OgreMkV
Posts: 3668
Joined: Oct. 2009
|
| Quote (Learned Hand @ Sep. 29 2014,01:20) | Please forgive a long post, but I'm listening to a (very boring) CLE class on bullying, which of course brings Mr. Arrington to mind.
I know many honest, decent people. (And given my profession, some who are honest if not always decent because they know the reputation benefits them.) None of them fret and rage about perceived slights to their character the way Barry Arrington does. They show their honesty rather than demanding that people take their word for it.
In my opinion, it's a warning sign when someone demands that you credit their honesty rather than being confident in their ability to demonstrate it. Let's test that rule of thumb against Mr. Arrington!
Off of the top of my head, I can think of three dishonest things he's done at Uncommon Descent. (I don't know much about his life outside of it, and express no opinion about it.)
The first was way back in 2009, when I was mostly lurking at UD: http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-scotus
Mr. Arrington quotemined Justice Ginsburg, claiming that she was " talking about controlling the growth of 'populations that we don’t want to have too many of'" and implying that she supported eugenics. But this is a dishonest manipulation of her statement. As I said at the time, she was not advocating eugenics but describing a mistaken impression she had in the 70s that others had that goal. Mr. Arrington didn't tell an outright lie, just a quotemine of the sort we see coming often from creationists. He did not bother to correct his calumny, but he also didn't ban me for challenging his misrepresentation. (Ironically he likes to demand that people who criticize him apologize; I've never seen him do the same, no matter how baseless his insults.)
About two weeks later, though, Mr. Arrington exercised another opportunity to demonstrate his character:
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....ossible
He thoroughly misrepresented a post by Seversky, and banned me when I pointed out that misrepresentation. His attempts to smear Seversky with a pretended defense of pornography and "sexual slavery" seemed, in my reading, so unfounded that even many of the UD regulars were hesitant to defend him. He was even uncharacteristically reluctant to defend himself, merely banning his critics. (I seem to recall I wasn't the only one, but couldn't swear to it.)
Eventually, after seeing Joe and others un-ban themselves with new registrations, I began posting again as Pro Hac Vice. That ended when, a little over a year ago, when Mr. Arrington had another tantrum about someone daring to question his integrity:
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....ot-sink
The backstory is a little tedious, but I cross-posted the message that (I think) got me banned at TSZ:
http://theskepticalzone.com/wp....t....t-35351
Long story short, Mr. Arrington edited a statement to make it look much more inflammatory than it was, then pretended to be on fire.
Three little instances of casual dishonesty, I think. Nothing to cry over or make a difference in the real world. But given his recent pious posturing about rules of charity and "Darwinian debating tactics," I thought it was worth illustrating Mr. Arrington's approach to his posts and comments at Uncommon Descent. He maligns his critics but demands that they treat him like a gentleman. He deceives his readers and bans those who point out the truth. He demands apologies from people he feels have wronged him, but revels in pettiness against them himself. And he complains that his enemies are tricksy debaters who can't have a serious conversation, but has never—and I mean that I can't think of a single example—had a polite discussion on UD with someone who disagreed with him.
Bydand! |
If one performs an action to be dishonest, then one is willfully dishonest.
If one makes a mistake, then one should own up to it and apologize.
Creationists, including Barry, are willfully dishonest, by promoting the known lies of others and creating new lies of their own.
--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.
http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat
|
