Bipartisan means it would be more than just telling a politician what he wants to hear, as is the case here. And do you notice nothing was ever done to the SI or its staff for the supposed wrongs? Kind of hard to push a full congressional investigation based on BS.
the conspiracy existed.
No, a bunch of his coworkers loudly complaining about him existed. That's not a conspiracy, it's your coworkers not liking you and being quite vocal about it for a good reason -- malfeasance in publishing the article. Poor baby, not well liked by his peers for what he did. Boo hoo.
Shall I take this consistent refusal to show a wrong done to Sternberg as admitting that the SI never actually did anything to him for his beliefs? Are you admitting that the movie lied?
Only you can consider a conspiracy against a person as something beneficial.
The emails clearly show that management was being very careful where Sternberg was concerned for fear of exactly the kind of unfounded outrage that was perpetrated by the DI. Remember, one email showed an SI employee offering to sponsor Sternberg just so he wouldn't be made a martyr. Such an offer wouldn't have been made had it not been for Sternberg's beliefs. Thus he got special consideration because of his beliefs.
NCSE HAS ABSOLUTELY NO BUSINESS CONTACTING THE SMITHSONIAN FOR ANY REASON CONCERNING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN STERNBERG AND THE INSTITUTION.
Talk about your red herrings. And even in the biased report it looks like the NCSE was on the level. They distributed materials to their members and the members of the Society that runs the journal refuting the Meyer article and Sternberg's claims. Many of those members are also SI employees and associates, which is probably why I originally thought the Society was directly related to the SI. The institutions of science are pretty intertwined. Then the SI went back to the NCSE for input.
And all this talk about limiting his freedom of speech is complete BS. A scientist gets a position at the SI by virtue of his standing as a scientist. As a scientist, anything he says, anything he does, anything he publishes in relation to science is part of his standing as a scientist. The SI definitely has an interest in such things and would of course go to the source of the problem for information. Had Dr. Hwang Woo Suk been an SI Associate, do you think it would have been wrong for the SI to contact Seoul National University concerning the problems over his stem cell research?
Wrong. There are two reports. One before the Congressman got involved. The fully documented one was the last one done by the staff. And your opinion remains your opinion. The fact that two indepentdent agencies came to the same conclusion indicates you are blowing smoke.
No, a bunch of his coworkers loudly complaining about him existed.
BULL! NCSE is not a co-worker.
Shall I take this consistent refusal to show a wrong done to Sternberg as admitting that the SI never actually did anything to him for his beliefs?
Well, I'm taking your refusal to see the facts presented in the two investigations as an asinine denial. What you consider as just a little hostility, is against the law when conducted against a government employee. The email traffic indicates the religious discrimination. What saved the Smithsonian is that Sternberg was not an employee. But a similar treatment to an employee would have resulted in head rolling. He was reduced to an RC from an RA after the controversy.
The emails clearly show that management...
NCSE is in no way connected with management. Their intrusion into the relationship is a de facto indication of a conspiracy.
Talk about your red herrings. And even in the biased report it looks like the NCSE was on the level
Blithely attempting to brush off the fact that NCSE has no reason to be involved. Repeat all you want. The fact still remains that NCSE HAS ABSOLUTELY NO BUSINESS CONTACTING THE SMITHSONIAN FOR ANY REASON CONCERNING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN STERNBERG AND THE INSTITUTION.
And all this talk about limiting his freedom of speech is complete BS. A scientist gets a position at the SI by virtue of his standing as a scientist.
Sternberg got a "position" at SI. He retained a "position" at SI, even though the "position" was a "demotion" caused by the conspiracy. That is plain fact. And if NCSE was concerned about science they should have pursued Axelrod with the same rigor as they did for Sternberg whose only "sin" was to allow the publication of an article counter to the dogma promoted by NCSE.