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

Status
Not open for further replies.
It was mentioned earlier that the "good ole boy" network exists in academia. It does but is called "academic freedom" and is something that goes hand in hand with "tenure." Once one is off probation (full professorship?), like that enjoyed by Bellesiles, they're "tenured" and can then say virtually anything they want to say within their field of expertise. It can be extremely controversial but the spirit of academic freedom is unlike political correctness. This allows for open discussio (again contrary to PC) to stimulate thought in the academic environment. Without this, we'd still be studying Aristotle.

What gave Emory the ammunition to let Bellesiles go is his embarassing of Emory. While a scholar can say virtually anything, it'd better be good and add to the prestige of the university. His pack of lies probably raised their collective blood pressure and they needed the outside investigation (assurances of objectivity/unbias) in order to pressure him out.

I wouldn't hire him to teach grade school history, but I'm sure he can be a good tour guide. Charleston is good. They've got horses there. For the rest of his life he can stare at a horse's behind & breathe in their farts :D
 
I used to have a lot of respect for Knopf as one of the better publishers. That evaporated when they published that creep's book and didn't check out the "noise" about it soon after. It wasn't hard to find out that the creep's foundation for his book was severely lacking, and why Knopf would publish the book in the first place is beyond me.

Sorry, Knopf. Too little, too late.... :cuss:
 
4v50 Gary
It was mentioned earlier that the "good ole boy" network exists in academia. It does but is called "academic freedom" and is something that goes hand in hand with "tenure." Once one is off probation (full professorship?), like that enjoyed by Bellesiles, they're "tenured" and can then say virtually anything they want to say within their field of expertise. It can be extremely controversial but the spirit of academic freedom is unlike political correctness. This allows for open discussio (again contrary to PC) to stimulate thought in the academic environment. Without this, we'd still be studying Aristotle.
Apparently, this respect for "academic freedom" does not extend to those who do not have tenure (like the TA remains anonymous and the undergraduate whose flyers were tossed).

An "academic freedom" that is limited to a small group of people in leadership roles of an institution while the same is denied to their assistants and pupils is no freedom at all.

I speak from experience as a former academician.
 
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 took your excellent idea and ran with it. Today I printed out the AP story and gave it to our local research librarian. She was shocked. She promised to send the information off to her superiors.

Of the 8,000 hardbacks sold, the King County Library system owns 12.

I can't wait to find out what the People's Republic of King County intends to do with them.
It was mentioned earlier that the "good ole boy" network exists in academia. It does but is called "academic freedom" and is something that goes hand in hand with "tenure." Once one is off probation (full professorship?), like that enjoyed by Bellesiles, they're "tenured" and can then say virtually anything they want to say within their field of expertise. It can be extremely controversial but the spirit of academic freedom is unlike political correctness. This allows for open discussio (again contrary to PC) to stimulate thought in the academic environment. Without this, we'd still be studying Aristotle.
I know professors who have been permanently ostracized for holding politically incorrect veiwpoints. They may not be able to be fired from their tenured positions (sans extreme pressure to resign as in B-what'shisnames case) but they certainly don't enjoy anything approaching freedom. They are all in the five colleges area of Amerst MA, and since that was the cradle of PC, they probably suffer more than other areas. Give it enough time and you will see more and more voices silenced. PC is bad, bad stuff.

I've known even more students with a lot on the ball that nearly flunked out until they learned to do their time, parrot back the PC nonsense and get their diploma and get out. What they recieve for their tuition is more properly described as indoctrination. Any education that they do recieve is incidental.

An "academic freedom" that is limited to a small group of people in leadership roles of an institution while the same is denied to their assistants and pupils is no freedom at all.
Bingo!
 
If you can't get your local library to dump the books, try to get them reclassified as fiction. At least that will stick them where no one will confuse them with actual history references.
 
IIRC, a few days ago this was talked about on the radio. I think it was NPR, but not 100% sure. There was an interviw with a woman whose name I don't recall(didn't really start listening until they were well into the report). She stated that she, and many others, believed everything in the book.

It seems that they feel Mr. Bellesiles has been the victim of the "right wing gun lobby". She said he (Mr. B) left Emory because he was upset that the school had give in to the pressure brought to bear by some "secret right wing power groups". When asked who she was talking about she said "I'm afraid for my life if I give out that information".

I wouldn't worry about Mr. Bellesiles, seems there are still folks who want/need to hear his version of history. He'll make a living going around the country telling his sad tale. It's all he has.
 
There is a simple way to debunk Bellesiles to any believer. He claims that he started with the original records everyone else used, but went deeper into the records looking for more information.

So by looking at the same plus MORE records, somehow he came out with FEWER guns that previous historians.:banghead:
 
http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20030110-89202833.htm

Discredited volume on U.S. gun culture going out of print
By Robert Stacy McCain
THE WASHINGTON TIMES


Alfred A. Knopf Inc. has halted publication of a book that claimed guns were rare in early America, after Columbia University revoked a prestigious award to the author who was accused of research misconduct.

Michael A. Bellesiles' "Arming America: The Origins of a National Gun Culture" won critical praise when it was published in the fall of 2000, and received the Bancroft Prize for historical writings in 2001, but was later discredited by researchers who found evidence that the author had fabricated or misrepresented his sources.
"The book had been subject to criticisms and we certainly looked at that," Knopf spokesman Paul Bogaards said yesterday. "As a responsible publisher, we thought it best to let the book go out of print."
The decision by Knopf, a division of Random House, to cease publication of "Arming America" was the latest in a series of reversals for Mr. Bellesiles, whose book initially generated widespread acclaim:
•Columbia revoked the Bancroft Prize — considered the most prestigious award for history writing — on Dec. 16, saying the university's board of trustees "concluded that [Mr. Bellesiles] had violated basic norms of scholarship and the high standards expected of Bancroft Prize winners."
•In October, Emory University announced that Mr. Bellesiles would resign as a history professor there. A review committee of three outside scholars found Mr Bellesiles' work showed "evidence of falsification," "egregious misrepresentation" and "exaggeration of data."
cIn May, the National Endowment for the Humanities demanded that the federal agency's name be removed from a fellowship awarded to Mr. Bellesiles, saying that "the name of the National Endowment for the Humanities represents a standard that Professor Bellesiles' application [for the fellowship] did not meet."
Despite Knopf's decision to stop publication of "Arming America," officials of the company continued to defend Mr. Bellesiles.
"I don't think there was any malice on Michael's part," Mr. Bogaards said.
Mr. Bellesiles' editor at Knopf, Jane Garrett, told the Associated Press, "I still do not believe in any shape or form he fabricated anything. He's just a sloppy researcher."
Those remarks angered one of Mr. Bellesiles' most persistent critics, author Clayton Cramer.
"I am very disappointed that Knopf is still pretending that Bellesiles's problem is just that he's a sloppy researcher," said Mr. Cramer, who exposed alterations of historic texts in the Bellesiles book. "He has told too many different, contradictory stories. He is a liar, and Knopf should feel real shame about allowing this fraud to continue as long as it did."
"Arming America," with its claims that guns were rare and militias ineffective in early America, was celebrated by gun-control advocates who said the book proved the Second Amendment was not meant to protect a right to private gun ownership.
Mr. Bellesiles was called "the NRA's worst nightmare," and even filed a friend-of-the-court brief in a federal trial involving gun control.
Despite its acclaim, however, the book came under increasingly harsh scrutiny by scholars, including James Lindgren, a law professor at Northwestern University who found errors in Mr. Bellesiles' research.
Journalist Melissa Seckora of National Review found that Mr. Bellesiles cited California records that authorities agreed had been destroyed in the 1906 San Francisco earthquake. Ohio State University history professor Randolph Roth concluded that assertions in "Arming America" were "not supported by the sources Mr. Bellesiles cites, the sources he does not cite, or by the data he presents."
Mr. Bogaards of Knopf said it is rare that a history book by a respected scholar leads to such claims of misrepresentation.
"I think instances like what we experienced with 'Arming America' are the very infrequent exception in our business," Mr. Bogaards said. "In most cases, the credentials will stand up. Most history books, you're not going to have teams of lawyers looking at it."
 
Mr. Bellesiles was called "the NRA's worst nightmare," and even filed a friend-of-the-court brief in a federal trial involving gun control.


Could He be prosecuted for filing false testimony in a federal case, would this be perjury?



Journalist Melissa Seckora of National Review found that Mr. Bellesiles cited California records that authorities agreed had been destroyed in the 1906 San Francisco earthquake.

No one can say he accidentally made up information that did not exist. He is really an idiot who does not know history, Interpreting existing records incorrectly is one thing, but a blatant fabrication of data cited as source material, there is no possibility that that was an honest mistake.
 
Oatka noted:
[...] the errata pages would outnumber the original. :)
I see what you mean. Perhaps, then, the peer review article that James Lindgren wrote (anyone know where it's published?) can be copied small enough to fit inside the cover.

Supplying the crucial, missing information—from a scholar, who is held to as high a standard as Bellesiles claimed, rather than a journalist, who isn't—solves the problem without recourse to censorship.
 
Master Blaster raises an interesting question:

"Could He be prosecuted for filing false testimony in a federal case, would this be perjury?"

Didn't the 9th circuit court recently quote "Belly-Silly" in one of their decisions?

:confused:
 
OT but...

Monkeyman,

I like that quote on your sig line! Where is it from?
 
Bahadur - you're absolutely correct about "academic freedom" not applying to TAs or non-tenured professors or "professional lecturers" or anything other than full tenured professorship. Keeps the peons in place you understand. Belly aching is only permitted to undergrads (but who listens to them unless they're in a mob).

I have a friend who is tenured in Washington State and when he taught at U.C. Davis, San Jose State and UCLA (all creative writing), his "peers" disliked him as an outsider. You see, he didn't go through their grist mill to get there. He came via being an accomplished writer and as an attorney. The latter gave him the capability to take them "head on" if he choose and they knew and resented it. The "ivory tower" is supported by those within and to exclude those without.
 
Daniel Flory, check your PM.

I just had to share this. I actually had an uber-lib co-worker complain the other day that it was getting hard to be a flaming liberal around here. The comment was prompted by my telling her that I used electronic hearing protection to shoot pistol competition (IDPA). You would have thought from the look on her face that I'd dropped something really offensive in the punch bowl. All of that and now the "NRA's Worst Nightmare" is getting hammered too? Get your high-water pants on folks, there's a flood of crocodile tears coming. :D
 
Although I am sure there are exceptions to the rule, academicians are right there, feeding on the bottom right next to their skin brothers lawyers and politicians. Oh yeah, and reporters. :barf: :cuss:
 
Anybody composed an eratta sheet?

It burns me up that my local library system has 25 copies (I counted them) of this PC crap at various branches and not a single copy of "Unintended Consequenses" by John Ross. I would systematically check out and destroy all 25 copies, except that I am a law abiding and morally upright person. I would, however, systematically check out and permanently insert a warning label. If anyone drafts an insert, please post it for all of us to use!
 
Interesting.

It occurred to me when this flap started that even if he had been 100% truthful and accurate in his study of probate records his data would have been worthless.

Why?

Because the tradition in most of the families I have known has always been when a parent dies the guns are unofficially divided up by the heirs long before the estate ever goes to probate.

How so?

I have known many elderly people and long before they died they have either given their guns to their children or named which child got which gun. Guns (as well as knives and precision tools) are most likely to be given as gifts of love from fathers to sons so that is would be sacrilage to leave them for some court to paw over and defame.
 
Meek & Mild - we think alike. That's the first thing I thought of when I heard of the book. It's a tradition from time immemorial to hide our wealth from the government.

The second thing that struck me is that the literacy rate of Americans along the frontier wasn't the highest. How many could write yet alone afford to pay $ for an attorney to write a will for them? Only the better propertied classes.
 
Bellesiles has a current research project in the works. He is determining with statistical accuracy the percentage of people who really DO "want fries with that?".

It will be based on personal in-depth research.

:neener:
 
IMO Knopf made itself look stupid by publishing Bellesiles' book in the first place, then went on to complete the destruction of its own credibility by attributing Bellesiles' downfall to sloppiness rather than outright fabrication. Intellectual judgment and honesty are dead at Knopf's. I haven't bought a Knopf book since "Arming America" was published. Now it's no more books for me from this publisher, ever.
 
Earlier I mentioned that publishers can reduce the profit from a book. The publisher of Bellesiles fictional work has just done that and dumped a load of his books on one bookseller. Received a newsletter from Edward Hamilton booksellers that has the latest arrivals. Bellesiles once $30 book is now $5.95. That's way too much for scratch paper.
 
I find it sweetly ironic that a book hailed as "the NRA's Worst Nightmare" upon its publication has turned out to be, instead, the Brady Bunch's Worst Nightmare.

:evil: :neener:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top