Hacker News Reader

>> So we un-person this individual and start to dis-credit his work, not based on its merit, but because of the creators "moral character".

There was no "un-person" ing and no dis-crediting of his work. He was dismissed from his position at CERN. His work is not retracted and he will continue to publish.

It would be interesting to see the slides of the other presentations given at the meeting. I'm quite sure that most agreed with the orthodoxy. But did any of them present data?

And if they did, how did they handle it? Compared (say) to how carefully they would handle data from their own field.

Lol

Firstly, the guy isn't qualified to make such a sweeping statement about the opposite sex. So before we even step into the problems with why it's a dumb idea to say such things, lets just make it clear that he's a physicist and not an anthropologist, biologist, or sociologist.

We definitely care about his moral character, but it's also just flat out incredibly naive to discredit women in his field when they've been playing catch-up for years due to cultural boundaries in the sciences.

Any scientist who steps out of their lane to attack another gender or race deserves every bit of what they get. It's cowardly to use your position as a scientist in a completely unrelated field to justify your hatred for some other group of humans.

Moreover, the guys history is terrible. He's got a chip on his shoulder about women and unethically chose to use his platform as a CERN scientist to exercise his anger.

Would he be qualified to state that men and women are equally skilled at physics? Surely you would need the same credentials to determine that.

> Einstein and many other prominent scientists I'm sure that they could find plenty of issues with their moral character as well.

The question has been raised as to whether Einstein's wife Mileva Marić made an uncredited contribution to his work.

People sometimes make very elaborate and well-reasoned arguments that seem enormously persuasive but turn out to be based on dubious axiomatic assumptions. Your suggestion that science might be slowing down because we're not being nice enough to jerks seems pretty questionable. Surely, if this were true, the jerks could all just get together an out-science everyone else, Ayn Rand style, and everyone else would be forced to admit their fundamental superiority. We'll never know unless they try.