Posted: Dec 08, 2011 3:35 pm
by twistor59
newolder wrote:More from Imperial College, London:
Contribution to the Special Issue of Foundations of Physics: “Forty Years Of String Theory: Reflecting On the Foundations”, edited by Gerard ’t Hooft, Erik Verlinde, Dennis Dieks and Sebastian de Haro.

String and M-theory: answering the critics

From Mike Duff's paper:

7I do not share Lubos Motl’s extreme views on politics, global warming, and sometimes not even string
theory. However, he occasionally has some good physics summaries, including a recent one giving a nice
history of the triumphs of unification[26].

He appears to have pissed off Lubos

Holy crap! What the hell is "extreme" about my views on politics or even global warming? A majority of the people in the civilized world agree with me about almost any of them. I am the ultimate prototype of centrist opinions that have been tested by centuries of the human experience.

But even if you were confused about the fundamental fact that it is the far left Academia's opinions, and not mine, that are extreme, what the hell is the role of such a sentence about politics and global warming in an essay about criticisms of string theory? Is the Academia so unbelievably hijacked by the far left movement that declarations of the loyalty to the global warming myths and other politically motivated misconceptions has to be included even in papers about string theory, just because someone who isn't a part of this left-wing bandwagon is being cited?