The CardBoard

Full Version: Stanford needs to fire Scott Atlas
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3
Or the Hoover Institute does.

The guy is a raving lunatic not only advocating for the whole country to get sick, but now for people to ignore the efforts of a Governor - who was the target of a kidnapping and assassination plot already - to protect her citizens. Atlas is a totally trash human being who stains Stanford's reputation.  Is someone starting a petition to fire him from all Stanford association?  If not, why not?




And just to further trash his credibility...


(11-16-2020, 01:04 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote: [ -> ]Or the Hoover Institute does.

The guy is a raving lunatic not only advocating for the whole country to get sick, but now for people to ignore the efforts of a Governor - who was the target of a kidnapping and assassination plot already - to protect her citizens. Atlas is a totally trash human being who stains Stanford's reputation.  Is someone starting a petition to fire him from all Stanford association?  If not, why not?




And just to further trash his credibility...



Well said. I agree.
I know some Stanford docs on campus and they are "horrified". They are PO'ed beyond belief that the general public thinks he's a Stanford doc. He left almost 10 years ago to pursue his interest in health policy. He was apparently an ok guy, but is totally out of his league in addressing a pandemic, they say.

Question: How much power does the Hoover Institute have over its "members"?
(11-16-2020, 02:23 PM)oregontim Wrote: [ -> ]
(11-16-2020, 01:04 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote: [ -> ]Or the Hoover Institute does.

The guy is a raving lunatic not only advocating for the whole country to get sick, but now for people to ignore the efforts of a Governor - who was the target of a kidnapping and assassination plot already - to protect her citizens. Atlas is a totally trash human being who stains Stanford's reputation.  Is someone starting a petition to fire him from all Stanford association?  If not, why not?




And just to further trash his credibility...



Well said. I agree.

And once again, I remind everyone that Atlas wrote an opinion piece in March using the trash Ab seroprevalence paper (Ioannidis + other Stanford/USC people) as why US will have maybe 10,000 dead from COVID-19.  If you're on record having missed the mark by 24x currently and probably much much more by the time this is over, one would hope you pause and self-reflect about how you reason & choose source material.

I personally would like to know more about the whistleblower and potential Stanford investigation on those initial papers.  Based on the independent COVID-19 Testing Project numbers and the whistleblower's bringing up Boyd's ELISA tests, I suspect they cooked their specificity measurement so results wouldn't undermine what they said on the Fox and other news appearances they had been doing for a while before that study got released.  Knowing academia, though, I imagine Stanford will bury it.
I find Scott Atlas’s views to be as harmful and wrong as anyone, and I find his conduct to be as odious as anyone, but I don’t know that these would qualify for grounds for dismissal for an academic.

What I found most troubling is the wording — to call for Michigan residents to “rise up” against a governor — the same governor who had been targeted by a militia group.

After criticism, Atlas claimed he never meant actual violence — as planned by the militia — and that he would never NEVER support or call for violence, to which, my answer is, WTF do you think “rise up” means and connotes in his language. I am sick and outraged by people playing with dangerous language and imagery and then claiming they were misinterpreted. They are irresposnsible, full of sh*t, assh*le liars, but he did afterwards claim he didn’t mean to call for violence, so I don’t think it justifies a dismissal.

Second, he is wrong in a way that harms hundreds of thousands of Americans. What is the most troubling to me is that he is doubling down after extremely positive results from mRNA vaccines, and after the current administration was voted out. It would be one thing to call for “herd immunity” if the vaccines had failed, or if there would be continuity in administrations beyond the next 2 months, but now his calls — growing more and more aggressive — are even more irresponsible and wrong-headed. After the positive vaccine and electiob results he should go quietly, and ideally acknowledge he was wrong. Hopefully he will do that. But as wrong as I think he is, I don’t think this justifies firing an academic. It is a viewpoint.

Incidentally, I don’t even think Scott Atlas is the most dangerous, harmful, and embarassing thing to come out of Hoover. But Hoover also does have world-class economists and leaders. I had hoped one of the reasons Condi took over at Hoover was to bring greater respectability to it and to pull them back from the dangers of Trumpism. No such luck so far.
(11-16-2020, 02:37 PM)old spanish trail Wrote: [ -> ]I know some Stanford docs on campus and they are "horrified". They are PO'ed beyond belief that the general public thinks he's a Stanford doc. He left almost 10 years ago to pursue his interest in health policy. He was apparently an ok guy, but is totally out of his league in addressing a pandemic, they say.

Question: How much power does the Hoover Institute have over its "members"?

What percentage of the US population know who Scott Atlas is?  And of that probably fairly small group, how many associate him with Stanford?  And of that even smaller group, how many think worse of Stanford because of it.

Whether he should be fired or not I’m not commenting on. But I do think folks here get a little too “worked up” over the Stanford connection. Because I truly doubt a whole heck of a lot of people make that connection or care.
(11-16-2020, 02:52 PM)lex24 Wrote: [ -> ]
(11-16-2020, 02:37 PM)old spanish trail Wrote: [ -> ]I know some Stanford docs on campus and they are "horrified". They are PO'ed beyond belief that the general public thinks he's a Stanford doc. He left almost 10 years ago to pursue his interest in health policy. He was apparently an ok guy, but is totally out of his league in addressing a pandemic, they say.

Question: How much power does the Hoover Institute have over its "members"?

What percentage of the US population know who Scott Atlas is?  And of that probably fairly small group, how many associate him with Stanford?  And of that even smaller group, how many think worse of Stanford because of it.

Whether he should be fired or not I’m not commenting on. But I do think folks here get a little too “worked up” over the Stanford connection. Because I truly doubt a whole heck of a lot of people make that connection or care.
Lex, 

Maybe on FoxNews his credentials aren't covered.   Someone else would need to chime in on the coverage of Atlas on FoxNews, OAN and Newsmax.   However, on CNN, NBC, CBS and other networks and major news sites like Usatoday they have profiled the guy many, many times. 

I never heard of Atlas prior to this year, but I know he is a Stanford MD from TV coverage.   I think I discovered on Thecardboard that he is really a Hoover person, but I am very confident his CV has been covered several times on major news networks to a point that most politically engaged Americans would know he is a Stanford person.  In fact, that "Stanford" brand name is tossed in to reinforce that this is not some Youtube/Facebook/Twitter dude without any medical education, so I suspect many know that part of his CV even if they know little else.

FWIW - I would think he has crossed the grounds to be fired now.  The herd immunity is a viable pandemic strategy, and certainly one that others have presented.   So that would not be termination worthy, IMHO.   However, advocating to rise up against a government official and/or her health safety orders seems like too much.   Probably doesn't matter though.   In 60 days his career as a federal government official will be over.  Then he can start making money on Parler or other similar sites.
(11-16-2020, 02:48 PM)Snorlax94 Wrote: [ -> ]I find Scott Atlas’s views to be as harmful and wrong as anyone, and I find his conduct to be as odious as anyone, but I don’t know that these would qualify for grounds for dismissal for an academic.

What I found most troubling is the wording — to call for Michigan residents to “rise up” against a governor — the same governor who had been targeted by a militia group.

After criticism, Atlas claimed he never meant actual violence — as planned by the militia — and that he would never NEVER support or call for violence, to which, my answer is, WTF do you think “rise up” means and connotes in his language. I am sick and outraged by people playing with dangerous language and imagery and then claiming they were misinterpreted. They are irresposnsible, full of sh*t, assh*le liars, but he did afterwards claim he didn’t mean to call for violence, so I don’t think it justifies a dismissal.

Second, he is wrong in a way that harms hundreds of thousands of Americans. What is the most troubling to me is that he is doubling down after extremely positive results from mRNA vaccines, and after the current administration was voted out. It would be one thing to call for “herd immunity” if the vaccines had failed, or if there would be continuity in administrations beyond the next 2 months, but now his calls — growing more and more aggressive — are even more irresponsible and wrong-headed. After the positive vaccine and electiob results he should go quietly, and ideally acknowledge he was wrong. Hopefully he will do that. But as wrong as I think he is, I don’t think this justifies firing an academic. It is a viewpoint.

Incidentally, I don’t even think Scott Atlas is the most dangerous, harmful, and embarassing thing to come out of Hoover. But Hoover also does have world-class economists and leaders. I had hoped one of the reasons Condi took over at Hoover was to bring greater respectability to it and to pull them back from the dangers of Trumpism. No such luck so far.

Excellent.  Save this commentary . . .
I'm all for people arguing their ideas. But sometimes a line is crossed between ideas that aren't very well-supported by evidence, and being reckless to the point of killing people with them.

Josef Mengele was probably a good doctor, but he did some horrible things that tortured and killed people. You can argue Atlas hasn't intended to kill people, but still, there is a criminal statute called manslaughter that punishes people for killing others even though that was not their intent.

Scott Atlas, by advocating for the insane policy of doing nothing to stop Covid spread, is without a question engaging in manslaughter-ish behavior.  He is not personally putting people in harm's way, but he is making sure more people are put in harm's way and more people are going to die as a result, and not just form Covid, because many other elective procedures and screenings that can save lives aren't being done as medical systems are overwhelmed by the pandemic.  This is not arguing for this tax policy or that one. This is not making a case for this or that foreign policy. This is not even advocating for one treatment or another.  This is willingly - with all available evidence - deciding to deliberately pursue a policy no epidemiologist, infectious disease expert, and no front line medical worker thinks is anything but unhinged lunacy that puts hundreds of thousands of lives in jeopardy.

If you don't create a line for Scott Atlas, that can't be crossed without severe retribution, how the hell can we make sure we avoid such catastrophes again? This is to say nothing of the toxicity Stanford being closely associated with such a horrible and dangerous person has for the brand. I'm pretty sure Stanford would not employ a head football coach who had a DUI, but it's totes cool to have a guy like Atlas who kills people with ignorance?
(11-16-2020, 03:17 PM)Farm93 Wrote: [ -> ]The herd immunity is a viable pandemic strategy, and certainly one that others have presented.   So that would not be termination worthy, IMHO.   However, advocating to rise up against a government official and/or her health safety orders seems like too much.

Actually, I don't think herd immunity is a viable pandemic strategy.  A number of experts have pointed out that it's never been done before as a way to combat a pandemic.  There's no viable way to protect the vulnerable, even if you knew exactly who they were -- and we kind of do in terms of the age demographics.  Even the architects of Sweden's response say they were not trying for herd immunity, even though they seemed to be and failed miserably.  (See recent graphs of new cases vs neighboring countries where they have no beneficial reduction.)

One of the few idiots openly proposing it as a strategy is Atlas, and I haven't seen him discuss how he plans to keep the deaths below a million.  Is he going to do forced separation of the vulnerable from their families and create an ESCAPE FROM NEW YORK style incubation center paid for by the government?
Before vaccines were developed, that's exactly how pandemics ended.  The virus ran roughshod through a community, and those who did not die developed immunity.

BC
(11-16-2020, 06:33 PM)BostonCard Wrote: [ -> ]Before vaccines were developed, that's exactly how pandemics ended.  The virus ran roughshod through a community, and those who did not die developed immunity.

BC

Haha, sure.  That's not what I call a strategy given the expected death count, not to mention unknown long-term morbidity.
Atlas's "rise up" and "protect your freedom" stuff, today, is despicable.
Stanford has released a statement:

"Dr. Atlas has expressed views that are inconsistent with the university’s approach in response to the pandemic. Dr. Atlas’s statements reflect his personal views, not those of the Hoover Institution or the university." https://news.stanford.edu/2020/11/16/sta...ott-atlas/

Too bad his statements reflect poorly on the university, whether or not the university wants it to. Also, let's dump the Hoover Institute.
(11-16-2020, 07:01 PM)JustAnotherFan Wrote: [ -> ]Stanford has released a statement:

"Dr. Atlas has expressed views that are inconsistent with the university’s approach in response to the pandemic. Dr. Atlas’s statements reflect his personal views, not those of the Hoover Institution or the university." https://news.stanford.edu/2020/11/16/sta...ott-atlas/

Too bad his statements reflect poorly on the university, whether or not the university wants it to. Also, let's dump the Hoover Institute.

This is a start by Stanford. Hopefully some momentum builds to go further, because that statement is not very strong. 

I don't know about dumping the Hoover Institute. It has done some good things and probably can in the future.  Sure would be nice to see it start standing up for democracy because it is clearly obvious more influential institutions must work to repudiate the fascism gripping the Republican Party. There are elected federal office holders questioning a free and fair election, and urging a State Secretary of State to throw out legally cast ballots to help someone "win" a lost state. This is straight up tactics from authoritarian countries and has NO place in the United States. If the Hoover Institute agrees, it would be good to keep it. If it isn't going to stand up to this nonsense, ya, dump it, post haste.
I mean, this guy is there too:

https://www.hoover.org/profiles/michael-mcfaul

He was Obama's ambassador to Russia.  I took Russian politics from him back in the 90's.

BC
(11-16-2020, 08:27 PM)BostonCard Wrote: [ -> ]I mean, this guy is there too:

https://www.hoover.org/profiles/michael-mcfaul

He was Obama's ambassador to Russia.  I took Russian politics from him back in the 90's.

BC

Not to mention he's one of our best fb recruiting profs. To tell the truth, I didn't realize he was on the Hoover payroll, (if there is a Hoover payroll) He's very smart and clear in his thinking and analysis. This would be a good time for Condi to step up and say something helpful.
Hoover is more than the people, it's an enormous archive of documents, particularly on Russia and the Cold War. I remember Solzhenitsyn doing research on the Russian Revolution there, while I was a student in the 1970s.
Michael A. McFaul, PhD

Director, Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies
Ken Olivier and Angela Nomellini Professor of International Studies, Department of Political Science
Peter and Helen Bing Senior Fellow, Hoover Institution

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Note the ranking of his affiliations. Running FSI is #1 responsibility now
(11-16-2020, 08:27 PM)BostonCard Wrote: [ -> ]I mean, this guy is there too:

https://www.hoover.org/profiles/michael-mcfaul

He was Obama's ambassador to Russia.  I took Russian politics from him back in the 90's.

BC

I'm against banishing Hoover. Stanford is a university. It should have disparate viewpoints that compete. Over the years, they have published works that I have found interesting and informative. Their membership includes people who have spoken out against the authoritarian bent of the Republican party as well as authoritarians overseas. However, their list of associates does show some lapses in quality control. I was especially disappointed to see John Yoo on the list. I'm used to taunting Weenies about their association with the torture lawyer.
Pages: 1 2 3