Home » Culture, News » Joseph Bozorgmehr is no longer with us

Joseph Bozorgmehr is no longer with us

One of our authors, Vince Torley, did a little sleuthing, and – to the best of our ability – it seems that Joseph Bozorgmehr was not entirely straightforward with UD News about Holocaust denial. He is free to publish, but we have little further interest in his work.

Thanks to Vince Torley for taking the time to sleuth (“nullius in verba”*), and to commenter Elizabeth Liddle for quite properly alerting us, so that Vince followed it up.

But we weren’t kidding when we said that Holocaust denial is unpopular here.

If there’s any urgency, we’ll post the evidence, but maybe Torley would like to do it himself.

* Nullius in verba: = We don’t listen to just any old tattle, whether it be Mayor Bloomberg’s civic money-wasting  Ida fossil or accusations of Holocaust denial. We follow up where we can and reserve judgement where we can’t. Here, we could follow up.

Follow UD News at Twitter!

  • Delicious
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • RSS Feed

10 Responses to Joseph Bozorgmehr is no longer with us

  1. taken very seriously indeed:

    From Darwin to Hitler – Richard Weikart; Historian – video
    http://www.youtube.com/v/w_5Ew.....autoplay=1

  2. For the record, I didn’t actually alert you – you posted that you’d heard a rumour in your OP and I provided the link to the evidence.

    I’m a stickler for referencing :)

  3. Well, if that’s not an alert, we don’t know what is, Elizabeth Liddle. It was just a rumour that came to us, and we routinely ignore them, but your link was followed.

  4. OK, that’s fine. I just didn’t want people to think I was responsible for unsubstantiated rumours. You wrote, in your OP, before I’d said anything at all:

    Apparently, Darwinists are freaked out by this guy’s work, which means he must be on to something. (We keep hearing rumours about Holocaust denial, which would certainly make a person unpopular around here [guvs' dads are WWII veterans ... ], but we heard nothing specific so far. And his work must be evaluated by itself anyway.)

    which seemed like a strong hint that we Darwinists were peddling rumours to discredit Joe’s work.

    So I posted the link so that at least you could see that, wherever you’d got the “rumour” from, there was evidence to support it.

  5. And Vince followed up. Thanks.

  6. Isn’t this a case of “Expelled”? I think people should be able to question the historical accuracy of the Holocaust. I personally find most of their view distasteful but I don’t believe in that kind of censorship. I especially don’t agree with laws criminalising such matters as they have in Austria.

  7. Timbo: It was made explicit above that Borzorgmehr is (= ought to be) free to publish his papers. That’s all free speech entails.

    At least one of the UD guvs is a free speech journalist, and a veteran of those wars. And would strongly protest any tampering with Bozorgmehr’s science papers on the grounds of questionable beliefs otherwise.

    That doesn’t require us to make him welcome here.

  8. Fair enough.

  9. I should make it clear that my criticism of Bozorgmehr’s papers has nothing to do with my views on his take on the holocaust.

    His papers are bad because the science is bad.

    Of course the science is probably bad because he has the kind of approach to evidence that also leads to holocaust denial, but you don’t need to know about his views on the holocaust to figure out that his science is bad.

    Although it does all make me suspect that his trolling habits have been extended to journal editors, and that for some reason he gets a kick out of sending provocative rubbish to people who will be annoyed by it.

  10. 10

    Technically, your logic “Bozorgmehr has a right to free speech, but that doesn’t mean we have to make him welcome” has to apply to journals as well. Bozorgmehr has free speech, UD has free speech, and so do the journals. It’s not censorship if UD uses its free speech to decline to publish Bozorg’s stuff. Ditto for journals. It’s only censorship if the *government* bans authors and publishers from publishing something. No one has a “right” to publish anything in any journal, at least not until the journal has agreed to publish, at which point it is constrained by whatever contractual arrangement is agreed upon.

Leave a Reply