stevestory Posts: 13407 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 14 2013,22:16    WHAT THE FUCK.

Glen Davidson Posts: 1100 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 14 2013,23:02    These two fill in most of the story after the "grenade" post: Shermer's lawyers David Silverman tweeted: Quote David Silverman ?@MrAtheistPants 11h I liked a @YouTube video from @mrdeity http://youtu.be/kMZ86PG....GVOQk?a  Mr. Deity and the Hat View media    Reply    Retweet    Favorite David Silverman ?@MrAtheistPants 11h Mr. Deity and the Hat: http://youtu.be/kMZ86PG....6PGVOQk  See @mrdeity @ #aacon14 I list his twitter source of the youtube (at least the top one works) because Silverman is president of American Atheists.  The shots taken at Myers by Mr. Deity begin a little after the five minute mark. Glen Davidson -------------- http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p....p Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of coincidence---ID philosophy

Driver Posts: 649 Joined: June 2011 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 14 2013,23:25    Quote (Glen Davidson @ Aug. 15 2013,05:02) These two fill in most of the story after the "grenade" post: Shermer's lawyers David Silverman tweeted: Quote David Silverman ?@MrAtheistPants 11h I liked a @YouTube video from @mrdeity http://youtu.be/kMZ86PG....GVOQk?a  Mr. Deity and the Hat View media    Reply    Retweet    Favorite David Silverman ?@MrAtheistPants 11h Mr. Deity and the Hat: http://youtu.be/kMZ86PG....6PGVOQk  See @mrdeity @ #aacon14 I list his twitter source of the youtube (at least the top one works) because Silverman is president of American Atheists.  The shots taken at Myers by Mr. Deity begin a little after the five minute mark. Glen Davidson Brian Dalton should know better than to present false equivalences. Rape is not an extraordinary claim, let alone a miraculous one! Idiot. Is he also implying that PZ made it all up? To what end? Myers is not trying to get Shermer convicted. Also pretty sure he would have known that if he gets sued, he will almost certainly lose. With his "personal responsibility" remark, what is Dalton saying? It is okay to have sex with women who are too drunk to consent? Women shouldn't drink at all? Both? Contrary to received wisdom, women do not generally lie about rape and sexual assault. -------------- Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray [A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

midwifetoad Posts: 4003 Joined: Mar. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2013,03:36    Of course it's not all right to have sex with a woman who is too drunk to give informed consent. It is also perfectly legal to stroll down any street in any neighborhood on any Saturday night. There are laws and there are rules of decency. There's also common sense. I asked my wife about this. Her question was what did she expect? If the accusation is true then Shermer is a pig,  but it's not surprising  that such men exist. A good chunk of literature is devoted to what happens when you mix men,  women and alcohol. Edit to add: I'm not blaming the victim, but I think it's fair to point out that bad people exist; preditors are over-represented among alpha males and celebrities; this is well known and frequently in the news; and finally, it is possible for a bad person and a foolish person to occupy the same room at the same time. Edited by midwifetoad on Aug. 15 2013,04:56 -------------- Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

Driver Posts: 649 Joined: June 2011 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2013,07:33    Quote (midwifetoad @ Aug. 15 2013,09:36) Of course it's not all right to have sex with a woman who is too drunk to give informed consent. It is also perfectly legal to stroll down any street in any neighborhood on any Saturday night. There are laws and there are rules of decency. There's also common sense. I asked my wife about this. Her question was what did she expect? If the accusation is true then Shermer is a pig,  but it's not surprising  that such men exist. A good chunk of literature is devoted to what happens when you mix men,  women and alcohol. Edit to add: I'm not blaming the victim, but I think it's fair to point out that bad people exist; preditors are over-represented among alpha males and celebrities; this is well known and frequently in the news; and finally, it is possible for a bad person and a foolish person to occupy the same room at the same time. What you are saying is that men can party but women can't. This is not the right way to go about things. This is not about being alone on a street. We are talking about TAM, Skepticon etc. Anyway, the anecdote related was not about getting deliberately blind drunk. It's not that hard to get someone more drunk than they intended when they have had a couple of glasses, especially if you have the status advantage. But most important of all, a victim's choices are NOT the point. To see this, think of anyone who commented on a murder or non-sexual assault charge with criticism of the victim's intoxication level. Irrelevant victim blaming isn't it? Dalton's segment was highly inappropriate. -------------- Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray [A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

OgreMkV Posts: 3668 Joined: Oct. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2013,08:15    Regardless of the truth or untruth of the event... it is being handled very, very badly. I have seen people's careers destroyed because of claims like this. This includes the victim and the accused. First we have to consider the source of the claim... oh wait, we can't because there isn't one.  Second we should consider the evidence of the claim, oh wait, there isn't any.  Third, we should consider the person reporting the claim, because we can't do anything else... and the person reporting the claim is known for being a shock jock and drama promoter. Now, I don't know what happened in the original event.  Myer doesn't know what happened.  The only two people who know what happened are the ones being accused and the one doing the talking to Myer (if such a person even exists). These things need to be handled very carefully.  Not just for the victim, but for the accused as well.   As  a small culture, we should be promoting responsible methods of reporting such incidents... immediately.  We should be promoting a social culture of dealing with the situation, making sure that victims get the support that they need and that perpetrators get the support or punishment (as required) that they need. My previous comment on the subject was that Myer has well and truly stuck his foot in his mouth and that's still true.  He's interfering in a legal situation and should have realized that legal action might have been taken.   In my opinion (that and $4.50 will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks) is that Myer, instead of naming names and promoting this drama, should be promoting the development of personal responsibility and support within his culture.  He doesn't do that because, (again, in my opinion) that doesn't generate blog hits.   So far, in the past week, I've seen no fewer than 9 accusations against Shermer, several against Lawrence Krauss, and a list of names of prominent atheists and skeptics who (it was claimed) all had been accused of sexual harassment.  Maybe it's all true.  Maybe none of it is.  Maybe some of it is.  No one knows.  The accuser is never named.  The accused never gets a chance to comment (which would just feed the flames anyway).  And NONE of these claims have been substantiated in any way, shape or form that I'm aware of. There's two fundamentally different issues here. The first is sexual harassment and rape.  These are wrong.   The second is the handling of claims and accusations by certain people within the atheist/skepticism community.  THIS (and only this) is the area that I'm talking about. OK, I'm done.  If you have evidence and logical arguments, you may very well change my mind about certain things. -------------- Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims. http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

Patrick Posts: 666 Joined: July 2011 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2013,08:20    Quote (Driver @ Aug. 15 2013,08:33)   Quote (midwifetoad @ Aug. 15 2013,09:36) Of course it's not all right to have sex with a woman who is too drunk to give informed consent. It is also perfectly legal to stroll down any street in any neighborhood on any Saturday night. There are laws and there are rules of decency. There's also common sense. I asked my wife about this. Her question was what did she expect? If the accusation is true then Shermer is a pig,  but it's not surprising  that such men exist. A good chunk of literature is devoted to what happens when you mix men,  women and alcohol. Edit to add: I'm not blaming the victim, but I think it's fair to point out that bad people exist; preditors are over-represented among alpha males and celebrities; this is well known and frequently in the news; and finally, it is possible for a bad person and a foolish person to occupy the same room at the same time. What you are saying is that men can party but women can't. This is not the right way to go about things. No, he's making the point that, while burglars are responsible for robberies, leaving your doors unlocked is still unwise.   Quote This is not about being alone on a street. We are talking about TAM, Skepticon etc. Allegedly about those conferences.  Thus far no evidence has been presented.   Quote Anyway, the anecdote related was not about getting deliberately blind drunk. It's not that hard to get someone more drunk than they intended when they have had a couple of glasses, especially if you have the status advantage. Which is why it is important to know your limits and your intentions before deliberately impairing your own judgement. Note that I am not blaming the victim of non-consensual sex.  If someone commits that crime, they should be punished severely.  This is advice for avoiding the situation in the first place.  In an ideal world, there would be no risk of that happening.  We don't live in that world. Quote But most important of all, a victim's choices are NOT the point. To see this, think of anyone who commented on a murder or non-sexual assault charge with criticism of the victim's intoxication level. Irrelevant victim blaming isn't it? Dalton's segment was highly inappropriate. You are ignoring Dalton's other key point.  PZ Myers publicly accused Michael Shermer of rape based on second or third hand hearsay.  Myer's blog is popular enough that this accusation will be returned in Google searches for Shermer.  This kind of accusation is legally defamation per se. Dalton is noting that the so-called skeptics at Pharyngula are accepting those claims without any evidence.

Kattarina98 Posts: 1267 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2013,10:27    On the Bathroom Wall, cubist posted a link to Greta Christina's blog entry in which she discusses the situation. I know you will eat me alive, but for once, I think she's 100% right. -------------- Barry Arrington is a bitch.

OgreMkV Posts: 3668 Joined: Oct. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2013,10:50    Quote (Kattarina98 @ Aug. 15 2013,10:27) On the Bathroom Wall, cubist posted a link to Greta Christina's blog entry in which she discusses the situation. I know you will eat me alive, but for once, I think she's 100% right. I don't know.  In a normal situation, then I would agree.  But (in my opinion) anything dealing with FtB is not normal. To be perfectly honest, if Myer, Laden, and Mcreight all told me it was raining... I would still go check. It's not the events that I'm having a problem with.  I don't know what happened with Schermer and Krauss or any of the others.  It's the reporting of accusations in a very public way by a group of people who claim to have anonymous sources and who have been (in my opinion) less than honest about other events. With the volume of people who support FtB, it would be almost child's play to destroy someone's career on totally made up statements. I admit to having a bit on confirmation bias here, but it is also my firm belief that is Shermer had accused PZ of rape then the FtB crowd would be demanding extensive evidence. A think that Greta is conflating two things.  The first is that yes, harassment and rape are unfortunately common and that if there are a lot of people accusing someone, then it may be more likely to be true.  The other is that publicly accusing people in this manner, regardless of the truth of the issue, is OK and should be done.   The first is good, the second is not. -------------- Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims. http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

socle Posts: 322 Joined: July 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2013,10:51    Quote (Kattarina98 @ Aug. 15 2013,10:27) On the Bathroom Wall, cubist posted a link to Greta Christina's blog entry in which she discusses the situation. I know you will eat me alive, but for once, I think she's 100% right. I 100% agree, FWIW.

JohnW Posts: 3217 Joined: Aug. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2013,11:18    Quote (Kattarina98 @ Aug. 15 2013,08:27) On the Bathroom Wall, cubist posted a link to Greta Christina's blog entry in which she discusses the situation. I know you will eat me alive, but for once, I think she's 100% right. No eating here, K.  I agree with you. -------------- Math is just a language of reality. Its a waste of time to know it. - Robert Byers There isn't any probability that the letter d is in the word "mathematics"...  The correct answer would be "not even 0" - JoeG

fnxtr Posts: 3504 Joined: June 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2013,11:31    Quote (Kattarina98 @ Aug. 15 2013,08:27) On the Bathroom Wall, cubist posted a link to Greta Christina's blog entry in which she discusses the situation. I know you will eat me alive, but for once, I think she's 100% right. I guess this would be the wrong time to make rude responses to "eat me alive". I just read it. I also think she's pretty much spot-on. If it walks like a douche, et cetera. -------------- "[A] book said there were 5 trillion witnesses. Who am I supposed to believe, 5 trillion witnesses or you? That shit's, like, ironclad. " -- stevestory "Wow, you must be retarded. I said that CO2 does not trap heat. If it did then it would not cool down at night."  Joe G

Kattarina98 Posts: 1267 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2013,11:47    Quote (fnxtr @ Aug. 15 2013,18:31) Quote (Kattarina98 @ Aug. 15 2013,08:27) On the Bathroom Wall, cubist posted a link to Greta Christina's blog entry in which she discusses the situation. I know you will eat me alive, but for once, I think she's 100% right. I guess this would be the wrong time to make rude responses to "eat me alive". I just read it. I also think she's pretty much spot-on. If it walks like a douche, et cetera. Hehe, I realised what I had done as soon as I had posted it. But I was too lazy to edit. -------------- Barry Arrington is a bitch.

Patrick Posts: 666 Joined: July 2011 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2013,13:45    Quote (Kattarina98 @ Aug. 15 2013,11:27) On the Bathroom Wall, cubist posted a link to Greta Christina's blog entry in which she discusses the situation. I know you will eat me alive, but for once, I think she's 100% right. I agree with her that reporting rape stigmatizes the victim.  That needs to change. I don't believe she refutes the "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" response (which I haven't actually read anyone use in this case).  While sexual assault is unfortunately common, sexual assault by a particular male is not. And while I might even give some credibility to her multiple witnesses argument, all of the "witnesses" are anonymous in this case. PZ screwed up.

BillB Posts: 388 Joined: Aug. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2013,14:00    Quote (Kattarina98 @ Aug. 15 2013,16:27) On the Bathroom Wall, cubist posted a link to Greta Christina's blog entry in which she discusses the situation. I know you will eat me alive, but for once, I think she's 100% right. I agree.

BillB Posts: 388 Joined: Aug. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2013,15:05    Quote what did she expect? What should she expect.

midwifetoad Posts: 4003 Joined: Mar. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2013,18:33    The degree of skepticism should be proportional to the consequences of being wrong. http://www.innocenceproject.org/know.......=38&y=4 Edit to fix Edited by midwifetoad on Aug. 15 2013,18:36 -------------- Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

RDK Posts: 229 Joined: Aug. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2013,22:13    PZ was wrong in the way he went about it. It's kind of sad to see how low-quality Pharyngula has become over the years.  If the comments section on his latest "grenade" debacle are indicative of his blog's fanbase, the kind of feminists and social justice warriors he's attracted are many orders of magnitude worse than the nutcases at Uncommon Descent.  Full of people who don't understand law, consent, or even how to form a logical thought properly. The biggest problem seems to be inability to understand that advising people to be safe when alcohol is involved is not the same as "blaming" the victim, if the victim even exists in this case.  Nobody can stop a rape from happening but the rapist, but at the same time the world is a scary place so to not take precaution opens yourself up for some pretty nasty things to happen to you. It's like getting into a car without having a seatbelt on and then acting indignant when some asshole crashes into you and you go flying through the windshield.  No shit the other guy should have been a better driver, but you also didn't take a necessary precaution.  This is the real world we live in, not fantasy feminism land. -------------- If you are not: Leviathan please Logout under Meta in the sidebar. ‘‘I was like ‘Oh my God! It’s Jesus on a banana!’’  - Lisa Swinton, Jesus-eating pagan

Doc Bill Posts: 1039 Joined: April 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2013,23:13    I agree, RDK. I hardly go over to Pharyngula these days.  PZ seems more interested in being the Big Bad Alpha Atheist rather than a scientist and it's all an ego trip for him. Every time I hear him speak I cringe at his inability to present a coherent idea.  Compare the brilliant clarity of Hitchens to the fumbling oatmeal mush of PZ.   I think PZ peaked about 10 years ago and is in a slow decline to irrelevance.  Too bad, really.  There was a time he could spark a discussion, but not any more.

Kattarina98 Posts: 1267 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,01:42    Quote (RDK @ Aug. 16 2013,05:13) PZ was wrong in the way he went about it. It's kind of sad to see how low-quality Pharyngula has become over the years.  If the comments section on his latest "grenade" debacle are indicative of his blog's fanbase, the kind of feminists and social justice warriors he's attracted are many orders of magnitude worse than the nutcases at Uncommon Descent.  Full of people who don't understand law, consent, or even how to form a logical thought properly. The biggest problem seems to be inability to understand that advising people to be safe when alcohol is involved is not the same as "blaming" the victim, if the victim even exists in this case.  Nobody can stop a rape from happening but the rapist, but at the same time the world is a scary place so to not take precaution opens yourself up for some pretty nasty things to happen to you. It's like getting into a car without having a seatbelt on and then acting indignant when some asshole crashes into you and you go flying through the windshield.  No shit the other guy should have been a better driver, but you also didn't take a necessary precaution.  This is the real world we live in, not fantasy feminism land. Well said. Just my two cents about teaching the youngsters that the world is a scary place: For more than a decade - starting at university - I was politically active. My experience is that although generally young females might be wary of predators, they don't expect that behaviour from their comrades-in-arms, especially not from an admired celebrity. They are the good guys, right? So the girls are way too trusting, and deeply traumatised when they are assaulted, maybe more so than it would have happened with a complete stranger. -------------- Barry Arrington is a bitch.

Driver Posts: 649 Joined: June 2011 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,04:19    Quote (Patrick @ Aug. 15 2013,14:20) Quote (Driver @ Aug. 15 2013,08:33)   Quote (midwifetoad @ Aug. 15 2013,09:36) Of course it's not all right to have sex with a woman who is too drunk to give informed consent. It is also perfectly legal to stroll down any street in any neighborhood on any Saturday night. There are laws and there are rules of decency. There's also common sense. I asked my wife about this. Her question was what did she expect? If the accusation is true then Shermer is a pig,  but it's not surprising  that such men exist. A good chunk of literature is devoted to what happens when you mix men,  women and alcohol. Edit to add: I'm not blaming the victim, but I think it's fair to point out that bad people exist; preditors are over-represented among alpha males and celebrities; this is well known and frequently in the news; and finally, it is possible for a bad person and a foolish person to occupy the same room at the same time. What you are saying is that men can party but women can't. This is not the right way to go about things. No, he's making the point that, while burglars are responsible for robberies, leaving your doors unlocked is still unwise.   Quote This is not about being alone on a street. We are talking about TAM, Skepticon etc. Allegedly about those conferences.  Thus far no evidence has been presented.   Quote Anyway, the anecdote related was not about getting deliberately blind drunk. It's not that hard to get someone more drunk than they intended when they have had a couple of glasses, especially if you have the status advantage. Which is why it is important to know your limits and your intentions before deliberately impairing your own judgement. Note that I am not blaming the victim of non-consensual sex.  If someone commits that crime, they should be punished severely.  This is advice for avoiding the situation in the first place.  In an ideal world, there would be no risk of that happening.  We don't live in that world.   Quote But most important of all, a victim's choices are NOT the point. To see this, think of anyone who commented on a murder or non-sexual assault charge with criticism of the victim's intoxication level. Irrelevant victim blaming isn't it? Dalton's segment was highly inappropriate. You are ignoring Dalton's other key point.  PZ Myers publicly accused Michael Shermer of rape based on second or third hand hearsay.  Myer's blog is popular enough that this accusation will be returned in Google searches for Shermer.  This kind of accusation is legally defamation per se. Dalton is noting that the so-called skeptics at Pharyngula are accepting those claims without any evidence. I am not ignoring his point about the sources. I disagree with it, but what I AM saying is that his response was highly inappropriate. Whenever it comes to any other type of assault, people's first response is not to speculate on what the victim might have done to facilitate the attack. Think about that. We don't do this for any other crime, I don't think, let alone assault. I already said that Dalton's comparison to the Gospels is stupid, but if it were not his response would STILL have been highly inappropriate. Myers' source is not hearsay, this is corroborated testimony by women he knows personally. Now you can argue that to us it is hearsay, but... really? PZ Myers is making it up? Do you really believe that? This is not completely news about Shermer, btw, and I see no reason to be skeptical about a woman's corroborated claim that she was raped. Most accounts of rape are not lies. Myers' decision was not about court standards of evidence and conviction, but about warning women to avoid a man who already had some reputation amongst quite a few skeptic conference-attending women as a predator, operating in a world where we have good evidence that a microculture of assault (including rape) and rape apology already exists. See Karen Stollznow and Ashley Paramore. -------------- Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray [A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

Driver Posts: 649 Joined: June 2011 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,04:24    Quote (Patrick @ Aug. 15 2013,14:20) Quote (Driver @ Aug. 15 2013,08:33)   Quote (midwifetoad @ Aug. 15 2013,09:36) Of course it's not all right to have sex with a woman who is too drunk to give informed consent. It is also perfectly legal to stroll down any street in any neighborhood on any Saturday night. There are laws and there are rules of decency. There's also common sense. I asked my wife about this. Her question was what did she expect? If the accusation is true then Shermer is a pig,  but it's not surprising  that such men exist. A good chunk of literature is devoted to what happens when you mix men,  women and alcohol. Edit to add: I'm not blaming the victim, but I think it's fair to point out that bad people exist; preditors are over-represented among alpha males and celebrities; this is well known and frequently in the news; and finally, it is possible for a bad person and a foolish person to occupy the same room at the same time. What you are saying is that men can party but women can't. This is not the right way to go about things. No, he's making the point that, while burglars are responsible for robberies, leaving your doors unlocked is still unwise. Where "leaving your doors unlocked" is drinking wine at a conference. -------------- Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray [A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

Driver Posts: 649 Joined: June 2011 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,04:31    You know what is most wrong about this "if only she had not done X" stuff? It helps perpetuate the perception that women can always avoid rape if they are "sensible". This is patent bullshit. -------------- Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray [A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

Quack Posts: 1961 Joined: May 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,04:32    This case brings New York vs. Strauss-Kahn to mind. -------------- Rocks have no biology.               Robert Byers.

Patrick Posts: 666 Joined: July 2011 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,08:27    Quote (Driver @ Aug. 16 2013,05:19) Whenever it comes to any other type of assault, people's first response is not to speculate on what the victim might have done to facilitate the attack. Think about that. We don't do this for any other crime, I don't think, let alone assault. There are public service announcements here on the east coast warning people not to leave their cars unlocked or the keys in them. When my teenagers go into the city, both their mother and I give them (no doubt too long) lectures about how to take responsibility for their own safety. This is not specific to any particular type of crime. Quote Myers' source is not hearsay, this is corroborated testimony by women he knows personally. Now you can argue that to us it is hearsay, but... really? PZ Myers is making it up? Do you really believe that? There's no way of knowing that.  Some of the material quoted in the cease and desist letter suggests that Myers got the information from a friend-of-a-friend, other statements suggest it was from someone he knows personally.  In either case it is hearsay. And while I don't believe that Myers is necessarily making it up out of whole cloth, nothing in his behavior over the past few years suggests to me that he can be trusted not to respond with hyperbole. Quote This is not completely news about Shermer, btw, and I see no reason to be skeptical about a woman's corroborated claim that she was raped. Most accounts of rape are not lies. You are treading dangerously close to libel yourself here.  The issue isn't about "most accounts of rape", it's about posting anonymous defamatory claims in a public forum. Quote Myers' decision was not about court standards of evidence and conviction, but about warning women to avoid a man who already had some reputation amongst quite a few skeptic conference-attending women as a predator, operating in a world where we have good evidence that a microculture of assault (including rape) and rape apology already exists. See Karen Stollznow and Ashley Paramore. Leaving aside whether or not skeptic conferences are more or less safe for women than any other venue, the fact that Myers blog isn't a court of law does not excuse his behavior.  If Shermer really did what was claimed, I'll volunteer to help nail his testicles to a wall.  Until that's proven, though, anonymous hearsay is defamatory libel. Do you really want to live under a justice system that allows anyone to be subject to these potentially life-destroying accusations, without evidence or recourse? Edited by Patrick on Aug. 16 2013,09:28

Patrick Posts: 666 Joined: July 2011 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,08:30    Quote (Driver @ Aug. 16 2013,05:31) You know what is most wrong about this "if only she had not done X" stuff? It helps perpetuate the perception that women can always avoid rape if they are "sensible". This is patent bullshit. It's a good thing no one that I've seen in this discussion is saying that, then. There's a difference between "The world can be a dangerous place -- here are some ways to protect yourself." and "Do this or you're responsible for the actions of evil people."

OgreMkV Posts: 3668 Joined: Oct. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,08:50    Regardless of the truth or not of the claim... Shermer is now basically untouchable.  Even if he is fully exonerated and FtB is shut down due to legal action... I don't know how Shermer's reputation and activities can survive this. I know people who have had this happen to them.  No evidence, no trial, no nothing.  Just an assumption of guilt and boom... no career, no wife, nothing.  It's all gone.  For a claim that may or may not have been real.  No one knows, nearly 20 years later, whether he was involved in a sexual assault or not because it never went to trial and no evidence was ever presented. PZ has basically destroyed Shermer... in just a few paragraphs. So far, I have seen two types of people arguing about this incident.  One the one hand are the people who assume that Shermer is guilty.  On the other hand are people who want to see evidence that he is guilty. If PZ had said "Shermer is a murderer", then people would have laughed it off... demanded to see evidence... then ignored it when none was forthcoming. Sexual assault/rape is fundamentally different from other crimes though.  Half the people seem to think that the victim is always telling the truth and half seem to think that the victim is lying.  There doesn't seem to be an 'innocent until proven guilty' status for sexual assault. Of course, in this case, we don't know because we have no idea who the victim is.  We don't know when this happened.  We don't know where it happened.  All we have is a claim by PZ. PZ doesn't like Shermer.  We know that.  PZ could be making this up.  PZ could believe the person, but that person is making it up.  There really could have been an assault.  Heck, the woman could have willingly said yes, but then regretted it in the morning.  No one knows (and we'll likely never know). What we do know is that PZ's actions have likely destroyed the reputation of someone... without evidence.  Maybe PZ does have evidence, he just chose not to post it.  But if there was evidence... then he should have gone to the authorities and encouraged his friend (or friend of a friend) to go to the authorities. BTW: All this stuff probably needs to get moved the BW. -------------- Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims. http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

midwifetoad Posts: 4003 Joined: Mar. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,12:24    I assume she is telling the truth from her point of view, and I assume it is not acceptable to have sex with someone too drunk to resist. I differ for the woman and from PZ in that I also don't think it is acceptable to get too drunk to protect oneself in public. It just isn't acceptable. I have no sympathy for drunk drivers and I don't like being with people who are drunk. Never have. and this is one of the reasons. People think they are excused from the consequences. I note that she didn't mention alcohol. I wonder why. I can accept being wrong in this case if I am wrong. But the  common M.O. in the auxiliary accusations seem to involve alcohol. -------------- Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

Driver Posts: 649 Joined: June 2011 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,14:30    Quote (Patrick @ Aug. 16 2013,14:27) Quote (Driver @ Aug. 16 2013,05:19) Whenever it comes to any other type of assault, people's first response is not to speculate on what the victim might have done to facilitate the attack. Think about that. We don't do this for any other crime, I don't think, let alone assault. There are public service announcements here on the east coast warning people not to leave their cars unlocked or the keys in them. When my teenagers go into the city, both their mother and I give them (no doubt too long) lectures about how to take responsibility for their own safety. This is not specific to any particular type of crime. You have not responded to the point I made. Read it again. Quote Quote Myers' source is not hearsay, this is corroborated testimony by women he knows personally. Now you can argue that to us it is hearsay, but... really? PZ Myers is making it up? Do you really believe that? There's no way of knowing that. There are plenty of ways of weighing it up. Please tell me what you think PZ Myers will gain. Bear in mind that the reaction to his actions is largely negative, even hostile, and that he would have been aware of this. Please also tell me when you have ever come across PZ Myers fabricating quotes. Quote  Some of the material quoted in the cease and desist letter suggests that Myers got the information from a friend-of-a-friend, other statements suggest it was from someone he knows personally.  In either case it is hearsay. The cease and desist letter is wrong, unless you now think both PZ Myers and Carrie are lying. Quote And while I don't believe that Myers is necessarily making it up out of whole cloth, nothing in his behavior over the past few years suggests to me that he can be trusted not to respond with hyperbole. So you are saying you think it possible that PZ altered the testimony? Seriously? Please give me an example where he has done this before. Quote   Quote This is not completely news about Shermer, btw, and I see no reason to be skeptical about a woman's corroborated claim that she was raped. Most accounts of rape are not lies. You are treading dangerously close to libel yourself here.  The issue isn't about "most accounts of rape", it's about posting anonymous defamatory claims in a public forum. What you think the issue is is noted. You are still implying that PZ may have altered the woman's testimony, and that the woman may not exist or is not credible.   Quote Quote Myers' decision was not about court standards of evidence and conviction, but about warning women to avoid a man who already had some reputation amongst quite a few skeptic conference-attending women as a predator, operating in a world where we have good evidence that a microculture of assault (including rape) and rape apology already exists. See Karen Stollznow and Ashley Paramore. Leaving aside whether or not skeptic conferences are more or less safe for women than any other venue, the fact that Myers blog isn't a court of law does not excuse his behavior.  If Shermer really did what was claimed, I'll volunteer to help nail his testicles to a wall.  Until that's proven, though, anonymous hearsay is defamatory libel. The amount of respect arguments conflating the law with "the right thing to do" deserve is zero. Especially in the case of rape. Also, the woman is not anonymous to PZ Myers nor is her testimony hearsay. Unless you are saying that PZ made it up or altered her testimony. It might have been hoped that skeptic '-cons' were better than other '-cons', but they plainly are not. "They are doing it too" is of course no excuse. Harassment at '-cons' is a big problem. Organizations failing to deal with harassment is a big problem. That the American skeptics are not any better is not something to leave aside.  The evidence of harassment within the skeptic movement is directly relevant to assessment of the rape claim. Quote Do you really want to live under a justice system that allows anyone to be subject to these potentially life-destroying accusations, without evidence or recourse? Shermer has recourse, and as PZ Myers surely knew when he posted, Shermer will probably win any libel suit. As for Shermer's life being destroyed... I doubt it. It's not Shermer who will get less cushy speaking jobs at conferences. There is evidence. There is testimony as to Shermer's conduct, and not all of it is anonymous either. How about living in the world we actually live in, Patrick? Where at least 1 in 6 women experience sexual assault in their lives. Where if a woman is raped, in whatever country in the world, she will have a hard time getting her peers, let alone the police and courts, to believe her? Where the public response to rape is "what did she do to allow it to happen?" and "what about the lives of the perpetrators?" Where first-hand testimony of rape (corroborated by more than one person), and multiple lines of evidence, are automatically dismissed as "no evidence" or "hearsay". Where hardly anyone expresses sympathy for the victims. At best there is 'if this is true, the accused should be castrated.' Where the lives deeply affected are far more often the lives of women raped than the lives of accused. Where if we tell of a man who goes out to a bar and gets drunk and then is followed home and assaulted for his wallet, the overwhelming reaction is condemnation of the assailant not "men shouldn't go out to pubs and get blind drunk" or "I don't believe it happened". Of course, because it is fucking ridiculous to be hyperskeptical about someone getting assaulted. However, the same people, good people too, react to testimony of rape with victim blaming and denial. How about living in a world of rape culture, institutionalized and deeply ingrained in even some of the most enlightened? I wonder what that would be like? -------------- Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray [A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

Driver Posts: 649 Joined: June 2011 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,14:49    Quote (Patrick @ Aug. 16 2013,14:30) Quote (Driver @ Aug. 16 2013,05:31) You know what is most wrong about this "if only she had not done X" stuff? It helps perpetuate the perception that women can always avoid rape if they are "sensible". This is patent bullshit. It's a good thing no one that I've seen in this discussion is saying that, then. Brian Dalton did exactly that. -------------- Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray [A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

OgreMkV Posts: 3668 Joined: Oct. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,14:55    Driver, everything you said is true. However, nothing you said is evidence.   Did PZ make this up?  I don't know.  You don't know.  He may not even know (he may be being duped).  That's the problem... no one knows. Do these people exist?  I don't know.  You don't know.  PZ may not even know (from a friend of a friend). What we do know is that PZ excels as a shock-jock.  Without any corroborating evidence, I find it difficult to trust him.  I will say that I find it curious that this happens right before his book is due to be released.  I just find it curious... I really hope that he wouldn't stoop to this level to garner blog hits and some media attention.  And this also does what PZ wants to happen, that is a divide in the atheism/skepticism community.  I'm willing to bet large sums of money that anyone who supports Shermer... or at least doesn't immediately support PZs position... will be cast as a 'rape apologist'. An accusation of rape is serious.  Florida has life imprisonment for rape.  Making an accusation like that is not helping the victim in any way. He could have easily said, "Shermer is a slime ball.  I don't trust him. I don't think any of you should trust him. And I don't think anyone should go to a conference where he is in attendance."  And then taken this claim to the authorities. A lot of people I am reading are saying, "But the authorities don't do anything."  And "it's all blame the victim."   None of which means that PZ gets to be judge, jury, and prosecuting attorney.  None of which means going to the authorities is still what should be done. Like I said, I agree with all that you have said.  That's not the issue.  The issue here is that PZ has done something dramatically stupid and just plain wrong.  This tactic will not help the girl, you say it won't hurt Shermer, it will get PZ lots of attention, and none of it will do a darn thing if Shermer is raping people at cons. The only thing that will prevent that is to get a judge and jury enough evidence to put Shermer behind bars.  To do that, will require lots of pain and suffering from the victim and it will suck and it's not fair to them.  But we don't have any other way of doing it.  Well, there's this thing that PZ did... I'm not saying that lots of women haven't been raped.  It's true.  There are also cases where no sexual contact occurred and the woman still cried rape and put a man in jail for years.  There are cases where a woman said 'yes', but later regretted it and claimed rape. Is that what's going on here?  I don't know.  No one knows.   We, as a culture, do have to do a better job in investigation of these claims.  We have to, as Patrick said, educate women AND men about these things.  We have to quit blaming the victim. But we also have to get to the truth of the matter. And yes, sexual assault is treated very differently.  Because it's the only one that can be consensual until after the fact. I guess you could choose to get beat up and then file assault charges... Anyway.  Take that as you will.  I'm open to logical arguments and discussion. -------------- Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims. http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

Driver Posts: 649 Joined: June 2011 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,15:14    Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 16 2013,14:50) If PZ had said "Shermer is a murderer", then people would have laughed it off... demanded to see evidence... then ignored it when none was forthcoming. They are not equivalent for many reasons, the most tangible of which is that rape is 2 to 3 orders of magnitude more common than murder in the USA. What evidence do you demand to see to confirm to your satisfaction that people have been raped at American skeptic -cons? But, bad analogy as it is, let's go with it: What if John published a testimony of Harry trying to murder someone, in an environment where several murders have been reported, Harry has a reputation for aggression, and several other people have said that Harry tried to assault or even kill them? Would people laugh it off then? -------------- Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray [A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

midwifetoad Posts: 4003 Joined: Mar. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,15:37    Quote What you are saying is that men can party but women can't. I don't recall giving men a pass. I can hold two concepts to be true at the same time. People who take advantage of the vulnerable are despicable and worthy of shunning. People who voluntarily make themselves vulnerable in situations that are well known and well understood by adults cannot get full sympathy from me. I despise salesmen who take advantage of the elderly and mentally handicapped, but if people want to be treated as adults, they need to accept responsibility for self protection. I come from this from my training in special education. From that I learned that people who claim victimhood in these situations will never be accepted as adults. It's a tough lesson and a tough world, but it's the world we live in. In Streetcar Named Desire, Blanche DuBois says: Quote Whoever you are, I have always depended on the kindness of strangers. It's not terribly surprising that she gets raped. One does not have to agree with or like predators to believe that adult human beings need to take care of themselves and not expect the world to protect them like children. For heaven's sake, good children's literature teaches that children can't depend on the kindness of adults, not even adults charged with your care. But to trust an alpha male celebrity? Give me a break. A false dichotomy has been raised. -------------- Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

Driver Posts: 649 Joined: June 2011 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,15:54    Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 16 2013,20:55) Driver, everything you said is true. However, nothing you said is evidence.   Did PZ make this up?  I don't know.  You don't know.  He may not even know (he may be being duped).  That's the problem... no one knows. Nothing *I* said is evidence. However, evidence exists. Quote Do these people exist?  I don't know.  You don't know.  PZ may not even know (from a friend of a friend). PZ says he knows the woman, who contacted him directly. Quote I will say that I find it curious that this happens right before his book is due to be released. Riiiight. It's not that people would email him when all this shit started coming to light, but rather that PZ jumped on the 'rape in the American skeptic movement' bandwagon. His master plan is to alienate the majority of American atheists. Quote  And this also does what PZ wants to happen, that is a divide in the atheism/skepticism community. Oh please. PZ wants a divide? There is a divide. A 15 year old posts a picture on Reddit and gets hundreds of rape comments. Reddit is a cesspool. The Slymepit... exists. Rebecca Watson gets thousands of abusive tweets and emails for saying "guys don't do that." Women have left the skeptic and atheist movements. Atheism Plus... exists, because some people could not tolerate the sexism and other phobic behaviour in atheist forums. Sexual harassment at atheist and sexism -cons is a big problem. Despite the ridiculous narrative, NONE of this is down to PZ Myers. Quote An accusation of rape is serious.  Florida has life imprisonment for rape.  Making an accusation like that is not helping the victim in any way. The victim asked PZ to publish it to warn women. Quote He could have easily said, "Shermer is a slime ball.  I don't trust him. I don't think any of you should trust him. And I don't think anyone should go to a conference where he is in attendance."  And then taken this claim to the authorities. Yeah, about that "taking it to the authorities". Catch up then get back to me. Quote None of which means that PZ gets to be judge, jury, and prosecuting attorney. Agreed, but irrelevant. PZ published a testimony, not held a court hearing. Quote  none of it will do a darn thing if Shermer is raping people at cons. It's an alert. It should make some difference. -------------- Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray [A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

Driver Posts: 649 Joined: June 2011 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,15:58    Quote (midwifetoad @ Aug. 16 2013,21:37) In Streetcar Named Desire, Blanche DuBois says:   Quote Whoever you are, I have always depended on the kindness of strangers. It's not terribly surprising that she gets raped. The saddest thing is you are not even aware what you are doing here. -------------- Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray [A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

Glen Davidson Posts: 1100 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,16:01    Actually, it makes it worse that it's "believable," because people might believe it.  Larry Flint got away with saying that Jerry Falwell had sex with his mom in an outhouse (something like that) because it was such a preposterous lie that no one would believe it. You don't get to just make accusations against people without having credible evidence to back it up.  If PZ has anything like that, we most certainly haven't seen it, and his original account makes it sound like third-hand knowledge at best. The fact is that you don't publish that William Kennedy Smith is a rapist, even though we have first-hand testimony (not hearsay) of the alleged rape (the trial was televised)--because he was never convicted.  That's how responsible journalists act, unlike yellow journalists and tabloid trash.   Responsible journalists will write about allegations and charges when they're formally made, typically not before.  And then they give the "other side" a chance to respond.  PZ simply accuses without providing credible evidence. Glen Davidson -------------- http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p....p Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of coincidence---ID philosophy

Driver Posts: 649 Joined: June 2011 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,16:10    Obviously all this should be moved, but I hope it can be moved to its own thread rather than the Bathroom Wall. Even though it is OT for the forum, it is an important topic. -------------- Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray [A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

Driver Posts: 649 Joined: June 2011 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,17:03    Quote (Glen Davidson @ Aug. 16 2013,22:01) Actually, it makes it worse that it's "believable," because people might believe it.  Larry Flint got away with saying that Jerry Falwell had sex with his mom in an outhouse (something like that) because it was such a preposterous lie that no one would believe it. You don't get to just make accusations against people without having credible evidence to back it up.  If PZ has anything like that, we most certainly haven't seen it, and his original account makes it sound like third-hand knowledge at best. The fact is that you don't publish that William Kennedy Smith is a rapist, even though we have first-hand testimony (not hearsay) of the alleged rape (the trial was televised)--because he was never convicted.  That's how responsible journalists act, unlike yellow journalists and tabloid trash.   Responsible journalists will write about allegations and charges when they're formally made, typically not before.  And then they give the "other side" a chance to respond.  PZ simply accuses without providing credible evidence. Glen Davidson Glen, if you think FTB ethics should be dictated by the ethics/practical considerations of American broadsheets, you are in for many jolts and disappointments if you continue to read the posts there. I'm sure Myers would publish any response from Shermer, if his legal counsel allowed it. You are one more person asserting that the testimonies as to Shermer's behaviour are not credible evidence. -------------- Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray [A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

Glen Davidson Posts: 1100 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,17:30    Quote (Driver @ Aug. 16 2013,17:03)   Quote (Glen Davidson @ Aug. 16 2013,22:01) Actually, it makes it worse that it's "believable," because people might believe it.  Larry Flint got away with saying that Jerry Falwell had sex with his mom in an outhouse (something like that) because it was such a preposterous lie that no one would believe it. You don't get to just make accusations against people without having credible evidence to back it up.  If PZ has anything like that, we most certainly haven't seen it, and his original account makes it sound like third-hand knowledge at best. The fact is that you don't publish that William Kennedy Smith is a rapist, even though we have first-hand testimony (not hearsay) of the alleged rape (the trial was televised)--because he was never convicted.  That's how responsible journalists act, unlike yellow journalists and tabloid trash.   Responsible journalists will write about allegations and charges when they're formally made, typically not before.  And then they give the "other side" a chance to respond.  PZ simply accuses without providing credible evidence. Glen Davidson Quote Glen, if you think FTB ethics should be dictated by the ethics/practical considerations of American broadsheets, you are in for many jolts and disappointments if you continue to read the posts there. Your sentence is illogically constructed, since the mere fact that you and many other FTBers practice scurrilous rumor-mongering has nothing to do with what I "think" should be done.  I am not surprised that many people think that they are above law and decency. Worse, it is a rather disingenuous claim, that I should think FTB ethics ought to be dictated by the broadsheets.  I'm talking about following the law, rather than not giving a whit about being decent.  Examples were given of journalists who don't act as defamers, not as who should set the ethics.   Quote I'm sure Myers would publish any response from Shermer, if his legal counsel allowed it. I am not sure of it, nor do I care about his printing something after first writing an unsupported accusation.   Quote You are one more person asserting that the testimonies as to Shermer's behaviour are not credible evidence. No, you're just making up lies as you go along.  The point isn't whether or not a person of whom we lack even the identity is or is not credible, the point is that we can hardly know whether or not she is because all we have is hearsay.  If you and the rest would quit lying about what we say and think, you might for once actually begin to understand our position.  So long as you fabricate our positions and shoot those down, you simply practice more scurrility. Glen Davidson -------------- http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p....p Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of coincidence---ID philosophy

Driver Posts: 649 Joined: June 2011 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,19:01    Quote (Glen Davidson @ Aug. 16 2013,23:30) I'm talking about following the law, rather than not giving a whit about being decent. Since the law and the process of law tend to uphold the status quo, and demonstrably so in the case of rape, your point may be of value to conservatives, but not so much to those seeking social justice. Quote   Quote You are one more person asserting that the testimonies as to Shermer's behaviour are not credible evidence. No, you're just making up lies as you go along.  The point isn't whether or not a person of whom we lack even the identity is or is not credible, the point is that we can hardly know whether or not she is because all we have is hearsay. No we do not only have hearsay. Testimony IS evidence. To dismiss even the anonymous testimony requires an assertion that PZ Myers may have made it up, and also ignores the corroboration of the testimony. -------------- Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray [A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

Glen Davidson Posts: 1100 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,19:16    Quote (Driver @ Aug. 16 2013,19:01)       Quote (Glen Davidson @ Aug. 16 2013,23:30) I'm talking about following the law, rather than not giving a whit about being decent. Since the law and the process of law tend to uphold the status quo, and demonstrably so in the case of rape, Evidence?   No, you've given up any pretense to dealing honestly with evidence.         Quote your point may be of value to conservatives, but not so much to those seeking social justice. I know the SJW prattle, parrot.  Make a case or STFU. I really don't need to hear about how wonderful all of you socially aware bigots are.  You would never allow yourselves to fall due to unsupported accusations, but you think that you're the particular elites whose word should be law.     Quote     Quote         Quote You are one more person asserting that the testimonies as to Shermer's behaviour are not credible evidence. No, you're just making up lies as you go along.  The point isn't whether or not a person of whom we lack even the identity is or is not credible, the point is that we can hardly know whether or not she is because all we have is hearsay. No we do not only have hearsay. I didn't see evidence beyond hearsay, although it's pretty clear that evidence and honesty aren't troubling your "objectivity."       Quote Testimony IS evidence. Oh my God, really?   You're a real expert in these matters, I can see.  You know that testimony is evidence.  Something that wasn't in contention, illiterate wonder.       Quote To dismiss even the anonymous testimony requires an assertion that PZ Myers may have made it up, Another insipid lie.  Clearly there are any number of scenarios that are possible, that Myers made it up, that the woman purportedly making the charge made it up, that someone seriously misunderstands what constitutes rape, and presumably others.  We don't know what the case is because we only have an anonymous charge, a problem that one illiterate chowderhead seems not to recognize as any sort of difficulty for bringing up what are, in consequence, unsubstantiated rumors.       Quote and also ignores the corroboration of the testimony. And just how stupid would I have to be to accept anonymous corroboration of an anonymous claim?  As stupid as your whole "case." Glen Davidson -------------- http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p....p Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of coincidence---ID philosophy

Driver Posts: 649 Joined: June 2011 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,22:00    Glen, Quote I didn't see evidence beyond hearsay If you mean "information not substantiated", there are several sources. If you mean "report of another's words by a witness", then you didn't look properly. Quote Clearly there are any number of scenarios that are possible, that Myers made it up, that the woman purportedly making the charge made it up, that someone seriously misunderstands what constitutes rape, and presumably others. Yes, but to put my reply in context again, to dismiss the anonymous testimony as hearsay requires an assertion that PZ Myers may have made it up. Quote illiterate Sorry, did I make a typo? Some unforgivable grammar error? Quote And just how stupid would I have to be to accept anonymous corroboration of an anonymous claim? You would just have to accept that PZ Myers had no good reason to lie. Anyhow, the reports are not all anonymous. You didn't look properly. Thanks for all the additional material in your last post, Glen. You clearly like to decorate your meat with lots of salad. -------------- Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray [A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

Glen Davidson Posts: 1100 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,22:28    [quote=Driver,Aug. 16 2013,22:00][/quote]   Quote Glen,     Quote I didn't see evidence beyond hearsay If you mean "information not substantiated", there are several sources. If you mean "report of another's words by a witness", then you didn't look properly. Why would I be referring to the shifted goalposts of an echo chamber?  Do you think that I care as little about truth and justice as you do? I mean testimony that can be checked out, at least something at the investigatory phase.  Not you trusting your demi-god PZ.   Quote     Quote Clearly there are any number of scenarios that are possible, that Myers made it up, that the woman purportedly making the charge made it up, that someone seriously misunderstands what constitutes rape, and presumably others. Yes, but to put my reply in context again, to dismiss the anonymous testimony as hearsay requires an assertion that PZ Myers may have made it up. Well, gee, I wonder if any court would accept that PZ is beyond question and any possibility of reproach.  Because, heaven forbid that we should even question anything PZ says.   And I don't even care about your specific concern that the holy rumor-monger PZ might or might not make something up, because we're not in any sort of position to find out  what did occur.   Quote     Quote illiterate Sorry, did I make a typo? Some unforgivable grammar error? No, you don't read properly, assuming that you're not always lying with your endless errors and goalpost moves.   Quote     Quote And just how stupid would I have to be to accept anonymous corroboration of an anonymous claim? You would just have to accept that PZ Myers had no good reason to lie. Again with the idiot-level reading.  That's not the only possibility, and I don't trust the self-righteous PZ any more than I do you.   Quote Anyhow, the reports are not all anonymous. You didn't look properly. We're talking about  a single charge, mangler of truth.  I'm not biting at the bait of your dishonest shift to other issues.   Quote Thanks for all the additional material in your last post, Glen. You clearly like to decorate your meat with lots of salad. Here's a thought:  Respond by making up the near-total lacunae of both evidence and clear thought in your sucking up to your favorite alpha male working for his and your petty bourgeois privilege, instead of making more baseless charges.  If you could make a case, you would, but instead you parrot your slogans and your inability to contemplate that anyone could ever question your vindictive shock-jock, PZM. Glen Davidson -------------- http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p....p Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of coincidence---ID philosophy

Richardthughes Posts: 11178 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,23:03    Aren't the authorities and courts not public fora the right venues for this? I do understand that victims may feel it traumatic, but "telling PZ" will only likely prolong things and it will end in the courts anyway? -------------- "Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield "You magnificent bastard! " : Louis "ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard "I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932 "...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

Driver Posts: 649 Joined: June 2011 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,23:43    Glen, Quote Well, gee, I wonder if any court would accept that PZ is beyond question and any possibility of reproach. It appears that your demi-god is the law, since you can't shake leaning on that authority. Anyhow, I did not say that PZ is "beyond possibility of reproach". I said give me a good reason why he would lie. Quote we're not in any sort of position to find out  what did occur. On the contrary, there are multiple lines of evidence by which we can provisionally believe what is, all things considered, an unexceptional claim. In the "debate" between Oxfordians and Stratfordians, we could say that we are not in any position to find out what really occurred, but that one requires acceptance of some sources and commonplaces, and the other is a conspiracy theory with no evidence for it whatsoever. Your hyperskepticism also amounts to giving credence to a conspiracy theory for which no evidence is presented. Quote     Quote       Quote illiterate Sorry, did I make a typo? Some unforgivable grammar error? No, you don't read properly, assuming that you're not always lying with your endless errors and goalpost moves. Ah, the insult you are looking for is "semi-literate". Also has a nice double meaning. Glad to be of help. Quote I'm not biting at the bait of your dishonest shift to other issues. I am talking about Shermer. There are several sources as to his conduct. Besides which, the climate is rather relevant. Quote     Quote Thanks for all the additional material in your last post, Glen. You clearly like to decorate your meat with lots of salad. Here's - more salad. Rich, The case was reported to an organization already, who were apparently not helpful. No-one is trying to get Shermer convicted. You are aware that very few rapists are convicted, US or UK? -------------- Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray [A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

Richardthughes Posts: 11178 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,23:57    I'm not trying to stir the pot, and if true it is horrendous, but reporting it to an organization isn't the same as reporting it to the police. I can imagine doing that may be emotionally very hard so I can understand why it may not happen, along with stigmatization, but I do know the efficacy of the police (as low as it may be) is more than that of conference organizers or blog writers. -------------- "Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield "You magnificent bastard! " : Louis "ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard "I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932 "...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

Driver Posts: 649 Joined: June 2011 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,23:57    Quote (Glen Davidson @ Aug. 17 2013,01:16) Quote (Driver @ Aug. 16 2013,19:01)         Quote (Glen Davidson @ Aug. 16 2013,23:30) I'm talking about following the law, rather than not giving a whit about being decent. Since the law and the process of law tend to uphold the status quo, and demonstrably so in the case of rape, Evidence?   This is just history denial. I thought we might be able to take it as a given that feminists and other civil rights advocates have usually had a point. I found this article for you: http://moourl.com/9uiur......r....ur By all means, do tell me how it is all fixed now. -------------- Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray [A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

Driver Posts: 649 Joined: June 2011 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,00:03    Quote (Richardthughes @ Aug. 17 2013,05:57) I'm not trying to stir the pot, and if true it is horrendous, but reporting it to an organization isn't the same as reporting it to the police. I can imagine doing that may be emotionally very hard so I can understand why it may not happen, along with stigmatization, but I do know the efficacy of the police (as low as it may be) is more than that of conference organizers or blog writers. Again, the woman isn't seeking any legal action. Read what she said. -------------- Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray [A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

Richardthughes Posts: 11178 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,00:10    Quote (Driver @ Aug. 17 2013,00:03) Quote (Richardthughes @ Aug. 17 2013,05:57) I'm not trying to stir the pot, and if true it is horrendous, but reporting it to an organization isn't the same as reporting it to the police. I can imagine doing that may be emotionally very hard so I can understand why it may not happen, along with stigmatization, but I do know the efficacy of the police (as low as it may be) is more than that of conference organizers or blog writers. Again, the woman isn't seeking any legal action. Read what she said. So I'm going to be honest, and possibly look foolish, forgive my ignorance in advance. Shouldn't she be seeking legal action? Presumably she doesn't want it happening to others, which is why she told PZ? Again, *I can't know what it's like / I'm not her / insensative male and all those caveats. Someone has done something wrong and I don't think anyone here is equiped to know who it is. I suspect it will end up in courts anyway. -------------- "Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield "You magnificent bastard! " : Louis "ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard "I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932 "...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

Glen Davidson Posts: 1100 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,00:26    [quote=Driver,Aug. 16 2013,23:43][/quote]   Quote Glen,     Quote Well, gee, I wonder if any court would accept that PZ is beyond question and any possibility of reproach. It appears that your demi-god is the law, since you can't shake leaning on that authority. Well, I didn't expect truth or decency from you.  My "demi-god" is the means of getting to the truth that has been honed into an adversarial system that actually tests so-called evidence.  Not the law, which needs to conform to it.  It's shameful that truth is such a missing ingredient your spiel. As far as the law goes, well, what else can we use at this time, other than your blatant disregard for honest methods of ascertaining truth?  Even were the law changed, it's unlikely that it would affect this matter.  Not that you have shown any indication of thought about this or other matters, save following your vengeful god.   Quote Anyhow, I did not say that PZ is "beyond possibility of reproach". Really?  Like that was the point.  You expect me to accept the word of a gutter snipe, who lacks regard for the methods that actually have a good chance of ascertaining the truth.  Since you don't actually care about truth, though, this is not surprising. Quote I said give me a good reason why he would lie. Oh I see, I'm asking you to meet the 'burden of proof,' and you cleverly (ha) pretend that I have the burden of proof to show that Myers is lying.  When I didn't say that was even what was happening, no matter how many times you dishonestly suggest that this is what counts.  So, you've failed egregiously once again to even contemplate what matters, instead shifting the goalposts to fit your prejudices.   Quote     Quote we're not in any sort of position to find out  what did occur. On the contrary, there are multiple lines of evidence by which we can provisionally believe what is, all things considered, an unexceptional claim. That's another mindless strawman that you bleat out with brazen stupidity.  I didn't claim that it was an exceptional claim, barely-literate one, I wrote quite the opposite, that it is believable, which is why you need to provide the "multiple lines of evidence" for it before simply throwing out unsubsatantiated accusations.  You provide nothing except more innuendo, more attacks, more blithering.   Quote In the "debate" between Oxfordians and Stratfordians, we could say that we are not in any position to find out what really occurred, but that one requires acceptance of some sources and commonplaces, and the other is a conspiracy theory with no evidence for it whatsoever. What a wonderful disanalogy.  It shows what a vapid and ignorant way of "thinking" that you have.   Quote Your hyperskepticism also amounts to giving credence to a conspiracy theory for which no evidence is presented. Oh nice, SJW name-calling, "hyperskepticism."  Actually, it's just skepticism, we're asking for substantive evidence, and you come up empty of anything but blather and lies instead.   Quote Ah, the insult you are looking for is "semi-literate". Also has a nice double meaning. Glad to be of help. No, that would be the truth, rather than an appropriate use of hyperbole for your poor grasp of anything written that doesn't fit your preconceptions.   Passive-aggressive dishonesty from you, I see.   Quote       Quote Again with the idiot-level reading.  That's not the only possibility If PZ Myers published the testimony without altering it, he is the publisher not author of the account. Only if he altered it or made it up is it not the woman's testimony. If it is the woman's testimony, it is not hearsay. My God, you're an ignorant twister of the truth.  It isn't "testimony" at all in the legal sense, it's just hearsay.  It doesn't become testimony even if PZM were beyond any kind of question.  Here's a simple piece on hearsay:   Quote In keeping with the three evidentiary requirements, the Hearsay Rule, as outlined in the Federal Rules of Evidence, prohibits most statements made outside a courtroom from being used as evidence in court. This is because statements made out of court normally are not made under oath, a judge or jury cannot personally observe the demeanor of someone who makes a statement outside the courtroom, and an opposing party cannot cross-examine such a declarant (the person making the statement). http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/hearsay....hearsay That's just how it is, there's nothing being done to make sure that the woman's statements are correct in this case, hence it's not "testimony," except in the equivocal sense.   What is more you did more goal-shifting, because the issue wasn't whether or not this was her "testimony" (which it isn't, by legal definition), but whether or not it was true.  We don't know that, even if we trust PZ completely, and, given how he changed his "grenade" post, he looks slippery there, as well as in other matters. So you fail to understand what hearsay and testimony are, and dishonestly shift the goalposts.  A lot of social justice there.     Quote     Quote I'm not biting at the bait of your dishonest shift to other issues. I am talking about Shermer. There are several sources as to his conduct. Yes I know, you dishonestly shift from the actual matter at hand, which is the unsupported allegations of rape in one case.  I never once claimed that Shermer wasn't a cad or the like (nor that he didn't rape, for that matter--we hardly have evidence that can adjudicate that matter), which he may very be, but of the utter lack of decency  and legality of PZ's accusations.   Quote Besides which, the climate is rather relevant. And hardly sufficient to make up for your complete lack of any kind of legally-acceptable evidence for the charge.     Quote     Quote       Quote Thanks for all the additional material in your last post, Glen. You clearly like to decorate your meat with lots of salad. Here's - more salad. Even if you weren't simply trying to trash by idiotic name-calling what you can't refute, it would be a whole lot better as salad than as your prevarication and indecency.   Quote Rich, The case was reported to an organization already, who were apparently not helpful. No-one is trying to get Shermer convicted. That's the point, ignorant troll, you're not bothering with credible evidence, but you smear with disregard for truth. Glen Davidson -------------- http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p....p Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of coincidence---ID philosophy

Glen Davidson Posts: 1100 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,00:36    [quote=Driver,Aug. 16 2013,23:57][/quote]   Quote     Quote (Glen Davidson @ Aug. 17 2013,01:16)     Quote (Driver @ Aug. 16 2013,19:01)             Quote (Glen Davidson @ Aug. 16 2013,23:30) I'm talking about following the law, rather than not giving a whit about being decent. Since the law and the process of law tend to uphold the status quo, and demonstrably so in the case of rape, Evidence?   This is just history denial. BS, as usual.   The truth, though, is that you'd need to explain "uphold the status quo."  Since I know the endless lies of PZ-type SJWs, I naturally assumed that you mean some dishonest fuckwitted notion of "rape culture," which, of course, is the implication to which I was responding. In a sense, of course, the law does uphold the status quo, especially your bourgeois privilege.  In the case of criminal law, though, I should only hope that they would stick with demanding legal evidence, rather than capitulating to the rumor and innuendo that you use to "convict" others.   Quote I thought we might be able to take it as a given that feminists and other civil rights advocates have usually had a point. Since the actual issue was defamation without credible evidence, I fail to see how feminists and civil rights activists had any point against that.  Not that you didn't attempt to shift the goalposts yet again, par for your disregard for truth and evidence. Quote I found this article for you: http://moourl.com/9uiur......r....ur   Quote By all means, do tell me how it is all fixed now. By all means, ignore what's at stake and shift the goalposts yet again. Glen Davidson ETA, this has gone far enough for me, Driver will do anything but forthrightly tackle the importance of evidence, shifts the goalposts constantly, and twists the truth as normal practice.  She's ignorant and resistant to learning from those of us who don't talk without knowing about which we're discussing.   And I've certainly caught her out in a host of ignorant claims and less than honest tactics, quite enough for any intellectually honest person to recognize that there's no more reason to deal with any more of this drivel and dissembling.  I'm out of this thread for a considerable time (week or more), with an estimated 90% certainty. This is why so many in the skeptic/atheist community have turned against Myers' and her tactics. -------------- http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p....p Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of coincidence---ID philosophy

Badger3k Posts: 861 Joined: Mar. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,01:32    Quote (Richardthughes @ Aug. 17 2013,00:10) Quote (Driver @ Aug. 17 2013,00:03) Quote (Richardthughes @ Aug. 17 2013,05:57) I'm not trying to stir the pot, and if true it is horrendous, but reporting it to an organization isn't the same as reporting it to the police. I can imagine doing that may be emotionally very hard so I can understand why it may not happen, along with stigmatization, but I do know the efficacy of the police (as low as it may be) is more than that of conference organizers or blog writers. Again, the woman isn't seeking any legal action. Read what she said. So I'm going to be honest, and possibly look foolish, forgive my ignorance in advance. Shouldn't she be seeking legal action? Presumably she doesn't want it happening to others, which is why she told PZ? Again, *I can't know what it's like / I'm not her / insensative male and all those caveats. Someone has done something wrong and I don't think anyone here is equiped to know who it is. I suspect it will end up in courts anyway. Haven't posted in a long time, even if I still read a bit (and that Gary G thread is something else), but if the allegations have substance, PZs actions may have caused harm to the woman and/or any case against Shermer.   Maryam Namzie had a good post up with reasons for reporting cases such as this (http://freethoughtblogs.com/maryamnamazie/2013/08/09/report-them/), but I get a 404 error and it seems to be down so I can't quote directly. I copy & pasted from comment 28, Aug 12, the following bit: Quote Telling someone who has already gone public with a case of sex assault or abuse or rape to report the perpetrator is not dismissing her claim. It is in fact taking it seriously. However poor the law is, it is a real option for people to get some sort of redress and hearing that is unavailable elsewhere. Even if the issue is addressed at one’s workplace or on a million blogs, the woman in question has the right to be heard. Perpetrators – however we dislike them – also have a presumption of innocence until proven guilty. That the system is unfair or that violence against women is ignored are not excuses for disregarding available options and pressing for justice. If everyone decided to take things in their own hands, we wouldn’t have had positive changes in the law because people fought for and finally got justice that was initially denied. Trying the case on blogs and via boards of various organisations is not the way to get real redress and justice. PZ has had a hard-on for Shermer for years.  If someone (prob Poppy from later comments both of them made around the web) sent PZ this email from this person, PZ could have seen the blood from Stollznow & Poppy's articles and decided to pile on as usual.   Notice though that at least one that seems credible (Stollznow) and one that is a bit more iffy to me (Poppy) have both been shoved in the back in light of the bigger "Shermer=rapist" brouhaha.  Not good for them, not really good for anybody but PZ and Co (such as a few others who are repeating the "well-evidenced rapist" claim, as well as the "Krauss=pedophile supporter" (if not serial harasser) claims.  Their blog hits have gone up, so they'll get money and attention, but the people with real issues (assuming they are real, all we have is PZs testimony, which was the point of the Mr Deity gospel allusion (?)) will probably suffer for it.  Any attention which might have gone to those two women has really been thrown away and onto PZ and Co.  Depends on what happens, but it all seems like an ideological witch hunt, along with an ego trip. All we can do is speculate and wait and see (and point and laugh or get sick at some of the people involved). Now, that's from someone who used to support PZ (but not his commenters) for years, but who has watched him go downhill (or maybe he just got more blatant with his behavior, or I just noticed it more as my own attitudes have grown), and who wouldn't trust him as far as I can throw him one-handed.  Take it for whatever you want. Whether anything will go to the courts...who knows.  PZ ignored (as far as we can tell) the C&D;  whether the lawyers think it is worth pursuing is anyone's guess, or even if either party wants to go that route.  Some people on PZs blog have been saying that PZ abandoned the woman, who will have to get a lawyer now.  Still, nobody other than two (or maybe three) people and their lawyers know what's going on. -------------- "Just think if every species had a different genetic code We would have to eat other humans to survive.." : Joe G

Driver Posts: 649 Joined: June 2011 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,01:58    Glen, Quote following your vengeful god. Content free and classy. Quote   Quote I said give me a good reason why he would lie. Oh I see, I'm asking you to meet the 'burden of proof,' and you cleverly (ha) pretend that I have the burden of proof to show that Myers is lying. The rational default position would usually be to provisionally believe an allegation of rape. In this instance, we have  separate sources that say Shermer has sexually assaulted someone, plus the climate, plus the reports of other unbecoming sexual behaviour by Shermer. Quote     Quote       Quote we're not in any sort of position to find out  what did occur. On the contrary, there are multiple lines of evidence by which we can provisionally believe what is, all things considered, an unexceptional claim. That's another mindless strawman that you bleat out with brazen stupidity.  I didn't claim that it was an exceptional claim I didn't say you did. It is an unexceptional claim, we are agreed. Quote I wrote quite the opposite, that it is believable This is not the opposite, but go on. Quote which is why you need to provide the "multiple lines of evidence" for it before simply throwing out unsubsatantiated accusations. Non-sequitur. Why does PZ Myers need to provide multiple lines of evidence before publishing the testimony of a person he knows and trusts who said she was raped by a man who has a reputation for being rather sleazy? PZ is not a court. He is not trying to establish guilt beyond all reasonable doubt. He is not an American broadsheet, either. He is relaying a woman's warning from a climate of sexual harassment. Or, PZ lied. In which case, yes, you rather do have a burden to say why he is lying. Which you can deny, sure. After all, PZ is a known liar, right? Creationists are always saying he lies. Also, PZ obviously wants to be invited to less of those  cushy paying gigs at skeptic conferences. He wants to encourage atheists not to buy his new book. Why wouldn't he make stuff up about Michael Shermer?     Quote What a wonderful disanalogy.  It shows what a vapid and ignorant way of "thinking" that you have. What  a stinging rebuttal.     Quote   My God, you're an ignorant twister of the truth.  It isn't "testimony" at all in the legal sense, it's just hearsay. Once again, there is no court of law here. There are two issues, yes. To tackle them both is not goal-shifting. One is: was PZ wrong to publish the report? You first said he is wrong because journalistic ethics, and now you are obsessed with the law. The other issue is: Should we believe the report? You say no because it is not established in a court of law, and because we have no way of knowing, and furthermore PZ might have lied.     Quote the utter lack of decency  and legality of PZ's accusations. Probably defamation, yes. There, we are agreed about illegality. Utter lack of decency? If he believes the allegation to be true, the decent thing to do is to publish it. Quote Even if you weren't simply trying to trash by idiotic name-calling what you can't refute I wasn't calling you a salad. I will call your statement an amusing display of a lack of self-awareness. -------------- Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray [A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

Driver Posts: 649 Joined: June 2011 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,03:03    Badger3k, what is this you know about Myers having a grudge against Shermer? -------------- Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray [A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

Cubist Posts: 558 Joined: Oct. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,03:18    It's worth noting that what PZ posted was not an accusation of rape, and, in fact, could not be an accusation of rape. Anybody who didn't actually read the thing, but instead relied on second-hand descriptions of its content, or (even worse) hyperbolic misrepresentations of its content, could easily get the (quite erroneous!) impression that what PZ posted was an accusation that Shermer raped a woman… but anyone who actually read the thing would know that the woman in question stated that someone intervened before events progressed to the point of nonconsensual sex. So if one regards that Pharyngula post as an accusation aimed at Shermer, the accusation would not be Shermer is a rapist, but, rather, Shermer is kinda skeevy/creepy. But okay, let's ignore the actual content of that post, and let's say that that post realio, trulio was an flat-out, explicit, no-foolin' accusation of rape. Just how much damage would such an accusation do to Shermer? Looking at other cases, including those in which the rapist in question wasn't just accused but was, in fact, convicted of rape, it's not particularly difficult to find examples of accused and/or convicted rapists who really didn't suffer all that much in the way of consequences from having been accused and/or convicted. For instance, how much harm has Roman Polanski suffered as a result of his having been convicted of rape in a court of law? Well, he can't travel to just any old place he feels like at any time. And some people have unfavorable opinions of him. But beyond these relatively minor consequences of a purely social kind, exactly what harm has Polanski suffered as a result of his rape conviction? And hey, how about the Steubenville rapists? The whole town rallied behind them, and ran their victim—the girl they raped—out of town. Somehow, I'm having trouble seeing any real harm done to these convicted rapists as a result of their having been convicted of rape… So. You say that Shermer will suffer harm as a result of what PZ posted? I'm skeptical of that proposition. Got evidence to support it?

Driver Posts: 649 Joined: June 2011 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,03:58    Quote (Cubist @ Aug. 17 2013,09:18) It's worth noting that what PZ posted was not an accusation of rape, and, in fact, could not be an accusation of rape. Anybody who didn't actually read the thing, but instead relied on second-hand descriptions of its content, or (even worse) hyperbolic misrepresentations of its content, could easily get the (quite erroneous!) impression that what PZ posted was an accusation that Shermer raped a woman… but anyone who actually read the thing would know that the woman in question stated that someone intervened before events progressed to the point of nonconsensual sex. So if one regards that Pharyngula post as an accusation aimed at Shermer, the accusation would not be Shermer is a rapist, but, rather, Shermer is kinda skeevy/creepy. " Quote At a conference, Mr. Shermer coerced me into a position where I could not consent, and then had sex with me. " It is the update on that post, the second report, that is not an accusation of rape. The first report is of rape. -------------- Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray [A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

RDK Posts: 229 Joined: Aug. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,09:55    Quote How many users on reddit? We're not talking about a handful of people. The userbase of Reddit is not indicative of anything but the shitty userbase of Reddit. What does Reddit have to do with this conversation?  I'm truly arguing in good faith. -------------- If you are not: Leviathan please Logout under Meta in the sidebar. ‘‘I was like ‘Oh my God! It’s Jesus on a banana!’’  - Lisa Swinton, Jesus-eating pagan

Driver Posts: 649 Joined: June 2011 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,10:15    Quote (RDK @ Aug. 17 2013,15:55) Quote How many users on reddit? We're not talking about a handful of people. The userbase of Reddit is not indicative of anything but the shitty userbase of Reddit. What does Reddit have to do with this conversation?  I'm truly arguing in good faith. What is the biggest subreddit? How many subscribers? How many  subscribers to r/skeptic? I already mentioned, in the post that got lost, the 15 year old girl who posted  a picture of herself with Demon Haunted World. The reaction to her was not acceptable to many atheists. There is the divide. It exists because significant numbers of atheists and skeptics are publicly homophobic, transphobic, misogynistic, and/or rape-endorsing. That is not an exhaustive list, but it will do for starters. -------------- Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray [A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

Driver Posts: 649 Joined: June 2011 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,10:16    page bug. -------------- Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray [A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

Dr.GH Posts: 2333 Joined: May 2002 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,10:27    Quote (Glen Davidson @ Aug. 14 2013,21:02) I liked Mr. Deity and the Hat: I also liked the afterword. -------------- "Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy." L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

Badger3k Posts: 861 Joined: Mar. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,15:31    Quote (Driver @ Aug. 17 2013,03:03) Badger3k, what is this you know about Myers having a grudge against Shermer? PZ has a long history of going after Shermer for various things.  He's a libertarian, that's pretty much a mortal sin for PZ (I've been broadly tarred with that label for being part of a forum);  I believe Shermer has spoken out against the type of tactics PZ uses, and IIRC PZ also spoke out against Shermer when he commented on the attacks and actions by people like Ophelia Benson (Shermer wrote an article on the witch hunts, Benson & Watson wrote against Shermer - well, Benson wrote a lot, and PZ chimed in several times as well in his own posts - last Dec).  I did a quick search of Shermer back on the Scienceblogs site, and found one from 2006 where PZ goes after Shermer for being an accomodationist. Someone posted a bunch of links to the more recent anti-Shermer stuff, but I couldn't find it.  If you go to both the FTB and Scienceblogs Pharyngula site and search for Shermer, you'll see a few that promote him for one thing or another, but also a lot of disagreement.  I'm not sure when he started to really go after him - I think it was his politics some years ago, but when Shermer started speaking out against the SJW actions (and, a big maybe here, the atheism+ debacle), PZ (and his friends) got more strident against him. Maybe it's just the emotional aspect, but from watching and reading him over...I don't know, 10 years maybe, if it goes back that far - at least sometime in the early 2000s, I've remembered more posts against something Shermer said or did than otherwise.  This is added in with things PZ has said against Libertarians (like Penn Jillette) and accomodationists, the "dictionary atheists" bit and other things. I also remember PZ talking about allegations against Shermer some time ago (pre FTB).  I think this had to do with either the rep Shermer had - apparently he liked to sleep with the Skeptic Groupies, from what PZ and his friends have said - or some instance where (the third-or more-hand story of someone who slept with Shermer and the next day all they apparently got was an autographed book, and were upset by it.  Not sure what an adult in a one night stand expected).  A lot of things have blended together over the years, so take that into account (I could be wrong on some specifics or even generalities), and my own bias may be coloring my memories. For Shermer, I'm not that fond of him myself - don't really care for his politics (his conversion story on his exposure to Ayn Rand sounds like some religious conversions, being just as lacking in critical thinking), and some of the attitude he displays towards some of the loons (both religious and alternative woo peddlers) comes off as soft to me sometimes.   Sorry I couldn't provide links - I used to have some but that was a few hard drive crashes ago, but if you search both sites you might be able to see what I mean (or see if I have a different take on it than what you read).  Some of this comes from reading other sites and comments at other sites, and I rarely keep links to anything like that.  If you look up Skepticblog and look for Shermer on Libertarianism, you might find (a few years back) his conversion story and may even see my comments (I wasn't polite, if I remember). Probably too much and not enough to help, but if you're interested do the searches and decide for yourself. -------------- "Just think if every species had a different genetic code We would have to eat other humans to survive.." : Joe G

Badger3k Posts: 861 Joined: Mar. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,15:41    Quote (Driver @ Aug. 17 2013,10:15) Quote (RDK @ Aug. 17 2013,15:55) Quote How many users on reddit? We're not talking about a handful of people. The userbase of Reddit is not indicative of anything but the shitty userbase of Reddit. What does Reddit have to do with this conversation?  I'm truly arguing in good faith. What is the biggest subreddit? How many subscribers? How many  subscribers to r/skeptic? I already mentioned, in the post that got lost, the 15 year old girl who posted  a picture of herself with Demon Haunted World. The reaction to her was not acceptable to many atheists. There is the divide. It exists because significant numbers of atheists and skeptics are publicly homophobic, transphobic, misogynistic, and/or rape-endorsing. That is not an exhaustive list, but it will do for starters. That's one of the things that I am skeptical of.  The automatic assumption that anyone who posts is an atheist and/or skeptic.  That assumes that no one who is not one of those things would read or post on the forum/reddit/thread/YouTube channel/etc without being one of those things. The same with Watson and her "threats" - she gets trolled for being loud and obnoxious, but everyone who writes to her is automatically evidence that they are atheists or skeptics.  It's politcal to just accept that they are since it fits the narrative being spread.   About the only thing I would say that we can say, is that a lot of the people who commented were assholes.   It's no problem for someone to say anything they want on the internet - I'm a one-armed Eskimo living in Topeka and I worship Cthulhu.  Obviously (I hope) that's too outrageous to believe, but a lot of people fell for the Tom Johnson/Wally Smith affair and apparently didn't learn to be skeptical. From what I've seen, the atheist and skeptic movements (and there are a lot of different ones of each, they are not monolithic) are pretty fairly representative of society at large.  I have seen no evidence that the problem is worse than in society - all I see is such "evidence" as you state, and other hyperbolic emotionalisms, misrepresentations, ignoring of countering evidence, etc.  And all the buzzwords, such as "hyper skepticism", "privilege", etc.  Like reading the pointy haired boss on Dilbert. -------------- "Just think if every species had a different genetic code We would have to eat other humans to survive.." : Joe G

Driver Posts: 649 Joined: June 2011 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,17:08    Quote (Badger3k @ Aug. 17 2013,21:31) Quote (Driver @ Aug. 17 2013,03:03) Badger3k, what is this you know about Myers having a grudge against Shermer? PZ has a long history of going after Shermer for various things.  He's a libertarian, that's pretty much a mortal sin for PZ (I've been broadly tarred with that label for being part of a forum);  I believe Shermer has spoken out against the type of tactics PZ uses, and IIRC PZ also spoke out against Shermer when he commented on the attacks and actions by people like Ophelia Benson (Shermer wrote an article on the witch hunts, Benson & Watson wrote against Shermer - well, Benson wrote a lot, and PZ chimed in several times as well in his own posts - last Dec).  I did a quick search of Shermer back on the Scienceblogs site, and found one from 2006 where PZ goes after Shermer for being an accomodationist. Someone posted a bunch of links to the more recent anti-Shermer stuff, but I couldn't find it.  If you go to both the FTB and Scienceblogs Pharyngula site and search for Shermer, you'll see a few that promote him for one thing or another, but also a lot of disagreement.  I'm not sure when he started to really go after him - I think it was his politics some years ago, but when Shermer started speaking out against the SJW actions (and, a big maybe here, the atheism+ debacle), PZ (and his friends) got more strident against him. Maybe it's just the emotional aspect, but from watching and reading him over...I don't know, 10 years maybe, if it goes back that far - at least sometime in the early 2000s, I've remembered more posts against something Shermer said or did than otherwise.  This is added in with things PZ has said against Libertarians (like Penn Jillette) and accomodationists, the "dictionary atheists" bit and other things. I also remember PZ talking about allegations against Shermer some time ago (pre FTB).  I think this had to do with either the rep Shermer had - apparently he liked to sleep with the Skeptic Groupies, from what PZ and his friends have said - or some instance where (the third-or more-hand story of someone who slept with Shermer and the next day all they apparently got was an autographed book, and were upset by it.  Not sure what an adult in a one night stand expected).  A lot of things have blended together over the years, so take that into account (I could be wrong on some specifics or even generalities), and my own bias may be coloring my memories. For Shermer, I'm not that fond of him myself - don't really care for his politics (his conversion story on his exposure to Ayn Rand sounds like some religious conversions, being just as lacking in critical thinking), and some of the attitude he displays towards some of the loons (both religious and alternative woo peddlers) comes off as soft to me sometimes.   Sorry I couldn't provide links - I used to have some but that was a few hard drive crashes ago, but if you search both sites you might be able to see what I mean (or see if I have a different take on it than what you read).  Some of this comes from reading other sites and comments at other sites, and I rarely keep links to anything like that.  If you look up Skepticblog and look for Shermer on Libertarianism, you might find (a few years back) his conversion story and may even see my comments (I wasn't polite, if I remember). Probably too much and not enough to help, but if you're interested do the searches and decide for yourself. Oh, I thought you knew something. Yes, PZ Myers has criticized Shermer for being a libertarian, and a global warming skeptic. The recent back and forth was over some sexist remarks that Shermer refused to own. Myers has also praised him for articles, books, videos, and debate performances. Anything that suggests PZ Myers has a grudge against Shermer? As far as I can tell, there wasn't an entry about Shermer since January. http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyng....shermer Also, I know that SJW is intended as a perjorative, but why? What is wrong with social justice? -------------- Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray [A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

OgreMkV Posts: 3668 Joined: Oct. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,17:47    Driver, was a woman raped by Shermer?  Yes or no? -------------- Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims. http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

Driver Posts: 649 Joined: June 2011 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,17:50    Quote (Badger3k @ Aug. 17 2013,21:41)     Quote (Driver @ Aug. 17 2013,10:15)     Quote (RDK @ Aug. 17 2013,15:55)       Quote How many users on reddit? We're not talking about a handful of people. The userbase of Reddit is not indicative of anything but the shitty userbase of Reddit. What does Reddit have to do with this conversation?  I'm truly arguing in good faith. What is the biggest subreddit? How many subscribers? How many  subscribers to r/skeptic? I already mentioned, in the post that got lost, the 15 year old girl who posted  a picture of herself with Demon Haunted World. The reaction to her was not acceptable to many atheists. There is the divide. It exists because significant numbers of atheists and skeptics are publicly homophobic, transphobic, misogynistic, and/or rape-endorsing. That is not an exhaustive list, but it will do for starters. That's one of the things that I am skeptical of.  The automatic assumption that anyone who posts is an atheist and/or skeptic.  That assumes that no one who is not one of those things would read or post on the forum/reddit/thread/YouTube channel/etc without being one of those things. Okay, let's pretend I am not familiar with those subreddits, and go so far as to say maybe only 10% of commenters on r/atheism are atheists. We would still then be talking about probably the largest atheist venue on the internet. A venue with a culture of rape and homophobic jokes. Unless you have a reason for thinking that those 10%, atheist redditors all, are disgusted by the culture at r/atheism (and generally throughout reddit), and are unlikely to participate in sexism, homophobia, and the like, your immaculate skepticism gives birth to the same conclusion as the less meticulous of us have already made: A significant number of atheists on the internet embrace minority-bashing and misogyny.     Quote I have seen no evidence that the problem is worse than in society It probably isn't. What is your point? -------------- Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray [A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

Driver Posts: 649 Joined: June 2011 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,18:04    Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 17 2013,23:47) Driver, was a woman raped by Shermer?  Yes or no? I think it is rational to provisionally believe that Shermer not only raped at least one woman, but that he has sexually harassed others. If I was planning to attend TAM and Skepticon with a woman, I would be damned grateful to PZ for publishing that account. -------------- Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray [A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

Driver Posts: 649 Joined: June 2011 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,18:08    Here is the timeline for the whole thing, not just regarding Shermer. Quote May 23rd, 2012 Pseudonymous commenter Miriamne, Michael Shermer, JREF Prior to the current spate of naming, a comment left at Friendly Atheist names Michael Shermer as allegedly having harassed her, and “trying to sleep with a new young woman every TAM”. [...] July 29th, 2013 Ashley Paramore, unnamed assailant, JREF Ashley details a recent sexual assault at a conference in a video on her Youtube channel, relating how a number of witnesses were present for an unwelcome groping at TAM. August 6th, 2013 Karen Stollznow, unnamed assailant, unnamed organization Possibly emboldened by Ashley Paramore’s stand, Karen Stollznow comes forward with her own story of having been serially sexually harassed and assaulted over the course of several years. (DOWN) Ian Murphy, Ben Radford, CFI Ian Murphy points the finger at Ben Radford as the serial harasser discussed in Karen Stollznow’s post, via Twitter. PZ Myers, Ben Radford, CFI PZ Myers updates a post linking to Stollznow’s blog several hours after Ian Murphy names Radford to verify that a number of others had named him as well in private emails. August 7th, 2013 Carrie Poppy, DJ Grothe and Ben Radford, JREF and CFI Carrie Poppy releases a series of email bombs about the Ben Radford case and describes the major events leading up to her leaving her job as Communications Director of JREF after being serially mistreated by DJ. Sasha Pixlee, DJ Grothe, JREF Sasha describes an incident when he first met DJ Grothe, wherein he suggests that he might drug Sasha and deliver him to his friends to “have fun with him”. Jason Thibeault, Ben Radford, CFI I point out that accounts regarding whether or not Radford was punished or even found to have sexually harassed Stollznow by the investigator are in contention, after a private message from Radford to someone who unfollowed him on Facebook is revealed in part in public. Unnamed victims through Jen McCreight, Lawrence Krauss, CFI Jen explains that one person alleged that Lawrence Krauss had harassed them, then later that a second person alleged he had assaulted them; and that this news came as no surprise as his name has long been whispered in the private back-channels at conferences between women wanting to protect themselves. (REDACTED) Unnamed victims through Brian Thompson, Ben Radford and Michael Shermer, CFI and JREF Brian Thompson, former employee of JREF, claims to personally know a number of women who have been harassed by Radford and Shermer, via Twitter. He specifies two instances of ‘being creeped at’, one of ‘being groped’. Elyse Anders, Michael Shermer, JREF Elyse describes some unwelcome salacious comments from Shermer after she drops a chicken tender at the TAM9 reception buffet. August 8th, 2013 Matthew Baxter, Ben Radford, CFI 10:35am Central: Matthew Baxter, Karen Stollznow’s husband, in a comment on Blake Smith’s Facebook page, corroborates Stollznow’s story. Speaking directly to Ben Radford, he says that Radford persistently continued to contact Stollznow after being asked for years to stop. Baxter says that he and Stollznow have copies of correspondence backing this up. He also says that when Stollznow cut off communication with Radford, Radford called her “disrespectful.” Jen McCreight, Lawrence Krauss, CFI After a vaguely lawsuit-threatening comment by Krauss on her blog, Jen redacts the previous post and begins referring to him as Famous Skeptic. Eddy Cara, Lawrence Krauss, CFI Eddy relates several of the stories that have floated around regarding Krauss’ questionable activities on a CFI cruise, and how he is frequently mentioned as an alleged serial harasser by the informal back-channel of women trying to protect one another from such harassment at conferences. The post is taken down the same day after Krauss comments almost identically to what was posted at Jen’s; the post is replaced with a statement by The Heresy Club that it was found to be in breach of guidelines. (DOWN) [/I]Eddy Cara, Lawrence Krauss, CFI[/I] Eddy Cara comments on his personal blog about the post that was taken down from Heresy Club, which he considered a “calculated risk”. Unnamed victim via PZ Myers, Lawrence Krauss, CFI PZ Myers reports that someone he trusts has claimed having been sexually assaulted by Krauss. Unnamed victim via Stephanie Zvan, Lawrence Krauss, CFI Stephanie Zvan reports being told the same story as PZ regarding an assault by Lawrence Krauss, though it could be the same person reporting the same incident. Unnamed victims via PZ Myers, Michael Shermer, JREF PZ Myers posts accounts by sources he trusts regarding allegations of Michael Shermer’s witnessed and experienced predatory tactics and alleged sexual assault of women he coerced into a position where they could not legally consent. bartmon, DJ Grothe, JREF Former employee of JREF bartmon concurs with Carrie Poppy’s assessments regarding DJ Grothe. August 9th, 2013 Unnamed victim through delphi_ote, Michael Shermer, JREF A participant at the JREF forums corroborates the existence of allegations against Michael Shermer by unnamed alleged victims. Ashley Paramore, unnamed assailants, JREF Ashley details in a follow-up video the absurd levels of harassment she has since received for talking about her assault, despite not naming names. She uses this to explain why underreporting of harassment and assault is such an issue. naomibaker, Michael Shermer, JREF naomibaker relates her story about how she was contacted ostensibly by Michael Shermer’s wife asking if the story she told about a cheating husband without names was talking about Michael. She listed names that Shermer had apparently had affairs with, several of the names being recognizeable. August 12th, 2013 Joe Anderson, Ben Radford, CFI Joe Anderson corroborates Karen Stollznow’s story, stating that he was one of the folks deposed by CFI’s investigators about the behaviour he witnessed from Radford. Karen Stollznow, Ben Radford, CFI The original post by Karen Stollznow is taken down after Ron Lindsay sends a letter to Scientific American. Karen is told by SA staff that it was taken down due to legal threats, while Ron Lindsay claims to have only asked for corrections. The Google Cache version of the page now also 404s, but a copy still exists on Scrible. PZ Myers, Michael Shermer, JREF Michael Shermer’s lawyer issues a cease-and-desist letter demanding that PZ remove the post containing the allegations and claiming that PZ did not hear directly from the alleged victim as he stated, pointing out an update suggesting that Carrie Poppy is responsible for putting the alleged victim in contact with PZ (no word on whether PZ actually spoke to the victim directly though); and claiming that PZ has a profit motive in blog hits. (DOWN) (A cached copy exists on scribd.) PZ Myers, Michael Shermer, JREF The post where PZ Myers linked the relevant PDF disappears after getting 70 comments within the span of an hour or so. (DOWN) (A cached copy exists on Google Cache.) PZ Myers, Michael Shermer, JREF The previous post is quickly replaced with this one stating that PZ has contacted Ken from Popehat. Stephanie Zvan, Ben Radford / Ron Lindsay, CFI Stephanie Zvan analyzes the differences and commonalities extensively between Ron Lindsay’s letter demanding corrections of SciAm, and Karen Stollznow’s original allegations. Most relevant is the fact that Lindsay concedes the harassment actually happened. August 13th, 2013 Carrie Poppy, Michael Shermer, JREF Carrie Poppy and PZ Myers publicly state that Carrie only put the alleged victim into contact with PZ, and that Carrie is not really involved otherwise, despite the assertions in the cease-and-desist letter. rikzilla, Michael Shermer, JREF rikzilla relates a story where Shermer propositioned his wife, calling her sexy and asking her to his room for private drinks while he was present. Renee Davis-Pelt, unnamed assailant, JREF Renee posts on Facebook that she was present to witness the assault described by Ashley Paramore that happened at TAM. August 14th, 2013 PZ Myers, Michael Shermer, JREF The deadline given to PZ by Michael Shermer’s lawyers to acknowledge receipt has elapsed. The post is still up. Brian K. Dalton, unnamed assailant, JREF In the comments on Ashley Paramore’s video, “Mr. Deity” corroborates Ashley’s story and regrets not doing anything at the time. August 16th, 2013 Ian Murphy, Michael Shermer, JREF Ian Murphy publishes an email exchange with Shermer wherein Shermer makes some comments, against his lawyer’s orders, about the allegations and his dealings with PZ Myers. http://moourl.com/1suu3......3....u3 -------------- Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray [A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

Driver Posts: 649 Joined: June 2011 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,18:27    Quote all the buzzwords, such as "hyper skepticism", "privilege", etc.  Like reading the pointy haired boss on Dilbert. Are you implying that you understand Dilbert's boss, or that you don't understand what "privilege" and "hyper" mean? Or, are you asking for simpler words? Or what? -------------- Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray [A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

OgreMkV Posts: 3668 Joined: Oct. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,18:38    Quote (Driver @ Aug. 17 2013,18:04) Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 17 2013,23:47) Driver, was a woman raped by Shermer?  Yes or no? I think it is rational to provisionally believe that Shermer not only raped at least one woman, but that he has sexually harassed others. If I was planning to attend TAM and Skepticon with a woman, I would be damned grateful to PZ for publishing that account. All I asked about was the accusation by PZ. So you agree that it is not 100% certain that the alleged event even happened? -------------- Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims. http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

Badger3k Posts: 861 Joined: Mar. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,18:39    Quote (Driver @ Aug. 17 2013,17:08) Quote (Badger3k @ Aug. 17 2013,21:31) Quote (Driver @ Aug. 17 2013,03:03) Badger3k, what is this you know about Myers having a grudge against Shermer? PZ has a long history of going after Shermer for various things.  He's a libertarian, that's pretty much a mortal sin for PZ (I've been broadly tarred with that label for being part of a forum);  I believe Shermer has spoken out against the type of tactics PZ uses, and IIRC PZ also spoke out against Shermer when he commented on the attacks and actions by people like Ophelia Benson (Shermer wrote an article on the witch hunts, Benson & Watson wrote against Shermer - well, Benson wrote a lot, and PZ chimed in several times as well in his own posts - last Dec).  I did a quick search of Shermer back on the Scienceblogs site, and found one from 2006 where PZ goes after Shermer for being an accomodationist. Someone posted a bunch of links to the more recent anti-Shermer stuff, but I couldn't find it.  If you go to both the FTB and Scienceblogs Pharyngula site and search for Shermer, you'll see a few that promote him for one thing or another, but also a lot of disagreement.  I'm not sure when he started to really go after him - I think it was his politics some years ago, but when Shermer started speaking out against the SJW actions (and, a big maybe here, the atheism+ debacle), PZ (and his friends) got more strident against him. Maybe it's just the emotional aspect, but from watching and reading him over...I don't know, 10 years maybe, if it goes back that far - at least sometime in the early 2000s, I've remembered more posts against something Shermer said or did than otherwise.  This is added in with things PZ has said against Libertarians (like Penn Jillette) and accomodationists, the "dictionary atheists" bit and other things. I also remember PZ talking about allegations against Shermer some time ago (pre FTB).  I think this had to do with either the rep Shermer had - apparently he liked to sleep with the Skeptic Groupies, from what PZ and his friends have said - or some instance where (the third-or more-hand story of someone who slept with Shermer and the next day all they apparently got was an autographed book, and were upset by it.  Not sure what an adult in a one night stand expected).  A lot of things have blended together over the years, so take that into account (I could be wrong on some specifics or even generalities), and my own bias may be coloring my memories. For Shermer, I'm not that fond of him myself - don't really care for his politics (his conversion story on his exposure to Ayn Rand sounds like some religious conversions, being just as lacking in critical thinking), and some of the attitude he displays towards some of the loons (both religious and alternative woo peddlers) comes off as soft to me sometimes.   Sorry I couldn't provide links - I used to have some but that was a few hard drive crashes ago, but if you search both sites you might be able to see what I mean (or see if I have a different take on it than what you read).  Some of this comes from reading other sites and comments at other sites, and I rarely keep links to anything like that.  If you look up Skepticblog and look for Shermer on Libertarianism, you might find (a few years back) his conversion story and may even see my comments (I wasn't polite, if I remember). Probably too much and not enough to help, but if you're interested do the searches and decide for yourself. Oh, I thought you knew something. Yes, PZ Myers has criticized Shermer for being a libertarian, and a global warming skeptic. The recent back and forth was over some sexist remarks that Shermer refused to own. Myers has also praised him for articles, books, videos, and debate performances. Anything that suggests PZ Myers has a grudge against Shermer? As far as I can tell, there wasn't an entry about Shermer since January. http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyng....shermer Also, I know that SJW is intended as a perjorative, but why? What is wrong with social justice? There isn't a problem with wanting equality.  That's not what Social Justice Warriors want.  They want a privileged position where their ideas are the only ones worth having.  The normally tolerate no dissent or even discussion, and love to tar their opponents with everything under the sun.  They see the world through their ideology, and all the activities that I've seen on the big name SJWs, they are rather loathsome people.  When someone who was been raped says somthing against them, the first thing you see is "you weren't really raped".  They hold others to a standard they don't hold themselves. These SJWs are the ones who want to force others to be with them or against them (re: Carrier's CHUD rant).  They want atheism, a simple lack of belief in gods, to carry all this other stuff that isn't appropriate (similar to theists insisting atheists have particular thoughts or values - or lack thereof). Social justice is a good thing.  Social Justice Warriors are the new Keyboard Kommandos. -------------- "Just think if every species had a different genetic code We would have to eat other humans to survive.." : Joe G

Badger3k Posts: 861 Joined: Mar. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,19:08    Quote (Driver @ Aug. 17 2013,17:50) Quote (Badger3k @ Aug. 17 2013,21:41)     Quote (Driver @ Aug. 17 2013,10:15)       Quote (RDK @ Aug. 17 2013,15:55)       Quote How many users on reddit? We're not talking about a handful of people. The userbase of Reddit is not indicative of anything but the shitty userbase of Reddit. What does Reddit have to do with this conversation?  I'm truly arguing in good faith. What is the biggest subreddit? How many subscribers? How many  subscribers to r/skeptic? I already mentioned, in the post that got lost, the 15 year old girl who posted  a picture of herself with Demon Haunted World. The reaction to her was not acceptable to many atheists. There is the divide. It exists because significant numbers of atheists and skeptics are publicly homophobic, transphobic, misogynistic, and/or rape-endorsing. That is not an exhaustive list, but it will do for starters. That's one of the things that I am skeptical of.  The automatic assumption that anyone who posts is an atheist and/or skeptic.  That assumes that no one who is not one of those things would read or post on the forum/reddit/thread/YouTube channel/etc without being one of those things. Okay, let's pretend I am not familiar with those subreddits, and go so far as to say maybe only 10% of commenters on r/atheism are atheists. We would still then be talking about probably the largest atheist venue on the internet. A venue with a culture of rape and homophobic jokes. Unless you have a reason for thinking that those 10%, atheist redditors all, are disgusted by the culture at r/atheism (and generally throughout reddit), and are unlikely to participate in sexism, homophobia, and the like, your immaculate skepticism gives birth to the same conclusion as the less meticulous of us have already made: A significant number of atheists on the internet embrace minority-bashing and misogyny.     Quote I have seen no evidence that the problem is worse than in society It probably isn't. What is your point? For the first part - significant # of atheists - let's see the evidence.  Do the study.  Let's see the results (be sure to include your methodology).  You've already limited your response to "atheists online" as opposed to "atheists in general", so it should be easier, although verification might be problematic. If we go with your assumption that 10% of the posters are atheists, and if we go with 7 billion on the planet, with millions of atheists over the world, what fraction is that? Now, is the internet infested with trolls?  I'd probably agree with that.   However, how can you say that a significant number of atheists on the internet embrace minority-bashing and misogyny, and then agree with me that the problem is no worse than in society?  Are you making the claim that the society (we'll limit ourselves to American culture in general) is filled with misogynists and racists to a large degree? If so, I disagree, and that is also where I disagree with the hysterical SJW trope of "the atheists and skeptics are filled with these rapists and misogynists who work to keep "the Patriarchy" in place."  Without that, all these chicken littles are doing is drawing attention to themselves, and every time the attack something that is not what they think it is, not only do they belittle the actual problem (such as actual sexual assault instead of "making me feel uncomfortable") and damage those who are actually working instead of blogging about it for their in-group on the internet. Case in point - David Silverman was accused of racist actions by an ex-employee.  Only one of the SJWs at FTB actually looked into it and said something.  Since he was an ally, they (almost) all gave him a pass, saying things like, we need more information.  Yet give them a simple thing such as Brian Dalton saying you can refuse a drink, and they want to crucify him as a witch, saying he is blaming the victim and that it is ok to rape drunk women.  These extremists are not living in the real world.  That's the danger of the internet silo they have.   The recent actions saying that storifying someone's public tweets is harassment. Yet when someone on their side records a ton of tweets that one of their opponents made (which if I recall correctly), that is ok.  Two legs good, four legs bad.  When you have some people who do vanity searches of their names and go to places where someone makes fun of them, then they make a blog post and point that location out (which may have received no attention otherwise)...and then claim that as harassment?  When an employee of CFI says that because she broke her ankle once, she knows how it feels to be blind?  WTF?  When someone says that internet comments or tweets has caused PTSD, minimizing those who really have it, such as soldiers or actual rape victims...WTF? Sorry, got a bit ranting which is more towards the SJWs than the current one I was responding to, but we're talking loons who think that their first world twitter comments are as bad as the real victims throughout the world, sorry, these nutters need to be shunned into the corner and ignored until they grow up.  There's a lot more (the different types of feminism, the infantilizing of women, the rejection of women of color by people like Marcotte, the white knighting, the rejection of standards of evidence (aka, the "always believe the victim" trope, which assumes they actually are victims without evidence), the redefinition or misuse of terms such as "misogyny" or "privilege", the attempt to basically take over a gravy train on the conference circuit (which also has issues) - a whole lot more I'm not going to waste anybodies time here on.  There are other venues for that, or which have my opinions on record. Sorry, rant over for sure now. -------------- "Just think if every species had a different genetic code We would have to eat other humans to survive.." : Joe G

Badger3k Posts: 861 Joined: Mar. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,19:13    Quote (Driver @ Aug. 17 2013,18:27) Quote all the buzzwords, such as "hyper skepticism", "privilege", etc.  Like reading the pointy haired boss on Dilbert. Are you implying that you understand Dilbert's boss, or that you don't understand what "privilege" and "hyper" mean? Or, are you asking for simpler words? Or what? They use buzzwords without understanding what they mean, or the correct way to use them.  When called on them, they scoff at "dictionary" definitions as if having consistent terms is something bad.  They seem to vie to see who can use the most buzzwords so they seem to be saying something, when in reality they are full of shit. Example: Privilege is a sociological term used, and which is very flexible since it depends on the context and culture.  The SJWs use it as a bludgeon, where my being a causcasian male means I can't understand many of the things they talk about. "hyperskepticism" is their buzzword which means "you are skeptical of things I like".  They reject any call for evidence of a claim when it supports them, but if the same situation is reversed, they'll make every demand for the same information they refused to give before. Consistency is not part of the SJW canon. -------------- "Just think if every species had a different genetic code We would have to eat other humans to survive.." : Joe G

Badger3k Posts: 861 Joined: Mar. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,19:17    Quote (Driver @ Aug. 17 2013,18:04) Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 17 2013,23:47) Driver, was a woman raped by Shermer?  Yes or no? I think it is rational to provisionally believe that Shermer not only raped at least one woman, but that he has sexually harassed others. If I was planning to attend TAM and Skepticon with a woman, I would be damned grateful to PZ for publishing that account. Why is it rational to provisionally believe that Shermer raped and harassed women?  Do you believe that of all speakers at such things?   Is there something about Shermer that makes you suspect he did it, or that the anonymous account that PZ says he obtained (probably through Carrie Poppy) has some veracity?  If someone said that they heard you raped a woman at a conference, would you be ok with them blogging about it and warning people away from you? -------------- "Just think if every species had a different genetic code We would have to eat other humans to survive.." : Joe G

OgreMkV Posts: 3668 Joined: Oct. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,20:11    OK, so what I'm getting here is that we aren't talking about the same thing at all.  I've been seeing this a lot on the internet with regards to this topic. I am talking about the following. 1) There is an accusation made that a particular person raped a woman. 2) That woman is unknown to the wider audience. 3) There is no evidence for anything EXCEPT what PZ says.  He says there is a woman.  He says that she was raped by Shermer.  He says she's not interested in going to the authorities.  He says a lot of things. 4) As far as the rest of the universe is concerned, there is NO EVIDENCE that the alleged event happened.  We don't know who it happened to, when, where, what other factors may or may not have been involved. I am ONLY talking about the fact that PZ accused someone of rape with no evidence.  PZ may have tons of evidence.  He may truly believe the person (or the friend of the person) who was raped.  But he very well may be being lied to.  He wasn't there. That is why I think PZ has done an abominably stupid thing.  He can't even defend his actions without naming the claimant.   He has stuck his neck out and it very well may be chopped off. No, you say that keeping quiet is a bad move.  I can understand how you might be angry.  Especially if this is your friend.  But shouting out to the rest of the world (WHO DOES NOT HAVE YOUR EVIDENCE) is stupid and, very likely, libel. I may believe that my friend was raped.  I know her.  I know the accused rapist.  But if I do not have evidence that would stand up in a court, then I shouldn't shout it out to the world. I can say that this guy isn't to be trusted.  That I wouldn't go to a conference with him.  That I think he's a slime ball.  But anything beyond that WITHOUT EVIDENCE is libel.   And honestly, testimonials are the absolute worst kind of evidence.  As I said before, we don't know what happened.  And it's a huge problem that sexual assault may very well not be sexual assault until after the fact. That is why I would do the things that I said and NOT TELL THE WORLD.  And why I would encourage going to the authorities.  Regardless of the problems that police have with sexual assault crimes, and I don't deny that these problems exist, we (non-police, non-judges, non-juries) cannot take matters into our own hands. And that is the real issue here.  Shermer cannot defend himself against an unknown accuser. -------------- Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims. http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

Driver Posts: 649 Joined: June 2011 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,20:17    Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 18 2013,00:38) So you agree that it is not 100% certain that the alleged event even happened? You know what will really knock me down, Kevin? Ask me if I was there. -------------- Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray [A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

OgreMkV Posts: 3668 Joined: Oct. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,20:51    Quote (Driver @ Aug. 17 2013,20:17) Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 18 2013,00:38) So you agree that it is not 100% certain that the alleged event even happened? You know what will really knock me down, Kevin? Ask me if I was there. I think I've already asked you.  Do you have evidence of the event? No, testimony of an anonymous person is not evidence. Why won't you just answer the questions?  Also, using something other than one's screen name is generally considered bad form.  Indeed, the only people I've seen do are creationists right before they threaten to beat the fuck out of me because I'm "stupid". So, OK, let's play your little game. Where you, Driver, present when the alleged rape happened? -------------- Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims. http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

Driver Posts: 649 Joined: June 2011 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,21:29    Quote (Badger3k @ Aug. 18 2013,01:08) Quote If we go with your assumption that 10% of the posters are atheists, and if we go with 7 billion on the planet, with millions of atheists over the world, what fraction is that? According to a 2011 survey, 64% of reddit users were American. Quote Now, is the internet infested with trolls?  I'd probably agree with that. I agree that you are agreeing with that. Quote Are you making the claim that the society (we'll limit ourselves to American culture in general) is filled with misogynists and racists to a large degree? Yes. 14% who don't approve of inter-racial marriage. That would be over 40,000,000 people. 20% of Americans say school boards should be able to fire homosexual teachers. Some evidence of misogyny. -------------- Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray [A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

Driver Posts: 649 Joined: June 2011 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,21:40    Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 18 2013,02:51) Quote (Driver @ Aug. 17 2013,20:17) Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 18 2013,00:38) So you agree that it is not 100% certain that the alleged event even happened? You know what will really knock me down, Kevin? Ask me if I was there. I think I've already asked you.  Do you have evidence of the event? No, testimony of an anonymous person is not evidence. [/quote] So, OK, let's play your little game. Where you, Driver, present when the alleged rape happened? Of course it is evidence. You mean it is not sufficient evidence. I posted the timeline up there ^^^^. ...I was not trying to offend you by using your name. Apologies. I am not going to threaten to beat you up. Quote So, OK, let's play your little game. Where you, Driver, present when the alleged rape happened? Whoosh. -------------- Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray [A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

OgreMkV Posts: 3668 Joined: Oct. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,21:46    Quote (Driver @ Aug. 17 2013,21:40) Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 18 2013,02:51) Quote (Driver @ Aug. 17 2013,20:17)   Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 18 2013,00:38) So you agree that it is not 100% certain that the alleged event even happened? You know what will really knock me down, Kevin? Ask me if I was there. I think I've already asked you.  Do you have evidence of the event? No, testimony of an anonymous person is not evidence. So, OK, let's play your little game. Where you, Driver, present when the alleged rape happened?[/quote] Of course it is evidence. You mean it is not sufficient evidence. I posted the timeline up there ^^^^. ...I was not trying to offend you by using your name. Apologies. I am not going to threaten to beat you up. Quote So, OK, let's play your little game. Where you, Driver, present when the alleged rape happened? Whoosh. Driver, you seem to be playing some game.  I tried.  You apparently aren't interested in an actual discussion. Like I said, you are behaving exactly like the creationists that appear here. "Whoosh" indeed. You're right personal testimony is evidence.  And, you are right, I think that it is the absolute worst form of evidence there is. On a jury, if the only prosecution evidence is eye-witness testimony, then I will not vote to convict.  I know too much about people.  You see, they lie.  And they might even think that they are telling the truth, but sometimes, they aren't. Sorry, but that's the way it is.  Now all we have here is a (apparently) 3rd hand account.   Let me ask you, is that sufficient to publicly accuse someone of a major crime? -------------- Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims. http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

Driver Posts: 649 Joined: June 2011 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,22:03    Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 18 2013,02:11)  And it's a huge problem that sexual assault may very well not be sexual assault until after the fact. Well, you have the resources at your fingertips. Is "sexual assault after the fact" a huge problem? -------------- Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray [A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

Driver Posts: 649 Joined: June 2011 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,22:19    Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 18 2013,03:46) Quote Like I said, you are behaving exactly like the creationists that appear here.   What question did you ask me that prompted me to suggest a question you could ask me? Quote I know too much about people.  You see, they lie. Then you know the stats on false reports of crimes  and specifically rape. Excellent. This is a link. Quote Now all we have here is a (apparently) 3rd hand account.   It's a first hand account, unless PZ Myers altered it or made it up. And it is not "all we have here." What else do we have? -------------- Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray [A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

socle Posts: 322 Joined: July 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,22:22    Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 17 2013,20:11) And it's a huge problem that sexual assault may very well not be sexual assault until after the fact. OgreMkV, I'm not sure what this means.  Could you elaborate for me please?  Thanks.

OgreMkV Posts: 3668 Joined: Oct. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,22:49    Quote (Driver @ Aug. 17 2013,22:19) Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 18 2013,03:46)   Quote Like I said, you are behaving exactly like the creationists that appear here.   What question did you ask me that prompted me to suggest a question you could ask me?   Quote I know too much about people.  You see, they lie. Then you know the stats on false reports of crimes  and specifically rape. Excellent. This is a link.   Quote Now all we have here is a (apparently) 3rd hand account.   It's a first hand account, unless PZ Myers altered it or made it up. And it is not "all we have here." What else do we have? From you link Quote The truth is, of course, that some women do lie about having been raped. That shouldn’t surprise us. People make false accusations about every type of crime, even murder, where it is excruciatingly difficult to do. If no woman ever lied about being raped, the gender might have some collective claim to sainthood. Therefore... we cannot be certain until the facts are established. What are the facts? umm... there aren't any.  All we have is a 2nd or 3rd hand account (because PZ has indeed changed his story). I don't understand what's so hard about this.   Maybe there was a rape.  You don't know.  I don't know.  And despite what he's heard, PZ doesn't know.  Until it is established in a court that Shermer is guilty, then saying that he is... is libel. socle: Rape is difficult because it's (AFAIK) the only crime that can be made into a crime after the fact. Person says "yes".  Sex occurs.  Person regrets action, decides they were tricked, etc.  Charges rape. I see, in the cases of the 8 false reports, they were fabricated.  Nothing happened.  This is possible, but I agree unlikely.  Although, I think that this report has much less impact than you think, because it's university over 10 years. Anyway, no, what I'm thinking is specifically that someone chooses to voluntarily have sex, then regrets that decision later. That would not be considered a 'false report' in this paper.  It would be considered a "Case did not proceed" or "insufficient information".   Regardless, this is not the point.  A public accusation has been made.  It's serious one that could have devastating consequences to everyone.  Because of the way the claim was made, Shermer has no way to defend himself. -------------- Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims. http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

Driver Posts: 649 Joined: June 2011 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,23:51    Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 18 2013,04:49) Therefore... we cannot be certain until the facts are established. How certain? Quote What are the facts? umm... there aren't any.  All we have is a 2nd or 3rd hand account. I see. There are no facts, and all we have is the account relayed by PZ. Have you ever posted or linked to information only for it to be ignored? Who does that?     Quote Rape is difficult because it's (AFAIK) the only crime that can be made into a crime after the fact. Wut? WUT?? What is going on in your head?   Quote Because of the way the claim was made, Shermer has no way to defend himself. That is completely untrue, isn't it?     Quote (because PZ has indeed changed his story) The account is a first hand account, in the woman's own words, unless PZ changed or made up the account itself. -------------- Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray [A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin