NEW ETHICAL DAMNATION - BOOKS TO BE PULPED!

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
astro3
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 335
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 5:52 am

NEW ETHICAL DAMNATION - BOOKS TO BE PULPED!

Postby astro3 » 9 years 1 month ago (Fri Jul 23, 2010 7:25 am)

The Journal ‘Isis,’ the most prestigious US History of Science journal, recently reviewed ‘The Biographical Encyclopaedia of Astronomers,’ a two-volume tome. It found something so terrible about these volumes, that it advised anyone owning copies at once to return them to the publishers - the prestigious science publisher Springer-Verlag, of Berlin- where they should be pulped. (Isis 101:1 2010 pp197-8)

What could be so terrible about history of astronomy? Is this not normally quite a serene realm, detached from the world’s bitter strife? But one of the contributing authors, it turned out, was a Revisionist! He had been thrown out of his college UCL in April 2008 with a severe, internet-posted damnation by the Science and Technology Studies Department, where he had been a member of staff for 11 years.

He had contributed three biographical essays to the forthcoming volume about astronomers: one on Sir Isaac Newton (12 pages), one on the Reverend John Flamsteed (Britain’s first Astronomer Royal) and a short one on John Couch Adams (who predicted where Neptune would be found).No-one is criticising these essays. No-one has even suggested that anything in his CODOH essays is untrue. The mere fact that a science –historian has written about Revisionism appears as unbearably shocking, to the Isis journal.

The Editor of this volume did not know about these Revisionist essays - as publication had taken several years – but this was not enough to exonerate his book from this doom, of needing to be sent back to its publisher and pulped.

But why stop there, shouldn’t they be burning piles of the accursed volumes in the street?

In place of debate – to be avoided at all costs - the slur was cast that this author's Revisionist essays had linked to pro-Nazi and anti-Jewish sources. Isis did not blush at publishing that poisonous lie: ‘He defends Nazis and condemns their victims, and supports his claims by links to strident Jew-hating websites’. Revisionists are folk who aspire to a more fair and balanced account of WW2: but, as Richard Widmann wrote to me, with terrible finality, ‘If you are a Revisionist, you will be called a Nazi.’

So, 1340 pages of the two volumes need to be sent back and pulped! Merely mention of the title of my CODOH essay ‘The Auschwitz Gas Chamber Illusion’ is enough to explain this. I love it! But, I’m an optimist: I believe that in a few years from now the English-speaking peoples will allow themselves to think about the nature of the illusion perpetrated concerning the Auschwitz gas chambers: though, maybe not just yet...


Notes:
1. Hardly relevant here, but I wrote a book about the London bombings of 2005 called ‘Terror on the Tube’ and this Isis reviewer – Noel Swerdlov - brazenly averred that I had claimed that ‘International Zionism’ perpetrated this deed: again, Isis did not blush at such a shocking, barefaced lie. Nowhere on its pages can you find anything resembling this.
2. Tsar NICHOLAS was murdered on SVERDLOV's orders night of 16/17th July 1918. (now canonised - feast day 17th July NS). For red jew killing the Tsar, see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakov_Sverdlov The Editor of these astronomy-history volumes, Tom Hockey, wrote to me about all this on July 17th so excuse me alluding to this synchrony. I might check out ancestry of Noel M. Swerdlow born 1941 in LA, history of astronomy lecturer.
3. For earlier CODOH thread on my college expulsion: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=4941&p=31953&hilit=kollerstrom&sid=acf9203785b4a1c14f514cdd7eb91f22#p31953 ‘Dr Nicholas Kollerstrom a Courageous Hero’ (thank you ‘Vlad’ for that)
4. All my Revisionist essays are on this CODOH site - http://www.codoh.com/author/kollerstrom.html but recently I did one for the TruthSeeker: http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=12960

nathan
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 229
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 10:14 am

Re: NEW ETHICAL DAMNATION - BOOKS TO BE PULPED!

Postby nathan » 9 years 1 month ago (Fri Jul 23, 2010 12:25 pm)

I would be curious to see Swerdlows review

The original Wikipedia entry for Kollerstrom cited (with source) a piece by “Unity” which justified the UCL action on grounds of Kollerstrom’poor scholarship. A natural inference from Unity’s original phrasing could have been that Kollerstrom had shown poor scholarship in his professional work, which Unity had in fact not discussed. A friend of accuracy change the entry to:

Britain's Index on Censorship asked Brendan O'Neill of Spiked and "Unity" of Liberal Conspiracy to comment on Kollerstrom's loss of his fellowship in Science and Technology studies. Unity argued that it was justified because of the poor scholarship and lack of judgment evident in Kollerstrom's essays about Auschwitz.


One clarifying amendment “fellowship in Science and Technology studies” has been allowed to stand. But the crucial antithetic phrase “about Auschwitz” has been removed. The deletion has restored the implication that Kollerstrom was sacked because of defective scholarship in his own field. I myself have no idea whether or not Kollerstrom is poor scholar in his own field, and neither does Unity; if he is such, then it is odd that UCL has spent ten years not noticing the fact. But in any case that was obviously not the reason he lost his fellowship.

Thirty years ago there would have been a noisy petition of academics defending Kollerstrom’s political and professional rights. Today, not a squawk. Since then, the sway of corporate power over universities has selectively bred a professoriat of beakless chickens.

Carto's Cutlass Supreme
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2359
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 1:42 am
Location: Northern California

Re: NEW ETHICAL DAMNATION - BOOKS TO BE PULPED!

Postby Carto's Cutlass Supreme » 9 years 1 month ago (Fri Jul 23, 2010 2:51 pm)

Don't let it get you down. It's analogous to Galileo. It really is. If you know something is true, but authority is against it, and you're into science, well it's Galileo then and Kollerstrom now.

I see footnotes above, but they're not in the body of the post.

HelenChicago
Member
Member
Posts: 29
Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2009 9:58 am

Re: NEW ETHICAL DAMNATION - BOOKS TO BE PULPED!

Postby HelenChicago » 9 years 1 month ago (Sat Jul 24, 2010 9:21 am)

And, as with Galileo, years from now everyone will know Kollerstrom was right all along.
"We simply didn't know back in those benighted days what we know now."

nathan
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 229
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 10:14 am

Re: NEW ETHICAL DAMNATION - BOOKS TO BE PULPED!

Postby nathan » 9 years 1 month ago (Sun Jul 25, 2010 5:34 am)

Distinctions can be useful. It is useful to distinguish defending a right from defending a truth. As regards Auschwitz I myself am not at all persuaded by the statistical argument which Dr Kollerstrom finds so convincing. That is off the point. Like Kollerstroms views on 9/11 an 7/7, all this is absolutely no business of the UCL Astronomy specialists, nor of any ISIS reviewer of the work discussed. Similarly, even if Galileo were wrong, the Church has no authority on matters which can be settled by observation and experiment.

However, if Dr Kollerstrom were to espouse the geocentric view of the solar system then I think that UCL would have a right to let him go - but even then only on the condition that they first gave him a fair hearing.

User avatar
Hektor
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 3313
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:59 am

Re: NEW ETHICAL DAMNATION - BOOKS TO BE PULPED!

Postby Hektor » 9 years 1 month ago (Sun Jul 25, 2010 11:05 am)

HelenChicago wrote:And, as with Galileo, years from now everyone will know Kollerstrom was right all along.
"We simply didn't know back in those benighted days what we know now."

Unlike Revisionists, Galileo was given a chance to defend his point of view.

Kurland
Member
Member
Posts: 25
Joined: Wed May 26, 2010 12:20 pm

Re: NEW ETHICAL DAMNATION - BOOKS TO BE PULPED!

Postby Kurland » 9 years 1 month ago (Mon Jul 26, 2010 2:42 pm)

nathan wrote:As regards Auschwitz I myself am not at all persuaded by the statistical argument which Dr Kollerstrom finds so convincing. That is off the point.


Nathan have you looked a daftmans excellent study of the faked morgues in Auschwitz? It should answer any problems you have from Kollerstroms helpful but not decisive work.
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.ph ... 4b7356860f

This is why I think too many revisionists arent looking at things in the best possible light. They know that the holocaust is a hoax but thats it. They dont know what REALLY happened but just no what didnt. I think we must move forward on things. More on my idea can be seen in my posts about Treblinka Belzec and Sobibor.
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.ph ... 4b7356860f

nathan
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 229
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 10:14 am

Re: NEW ETHICAL DAMNATION - BOOKS TO BE PULPED!

Postby nathan » 9 years 1 month ago (Mon Jul 26, 2010 3:51 pm)

Even if Dr Kollerstrom were proved entirely wrong to put so much weight on a single t-statistic when discussing the chemistry of Auschwitz, I say it would have no bearing on his right to employment as a historian of astronomy. But as far as I can see there is nothing in daftmans thread to show that Dr Kollerstrom was wrong about this or any other matter.

The subject here is the persecution of Kollerstrom for expressing revisionist views. Mr Daftman’s thesis can surely be pursued on his own thread by those who understand it.

TreeHuggingHippie
Member
Member
Posts: 10
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 3:47 pm

Re: NEW ETHICAL DAMNATION - BOOKS TO BE PULPED!

Postby TreeHuggingHippie » 9 years 1 month ago (Sun Aug 01, 2010 10:41 pm)

Here is a PDF of the book review: http://drop.io/kmmmsxq/asset/82533-pdf

nathan
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 229
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 10:14 am

Re: NEW ETHICAL DAMNATION - BOOKS TO BE PULPED!

Postby nathan » 9 years 1 month ago (Tue Aug 03, 2010 4:52 pm)

Treehugginhippie has joined up expressly to bring us the words of Swerdlow. Rare benevolence. Unfortunately my View and Zoom buttons are of no avail here. Is there another trick which can enlarge PDF print as microscopic as this? By squinting from two inches I was only able to make out some of the concluding paragraph.

The gist is that the editor who included the article in the collection was unaware that Kollerstrom had crossed a line in his extra-curricular activities. Nevertheless the inclusion of the article cannot be excused. Since a line has been crossed, though not within this article, the volume containing the article should be withdrawn and pulped.

TreeHuggingHippie
Member
Member
Posts: 10
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 3:47 pm

Re: NEW ETHICAL DAMNATION - BOOKS TO BE PULPED!

Postby TreeHuggingHippie » 9 years 1 month ago (Wed Aug 04, 2010 12:16 am)

Nathan -- just use the download button to the right. Or click "full screen" above the document.

By "crossing a line", I assume you are talking about Kollerstrom's dissenting views on the Holocaust. I disagree, I don't think his articles on Astronomy should be judged by how much of the Holocaust he buys into. That's dark age thinking.

User avatar
Occam's Razor
Member
Member
Posts: 85
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 7:45 pm

Re: NEW ETHICAL DAMNATION - BOOKS TO BE PULPED!

Postby Occam's Razor » 9 years 1 month ago (Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:37 am)

TreeHuggingHippie:
By "crossing a line", I assume you are talking about Kollerstrom's dissenting views on the Holocaust. I disagree, I don't think his articles on Astronomy should be judged by how much of the Holocaust he buys into. That's dark age thinking.


I think nathan only summarized what Swerdlow said in his article. He didn't say that he agrees with him.

nathan
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 229
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 10:14 am

Re: NEW ETHICAL DAMNATION - BOOKS TO BE PULPED!

Postby nathan » 9 years 1 month ago (Thu Aug 05, 2010 8:47 am)

I was summarising Smerdlow's opinion, which years ago would to most academics have seemed self-evidently wrong and even, to a vocal minority, outrageous. Swerdlow has clearly found nothing in Kollerstrom’s three articles to warrant withdrawing and pulping the volume

The worst that Swerdlow can say that is the articles are undistinguished, and one of them has old-hat ideas about Newton’s originality. The worst that can be said is certainly what will be said. After Faurisson became famous for his extramural activities, the word went around that his work on French literature, which had earned him some distinction, was not really up to the mark after all. I would take a small wager that after 1976 people also started saying the worst that could be said about Butz’s technical writings, finding shortcomings in that work which had hitherto gone unnoticed.

Kollerstrom does not control the presses in this country. Anyone who thinks that he voices crackpot ideas in his spare time will not lack outlets to say so. Swerdlow’s only relevant accusation is that Korherr is an astrologer. The common understanding of this would surely be that Kollerstrom thinks the position very distant objects, far outside our solar system, can exert a predictable influence on individual destinies on this planet. If Kollerstrom does think that, then I have to concede that UCL may have had a case for him to answer. If he does not think that, then he would have every right to sue.

astro3
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 335
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 5:52 am

Re: NEW ETHICAL DAMNATION - BOOKS TO BE PULPED!

Postby astro3 » 8 years 3 months ago (Thu Jun 16, 2011 3:52 pm)

The journal Isis published a rebuttal to the Swerlow review by Emeritus professor Jim Fetzer - which affirmed that honest investigation of 'the H' was OK! That's in the current issue.
That should surely have been the end of the matter - but no: Swerlow was allowed a further vicious and untruthful attack upon me. In the course of that he started attacking Jim Fetzer - maybe a mistake! I was absolutely refused permission to reply to this second out-of-the-blue polemic against me.

So Jim F. has made a blog out of it, in his inimitable style: http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/

He calls for the resignation of the Isis editor....
I suspect that the editor of Isis may be in trouble here.
After all the book being reviewed is about 1400 pages with over 400 contributors and well over 1000 bios of astronomers are contained in its two large volumes. And Isis says it should be PULPED - just because some Jew is offended by the views of one of the contributors.

Jim concludes:
In my opinion, Nicholas Kollerstrom was savaged by N. M. Swerdlow, not for offenses against the history of science, but for transgressing boundaries that are intended to protect sacred myths from refutation. In Swerdlow’s view, Kollerstrom deserved to be pilloried, not for his entries in an encyclopedia about astronomers, but for doing something that is forbidden--conducting scientific research on the Holocaust. And not even the Editor-in-Chief of ISIS has been willing to grant him a fair shake.


The debate is also ongoing at 'The Education Forum' a big-hitting US site:
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index ... ntry228844

Jim is the author of over twenty books, mostly academic: http://www.d.umn.edu/~jfetzer/

James H. Fetzer
Member
Member
Posts: 11
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2011 3:41 pm

Re: NEW ETHICAL DAMNATION - BOOKS TO BE PULPED!

Postby James H. Fetzer » 8 years 2 months ago (Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:51 pm)

Glad you created this thread. The right link to reach this blog specifically is

http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2011/06 ... falls.html

For those who have not yet read my piece, here is the final section of the blog:

THE BIOGRAPHICAL ENCYCLOPEDIA OF ASTRONOMERS, of course, is a collaborative academic publication from Springer, one of the world's leading publishers of technical and scientific journals and books, which has an enormous number of contributions from a very large number of contributors, where its Table of Contents, http://www.springer.com/astronomy/astro ... 87-31022-0 is simply staggering. Swerdlow faults the volume for having a few entries of which he does not approve. But that appears to be highly selective on his part and a very cheap shot.

These are not issues about which the authors are remotely likely to be unqualified. Swerdlow’s review—even apart from his attack on Nick—appears to be suspect on its face. And how could anyone in their right mind allow Swerdlow’s suggestions that libraries not purchase the volume and that it ought to be pulped to stand without vigorous protest, even if one of the contributors has an interest in research on subjects that some—perhaps even most!—may disapprove? What kind of standard is that? How is that being fair to the contributors, the editors, or the publisher? That is a disgrace.

There are some 1,550 entries in the encyclopdia, which were authored by 430 scholars, of whom Nick Kollerstrom is only one, under the supervision of an Editor-in-Chief and a team of six associate editors. I would be willing to conjecture that a significant proportion of them may well have vices of their own, such as addictions to alcohol, pornography, adultery, S&M, or who-knows-what other practices of which public disapproval may be widespread. Should those authors be ferreted out and have their entries abolished, too? No, let’s just pulp the whole book!

I am reminded here of the occasion on which I first became involved in serious research on the assassination of JFK. It was in mid-1993 and I was lying in bed, drinking a cup of coffee and reading the paper, when my wife came in and said, “You won’t believe this!”, while turning on the TV. The image appeared of a distinguished man in standing behind a lecture with the logo of the American Medical Association, who was denigrating every serious student of the assassination from Mark Lane and Robert Groden to David Lifton and Charles Crenshaw.

He was especially caustic in attacking Oliver Stone’s “JFK”, which offers the most comprehensive, accurate, and complete depiction of what actually happened in Dealey Plaza on 22 November 1963 ever presented to the American people through the mass media. The person turned out to be George Lundberg, M.D., Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of the AMA. I was stunned that someone of his stature would appear to be abusing the journal for political purposes and citing interviews with the autopsy pathologists as though they were science. That convinced me that perhaps some of us with special backgrounds and abilities should become involved.

Swerdlow’s abuse of his position has similarly convinced me that, once again, if those in positions of authority are abusing them for political purposes, some of us who might not otherwise have become involved in questions of this kind also have an obligation to pursue them. The issues involved are as important as they could be for the defense of academic freedom and freedom of inquiry, especially about controversial historical events. If the Holocaust is a reality, as I believe, then responsible research should confirm it; and if it is not, we are all entitled to know.

Perhaps the ultimate irony concerns the ethics of Swerdlow’s review. The essence of morality is treating other persons with respect. But by recommending that the other contributors, the editors, and the press should be punished for the perceived sins of one of the contributors, he is promoting the practice of collective punishment, contrary to the laws of war and the Geneva Conventions. It was even condemned by the Nuremberg Tribunal in the prosecution of Nazi war crimes. In his zeal to condemn Kollerstrom for pursuing research on the Holocaust, therefore, Swerdlow has gone off of the deep end and committed an intellectual offense that is arguably even worse, which thereby exposes the immoral core of his own position.

The Egyptian goddess, Isis, after whom the journal is named, was long worshiped as the matron of nature and of magic. She has been described as the friend of slaves and sinners, by some accounts, which makes her name all the more appropriate here. In my opinion, Nicholas Kollerstrom was savaged by N. M. Swerdlow, not for offenses against the history of science, but for transgressing boundaries that are intended to protect sacred myths from refutation. In Swerdlow’s view, Kollerstrom deserved to be pilloried, not for his entries in an encyclopedia about astronomers, but for doing something that is forbidden--conducting scientific research on the Holocaust. And not even the Editor-in-Chief of ISIS has been willing to grant him a fair shake.


James H. Fetzer, Ph.D.
McKnight Professor Emeritus
University of Minnesota Duluth
http://www.d.umn.edu/~jfetzer/
Founder, Scholars for 9/11 Truth
http://911scholars.org


Return to “'Holocaust' Debate / Controversies / Comments / News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 3 guests