The Report’s In On My Old Buddy Ward

And it ain’t pretty:

Based on the foregoing, the Committee finds by a preponderance of the evidence that: (a) Professor Churchill has engaged in research misconduct with respect to Allegation A regarding the General Allotment Act of 1887; and (b) that such research misconduct was not and could not have been inadvertent and therefore was deliberate. Specifically, the Committee finds by a preponderance of the evidence that…

And believe me there’s a lot of evidence that ensues.
But in sadly typical fashion, in spite of all the evidence showing his completely fraudulent nature as a ‘scholar,’ they can’t bring themselves to say “fire the bastard.” No, the committee splits and splinters on this and can not resist saying that “the only reason we’re investigating him is because of the bruhaha about his WTC remark. Damn you Bushhitler for attacking free speech. And don’t question our patriotism.” Disgusting. Here’s yet another example where people bloviate about respect and integrity yet refuse to enforce any sort of standards that give such terms any meaning or worth.
(h/t to No Brainer)

8 Responses to “The Report’s In On My Old Buddy Ward”

  1. John says:

    Mr. B. – did you read Big Arm Woman’s take on this? (I can’t link, for some reason her site is blocked @ work).
    The two that recommended the longer without pay suspension admitted that this was grounds for dismissal, they were just uncomfortable with dismissing a tenured prof. But isn’t tenure based one one’s research record, and if that record is fake, wasn’t the tenure application fradulent? Chickens@#ts.
    But since the two in the longer suspension camp did admit that he could be fired for the offence, you can add them to the ones that did recommend firing and get a majority for dismissal, so Colorado can get rid of him while maintaing an argument against those who defend tenure at the expense of honesty.

  2. Mr. Bingley says:

    No, I didn’t see that. Early in this blog’s life I had a bunch of Ward posts: here, here, here,here, here, here, here, here, and here, all of which link to a lot of stuff about the sole reason this guy got tenure in the first place: he claimed he was an american indian. He only has an MA, for gosh sakes, and that from a school that is somewhat suspect itself (I don’t remember which link goes into the story of that). He is a poster boy for affirmative action excess.
    Hmm, I was a little obssessed on this, no? Wonder why…

  3. Ken Summers says:

    Volokh has several great posts about it, including one aspect that few (none that I’ve seen) others have noted: he hanged himself on one of the allegations by his claim that he ghostwrote the pieces he was accused of plagiarizing – those two pieces were the only “independent” sources he referenced.
    Irony is a beautiful thing.

  4. nobrainer says:

    So… as long as I can get tenure before I get caught, I’ll be ok, right? Right?

  5. The_Real_JeffS says:

    Well, nobrainer, you’ll need to adopt the facade of a brainless leftoid first. Otherwise, yes.

  6. nobrainer says:

    You all are racists!

  7. Ken Summers says:

    Well you’re a little Eichmann!

  8. Kathy K says:

    Big Armed Woman’s take:
    “I would, however, like to point out to the unfortunate commenter crowing about Churchill’s “authoritative body of work” that citing your own (plagiarised) work in support of your own (plagiarised) work does NOT, no matter how fondly you may wish it, make your work “authoritative” in any way. At least not on planet earth.”
    At least…that’s the part I liked. Full rant here.

Image | WordPress Themes