Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A tenured professor with a PHD (only 3% of Americans hold this distinction, btw) is an "idiot" because he happens to have a different perception and opinion in regards to the Sandy Hook shooting? OK, I'll take your word for it.
A tenured professor with a PHD (only 3% of Americans hold this distinction, btw) is an "idiot" because he happens to have a different perception and opinion in regards to the Sandy Hook shooting? OK, I'll take your word for it.
I will have to come back with the source (sorry, it's been awhile since I read about this), but that professor has a history of using unorthodox methods to teach his students. He is somewhat famous for bringing up conspiracy theories trying to get the students to think and consider different perspectives.
I liken to Wakefield. He had an MD, was a researcher, yet that didn't stop him from fabricating results that led to the "autism is caused by vaccines" nonsense that has been debunked again and again by actual non-fabricated data. Just because someone has a degree does not mean they are automatically an unbiased subject matter expert.
Everyone is entitled to their opinions, though how anyone could buy into the "Sandy Hook is hoax" thing is beyond my powers of comprehension. And no, I have no trust in any form of media being unbiased, before anyone asks.
ETA: Sorry for the source - all I could find quickly - the pertinent part is the professor's quote about critical thinking exercises in his class about halfway through the article : http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_2428898.html
I will have to come back with the source (sorry, it's been awhile since I read about this), but that professor has a history of using unorthodox methods to teach his students. He is somewhat famous for bringing up conspiracy theories trying to get the students to think and consider different perspectives.
It sounds like from the little that I have read about him that he likes to promote critical thinking, a skill that is sadly lacking in many people.
Quote:
I liken to Wakefield. He had an MD, was a researcher, yet that didn't stop him from fabricating results that led to the "autism is caused by vaccines" nonsense that has been debunked again and again by actual non-fabricated data. Just because someone has a degree does not mean they are automatically an unbiased subject matter expert.
In all fairness I was responding a poster who called him an idiot. I don't think an idiot could earn a PHD AND earn a tenured position if they were just some random idiot. Sorry, I don't see the parallels to Wakefield. He's not fabricating things, he is trying to get people to look at things with a critical eye and utilize critical thinking skills.
Quote:
Everyone is entitled to their opinions, though how anyone could buy into the "Sandy Hook is hoax" thing is beyond my powers of comprehension. And no, I have no trust in any form of media being unbiased, before anyone asks.
It sounds like from the little that I have read about him that he likes to promote critical thinking, a skill that is sadly lacking in many people.
In all fairness I was responding a poster who called him an idiot. I don't think an idiot could earn a PHD AND earn a tenured position if they were just some random idiot. Sorry, I don't see the parallels to Wakefield. He's not fabricating things, he is trying to get people to look at things with a critical eye and utilize critical thinking skills.
That's fine. I can respect that.
I don't see anything wrong with promoting critical thinking skills. I think we need more of this, not less.
My point about the professor was his history of using unorthodox means. I agree critical thinking is desirable; rote swallowing of conspiracy theories is not critical thinking.
My point in the parallel to Wakefield is that just because someone has a high level degree doesn't make them unbiased, or not paranoid, or not foolish in other respects. There are plenty of PhDs who are very smart and also batS*&%( insane. I worked with several. I question the critical thinking skills of anyone who thinks he is raising good points rather than expressing his own crazy and complicated theory of how a tragedy occurred. Parsimony is our friend, as is logic. There is a difference between exercising critical thinking and being gullible.
Last edited by eastwesteastagain; 02-21-2013 at 08:22 PM..
Actually, I keep an eye on all the wackadoodle post-Sandy Hook threads.
My point in the parallel to Wakefield is that just because someone has a high level degree doesn't make them unbiased, or not paranoid, or not foolish in other respects. There are plenty of PhDs who are very smart and also batS*&%( insane. I question the critical thinking skills of anyone who thinks he is raising good points rather than expressing his own crazy and complicated theory of how a tragedy occurred. Parsimony is our friend, as is logic.
From what I've read from this guy (and I admit, I haven't read very much), he doesn't sound crazy. Different point of view that is outiside the box for most people? Yes. Crazy? No. I happen to find peoples' apathetic and overly defensive attitudes regarding the misinformation and inconsistencies in reporting by the mainstream media surrounding this tragedy to be concerning.
Give me a break. No one is happy that this shooting occurred. No one is happy that children were killed. No one is "frothing at the mouth waiting for autopsy photos". No one wants a school shooting to happen, ever again. Asking questions does not make a person a cold, uncaring, "conspiracy groupie". I can only speak for myself in saying that I want to know what really happened because I think that information is an important element in preventing something like this from happening again.
Really? Your friend the prof, who you are defending as "he happens to have a different perception and opinion in regards to the Sandy Hook shooting?" is saying the shootings didn't happen at all! Perhaps you have lost sight of the OP:
Quote:
Originally Posted by WannaliveinGreenville
Professor claims Sandy Hook Shooting didn't happen...
James Tracy, known for conspiracy theories, claims trained “crisis actors” may have been employed by President Obama’s administration to get public opinion behind gun control laws.
But Tracy, 47, a professor of media history at Florida Atlantic University, wrote: “As documents relating to the Sandy Hook shooting continue to be assessed and interpreted by independent researchers, there is a growing awareness that the media coverage of the massacre of 26 children and adults was intended primarily for public consumption to further larger political ends.”
The professor writes on his blog, Memory Hole, “While it sounds like an outrageous claim, one is left to inquire whether the Sandy Hook shooting ever took place—at least in the way law enforcement authorities and the nation’s news media have described.” He suggests that there were multiple shooters and that the number of dead is incorrect. The blog post was published on the Global Research site, where it caught the attention of the Web.
Read more: Professor claims Sandy Hook shooting ‘didn’t happen’ | The Sun |News
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dorthy
A tenured professor with a PHD (only 3% of Americans hold this distinction, btw) is an "idiot" because he happens to have a different perception and opinion in regards to the Sandy Hook shooting? OK, I'll take your word for it.
What a joke! It sure as hell is a different perception!
Really? Your friend the prof, who you are defending as :he happens to have a different perception and opinion in regards to the Sandy Hook shooting?" is saying the shootings didn't happen at all! Perhaps you have lost sight of the OP:
What a joke!
My friend? Huh? I said that I've read a little bit of what he has said. I didn't say that I agree with everything he says but I also don't think he sounds crazy. You do. I don't care.
From what I've read from this guy (and I admit, I haven't read very much), he doesn't sound crazy. Different point of view that is outiside the box for most people? Yes. Crazy? No. I happen to find peoples' apathetic and overly defensive attitudes regarding the misinformation and inconsistencies in reporting by the mainstream media surrounding this tragedy to be concerning.
Oh, I didn't mean he in particular is crazy (though that is plausible but I also don't know enough about him to say that), just that high level degree holders can be and are sometimes crazy. The degree itself does not necessarily confer mental stability. I do have to say, though, that it sets off some alarm bells for me that he is advancing the theory that this was a ploy set up by the government for nefarious purposes while completely ignoring (and in fact undermining) the actual loss real families are experiencing. That moves from questioning inconsistencies in media reports (which is generally speaking a critical thinking exercise) into the realm of "what are you smoking?" at best. I am going to leave it at that, because my opinion of his behavior is probably not consistent with the TOS.
Haha, it seems apparent that my posting in this thread is feeding the paranoia, so I'll bow out.
Quite frankly I don't feel the need to know every aspect of the forensic evidence, the fact that 26 people died is the focal point for me personally.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I question the critical thinking skills of anyone who thinks he is raising good points rather than expressing his own crazy and complicated theory of how a tragedy occurred. Parsimony is our friend, as is logic. There is a difference between exercising critical thinking and being gullible.
