Physics prof fired from oil spill cleanup job due to controversial blog.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/wire/sns-ap-us-oil-spill-professor,0,3504925.story

by yummyfajitas • 16 years ago

20 32 16 years ago

Perceval2• 16 years ago

It's unclear to me why the professor's opinions on homosexuality or multiculturalism would impede his ability to find a solution to our current predicament in the gulf, which requires a rapid and expert insight.

If his other four colleagues selected by the Obama administration were unable to work with him, that would be one thing. There doesn't seem to be any public indication of that. This mostly seems to be a bow from the administration to pressure to enforce political correctness.

It would be a shame if the professor's absence unnecessarily prolonged or impeded a rapid solution to the gulf oil geyser. The longer that geyser is allowed to spill, the greater the devastation to marine life and the gulf economy.

mturmon4• 16 years ago

Look at his publications:

http://wuphys.wustl.edu/~katz/publist.html

He does not seem to have particular expertise on this problem.

Perceval2• 16 years ago

That's a relief. Hopefully his removal will not undermine a solution to the oil geyser.

Nevertheless, he was not removed because of his lack of area knowledge. (One wonders why he was selected in the first place, if his work wasn't relevant.) It appears that he was removed because he was holding the 'wrong' socio-political opinions. And that's unsettling.

billpaetzke4• 16 years ago

He entered the project based on aptitude and left based on politics. That's why it's unsettling.

waterlesscloud• 16 years ago

While not relevant to this particular problem, "Detection of Neutron Sources in Cargo Containers" is an interesting title...

billpaetzke4• 16 years ago

It's unfortunate his social views became a "distraction"--whatever that means. I am disappointed. He should not have been dismissed due to social pressure. He's not running for a political office.

He's a smart man who's trying to solve a very important, urgent science problem. His involvement should only be tied to his problem-solving abilities.

We need to band together--irrespective of barriers and beliefs--like in the movie Independence Day--where all the countries united to defeat the alien invaders :)

pvdm• 16 years ago

... should NOT have been cut ... I think you meant to say. Correct ?

billpaetzke4• 16 years ago

fixed wording

savant2• 16 years ago

It's disappointing at a time like this that when all Americans need to come together and focus on relief efforts and recovery efforts in the Gulf, someone in power decides a person's divisive position on an issue affects his ability to focus on a problem.

halostatue• 16 years ago

If it affects other people's ability to work with him, it matters.

lidmith3• 16 years ago

Maybe it effects his ability to work with them, and they should be removed.

I don't like homophobia, though I do agree with him on diversity (based on what the article showed): that we should focus on people's merits, and not their race, for college admissions and jobs.

However, it's my understanding that he only wrote this stuff on his blog; that he wasn't preaching about it at work, or in this scientist group.

If some scientist is too effected by the personal writings of this guy on his blog that they are unable to work with him, then that scientist should leave the group. Moreover, for someone to be removed from a government position based on his personal beliefs, expressed on his personal web site, is very clearly a violation of freedom of speech.

To put it another way, suppose someone on the team believed that women should have the right to vote, and this offended the sensibilities of other members of the group. Should that person have been removed?

Just because his ideas are wrong, doesn't make them any of our business, or the government's, or that groups'.

savant2• 16 years ago

I don't see why it would. I go to work and I talk about stupid stuff with my coworkers all the time. They definitely don't have much in common with me, and it's an even larger gap between me and the founders. Even so, I manage to do my job and hopefully do it well, regardless of what they thought of my peach/orange/pink hair last week.

There just happens to be this little thing called professionalism....

eavc2• 16 years ago

Let's be clear about what he said in his blog that's so inflammatory.

Essentially, he said that gay people are morally culpable for AIDS, and that the monogamous gay people are culpable because they belong to the same group much how people belonging to the KKK are to blame even if they aren't the exact person committing violence.

yummyfajitas4• 16 years ago

He really didn't say that. He compared homosexuals to people who ride motorcycles without a helmet, not the KKK. He also criticized the homosexuals and IV drug users who spread disease.

What this has to do with his ability to mitigate an oil spill is beyond me.

eavc2• 16 years ago

"Post-Script October 9, 2005: In recent weeks this essay has been the subject of controversy at, and even beyond, Washington University (see, for example, recent issues of Student Life). A number of critics have asked if monogamous homosexuals are also culpable. Quite apart from the question of the definition of monogamous (sexual contact with only one person in a lifetime? serial monogamy? some cheating? etc.), I suggest the following analogy: A man joins the Ku Klux Klan. He is not violent, and would never hurt a fly; he just wants a safe place to express his racist feelings. Is he culpable for the Klan's past acts of violence? I believe that even though he is not criminally responsible for acts that occurred before he joined, he is morally culpable for joining the Klan. The Klan has blood on its hands, and anyone who joins must share the guilt. So, too, with the homosexual movement."

darkhorse• 16 years ago

wow, lots of homophobe-apologists masquerading as free speech crusaders here tonight.

it doesn't take a genius to realize that:

a) having a lightning-rod homophobe/bigot on the team will turn into a PR nightmare and result in a media circus

b) it'd be better to not have such a circus and focus on the important stuff

c) removing the bigot puts this problem behind you so you can focus on the task at hand

furthermore, $50 says this guy is a self-hating closet homo. wait for it....

Physics prof fired from oil spill cleanup job due to controversial blog.

Related Stories