If your question is how do you evaluate whether something like this is a joke, then why don't we start by considering the fact that Shivers has a distinguished

If your question is how do you evaluate whether something like this is a joke, then why don't we start by considering the fact that Shivers has a distinguished and successful track record of a capable scientist and advisor that spans more than a quarter century? A joke written 20 years ago does not erase this. It's really this simple folks: it is irresponsible to go around say dumb things like "never take this person as an advisor because they are literally crazy" when we have demonstrable proof that they are more than capable in that regard. I don't see why this is controversial.