“REPORTER MISREPORTED NOBEL SCIENTIST TIM HUNT’S WORDS TO SMEAR HIM AND GET A #SOCIALATTENTIONWHORING STORY GOING,” Ace of Spades writes:
Unbelievable. According to a third-party EU official, and Sir Tim Hunt himself, she took words out the context, and concealed the fact that Hunt’s remarks were jokes at his own expense.
The Guardian has now heavily re-edited this Social Attention Whore’s story to make it less defamatory — but the Guardian doesn’t alert you to that, contrary to its own claimed rules.
Hunt has now resigned from his important work in cancer research. And this Social Attention Whore got her scalp.
New revelations about the speech and the context of the joke have surfaced. An account of a European Commission Official who took detailed minutes of the event adds key information absent from the original report:
According to the new account, Sir Tim started with: “It’s strange that such a chauvinist monster like me has been asked to speak to women scientists” which makes clear he mocking sexism, rather than indulging in it. St. Louis reported this as Hunt simply admitting: “he has a reputation as a male chauvinist.”Immediately after the now infamous joke, according to the new evidence, he proceeded to make several very pro gender equality remarks, including: “Now seriously… Science needs women and you should do science despite all the obstacles, and despite monsters like me,” which was similarly disregarded in St. Louis’s twitter report.
Hunt has already protested that he added, “now seriously” to indicate the joke was over.
The Daily Mail is now vetting this #SocialAttentionWarrior, Connie St. Louis, and finding lots of troubling facts.
Troubled by Sir Tim’s fate, a collection of eminent scientists, including eight other Nobel Prize winners (and several senior female academics) chose to speak out publicly in support of him. Many professed outrage that, in the echo-chamber of social media, a single careless remark, just 37 words long, could apparently derail the career of a pioneering scientist.
Hey, these days all it takes for a SJW to derail a leading scientist’s career is his wearing the wrong shirt. Read the whole thing, and then follow the link to the London Daily Mail article — a publication that St. Louis claimed to have written for, and yet according to the author of the above piece, the newspaper can find no evidence of her contributions in their archives or accounts payable department.