Today, PZ Myers continued his abject lesson in how to be entirely un-self aware by accusing someone else – Michael Nugent – of using biased sources and motivated reasoning.
And PZ would know a bit about each of those things because he uses them extensively. They nicely complement his lying.
We detail two lies today, one about Michael Nugent and another about perpetual PZ punching bag Jeffrey Epstein. Let’s get right to the action.
PZ Myers Lie [in bold]:
I am not going to address most of it, because I think the perspective most needed here would be that of actual trans people, not another cis het man. It is intrinsically offensive that a couple of guys would meet for lunch and decide what should be done about the LGBTQs, and another guy chiming in doesn’t help matters.https://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2019/09/05/biased-sources-motivated-reasoning-and-blithe-assumptions-the-terf-story/
PZ does, of course, chime in, but wants to get credit for at least saying he shouldn’t. And what a way to start! He lies about the very first paragraph in Nugent’s post:
Since my recent lunch with my friend Graham Linehan, I have been learning more about the issues of biological sex and socially-constructed gender. Thank you to everyone who contacted me with constructive comments. In this article I am sharing my current opinions on the following topics:https://www.michaelnugent.com/2019/09/02/sex-and-gender/
PZ’s version of this paragraph is exactly the opposite of what Nugent says actually happened. Instead of deciding what to do “about the LGBTQs,” at the lunch, Nugent left and decided he needed more information. He’s learned more about the issues since and solicited comments from others as well.
It’s not just this snippet, PZ misrepresents Nugent’s entire post, just not in a way we could classify as a lie. Reading PZ alone, you would get the idea Nugent is a transphobic bigot trying to deny the existence of people who don’t neatly fit into one of two binary biological sex “boxes.” But, that couldn’t be further from the truth. Nugent appears to be genuinely wrestling with the issue in a thoughtful, respectful manner.
The problem is he doesn’t agree, totally and wholeheartedly, with PZ Myers. That’s more than enough to get you banned from commenting at Pharyngula, and it’s also enough for PZ to lie about you.
PZ Myers Lie #2 [in bold]:
Negroponte just got up and admitted that all the great things that benefited all the lucky people at MIT were the product of unclean hands, and that he’d happily take any money from anyone, no matter how they acquired it.https://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2019/09/05/butbutthats-the-whole-goddamn-problem/
I guess ethics isn’t one of the scholarly disciplines MIT is known for.
PZ is writing about this article from Technology Review, and we’re going to give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he read it before it was updated. The original article made it sound like Nicholas Negroponte would have encouraged MIT Media Lab director Joichi Ito to take money from Jeffrey Epstein even if he had known Epstein was a sex trafficker.
But, for the purposes of this lie, it doesn’t matter what version of the story PZ read, because the very paragraphs he quoted expose the lie. These two are reproduced in the post:
Negroponte said that he prided himself on knowing over 80% of the billionaires in the US on a first-name basis, and that through these circles he had come to spend time with Epstein. Over the years, he had two dinners and one ride in Epstein’s private jet alone, where they spoke passionately about science. (He didn’t say whether these occurred before or after Epstein’s 2008 conviction.) It was these interactions, he said, that warmed him to Epstein and made him confidently and enthusiastically recommend that Ito take the money.https://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2019/09/05/butbutthats-the-whole-goddamn-problem/
It was at this point that Negroponte said he would still have given Ito the same advice today. Different people in attendance had conflicting interpretations of his statement. Some understood him to mean he would act the same way even knowing what he knows now about Epstein’s alleged sex trafficking. But Negroponte told the Boston Globe that in retrospect, “Yes, we are embarrassed and regret taking his money.”
In other words, Negroponte did not say “he’d happily take any money from anyone, no matter how they acquired it. And he most definitely did not admit “that all the great things that benefited all the lucky people at MIT were the product of unclean hand.”
Once again, PZ just makes this stuff up out of whole cloth.
Negroponte might have been trying to make a similar point to the one we made a few days ago, but the backlash was so swift and severe that he walked it back pretty quickly. Our question still stands: are pedophiles irredeemable? Should they be banned from participating in life after serving time for their crimes?
If your answer is yes, then the real issue is with the criminal justice system and pedophilia sentencing guidelines. If your answer is no, then why shouldn’t they be allowed to give their money away to science?
PZ will never explain. Taking money from Epstein was bad because he says so. End of story.
Today: 1 science-related post, 3 posts on other stuff
Since 30 May 19: 99 science-related posts, 317 non-science posts.
24% of the posts on a “science blog” are about science.
Today: 2 PZ Myers Lies
Since 30 May 19: 112 PZ Myers Lies
Over to you, PZ. Until tomorrow.