4 ms·
He’s a hack. Most people in quantitative genetics think he’s a hack. He’s still a fully tenured professor making a lot of money & free to choose his research ag
by skosuri 6y ago
He’s a hack. Most people in quantitative genetics think he’s a hack. He’s still a fully tenured professor making a lot of money & free to choose his research agenda. It’s just that he shouldn’t be head of research and really amazing faculty have left at least in part because of him.
- blisterpeanuts 6y agoAre you a grad student at MSU?
- skosuri 6y agoNo. I’m faculty though and some of my best friends and colleagues are or were faculty there. I also research quantitative genetics. Been hearing the back story for years; many fear him and he threatened retaliation against some of my friends who were junior faculty.
- ylem 6y agoSorry to hear that. How much power did he actually have to damage someone's research career?
- amznthrowaway5 6y ago> many fear him and he threatened retaliation against some of my friends who were junior faculty Do you have real examples? These types of accusations are meaningless without real data. If they are real, I'd like to know the actual threats.
- bJGVygG7MQVF8c 6y ago> He's a hack In the same sense of "hack" used in "Hacker News", sure, perhaps. A pattern that's repeated itself multiple times in the history of science is mathematicians and theoretical physicists showing up in other fields and making groundbreaking discoveries that end up re-orienting the field. It's not at all surprising that incumbents would object to the competition, fault the 'interlopers' for not working within accepted paradigms, or just not have the background to fully understand their projects in the first place.