Matt Barrow"

There are plenty of profs who are controversial.

Controversial, sure; psychotic, is a whole different story. The braindead
nature of many propfs, now with tax funded tenure, is evident all through
our society.

How has the frequency of psychosis been determined? And, although I don't
doubt that the dumbing down of the educational system in general (every
child left behind), I haven't seen a decent alternative to tenure that would
allowed the truly gifted (and productive) a way to continue creating and
pass on knowledge. Up the tuition?

Unless they're saying something politically incorrect, they
don't get much attention outside the ivory tower. Do you really believe
that this guys students are going to be unable to think their way through
anything he says?

Some do, many do. It's the nature of learning. While his spew generated
attention THIS time, it's not unusual in any sense.
He's not a commentator, he's ostensibly a _teacher_.

And students are _learners_. So they must learn what their teachers say.
Right? Look, in anything but hard sciences, and even then some, much of
teaching is commentary. Otherwise, why have teachers at all?

Or just the outrageous stuff?

As before, this isn't his only instance and it sure as hell isn't the only
instance, by far, in that loony bin they call _academia_.

And who do you suggest should draw the line? You clearly think there should
be one.


Google Gary Schwarz. Or Nobel laureate Brian Josephson. Both
whackos.

And their influence on the young people is...what, exactly?

They'll be influenced by bull**** pseudoscience.

Are these guys teachers/professors?

Yes. Scharwtz at Arizona, Josephson at Cambridge.

Bad profs unduly influencing the sponge-like minds of both undergrad and
grad students?

So, let's just let the status quo run?

To criticize is to volunteer. Suggest something.

moo