Dr. Eric R. Pianka's side of the story. (Scientist being smeared.)

[Heidi]

The University of Texas professor who teaches Evolutionary Biology (and thus is described by fundies as a "lizard expert") was interviewed by KRIS TV in Corpus Christi, and he tells a _very_ different story than what has been reported by The Drudge Report and discussed at DU.

Excerpt:

But Eric Pianka said Monday his remarks about what he believes is an impending pandemic were taken out of context.

"What we really need to do is start thinking about controlling our population before it's too late," he said. "It's already too late, but we're not even thinking about it. We're just mindlessly rushing ahead breeding our brains out."

(snip)

Pianka said he was only trying to warn his audience that disease epidemics have happened before and will happen again if the human population growth isn't contained.

He said he believes the Earth would be better off if the human population were smaller because fewer natural resources would be consumed and humans wouldn't continue to destroy animal habitats. But he said that doesn't mean he wants most humans to die.

Please read and think for yourselves, DUers. http://www.kristv.com/global/story.asp?s=4720802

Edited to add: Yesterday's discussion here in GD: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=827024&mesg_id=827024

[xchrom]

i didn't see it -- did his remarks cause a flamefest here?

[Heidi]

2. Lots of people accepted at face value

the original article from a less-than-credible news source. (Some DUers did question the OP, though.)

Here's the original DU discussion: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=827024&mesg_id=827024

[xchrom]

14. wow -- that was one of the more bizzare flamefests

i've read.

one wonders if the original story should have been allowed up in the first place?

piankas actual words should speak for themselves -- if someone smears him -- as happened in the original thread -- then THAT should have been the story.

[Heidi]

15. I totally agree.

But, sadly, even we liberals sometimes are too lazy to do the footwork that it takes to construct an informed opinion.

[BrklynLiberal]

109. See a direct quote from Dr. Pianka at bottom of thread.

[Swamp Rat]

1. Thank you!

:kick:

I'm tired of the Mims/Drudge gossip and propaganda. :eyes:

[Heidi]

3. It's a round-the-clock battle

against the master manipulators, isn't it, my friend? (Very nice to see you. :hug: )

[Swamp Rat]

6. Yes it is.

That is why I rarely get enough sleep nowadays.

:hug:

[Heidi]

37. .

I just wrote to Dr. Pianka and asked him for a transcript of the speech. :thumbsup:

You get some rest, my friend.

[melody]

4. I'm inclined to think he's back-pedaling at the speed of sound

Hate as I do to suggest there's an iota of truth in ANYTHING Drudge writes, Eric Pianka's specific comments are hard to spin any other way. I don't know how one could interpret them differently given any "different context" and I tried, given I have a great deal of respect for his field.
I think he was using gallows humor that someone didn't understand. It's one thing to say that sort of thing around people with whom you have rapport, but another to say it to a student body with the press present. He got caught being cynical and stupid.

[Heidi]

5. Why do you think he's back-pedaling?

I believe he gave a scenario in which a pandemic could wipe out 90 percent of the earth's population. Denser populations as more susceptible to fast-spreading contagians. Why wouldn't we want to do all we can to prevent that?

Also, it burned me up to hear Dr. Pianka being described as a "lizard expert" when, in fact, he's a widely respected biologist.

[melody]

9. Because he's known for having a black sense of humor

His remarks were not merely that this might happen, but that he championed the fact. I think he got spanked and maybe rightfully so. That's all the non-scientific community needs is cynical crap like that to use against science.

[Heidi]

10. I'm going to write to him

and ask for a transcript of his remarks. I'd like to decide for myself.

[melody]

12. I think that's a good idea n/t

[Heidi]

22. Done.

I sent him a courteous email about five seconds ago. :hi:

[melody]

26. I think we need to be aware though ...

That Pianka's memory is liable to be as distorted as Mims'.

I should think it would be unfair to determine one to be more correct than the other simply because we prefer that point of view.

[Heidi]

31. I was a journalist for 25 years.

I know how to read a transcript. But thanks for the warning.

[melody]

34. Please don't take this so personally

It's a logical discussion, nothing more. I didn't intend to hurt your feelings. I'm sorry if this is a sensitive topic with you.

Probably best to let the matter be.

[Heidi]

35. It's only sensitive because I saw scads of DUers

dogpile a scientist on the basis of an article from a less-than-credible news source (Citizen Scientist), without any inquiry as to what the truth of the matter might be.

If you have access to some of Dr. Pianka's academic papers or other published research, I'd be very eager to read them, and grateful to you for sharing them.

[theHandpuppet]

39. Um... I have a question

You all do know that Forrest Mims is the editor for the Citizen Scientist?

[Heidi]

40. Makes no difference to me.

He's also a fundamentalist Christian who says he doesn't believe in evolution, and I believe he's crucifying a respected scientist on the cross of Creationism. Also, Mims claims to have an audiotape of Pianka's speech, and I'd like to know why he hasn't released it in support of his criticism against Dr. Pianka.

[theHandpuppet]

41. I think you misread my post, Heidi

I believe the very fact that Mims, Pianka's critic as well as an anti-choice and anti-evolution advocate, is editor of this "Citizen Scientist" only lends credence to my suspicions that the inital reports weren't accurate. People keep quoting this report from "Citizen Scientist" as if it's a reputable source, without noting that Mims is its editor! Mims has his own agenda and in some areas his science is tainted by his fundamentalism. I'm in full support of your posts!

[Heidi]

43. .

Check your PMs. I think I'm wound up about someone pretending to be an editor when in fact he just prints his own editorial views on the front page of his website. :puke: Mr. Mims needs to release the transcript that he's holding back as a means of manipulation. Can you say "passive-aggressive"?

Here, have a Swiss kiss: :*

[theHandpuppet]

48. Yes, we're all still waiting for transcripts

But I think all we're going to get is Mims' interpretation of events. Some scientist!

Oh, and the "Citizen Scientist" appears to be little more than Mim's version of a vanity press.

Thanks for the Swiss kiss -- now how about some of that Swiss chocolate? :9

[Heidi]

55. .

Check your PMs. ;)

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

59. Point that last sentence right back atcha. -nt

[slaveplanet]

20. Mims was all over radio yesterday

saying he has a tape of the lecture. So we will soon see if the good doctor Pianka was just giving a scenario of a pandemic, or if he was advocating one as a solution as Mims suggests. Things should be clearer soon enough.

[Heidi]

36. I'll be very interested in reading a transcript of that tape.

Thank you for the heads-up, slaveplanet.

[slaveplanet]

38. If he doesn't come up with it now

after going on record, we'll know if he's full of it.

I'll keep an eye out for it.

[EstimatedProphet]

47. How do you advocate a pandemic that wipes out 90% of all people?

Seriously? How could someone go about working out the technical difficulties of making a disease kill off 5 1/2 billion people?

[slaveplanet]

87. that's what Mims is charging

says Pianka was almost euphoric with the idea.

Technical difficulties?-I've no idea, but apparently there were microbiologists in the hall.
I'll have to wait for the transcript for context.

[EstimatedProphet]

92. The fact that Mims is charging it

means it's false

From Wikipedia, a neutral source:

The Pianka controversy

In 2006 Mims expressed concern with the lectures of scientist Dr. Eric Pianka. In these lectures before the Texas Academy of Science, Mims alleges that Planka advocated genocide by means of the ebola virus to exterminate 90% of the human population<4>. Mims disapproved when the Texas Academy of Science awarded Pianka with a plaque naming him "2006 Distinguished Texas Scientist". Pianka has stated that Mims took his statements out of context and that Pianka was stating what would happen if present trends continue and was not in any way advocating for it to happen. No other sources have as yet confirmed Mims's version of events. <1>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forrest_Mims

[slaveplanet]

94. Yes most of that 's true

except for in the radio interview he indicated that there ARE other parties that have come forward, and that unbeknownst to Pianka a recording was made, and that the tape will be forthcoming publicly.

There is an edit button on Wiki, and I suspect many will make use of it if they have the chance.

[Canuckistanian]

42. His reputation is based on work with lizards

That's nothing to be ashamed of.

[Heidi]

82. He's also an expert in integrated biology and evolutionary biology.

I think it's the "evolutionary" thing that has Christian extremists' neuticles inflamed.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

13. Do you have any credible source giving us his exact remarks?

[Heidi]

16. I'm writing him an email to ask for a transcript

or copy of his notes for that speech.

Great username, by the way. :thumbsup:

[melody]

24. I'm going to drag some together later and post them

Pianka has a rather bent sense of humor (I do, too, so I can sympathize), but we have to be very careful when we're
making such remarks around literal thinkers.

When I post them later, you'll be able to see the room for misinterpretation, but Pianka still said what he was quoted to
say.

[fishwax]

96. which of his comments do you mean, exactly?

Eric Pianka's specific comments are hard to spin any other way. I don't know how one could interpret them differently given any "different context" and I tried, given I have a great deal of respect for his field.

I haven't seen any quotes of his that would require backtracking on his part. In the articles I've read, Pianka is quoted as saying rather ambiguous things, and then the really juicy tidbits are provided in summaries by the writers. So if you've seen some particularly egregious quotes from Pianka's speech, I'd be interested ...

[theHandpuppet]

7. Here's an article on Forrest Mims, Pianka's vocal critic

I think some of you might find this quite interesting.

http://www.christianitytoday.com/tc/2005/001/19.46.html

[Heidi]

8. Thank you so much for helping to debunk an obvious smear

of a credible scientist. :thumbsup: I'm gonna read your article _now_. Did you post it in the Science Group's discussion of the Pianka smear? http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=228&topic_id=19287&mesg_id=19287

[theHandpuppet]

18. Not yet -- but I will

The near-hysterical smearing of Pianka is really getting on my nerves. I didn't really expect this kind of reaction here on DU of all places.

Do some research, people!!!!!

[melody]

11. Mims didn't put the words in his mouth

Mims is a fundamentalist but that's only part of the story. A more discriminating mind would have put the comments in context, but Pianka was still flapping his gums.

[Heidi]

17. A scientist giving an acceptance speech on the occasion

of having earned a scientific award is "flapping his gums"?

[melody]

29. We have to stop idolizing science

Just as religion should stop creating iconic god figures out of their own neuroses.

We're all just humans, with good and bad aspects in each of us. So yes, Pianka was
flapping his gums.

[Heidi]

33. I don't idolize science.

I'm a rational human bean, melody. That's why I've not taken personal potshots at either of the scientists under discussion here.

[EstimatedProphet]

50. LOL

"Flapping his gums"?

This was a SCIENTIFIC FORUM, not the Academy Awards. It wasn't there to be recorded. Scientific meetings are private-you pay to go there. Press hardly ever shows up at them, because there's nothing there for them.

[Heidi]

62. Wow.

Was that a wedgie? Cuz it _read_ looked like a wedgie.

[theHandpuppet]

19. And Mims wasn't?

Ever heard that what one person says and what another hears can be completely different yet neither of them is lying? Mims' fundamentalism, particularly when it pertains to matters of science, would certainly make me question his interpretation of Pianka's remarks.

[melody]

21. Both are the case

There are specific quotes attributed to Pianka from other sources that echo Mims' general comments.

>Ever heard that what one person says and what another hears can be completely different yet neither of them is lying?

So much so that I wrote a paper on it. :) But the specific comments in a speech are hard to misinterpret when they are as black-and-white and focused as Pianka's are in this.

I think both are the case -- Pianka stuck his foot in his mouth and Mims' couldn't make a fine distinction to save his life. And
I made both points in my comments also, which were there to be read by the careful reader.

[Heidi]

23. What are the other sources quoting Pianka?

Links?

[melody]

25. As I said in another post ...

I'll look them up and post them later. I don't know of any online sources. Most of these are journal related.

I think we need to give both men the benefit of the doubt and not merely leap to the conclusion that one is evil
and the other is good. I suspect something in the middle is more the case than not.

[Heidi]

28. I've not seen evidence that either man is evil.

But I have seen evidence that indicates that one is a scientist with a Creationist agenda, and the other is a scientist who spoke at a meeting of scientists. I haven't seen Dr. Pianka attempting to smear Mims, but if you have seen such material, I'd like to read that, too.

[melody]

32. Pianka hasn't tried to smear Mims that I know of

However, Pianka is tending to back-off comments which I think he made in some form. No one can know until we have
an audio tape and even then every individual will have a different interpretation.

Mainstream scientists can be just as hardline and fundamentalist-thinking as Creationists. Science (at all levels)
is nothing more than a complex primate dynamic (but what human activity isn't).

[BurtWorm]

67. "Mainstream" scientists do not usually argue for genocide

That should have been clue one to anyone that the quote was taken out of context. (Actually clue one is that right-wingers are up in arms over it.)

[EstimatedProphet]

95. No, science is a little more than that

Science is a way of applying a logical foundation to our world-experience. Trying to say it is in the same class as religion is patently false. Religion is based on faith. By definition religion cannot be proven. Science is by definition proven.

[Heidi]

112. How's your research coming along?

I'm curious to know what you've learned of Dr. Pianka, since he's now getting death threats as a result of the unsubstantiated allegations levied by Mims, who _ still_ has not released the audiotape that he claims to have of Pianka's TAS speech.

It's interesting, I think, that Mims is the one who has made these claims against Dr. Pianka, and so it's incumbent upon _him_ , rather than Pianka, to substantiate his claims by releasing a transcript. Otherwise, I would think that Dr. Pianka would have a very tidy libel case, since the burden of proof is with Mims.

So, what'd you find out?

[fishwax]

97. but even Mims doesn't offer any outrageous quotes from Pianka

Here, in their entirety, are the "direct quotations" from the speech in Mims's article:

“What good are you?”

“We're no better than bacteria!”

“We've got airborne 90 percent mortality in humans. Killing humans. Think about that.”

“And the fossil fuels are running out,” he said, “so I think we may have to cut back to two billion, which would be about one-third as many people.”

“You know, the bird flu's good, too.”

“We need to sterilize everybody on the Earth.”

"I speak to the converted!"

"...because they deceive the public in every way they can to stay in power."

"Smarter people have fewer kids." He said those who don't have a conscience about the Earth will inherit the Earth, "...because those who care make fewer babies and those that didn't care made more babies." He said we will evolve as uncaring people, and "I think IQs are falling for the same reason, too."

Notice how none of these quotes says anything like what he claims. Notice how the controversial comments are all part of Mims's summary, not part of his direct quotations. To wit: After praising the Ebola virus for its efficiency at killing, Pianka paused, leaned over the lectern, looked at us and carefully said, “We've got airborne 90 percent mortality in humans. Killing humans. Think about that.”


But despite his apparently meticulous notes, Mims can't quote Piankin actually praising Ebola. Bummer.

They laughed again when he proposed, with a discernable note of glee in his voice that, “We need to sterilize everybody on the Earth.”

Once again, Mims is ascribing emotion/endorsement to Piankin that he simply can't demonstrate with the man's words.

So even if his quotations are an accurate reflection of what Piankin said, there's really little reason to accept his interpretation of Piankin's speech as accurate or authoritative. Indeed, one would think that if Piankin actually said what Mims claims he said, Mims might be able to quote him saying it.

[The Stranger]

68. Fundamentalist Christians are most likely concerned about BIRTH CONTROL.

As Christians, Forrest and Sarah believe that an intelligent Creator designed the universe, and that therefore they can learn more by looking at it as a planned creation rather than a cosmic accident. For example, Sarah suspected that the fungus that turned up in her samples was not there by chance. Fire is one way that fungus is designed to spread. Scientists who follow this approach are part of a growing movement in science called Intelligent Design.

[blindpig]

27. Thanks, Heidi.

A fine display of the right wing propaganda machine this is. The reaction here is saddening, I don't know where it comes from. Is the anti-science bias so ingrained in Americans that it can pop up anywhere? That would explain some of the effectiveness of their propaganda. Or is it that many reject the idea of human overpopulation and are willing to believe the worst of any who bring this issue to the fore?

I contacted Dr Pianka yesterday asking for a transcript. I expect hat he's busier than a one legged an in an ass kicking contest right now. If I get a response I'll post it post haste.

[Heidi]

30. I just wrote to him, too!

And I gave him the links to the DU discussions on this matter. If a transcript is available, I'd like nothing more than to be able to post it and let DUers decide for themselves. In any event, I find it sort of reprehensible that a credible scientist is being villianized for expressing _ideas_. I don't know that his ideas are dangerous, but I think we're _all_ safer if dangerous ideas are made to withstand public scrutiny. :thumbsup: Wish that had happened with Bush's call to war.

[Celebration]

46. Transcript available but not being distributed

I am wondering why not!! I agree, a lot of this would be settled with a transcript. I hope you can get it. I would love to see it. Even with a transcript two different people might read it different ways, but at least we can make up our own minds.

http://www.kristv.com/global/story.asp?s=4720802

David Marsh, president of the Texas Academy of Science, did not return telephone and e-mail messages seeking comment. No recording or transcript of either that speech or another delivered last Friday at St. Edward's University in Austin was available for review by the AP. The Gazette-Enterprise said it reviewed a transcript of the original speech, which was provided on the condition that it not be distributed.

Is there another censorship concern?

http://seguingazette.com/story.lasso?ewcd=bb5a122cfbeab898&page=2

Until recently, Pianka’s university Web site detailed evaluations from past semesters indicating some former students believed the professor was, in deed, advocating “90 percent of the population should die of ebola.” But Monday afternoon, the evaluations were removed.

Archived copies of the pages can be found at http://web.archive.org/web/20050304073851/http://www.zo.utexas.edu/courses/ bio357/357evaluations.html .

“Pianka has crossed over into that rare category of scientist who serves as lightning rod,” McGee said. “His claim is stupid, irresponsible, and casts doubt in the minds of the public on what it is that scientists like him do in the first place: It makes people wonder whether or not every scientist with a big beard, who worries about the biological balance of the earth, is actually planning a holocaust of the kind Pianka appears to want”

[EstimatedProphet]

51. Maybe you have to pay for it

People, this is a SCIENTIFIC MEETING! They sell the transcripts to defray the cost of the meeting. They are never free!

[Celebration]

53. Any evidence that the transcript is for sale?

Just wondering........

[EstimatedProphet]

54. Yes

Selling the transcripts after a scientific meeting is standard procedure.

[Heidi]

57. I'll buy it.

EP, I totally respect you as one more familiar than me with these procedures. Please contact me with any info you might have about how I can buy the transcript. Mr. Mims, who first made these self-serving accusations against Dr. Pianka, claims to have an audiotape of the TAS speech, but he has not released it. If anyone else has access to a transcript, I'll pay for it and share with DU. :thumbsup:

[EstimatedProphet]

77. They have a copy of the program here:

http://www.texasacademyofscience.org/annualmeetingprograms.aspx

But a fast search doesn't bring up a transcript of his comments. Hang on...

[nashville_brook]

44. just look at how this story has spread like kudzu in the last 48 hours...

it's a smear on environmentalism in general. so glad to see some rationality come around.

[BlooInBloo]

45. You mean he DIDN'T actually want to exterminate the population?

:sarcasm:

What a bunch of suckers on DU.

[rman]

49. I suppose that means you are not a DU-er

[BlooInBloo]

52. Your logic escapes me.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=834530&mesg_id=837701

[Heidi]

56. Do you generally support progressive ideals?

That's the salient question here.

[BlooInBloo]

58. ROFL! No it's not.

So there!

As if I have to prove my lib-cred to the likes of YOU.

Not.

[Heidi]

60. That _is_ the salient question at DU.

Do you generally support progressive ideals, or not?

If you don't recall that this is among the criterion for being a member, perhaps you ought to review the rules. :hi:

[BlooInBloo]

61. What a bizarre person you seem to be...

The notion that my liberal-ness is in question is laughable.

The notion that I have to answer to YOU is asinine.

All for no reason.

(shrug) Go find a mod if you like - I'm happy for him or her to decide, if you really wanna pursue this...

[Heidi]

63. I'm not calling you out.

But when you refer to DU'ers in the third person, you raise questions. Nothin' personal.

Welcome to DU, by the way. :hi:

[Viking12]

64. He is referring to the "suckers" that continue to accept the swift-boating

of Pianka. He's got a point, there are many of them and they are vocal. Pointing out that a segment of the population here has fallen for propaganda has nothing to do with his liberal creds.

[BlooInBloo]

66. Watch out!

Are you now or have you ever been a member of the freeper-ist party???

Well?

Have you?

HAVE YOU????


:rofl:

[Viking12]

70. Unfortunate that you were misunderstood...

and had to face such a line of questioning.

[BlooInBloo]

72. In the words of the immortal Kid Rock....

It's all good, and it's all in fun... Now get in the pit and try to love someone!

Cheers!

[Heidi]

74. Oh.

Not sure how any of us would have known that, but OK.

[The Stranger]

65. Here is a blog containing a report from someone who witnessed the speech.

http://brenmccnnll.blogspot.com/2006/03/dr.html

Dr. Eric R. Pianka, University of Texas at Austin:

"There's a place called Three Trees. One night, some cold, poor fellow went out and cut down those trees to build a fire. The trees are gone now, but we still call the place Three Trees. And that's how we do things."

"Snakes behind glass are like words in a book out of context. They have no habitat, no reality, no context. The snake may as well be dead."

"Technology has only gotten us out even further on thin ice."

"We've made wild animals very valuable and humans very cheap."

Dr. Pianka was named the 2006 Distinguished Scientist by the Texas Academy of Science. He's an ecologist, a "doomsday ecologist" as he puts it, with a CV several pages long and results that have changed the way ecologists think, forever. And damn is he ever entertaining to listen to.

Dr. Pianka's talk at the TAS meeting was mostly of the problems humans are causing as we rapidly proliferate around the globe. While what he had to say is way too vast to remember it all, moreover to relay it here in this blog, the bulk of his talk was that he's waiting for the virus that will eventually arise and kill off 90% of human population. In fact, his hope, if you can call it that, is that the ebola virus which attacks humans currently (but only through blood transmission) will mutate with the ebola virus that attacks monkeys airborne to create an airborne ebola virus that attacks humans. He's a radical thinker, that one! I mean, he's basically advocating for the death of all but 10% of the current population! And at the risk of sounding just as radical, I think he's right.

Humans are far too populous. We've used up our resources, and we're destroying the Earth at an accelerated pace. The more technology we create, the more damage we're capable of doing. We now consider keeping the forest natural to save a species of catepillar more important that using that space for humans to live and till. And I'm in complete agreement with that. It's the harsh reality that many people alive right now should be dead. And even harsher to think that the world would be better off with them dead too. My grandparents, who I love dearly and am so incredibly thankful to know, are honestly being kept alive only through the technology that we have created via medicine. The same goes for the millions of other old folk alive and kicking and will continue to do so for another 5-10 years, using up more resources. Or think of all the babies being born every hour with abnormalities that 50 years ago would have kept them from living. Now, those lives can be saved, and we pat ourselves on the backs at how smart and charitable we are as a species that we can create and sustain life. For those against cloning, etc because it's "playing God," how is this any different?? Life has a built-in mechanism that keeps species from becoming too overpopulated, and it wasn't until humans started messing with the system that it went out of whack. Now that we've killed off the majority of all top predators, we now must take on the duty of keeping populations in check and at the same time, allowing other species a fair chance at reproduction.

It wouldn't have been so bad 15-20 years ago when we reached that threshold of sustainability if we as humans would have learned to control our population size then. But instead, we saw the Earth's resources as unlimited and our authority over them exclusive, and we continued to reproduce when we should've stop. Dr. Pianka made a very profound comment during his presentation; he said that China has the right idea by limiting reproduction at 1. We're past the point of replacement reproduction as a species. We're too many for the number we're at now! We need to decline in population. A virus is probably the fairest method of extermination (though still not completely fair, I admit) because it's nondiscriminatory as to whom it targets. Rich, poor, black, white, brown, nice, mean, religious, agnostic - we'd all be targeted equally. The only difference is who can afford medicine and even then, if it's a mutated virus that strikes fast, humans would have only the tiniest of a chance to find a cure in time so money wouldn't matter.

It'd be nice if humans could learn to manage our population as successively as we've learned to manage the population of literally every other species on this planet with whom we share. We're very skilled when it comes to killing off deer, snakes, rabbits, and fish for population control. But we're a stupid species when it comes to managing ourselves. An insightful observation was made during the talk that education should be the key to learning how to take care of the Earth, but the problem is that the educated have fewer children and the uneducated have many children. So eventually, the uneducated will take over the Earth. It may have already happened.

[BlooInBloo]

69. One quibble with his reasoning....

He says that due to birth rate, the uneducated will inheirit the earth. The conclusion doesn't follow (which is NOT the same as saying it's false).

The uneducated ALSO have a higher death rate than the educated - and it's an unanswered question in his speech whether or not that evens things out vs the educated. Maybe it doesn't - but until that lacuna is filled, his conclusion doesn't follow.

Thanks for the info tho!

[The Stranger]

73. By "educated" he appears to mean understanding overpoplation consequences.

It does not appear to be a statement regarding demographics or people who get letters after their names.

Then again, that is a version provided by the blogger, so "educated" may be his/her choice of words.

[BlooInBloo]

78. (shrug) Fine - I didn't say anything about letters after one's name...

... Only about an unaddresses potentially mitigating factor affecting the validity of an inference he drew.

I DID, however, assume that the blogger was providing a quote from the speaker - that may have been a mistake on my part....

[SoCalDem]

71. Pianka or NO Pianka

Humans have neared extinction before..Just because we have scientific knowledge now, we are not protected from everything that Mother Nature decides to serve up.

At SOME point, therejust WILL be too many people to be sustained, and things will change to "correct" that imbalance. It's happened before, and no doubt, will happen again.

[Heidi]

75. I have a friend who says,

"Gaia takes care of herself," and I believe that to a certain extent, though I don't believe it absolves us of our obligation as rational creatures to control our population and consumption of natural resources. :hi:

[SoCalDem]

80. Very true, and equally sad

since the "conservers" will also feel the effects of the "gluttons"..Mother Nature does not didcriminate when it comes to pandemics and ecological disasters:(

[wtmusic]

76. I don't understand what's at issue

He's telling the truth--maybe looking at the dark side. Some people just need an excuse to get their panties in a wad.

[Beacho]

79. Holy Crap Too Wierd

I just got the whiff of this story today and sent an email to the guy telling him what the RW blogosphere was saying about him

text of email:

"Dear Professor Pianka

Recently I stumbled across an article, on the right wing blogosphere, that accused you of making some extreme statements in a presentation at the Texas Academy Of Science held from March 3rd-5th.

This is the link to the first site I found this article
http://bamapachyderm.com/

It links to this article, authored by a Forest M. Mimms
http://www.sas.org/tcs/weeklyIssues_2006/2006-04-07/feature1p/index.html

The author states that you made the assertion that Ebola should be used to wipe out 90% of the human population, as well as some other comments, and that you received a standing ovation for said comments.

I only ask for confirmation of these comments(I hope for a refutation).

As you must certainly know, the right wing is at war with science and such comments would be pure gold in their quest to frighten their followers about 'dangerous professors'.

I appreciate any response you can give me"

Dudes probably getting deluged as we speak

[Heidi]

81. I wrote to him, too.

But I don't expect an answer, given the firestorm that Mims has created. Incidentally, I find it interesting that Mims, who wrote the original article in the Citizen Scientist (of which Mims also is the editor, I learned, thanks to DUer theHandpuppet), also claims to have an audiotape of Dr. Pianka's remarks. I wonder why Mims hasn't released a transcript of the speech, since Mims is the one making accusations against a widely respected biologist. Seems to me, when one is making such serious, fear-mongering allegations, it's incumbent upon the accuser to back up his or her statements.

[BrklynLiberal]

83. Thank you for posting this.

Some additional rationality on this subject is greatly appreciated.

I linked to this thread in another one also calling for some common sense.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=837828&mesg_id=837971

[BrklynLiberal]

84. DailyKos link on this subject

http://feeds.dailykos.com/dailykos/index?m=3337

[Call Me Wesley]

91. Great Link!

Thanks for posting this!

[Beacho]

85. Here's the bunghole who started this whole mess

[e-mail]

sending my nasty gram right now

[Beacho]

86. Need a judgement call

I wrote up an email because this jack ass cannot go unchallenged:


{i}"...regarding the prof from UT Austin. Maybe you don't realize this or maybe you just don't care, but the article that you posted attacking Dr. Pianka has not only resulted in harassing, threatening emails and phone calls to him, but has affected the members of the Texas Academy of Science as well. In your article you state that Dr. Pianka 'endorsed' the release of the Ebola virus to eliminate ninety percent of the population. I suggest that you make public the recording, you claim to possess, of these statements and the resulting 'standing ovation' by other members at this awards ceremony. If you do not, or if you have mischaracterised this event, I then suggest that you retract your statements and call off the drooling, basement dwelling, misfits that answered your call for internet 'jihad'.


If it is proven that you perpetrated this act knowingly and with malice of forethought, then let me give you a preview of what awaits you on the 'internets'. Basically you will become an 'internet celebrity', wherein you will be mocked, humiliated, and your 'scholarship' will be gone over with a fine tooth comb, all of which will provide amusement to thousands. You will then face two choices, fight 'teh internets'(not wise) or crawl back under the rock you came(the best you'll get). Unless you're a craven attention whore or a massive persecution complex(likely) and relish this prospect, the best hope to avoid your coming 'celebrity' is to retract your article and call off aforementioned basement dwellers.


I actually hope that you don't choose the latter because frankly as an avid fan of Interweb drama I'm looking forward to the many lulz provided by your poor choices, the eyes of teh internets are upon you

Sincerely"



I'm a little hot headed right now and would like a second opinion

[Heidi]

98. Second opinion:

I hope I never piss you off. :rofl:

:thumbsup:

[Beacho]

88. *kick* for need of a response

thanks

[BrklynLiberal]

89. I would guess that he knowingly started this controversy

He wanted it for his own agenda that probably involved some publicity for himself, and some general anti-evolution, anti-ecology, anti-global-warming, anti-birth control passion to be aroused among his fellow creationists.

Maybe Dr. Pianka just happened to be the first target who happened to voice something that was a good source for his "editorial" pulpit.

This guy is known as a "scientist" but appears have no very creditable scientific training. His degree was in English if I remember correctly.
I am sure he is sitting in his den laughing his ass off at the turmoil he has created. That was his exact intention. After all, had you ever heard of him before this?

I think Forrest Mims III started all this, but it was Carlson who gave out addresses for protests after reporting second hand on hearsay evidence.
http://www.sas.org/tcs/weeklyIssues_2006/2006-04-07/feature1p/index.html

[BrklynLiberal]

90. Forrest Mims III : Condensed CV

CONDENSED CV

UNIVERSITY DEGREE THE ONLY ONE

Bachelor of Arts, Texas A&M University (major in government with minors in English and history).

MILITARY SERVICE

United States Air Force air intelligence officer (Vietnam) and development engineer (Laser Division, Phillips Laboratory).

GOVERNMENT SERVICE

Appointed by Guadalupe County, Texas, Commissioner's Court as Air Quality Advisor and to represent the court on the AIR Technical Advisory and the AIR Advisory Committees of the Alamo Area Council of Governments (AACOG). Citizens Organized for Good Science is an important advocate of objective, high quality science by government agencies like AACOG.

TEXAS ACADEMY OF SCIENCE

Vice-Chairman, Environmental Science Section (2002-2004)

Chairman, Environmental Science Section (2005-present)

AWARDS

2005: Benjamin Franklin Citizen Scientist Award

1993: Rolex Award for Enterprise, Laureate (for a Global Network to Measure Ozone)

1993: Design 93 Engineering Achievement Award, Second Place (for a Miniature Instrument That Measures the Ozone Layer)

1987: Rolex Award for Enterprise, Honorable Mention (for Eyeglass-Mounted Electronic Travel Aid for the Blind)

1986: Best General Nonfiction Book, Computer Press Association, runner-up (for "Forrest Mims’ Computer Projects,"Osborne/McGraw-Hill, 1985)

1985: Best General Nonfiction Book, Computer Press Association, runner-up (for "Siliconnections," McGraw-Hill, 1985)

1972: Industrial Research 100 Award for Developnment of One of the 100 Most Significant New Technical Products of the Year (for Hand-Held Infrared Travel Aid for the Blind)

WRITING AND EDITORIAL ASSIGNMENTS

Jul 1970-present: Independent scientist, consultant and free-lance writer and photographer

Dec 2003-present: Editor of Society for Amateur Scientists E-Bulletin

Oct 1998-present: Columnist for Seguin Gazette-Enterprise

Nov 1994-1997: Contributing science writer for World

Nov 1990-Jan 1993: Editor and columnist for Science Probe!

Apr 1991-Mar 1992: Columnist for Computercraft

Oct 1984-Mar 1991: Columnist for Modern Electronics

Jun 1990-Oct 1990: Columnist for Scientific American

Mar 1984-Mar 1985: Columnist for Computers & Electronics

Oct 1975-Feb 1984: Columnist for Popular Electronics

Sep 1969-Nov 1970: Columnist for Model Rocketry

SELECTED CONSULTING ASSIGNMENTS

1980: National Geographic Society (proposed and assisted in development of exhibit in Explorer’s Hall recognizing invention of light-wave communications by Alexander Graham Bell)

1992-1998: Consultant, TERC, Inc., Cambridge, Massachusetts (develop high school educational curricula)

1995-2000: Consultant, Concord Consortium, Concord, Massachusetts (develop high school educational curricula)

1995-2001: Consultant, National Science Teachers Association (Finalist judge Duracell Competition and present teacher’s workshops on using atmospheric monitoring instruments)

1996-present: Consultant, Solar Light Company (technical advice; calibrate instruments which measure ozone and aerosols)

Aug 1995-Dec 1995: Consultant, Goddard Space Flight Center, NASA (measured smoke effects from widespread burning in Brazil) Oct 1996-Dec 1996: Consultant, Goddard Space Flight Center, NASA (measured smoke effects from forest fires in Western USA)

Aug 1997-Dec 1997: Consultant, Goddard Space Flight Center, NASA (measured smoke effects from widespread burning in Brazil)

May 1998-present: Co-Principal Investigator, GLOBE (international network of 8,000 schools in 83 countries).

October 2000-2001: Consultant for comparison of atmospheric water vapor measurements from satellites and the surface, Space Science and Engineering Center (SSEC), University of Wisconsin.

March 2004-present: Site operator for USDA UV-B and visible wavelength shadowband radiometers installed at Texas Lutheran University by Colorado State University.

TEACHING ASSIGNMENTS

1993-present: Teach experimental Earth science once or twice each year at the University of the Nations (Kona, Hawaii, and Lausanne, Switzerland).

1994: Distinguished visiting lecturer in the physical sciences, Colorado Christian University.

1994-present: Workshops on various aspects of hands-on science for secondary school science teachers.

1980-1982: Developed, wrote textbook and taught at various cities "A Practical Introduction to Lightwave Communications" for the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers.

1970-present: Numerous talks on journalism and science at various universities, government meetings, service clubs, churches and both public and private secondary and primary schools.

[theHandpuppet]

93. Mims' specialty is electronics

He is an amateur scientist/inventor and has written several popular books on electronics. Granted, he has a real talent for electronics but when the man starts infusing his religious beliefs in other areas of science, I draw the line.

[alarimer]

105. Why is this guy a director of the Texas Academy of Science?

He is no scientist. He is a nutball creationist with NO credentials. He does not belone at an Academy of SCIENCE. But it is Texas so I suppose that is part of the reason.

[theHandpuppet]

110. Why is George Bush our President?

Beats the hell outta me. I think I'll do a little digging.

[theHandpuppet]

111. Does he say he's the director of TAS?

Because all I could find on the TAS website is Mims listed as a Vice-Chair in Environmental Science. http://www.texasacademyofscience.org/section.aspx

Also found this interesting tidbit at Wikipedia:
Mims disapproved when the Texas Academy of Science awarded Pianka with a plaque naming him "2006 Distinguished Texas Scientist".

Sounds like Mims has a bit of an ego problem.

[alarimer]

116. No I think I got it wrong

But what I want to know is why is there at all. Vice-Chair in Environmental Science? Sure he is an Environmental scientist like John Stossel is an environmental reporter. I've been following the discussion at http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula
Pretty cool blog for science types. I think someone here mentioned it first.

[Beacho]

99. Update

My serious condition of NTCS(Need To Cause Shite) overwelmed me within the first five minutes of posting for a second opinion and I sent the email in question(too late now). While many promising treatments for my condition are readily available, the failure of the passage of "Hillary Care" has left me without recourse.

I thank you, in advance, for your understanding

:evilgrin:

[Heidi]

102. Troublemaker.

We need more like you. ;)

[MaraJade]

100. Seems he is right, however poorly he framed the issue. . .

We have increasing numbers of children who are orphaned, mostly due to war or disease, yet people continue to
reproduce in the face of dwindling resorces in many areas.

The latest is that drinking water supplies are running short in many places, yet people continue to reproduce.

Sooner or later the natural tipping point will be reached. It has nothing to do with what anyone wishes.
The sheer weight of humanity on this planet will bring it about.

Too bad.

[Heidi]

103. Dr. Pianko makes several valid points,

and I take into account that he's a scientist, rather than a celebrated member of Toastmasters International. ;)

It seems to me what he was arguing is that our overpopulation makes us vulnerable to the ravages of a pandemic, and with that I would not disagree.

[countryjake]

101. Is Mims the guy trying to prove that dinosaurs were on an ark...

during a flood which created the Grand Canyon?

Thanks for speaking truth to dimwittedness.

[Silver Gaia]

104. In following some of the links posted here, I found an article by Pianka

himself posted at his website that may of interest to some here. I think it explains his position quite well, and it seems to be nowhere near what Mims tried to portray so sensationally, IMO.

What nobody wants to hear, but everyone needs to know

Eric R. Pianka

I have two grandchildren and I want them to inherit a stable Earth. But I fear for them. Humans have overpopulated the Earth and in the process have created an ideal nutritional substrate on which bacteria and viruses (microbes) will grow and prosper. We are behaving like bacteria growing on an agar plate, flourishing until natural limits are reached or until another microbe colonizes and takes over, using them as their resource. In addition to our extremely high population density, we are social and mobile, exactly the conditions that favor growth and spread of pathogenic (disease-causing) microbes. I believe it is only a matter of time until microbes once again assert control over our population, since we are unwilling to control it ourselves. This idea has been espoused by ecologists for at least four decades and is nothing new. People just don't want to hear it.

Population crashes caused by disease have happened many times in the past. In the 1330s bubonic plague killed one third of the people in Europe's crowded cities. Smallpox and measles decimated Native Americans when Europeans transported them to the new world. HIV is a relatively new disease wreaking havoc in Africa and Asia. Another population crash is inevitable, but the next one will probably be world-wide.

More here: http://uts.cc.utexas.edu/~varanus/Everybody.html

[BrklynLiberal]

106. Thanks for posting this. And taking the time to find it.

:thumbsup: :hi:

[Heidi]

113. Thank you a million times.

Mims is an avowed academic enemy of Dr. Pianka, and I don't find it surprising that a Christian extremist (and that's _exactly_ what Mims is) would seek to spark his own career by offering as a sacrifice a dissident (but widely respected) scientist like Pianka. Mims = Pond scum. :grr:

[Silver Gaia]

115. You're very welcome! And thank you.

If I hadn't happened upon this thread and started surfing using the links here, I wouldn't have run across it.

[BrklynLiberal]

107. kick

Because there are still those who have not heard Dr. Pianka's side of this story!

[BrklynLiberal]

108. delete

[Roland99]

114. Thank you!

[Silver Gaia]

117. Link to transcript of Dr. Pianka's speech

as reported today in The Gazette-Enquirer of Seguin, Texas:

http://www.seguingazette.com/story.lasso?ewcd=3817403731ee3d74&page=all

Looks to me like he was definitely misquoted.

[Heidi]

118. Thank you, Joolz!

Great find! :thumbsup: I'm reading the speech now.

[Silver Gaia]

119. Clarification: From what I understand, this

is not a transcript of THE actual speech in question, of which no actual transcript or recording may exist, but it is a transcript of one of Dr. Pianka's presentations during this same time period, and Pianka has said that this transcript represents the general tone and outline of the presentation Mims mischaracterized. (I was not aware of this at the time I posted this link, but The Gazette-Enquirer did apparently publish it as a response to all the brouhaha surrounding Pianka's speech, and, I would think, possibly at his request.) In other words, this represents the presentation he had prepared and was using at this time, which makes sense, since it is time-consuming to plan and write such a lecture as this, and it would be used many times during a given period of time. I am wondering if perhaps Mims chose to write up his smear using the particular speech he did precisely because he knew there would be no recording or transcript to refer to later.

Has anyone been able to find any credible reports from someone in attendance at the TAS event in question? I've seen one from Dr. Kathryn Perez with Duke University that seems credible to me, but nothing from anyone else, save one questionable report repeating the same memes as Mims (yet claiming to support Pianka) from a blogger that I think may already have been linked in this thread.

I am very concerned about this issue in regard to the targeting of academics and scientists by right-wing ideologues and right-wing religious fanatics.

[slaveplanet]

120. TRANSCRIPT 109th TAS meeting March 3 2006

Heidi, I told you upthread that a transcript would be forthcoming, well, here it is.

Transcript From the Speech That Started It All
Dr. "Doom" Pianka Speaks

Exclusive -- April 6, 2006: Relying on a transcript from audio recorded during Dr. Eric Pianka's presentation at the 109th meeting of the Texas Academy of Science March 2-4, The Pearcey Report has first-hand documentation on what the controversial ecologist said regarding a number of issues, including taxes, children, forced sterilization, overpopulation, economic growth, and more.

(...)

This is not new intellectual territory for the professor. A Fall 2004 student evaluation from the University of Texas says, "Though I agree that convervation biology is of utmost importance to the world, I do not think that preaching that 90% of the human population should die of ebola is the most effective means of encouraging conservation awareness."

Another student comment from Fall 2004 says, "I don't root for ebola, but maybe a ban on having more than one child. I agree . . . too many people ruining this planet."

That student may not be rooting for Ebola, but as Jamie Mobley reports, Dr. Pianka has supporters. One of them attended Dr. Pianka's Texas Academy of Science lecture and posted these comments online afterward: "Dr. Pianka's talk at the TAS meeting was mostly of the problems humans are causing as we rapidly proliferate around the globe. While what he had to say is way too vast to remember it all, moreover to relay it here in this blog, the bulk of his talk was that he's waiting for the virus that will eventually arise and kill off 90% of human population. In fact, his hope, if you can call it that, is that the ebola virus which attacks humans currently (but only through blood transmission) will mutate with the ebola virus that attacks monkeys airborne to create an airborne ebola virus that attacks humans. He's a radical thinker, that one! I mean, he's basically advocating for the death of all but 10% of the current population! And at the risk of sounding just as radical, I think he's right."

http://www.pearceyreport.com/archives/2006/04/transcript_dr_d.php/

[blindpig]

121. Nice source

:sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm:

You expect a christofascist link to be credible in this dispute?

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[slaveplanet]

122. I have no control over where It's hosted

MIMs said he recieved a copy of the recording , and Heidi was asking for it.
I imagine he will be playing the tape on air soon, as that's what he was saying earlier in the week...in the meantime, this is all there is.

and FTR I don't subscribe to MIM's interpretation.

for instance he is not saying kill 90% of population, but rather - It kills 90% of those infected...big difference.

There's much I believe MIMS gets wrong



DR. PIANKA TRANSCRIPT
From Recorded Audio at speech, March 3, 2006
Texas Academy of Science

Note: Brackets indicate possible wording. Two sets of remarks follow. Set 1 is based on audio from the speech itself. Set 2 is from the question and answer period that followed.

SET ONE: From the Speech

. . .

We've got an airborne 90 percent mortality human killing . Think about that.

Now, so far, it’s been down, down, down. Let’s start up. But we can’t get up very far.

Aldo Leopold is one of the greatest ecologists of all times. He was really the first conservation biologist.

And here’s quotes from Aldo. If you haven’t read his Sand County Almanac, I encourage you to read it.

(...)