3 ms·
"There's no evidence" is a weird claim to make against a thing that is well known to have happened, to the point that it is documented on Wikipedia? https://en
by DagAgren 7y ago
"There's no evidence" is a weird claim to make against a thing that is well known to have happened, to the point that it is documented on Wikipedia?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_M._Krauss#Allegations_of_sexual_misconduct https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_M._Krauss#Allegations...
"ASU found that the preponderance of evidence suggested that Krauss had violated the university's policy against sexual harassment by grabbing a woman's breast without her permission.[30][31] As a result, Krauss was not renewed as Director of the Origins Project and the University moved its staff to a project run by planetary scientist Lindy Elkins-Tanton, formally ending the Origins project.[32]"
- Turing_Machine 7y agoThat's talking about ASU. Not the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. Once again: so what? How does that make him automatically wrong about this specific issue? I'm still not seeing a substantive rebuttal of his claims, so I'm going to conclude that you just don't have one. I think we're done here.