You will notice that it lacks definiteness; that it lacks purpose; that it lacks coherence; that it lacks a subject to talk about; that it is loose and wabbly; that it wanders around; that it loses itself early and does not find itself any more. --Mark Twain
Joshua Rosenau spends his days defending the teaching of evolution at the National Center for Science Education. He is also a graduate student at the University of Kansas, completing a doctorate in the department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology. When not modeling species distributions or battling creationists, he writes about developments in progressive politics and the sciences.
The opinions expressed here are his own, do not reflect the official position of the NCSE. Indeed, older posts may no longer reflect his own official position.
Thanks!
The Birth of Intelligent Falling
A failure of Intelligent Design
Why it's called Intelligent Design Creationism
Buying some music for your friends?
Or maybe some gift certificates?
Buy me things from my Amazon.com wishlist.
Buy yourself things!
Register here to join the PBA.
« In which I steal material wholesale | Main | When bad ideas strike »
Category: Policy and Politics
Posted on: October 1, 2006 11:28 PM, by Josh Rosenau
Canada.com reports the firing of a government scientist because he wouldn't refer to the government as "Canada's New Government."
We could also file this as just another battle in the war on plain language.
The scientist was fired from an unpaid emeritus position, and is appealing his dismissal.
Update: And he was reinstated.
YES! Send me a free issue of Seed.
If I like what I see, I'll receive 5 more issues (6 in all) for just $14.95. That's 50% off the cover price! If I'm not completely satisfied, I'll simply write "cancel" on the invoice and owe nothing. The free issue is mine to keep.
(Non-U.S. subscribers, click here.)
Comments
Wow. What a stupid thing to fire somebody for - a pissing match over plain language. Even for a pissing match this is pathetic.
I think "Blow it out your ass" would have been appropriate, though obviously dangerous for the career. I wonder what he said, exactly? I hate it when a detail is left out because it involved a "curse word" or it's not "politically correct."
Posted by: Aerik![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://scienceblogs.com/tfk/nav-commenters.gif)
|
October 2, 2006 12:24 AM
Here's an update, Dr. Olikitch got his position back. It also quotes the so-called undiplomatic language:
http://www.nupge.ca/news_2006/n21se06a.htm
Posted by: T. Bruce McNeely | October 2, 2006 2:17 AM
To even hint at this being evidence of some sort of "war on science" is just silly. It's got nothing to do with science at all.
"Bureaucratic overreaction" is a lot closer to the mark.
Posted by: Scott Belyea | October 2, 2006 7:10 AM
This may not be a full-blown war on science yet, but it has the potential to become the real deal. I was just complaining that these people follow me everywhere since the GOP gubanetorial candidate here in Michigan has been talking about getting creation back into the classroom. Now I'm applying for a job at the U of Alberta. Surely if I end up there the DI will declare Edmonton the new front in the international war on science. It's not paranoia if they're really following me.
Posted by: polychrome | October 2, 2006 8:32 AM
Based on this incident? That's just wrong.
The "offending" comments had nothing to do with science and the reaction had nothing to do with science. The fact that it was a scientist who spoke up is absolutely irrelevant.
If it had happened in Canada Post, would the post have been headed, "War on Mail in Canada?"?
Posted by: Scott Belyea | October 2, 2006 9:02 AM
The concern is that scientific staff are being required to toe a political line.
Posted by: Josh | October 2, 2006 9:57 AM