Lawrence Krauss is getting worse


He has a new book coming out, The War on Science. It does not look promising. Here’s a list of the contributors:

Dorian Abbot, John Armstrong, Peter Boghossian, Maarten Boudry, Alex Byrne, Nicholas Christakis, Roger Cohen, Jerry Coyne, Richard Dawkins, Niall Ferguson, Janice Fiamengo, Solveig Gold, Moti Gorin, Karleen Gribble, Carole Hooven, Geoff Horsman, Joshua Katz, Sergiu Klainerman, Lawrence M. Krauss, Anna Krylov, Luana Maroja, Christian Ott, Bruce Pardy, Jordan Peterson, Steven Pinker, Richard Redding, Arthur Rousseau, Gad Saad, Sally Satel, Lauren Schwartz, Alan Sokal, Allesandro Strumia, Judith Suissa, Alice Sullivan, Jay Tanzman, Abigail Thompson, Amy Wax, Elizabeth Weiss, Frances Widdowson

I don’t know all of those names, but the ones I do are just the worst. Krauss dredged the slime from the bottom of the grievance-obsessed academic shithole. I’m not going to read this trash, so I’ll let Genetically Modified Skeptic discuss what is in it.

It’s a collection of essays by people who are triggered by DEI. Screw that.

Comments

  1. nevillepark says

    Janice Fiamengo! *Obi-wan voice* Now that’s a name I’ve not heard in a long time…a long time. She’s long been one of the Not Like the Other Girls™ men’s rights activists.

    The rest are a mix of the usual culture-war suspects and people I’ve never heard of. But something about the name “Christian Ott” sounded familiar…ah! His claim to fame is being the first faculty member suspended for gender-based harassment at Caltech, in 2015. (The unpleasant details.)

    I suspect looking further into the list of authors will turn up similar gems.

  2. raven says

    I recognize about half those names.

    They are slime from the bottom of the swamp.
    The worst of the worst.
    FFS, they’ve got that fake quack, Jordan Peterson in there.

    Niall Ferguson:
    Wikipedia

    Ferguson supported the Iraq War and described himself a month after the invasion of Iraq in 2003, as ‘a fully paid-up member of the neo-imperialist gang’[139][140
    and
    Ferguson has endorsed the work of Bat Ye’or and her Islamophobic Eurabia conspiracy theory,[130][131] providing a cover comment for her 2005 Eurabia book, in which he stated that “no writer has done more than Bat Ye’or to draw attention to the menacing character of Islamic extremism.

    They’ve got Niall Ferguson in there.

    A generic far right extremist who never saw a conspiracy theory he didn’t immediately believe.

    He is always wrong about everything but his notable delusions are cheering on the Iraq war long after it became apparent that it was a huge mistake.
    He is also an Islamophobic hater, who was rattling on about how the Muslims are coming and going to overrun Europe and the USA any day now.
    Still waiting for that one and it never is going to happen.

  3. Dunc says

    FFS, they’ve got that fake quack, Jordan Peterson in there.

    Jordan Peterson is definitely a real quack.

  4. raven says

    Amy Wax Wikipedia:

    2021 and 2022 remarks on Asians, African Americans and other minorities

    In 2021, Wax wrote that “As long as most Asians support Democrats and help to advance their positions, I think the United States is better off with fewer Asians and less Asian immigration.” She claimed that Asians are ungrateful for the advantages of living in the US and vote disproportionately for the “pernicious” Democratic Party, which she called “mystifying” because the Democratic Party “demands equal outcomes despite clear . . . group differences” and “valorizes blacks.” She cited Enoch Powell while calling for stricter race-based immigration restrictions against Asians.[38][39]

    During a January 2022 interview, Wax stated that among her past students “there were some very smart Jews”, but “Ashkenazi Jews are ‘diluting [their] brand like crazy because [they are] intermarrying.'”[40]

    In April 2022, Wax said on Tucker Carlson Today that “blacks” and other “non-Western” groups harbor “resentment, shame, and envy” against Western people for their “outsized achievements and contributions.” Wax then attacked Indian immigrants for criticizing things in the United States when “their country is a shithole” and went on to say that “the role of envy and shame in the way that the Third-World regards the First-World […] creates ingratitude of the most monstrous kind.”[41]

    Wax’s syllabus for her seminar “Conservative Political and Legal Thought” that was released in August 2022 included a scheduled speech by white supremacist Jared Taylor, the editor of the white supremacist magazine American Renaissance.[40]

    Amy Wax is on there.

    She is a right wing extremist and an out and loud white racist.
    At various times, she has attacked Asians, Indians, non-Westerners whoever they are, and of course Blacks.
    Then she got upset when her employer, U. of Pennsylvania sidelined her.

  5. John Harshman says

    Is it ironic that this is coming out just as the Trump administration is in the midst of an actual war on science, much of it in the name of the anti-DEI crusade promoted by these folks?

  6. John Watts says

    I see Sabine Hossenfelder’s face among the pantheon of fallen gods. But, her name is not included in the list. I’ve watched a few of her YT videos. She’s a bit of a trip. A sensationalist desperately mugging for views with clickbait titles. She grabs popular science headlines and goes on some strange riffs. By the time she’s done, you realize you haven’t learned a damn thing.

  7. Rob Grigjanis says

    John Watts @10:

    A sensationalist desperately mugging for views with clickbait titles

    Sadly, yes. She used to be a go-to explainer. The corruption of clicks…

  8. Hemidactylus says

    I wonder if Jerry Coyne flirts again with the lab leak origin story as he’s several times done on his blog (in 2025).

    And Boghossian could again hype up the Haitians eating the cats nonsense as he’s done at least twice on his Youtube channel.

    Does Pinker march out his minimizing of the “bloody shirt” of the Tuskegee syphilis experiment again without even mentioning our STD experiments in Guatemala as he avoided in Enlightenment Now?

    Three prominent jackasses right there telling us about science.

  9. chrislawson says

    @12– Pinker didn’t just make excuses for the Tuskegee Experiment, he misrepresented the history to make it appear less obscene.

  10. says

    read some of yer examples, wotta nasty collection of creeps. might as well have gotten his old acquaintance ghislaine maxwell to write the foreword from her cell.

  11. StevoR says

    @ ^ Bébé Mélange : Slightly surprised Trump hasn’t pardoned her yet.

    FWIW There could well be a quite a few good books written on the Trump regimes War on Science and conservative regressive polititicans attacking science generally. This book is obvs NOT gunna be one of them.

  12. knut7777 says

    I stopped paying attention to that manchild after the sexual harassment business. I wish I could return the books I bought for credit.

  13. rorschach says

    Funny coincidence. Just earlier this week someone was arguing on Bluesky how many things Pinker fucked up wrt to creating an intellectual pseudorationale for some of the fash, antiscience, anti-trans and anti-women stuff happening in the US right now, and I replied by posting a pic of Krauss and Pinker with Jeffrey Epstein. People tend to forget this.

  14. says

    Let me guess: They’re concerned about how people don’t accept their wisdom on the subjects of dark matter and the use of CRISPR-CAS to develop new strains of agricultural products.

    Or maybe it’s about their views on gender and race. It’s so difficult to tell. Could really go either way.

  15. says

    What timing. How are the scientists on that list not dying of embarrassment?

    I get a feeling the authors of this magaturkey of a book were expecting a Democratic win last year; which would have enabled them to keep up the decades-old pretense that there’s a “liberal establishment” enforcing “liberal orthodoxy” and silencing good sensible conservatives who have been Just Asking Questions. And since radical right-wingers would have been defeated in that case, they could have focused attention on an ascendant “radical left” instead; and their case would have looked at least a tiny bit more plausible than it looks in this reality.

Leave a Reply