Final nail in Bellesiles coffin.................

Status
Not open for further replies.

2dogs

Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2002
Messages
1,865
Location
the city
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030107/ap_on_en_ot/history_book_canceled_1

Publisher Stops History Book Publication
Tue Jan 7, 5:34 PM ET

By HILLEL ITALIE, Associated Press Writer

NEW YORK - Publication has been halted on a disputed book about the history of guns in the United States.



Questions about Michael Bellesiles' "Arming America" had already led Columbia University to rescind the prestigious Bancroft Prize for history.


When Columbia made the announcement last month, publisher Alfred A. Knopf said the book would remain in print. But Jane Garrett, Bellesiles' editor, told The Associated Press on Tuesday that the publisher would no longer sell it.


"We are in the process of ending our contractual arrangement with Michael for `Arming America,'" Garrett said.


According to Garrett, Bellesiles (pronounced Bell-eel) had proposed some revisions, but the publisher found them inadequate. Knopf spokesman Paul Bogaards said the decision to stop printing "Arming America" was made weeks ago, although without a formal announcement.


Efforts to reach Bellesiles for comment were not immediately successful; he recently resigned as a professor at Emory University, after an independent panel of scholars commissioned by the school strongly criticized his research.


According to Garrett, the book has sold about 8,000 copies in hardcover and about 16,000 in paperback.


Bellesiles spent 10 years working on "Arming America," published by Knopf in 2000. The book challenges the idea that the United States has always been a gun-oriented culture and that well-armed militias were essential to the Revolutionary War.


"Arming America" was praised in both The New York Times and The New York Review of Books and won the Bancroft Prize, presented to works of "exceptional merit and distinction in the fields of American history and biography."


Many cited it as a devastating statement against America's alleged historical love affair with firearms. But gun advocates quickly attacked the book, and scholars and critics also became skeptical.


The Emory report, written by scholars from Harvard and Princeton universities and the University of Chicago, said Bellesiles' failure to cite sources for crucial data "does move into the realm of 'falsification.'" It also suggested he omitted other researchers' data that contradicted his arguments.


Garrett said Tuesday that she still had "great respect" for the author. "I still do not believe in any shape or form he fabricated anything," she said. "He's just a sloppy researcher."


Bellesiles has acknowledged some errors, but defends his book as fundamentally sound.


"I have never fabricated evidence of any kind nor knowingly evaded my responsibilities as a scholar," he said after announcing his resignation in October.
 
YEAH!! Now, that's what I call good news.
yes.gif
 
Garrett said Tuesday that she still had "great respect" for the author. "I still do not believe in any shape or form he fabricated anything," she said. "He's just a sloppy researcher."

She probably believes that Clinton didn't inhale too. I'm sorry, but given the mountain of evidence, you may not like it, but to not believe it should be cause for you to be removed from your job. You just proved that you can not/will not be objective while looking at material. Given that, Knopf as your employer should remove you from any editorial duties as you may once again decide that the "message" is more important that then truth.

Greg
 
Gee, maybe there's hope for this rat-infested, liberal cesspool called Emory.

See ya Mikey, don't let the door hit you in the a** on the way out.
:neener:
 
Garrett said Tuesday that she still had "great respect" for the author. "I still do not believe in any shape or form he fabricated anything," she said. "He's just a sloppy researcher."

If you or I submitted a paper as a grad student and we did what Bellesiles did we would be thrown out of the graduate program.

He Fabricated evidence and he was very sloppy in his fabrication.

He quoted probate records from the 1850-1900 period, specifically found at the Court House in San Francisco California.
He used them as evidence, and cited them in his bibliography as original source material.

Only 1 HUGE problem, the courthouse burned to the ground in 1906 in the great San Francisco earthquake, all the probate records he cited, were destroyed in 1906. The whole lot 1850-1900 burned to ashes in 1906.

There is no way that anyone could say that this was not an intentional fabrication.

Belleel is an idiot, as well as a liar.


:scrutiny:
 
I heard (or read) somewhere that the Bancroft Award was revoked, too, but I haven't been able to confirm that.


BTW, isn't his name "Belles-Lies" ? ? ?
 
Bancroft award was rescinded

The Bancroft prize committee rescinded his award before Christmas, if I recall correctly.

Yes, he is supposed to return the award money to the committee. Don't hold your breath on that one.

This is indeed good news ... that no one will hear. Brit Hume and Rush reported on the Bancroft award being pulled and his departure from Emory.

But for some strange reason the NY Times didn't feel it was the same kind of front page news that the orioginal release of the bok was. Imagine that?

He's gone, the book is being pulled, he has been disgraced by his fellow academicians, he has embarassed the Bancroft committee and his former University. It's the academic equivalent of a tar and feathering and being run out of town on a rail.

Good riddance to another liberal with a blind agenda.

Don P.
 
An author generally receives 10% profits from the publisher. So, if 8,000 hardbacks ($30 each? My guess) and 16,000 paperbacks were sold ($20 each? Another guess) that would work out to a respective $2.4k & $3.2k. Considering it was ten years of research, that won't even pay for many of the expenses (probably picked up by Emory anyway). A miserable $5,600 to show for ten years and since his credibility is destroyed, no publisher will touch him. :D

Now, a publisher can "dump" his book on a discount jobber and write off the loss, thereby decreasing any "profit" (happens all the time in the publishing business) and this will probably happen with the left over copies.

Admit it guys, there are only two good uses for the book. The cover is pretty (Harnett's tromp l'oeil painting of the gun) and the pages, fire starter of course. :)
 
Bellesiles spent 10 years working on "Arming America," published by Knopf in 2000. The book challenges the idea that the United States has always been a gun-oriented culture and that well-armed militias were essential to the Revolutionary War.

"Arming America" was praised in both The New York Times and The New York Review of Books and won the Bancroft Prize, presented to works of "exceptional merit and distinction in the fields of American history and biography."

Many cited it as a devastating statement against America's alleged historical love affair with firearms...
But,

But gun advocates quickly attacked the book...

"Bellesiles' failure to cite sources for crucial data "does move into the realm of 'falsification.'"....

"I still do not believe in any shape or form he fabricated anything," she said. "He's just a sloppy researcher."...

Bellesiles has acknowledged some errors, but defends his book as fundamentally sound. "I have never fabricated evidence of any kind..."
OK, so we have a highly-praised book, a book that's a devastating statement against America's love affair with the gun, that was attacked by gun advocates, and, well, he was just a little, teensy-weensy bit sloppy in his research. You know, it may have some errors, he may have failed to cite some sources, but his condemnation of "America's love affair with the gun" is based on ten years of "fundamentally sound" work.

Don't you just love unbiased journalism? :fire: :banghead: :cuss:
 
The socialist/commie scene rarely eats its own so we're witnessing a milestone event.

This is just awesome!
 
I wonder how many of the 24,000 copies were bought by Sarah Brady and denizens?

Lets see...
Forced resignation from Emory University
Rescinded Bancroft prize money
Reputation in ruins
Publication of book stopped

Michael Bellesiles has only two options.
1) Work for Sarah Brady
2) Work for Ronald McDonald
 
Daniel Flory hit the nail square on the head. People that have little or no contact with academia don't know that these folks can out good-ole-boy the good-ole-boys in their sleep. Take it from someone in the middle of it, this is GREAT! In 13 years at this sink hole I've only seen it happen one other time and that one never got the publics attention. Ssshhh-very hush, hush.

:banghead: :cuss:

Stay safe.
 
Not to put too fine a point on it, but I intend to ask the Clark County library system what their policy is on retaining a book that has all those caveats.

I have no problem in them retaining it as long as there's some kind of note attached to the book, notifying the reader that the Bancroft prize has been recalled and the book's printing suspended because of false info.

It might be something to ask your local library. That would be the crowning blow - even the libraries dump the copy.

That won't stop the Brady Bunch and their clones from still referring to it, as in the Kellerman "study", but it affords a great chance to quote its history, as Frohickey has done, with this addendum:

Forced resignation from Emory University
Rescinded Bancroft prize money
Reputation in ruins
Publication of book stopped
Libraries refused to carry it, even under “Fictionâ€
 
Oatka: not such a bad idea. I've often seen an old book with an "Errata" leaf tucked just inside the front cover listing each page on which an error (usually a typo) is printed with its correction. Perhaps as a political action, you could print up a whole bunch of such pages for the library to slip into Bellesiles's book. (Or, you could systematically borrow each of the library's copies and slip them in yourself... go back a year later and I bet they'll still be there.)
 
Now it's time to start writing Amazon, B&N, BAM, Borders, etc. and ask them to either file it under fiction or stop selling it.
 
Not taken down by gun advocates!

The real saving grace of this whole ugly event was that he was undone, not by the "gun nuts", but by fellow academicians.

He was not "picked on" by the NRA or anyone esle. His work did not stand up to the most cursory peer review. After the original press hoopla hit, some academics tried to use some of his research and sources and found them non-existent or mysteriously unavailble (The flood in the basement story).

After several of them had the same problem checking his sources, they did an informal peer review and started to uncover more inconsistencies. That led to the formal peer review that was his ultimate undoing.

That review included Hannah Gray the former Chancellor of the University of Chicago and several other people with impeccable academic credentials and they roasted him slowly and completely.

Us "Gun Nuts" had nothing to do with his undoing, thankfully. But then again it doesn't serve the purpose of trying to salvage some of his "findings" to admit it was all made up stuff.

Don P.
 
Clayton Cramer - who writes in Shotgun News - is a gun "nut" and had a hand in his demise. Cramer is not an academic but a software engineer.
 
nualle - Interesting approach, for I have seen a few myself.

Unfortunately, in this case, the errata pages would outnumber the original. :)
 
There have been people convicted of fraud with a lot less evidence. The man really needs to have his life trashed as best as possible.
 
Columbia also requested that Bellesiles return $4,000 in prize money. It is the first time the prize has been withdrawn since it was first awarded in 1948.
Ouch, that must've hurt!

How will the good professor make a living, now that even the Brady Bunch will not touch him with a ten-foot pole? No doubt some lucky community college will give him a "second chance."
"I was not allowed to put the packets in the mailboxes of professors and staff, so with the approval of the secretary, I placed them on the desk," he said. "According to a friendly TA (teaching assistant), whose anonymity I have kept secret for the protection of his career, Professor Eric Foner saw the handouts and threw a fit. All of the packets were thrown out."
You gotta love the toleration of opposing views and the widespread appreciation for open debate in the academia! :)
"Arming America" was embraced by many scholars because it appeared to confirm what several already believed: that the Second Amendment protects only a collective right to bear arms, and individual gun rights were unimportant to America's Founders (emphasis mine).
Whoa! Gotta love that academic integrity - because, as all know, belief is reality.

The whole episode has been so, so sweet. Yet the fruits of victory are also bitter for we do not share them with all.

Can we imagine just what sort of media frenzy there would have been if this were a pro-Second Amendment scholar whose work was found to be "merely sloppy"? Yet the silence in the media over this little episode is... deafening to those who can hear!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top