MatthewB comments on The 9/11 Meta-Truther Conspiracy Theory - Less Wrong

43 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 22 December 2009 06:59PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (178)
Tags: humor conspiracy_theory 911 affiliation reversed_stupidity

Comments (178)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: roland 22 December 2009 07:51:07PM *  3 points [-]

Eliezer kudos for you to touch such a hot iron! There is at least one professor in the US who lost his tenure because of his contrarian views in regard to 911.

Comment author: SilasBarta 23 December 2009 01:29:48AM *  9 points [-]

IIRC, I think that case was about a lot more than just his contrarian 9/11 views, although I suppose they were instrumental in shining a spotlight on him bright enough to reveal all the other ways in which he was a fraud.

ETA: Okay, found his name: Ward Churchill. Intro matches my summary:

In January 2005, Churchill's work attracted publicity, with the widespread circulation of a 2001 essay, On the Justice of Roosting Chickens. In the essay, he claimed that the September 11, 2001 attacks were provoked by U.S. policy, and referred to the "technocratic corps" working in the World Trade Center as "little Eichmanns".

In March 2005 the University of Colorado began investigating allegations that Churchill had engaged in research misconduct; it reported in June 2006 that he had done so. Churchill was fired on July 24, 2007, leading to a claim from some scholars that he was fired over the ideas he expressed.

So he was officially fired for research misconduct, but that misconduct would probably have gone unnoticed if not for his look-at-me-I'm-a-contrarian spiel.

Note: If you have a cushy job predicated on fraudulent work you've done in the past, and ethics don't trouble you, try to keep a low profile, moron.

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 22 December 2009 07:55:19PM 3 points [-]

I hope you're congratulating me for touching the hot iron rather than picking it up, metaphorically speaking?

Comment author: roland 23 December 2009 03:40:18AM 2 points [-]

I don't get the difference, sorry I'm not a native english speaker. I googled "hot iron" but didn't find information to clarify it.

Comment author: wedrifid 23 December 2009 03:49:30AM *  7 points [-]

Getting associated with a low prestige topic can lower someone's status even if they are on the side that isn't stupid. (See OvercomingBias.)

If picking up a hot iron can be considered to be advocating a stigmatised contrarian position then even just mentioning the topic without advocating for it could perhaps be considered 'touching the hot iron rather than picking it up'. (I think Eliezer made this up on the spot by expanding on the metaphor that you provided.)

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 23 December 2009 04:43:46AM 3 points [-]

Correct.

Comment author: roland 23 December 2009 04:11:36AM 1 point [-]

If this is the case, yes I don't think that he picked it up. He just touched it in a clever way making people think about it. I suppose he is in the know but doesn't want to be open about it and it's the right thing to do in his position, living in the US. Btw, AFAIK this metaphor is widely used, no?

Comment author: wedrifid 23 December 2009 04:47:00AM 1 point [-]

Btw, AFAIK this metaphor is widely used, no?

Don't know. I don't think I have heard it before but it sounds like the kind of thing that is a popular metaphor.

Comment author: roland 23 December 2009 05:29:22AM 1 point [-]

It seems that I unknowingly got influenced by my german background where this metaphor is quite common.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit