Glenn Reynolds pointed out this Associated Press story about the investigation of Michael Bellesiles. But what I noted was this ridiculously wimpy version of events:
But scholars and critics also became skeptical. Bellesiles has been accused of ideological bias, selective scholarship and misleading statements. Some corrections already have been made in the paperback edition, and Bellesiles' editor at Knopf, Jane Garrett, has said that "other corrections will be made in subsequent printings."Actually, Bellesiles has been accused of fraud, of making up numbers from sources that don't exist and then lying about it. That's not quite the same as "misleading statements."
Comments (1)
Bellesiles has been accused, period. Accused relentlessly and accused, it seems, by people with a strong pro-gun agenda. This of itself would not invalidate those accusations but the other remarks (such as the reference to corrections made in the paperback edition, something that commonly occurs in academia) are gratuitious, hostile, and prejudgmental.
Try to keep your glee in check just a little, and patiently wait for the investigation's results before drawing your conclusions.
Posted by Maezeppa | September 26, 2002 3:22 AM
Posted on September 26, 2002 03:22