Monday, May 29, 2006
Were Professor Churchill a scientist, rather than a researcher engaged in social science research in ethnic studies, the equivalent would be (1) the misstatement of some underlying data�and (2) the total fabrication of other data to support his hypothesis.
If only. It's actually in the Investigating Committee's report to CU on Churchill. And, as Charles Mitchell points out, only one of five members of the committee thought this behavior warranted firing Churchill (I like Diana Hsieh's wording of the other four's behavior: "although they formed the proper moral judgment, they failed to act upon that knowledge.") Mitchell has a list of other references to Churchill's work in the report that are equally damning.