38 COMMENTS

  3. Alright we are on the board finally. Looks like a solid pick up, tackles well, I would like to see some more of him in coverage. Hopefully we get a snowball effect and more start giving their verbal.

    Reply

  6. From the espn website, a very positive tidbit of information.

    “Solomon attended the Beavers’ Southern California camp over the weekend and connected with the coaching staff.”

    I had no idea that the coaches conducted camps in SoCal. Smart move. Easier for LA recruits to make the trip.

    Reply

    • I’m hearing UCLA didn’t “pull” his offer. Instead, they offered him as a Plan B, and he didn’t understand that was the reality (or they didn’t explain it to him before he went public with an attempted commitment). Apparently UCLA is now in the business of “accepting commitments,” which makes about as much sense as promising to stop procrastinating tomorrow. If you’re going to offer a kid, then offer. If you’re not, then tell him.

      It looks like Solomon is coming in with a chip on his shoulder.

      Reply

    • Yeah… this is just dumb. He’s an orgo instructor (not professor) using university resources to make a case against climate change (which he still can’t decide is called climate change or global warming). And his “research” as a skeptic is about as solid as a souffle… dropped on the floor… in front of a hungry dog.
      http://chemistry.oregonstate.edu/~drapelan/Climate%20Change.htm

      It’s unfair to speculate since OSU can’t legally say anything about the dismissal. I mean, for all we know he could have been found to be in possession of another professor’s property/papers after it had gone missing from another office. And that’s not to say the info he had was damning to any research, but given his Swiss cheese approach to the subject involved, it could have been damning enough if edited his way and released.

      But that would be speculation.

      Or he could have been at OSU long enough that his work did not warrant renewal of his contract at the end of last month. Yes, he wasn’t fired. His contract was not renewed. But he knew that. There’s something to be said for a guy who is only an instructor after ten years of research at a department which is highly respected worldwide. Maybe OSU is going to fill the position with four real professors in the fall. Maybe instructors whose contracts run out are going away and real professors are taking their places.

      But that would be speculation.

      Btw… if any of you have been paying attention, UVA is going down the drain pretty quickly. Their state governor doesn’t care (about anything substantial really), and their school’s governing board won’t say why they’re crapping on their own reputation. I’m sure Nikegon honks will try to commiserate over this and the firing of Lariviere. But there’s nothing remotely similar in the two cases. But there are going to be several excellent professors on the open market due to apparent mismanagement.

      Reply

      • Btw… I don’t want to start this conversation here. If someone wants to discuss it on the forums, then I’ll be glad to supply gobs of info related to climate change. As far as the decision to not renew Instructor Drapela’s contract, there are two camps on this one (not the first hypothetical above which was to demonstrate how dumb speculation can be).

        There was an 11% decrease in funding from the state, and a research university simply cuts non-research personnel when their contracts expire.

        My father (an orgo PhD from OSU) tells me that Ed Ray is upgrading the talent across the board with some of the monies gained from recent fundraising. In addition, faculty ranks need to increase to form an infrastructure capable of supporting both increased enrollments in the future and increased peer-reviewed research goals. OSU is adding five additional tenure-track faculty members hired to the Chemistry department (four are already hired) and one senior tenure-track position who will work jointly with the College of Pharmacy. They will get a chance to continue their scientific careers using the resources provided by OSU.

        There’s that term, tenure-track. If after 10 years a single link containing their skepticism about an unrelated field posted on their OSU homepage outweighs their peer-reviewed papers within their actual field, then they might not be at OSU anymore either.

        Reply

      • Jack, while I see what side of the aisle you fall in on this one, I wouldn’t be entirely surprised if their was at least some validity to his claims. I find that the truth is often in the middle of two stories. In this case, you and Drapela both likely have truth to your statements. I remember as a student at OSU that there did seem to be some backlash from his political beliefs. Now, I didn’t know him personally so I cannot attest to why he was not in a tenure tracked position as opposed to remaining as a professor (I assume that is because until very recently OSU preferred to hire instructors because they were cheaper) but he was generally well liked and was not likely let go because he was a poor instructor. I do find it interesting that he conducted research as an instructor (most of my instructors at OSU were hired for teaching only).

        While we may never actually get the reason he was fired, I think that the political persecution is a possibility (coming from someone who doesn’t necessarily even agree with his views). During my time at OSU (2006-2010) there was often an underhanded way of doing things that persisted, especially when the topics began to fall along political lines. And while a body of evidence may stack against a professor, to fire them for research that counters the mainstream seems silly. In the name of science all research should move on, despite it’s goals, and be evaluated after the fact. Often some of the best evidence comes from research that fails to disprove a hypothesis. While not as extreme as McCarthy (if true) this does have some vague similarities.

        Reply

        • Also, the thing that bothered me most is that it occurred before the academic year ended. I think it is plain wrong because it directly impacts the students in the course. Of course, OSU cares more about its precious research than its students (this bothers me more than anything). This was an ever present understanding by all students at the university during my time. Essentially we are cattle to be herded through the courses instead of supported as we sought out opportunities to further our education.

          Reply

        • First, he wasn’t fired. His contract was not renewed. Huge difference.

          And that decision had absolutely nothing to do with his skepticism, which doesn’t even rise to the level of good blogging, let alone research. If you’ve read some of his writings on the subject, you would probably think you were reading a comment on O-live from one of their indelible contributors. The decision also likely had nothing to do with his actual performance in the position he held. It most likely and logically had to do with upgrading the position entirely. OSU is a research facility, and as such students expect and deserve to learn from people who contribute to the scientific community, not those who stay cushy with a job simply parroting the former’s work.

          Climate change is ancillary to Drapela’s actual job. And it was less important in this decision. He never conducted any research beyond compiling, editing and disseminating work done by others. He did it well in chemistry. He was beyond poor in his pet project.

          If you’re interested in true work as a skeptic, Dick Lindzen is probably the most respected. But he has faltered badly in the last couple years since he’s had to revise his work of twenty years ago to account for his being wrong. His work has become shoddy, politicized and hypocritical. I enjoyed his voice in this argument because he asked valid questions along the way. But now that he seems to be reaching he leaves in his huge wake a vacuum. It seems everyone has followed him into the abyss instead of thinking for themselves, and nobody is left to ask the good questions a true contrarian should ask.

          Reply

          • I just have to say the vigor that you are protesting shows that the emotion around his research may have been a factor here. I get it that his contract was not renewed, but isn’t it odd that his contract would not have had him finish the Spring term? I know nothing about this other than what I read and I don’t fall into the conspiracy camp but I’m with OSBeavs on this one, logic says that this probably has some amount of truth to it. In general, I’m okay with it if that is true, I think the University should be able to hire and fire pretty much at will (obvious exceptions to this, ie… discrimination, etc…). I would prefer that if it was for difference of beliefs that the administration just say it, and let the market take care of the rest. And the market is those who give the grant money to the Universities. Let’s not pretend that science and scientific research is not about the money. Again, I’m okay with that, I would just prefer that Universities not act as if they are above all that.

            Reply

          • Let’s start with the canard that he was fired. That right there should give you pause. Can you honestly believe another word of any “report” which claims this is reality?

            OSU has its hands tied. It is illegal for them to say anything about a former employee, period. This is a one-sided rant fomented by people who are historically just plain nutjobs. Even if there is any truth to it, it will be ignored for the simple fact that the nutjobs are carrying that supposed mantle of truth.

            Note that nobody has called for any sort of investigation regarding this situation. They’re just so damn sure that they’re correct. Follow-up doesn’t matter. To me that says blowhard bully.

            Where’s Art Robinson when I need him? His silly little lies would be nice to hear right about now.

            Reply

          • One’s hands are tied only if one wants their hands to be tied. It is both real policy and a cop out at the same time that permits leaders to hide hatchet jobs in with the pruning. This is a story repeated a thousand times in history. Don’t like the message, kill the messenger. Perhaps it shows we have not evolved after all.

            Reply

          • What message? If anything OSU would benefit from this guy’s “message” because he’s so ineffectual. A true conspiricist would point to us keeping him because he’s just a troll in the world of scientific commentary, and we would have easy pickings for bash opinion pieces.

            Unfortunately, skeptics of anthropomorphic climate change have wormed their way into this role as a whole. I would like them to come up with something contrarian and sound. But they’re failing more so on a daily basis.

            There is no “cop out.” If you’ve ever been a manager anywhere (read: anywhere), then you know that you can not say anything about a former employee except to verify employment dates. If OSU were to drop some nugget about why he may have not gained another contract, then they would be instantly liable for his future employment status and beyond.

            It’s fine for him to tell us why his contract was not renewed. But we still have to take it all with a grain of salt since OSU still can’t comment on whatever he says. Still, I think the hires taking place make a +1 to this equation which equals 2. They have been in the works for quite a while, and his contract has been expiring for the same period.

            You can’t tell me that he didn’t see the writing on the wall. If he didn’t, then I’m ashamed that he was an instructor at OSU in the first place. One could say that he miscalculated the condition of OSU chem faculty positions by a factor of -4… not surprising given his pet “research.”

            Reply

          • Oh… and a true conspiricist would also point to his promotion in 2008 as proof that someone who was most vocal about his pet in 2007-08 would be fired for what the junk conspiricists are saying now.

            Right now I’m thinking Biff running into the manure truck in Back to the Future is the best analogy for these dumb-fucks trying to make something out of nothing.

            Reply

          • And vigor? I’m more focused when I wake in the middle of the night and wander toward the fridge for a cold water… and see some good leftovers.

            This nonsense is only known to me because my father knows about it and discussed it with me. The conspiracy nuts are way off base and roaming beyond left field on this one. I think my alma mater deserves at least one voice in support, albeit unfocused.

            Reply

  12. I’m remembering back a few months their was talk on here that the Oregon NCAA investigation was going to wrap up in June. It’s been awfully quiet since then. Has anybody heard ANYTHING? We’re running out of June days quickly

    Reply

    • The penalties are probably something UO considers REALLY serious for them. Like they’ll be restricted to wearing only…ONLY!!!……one uniform all year in their official ugly colors, green and yellow.

      Reply

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here