Monday, 19 January 2009

Just how stupid is Gus the Fuss?*

Rosemary has, for once, done a sensible thing. She's reposted a letter to the Guardian from Prof Simon Baron-Cohen (I can't find it on the Guardian website, so I'm taking it on trust that she's copied it properly - it's here: http://jabs.org.uk/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=3474) in which he bemoans the poor and misleading reporting of his recent study which "found a correlation between levels of foetal testosterone (FT) and the number of autistic traits a child shows at the age of 8."

He's gone through the errors point by point, and explained, in simple terms exactly what was wrong with the reporting, and how his work was misrepresented.

This isn't enough for Gus the Fuss, a man who is apparently psychic and psychotic in equal measures, believing that a) He knows more than Professor Baron-Cohen does about his own work, and b) That the reporters from the Daily Mail, and the lunatics who inhabit the insane world of JABS have a better insight into his work, despite most probably having not actually read the research.

Looks like Cohen and Fitzy re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic!

While the band plays on ..we believe you Cohen along with your other crack-pot theories..DUH we all got it wrong,BBC,Mail, and your right ?NOT!

The Big Lie has nothing on you,you now have surpassed all your peers in producing the most irrelevant, inaccurate and stale study on autism yet.

I don't understand the mindset of someone who rabidly rants at an article, but when the author of the original source material says "Let's clear this up - actually, that's not what I meant…"; then rants at them for lying, maintaining the first version was true.

As ever, let's not let facts or research get in the way of irrational belief.

* a rhetorical question.

6 comments:

millipede said...

And John Stone writes an article calling Baron-Cohen a "Malefic Idiot", which is just so pleasingly ironic, that I had to mention it.

Warhelmet said...

oooh. Just found your blog. Luverly.

Whether or not you agree with Baron-Cohen, at least he describes his theory as a theory.

I am reminded of Dilbert. In particular the "Joy of Work" book and a section devoted to arguing with illogical co-workers. Scott Adams posits that the illogical believe anything that they read in print. Hmm. I think that they believe the first thing that they read on a particular subject. Hence Baron-Cohen being attacked for his attempts to clarify mis-reporting of his theory.

It is particularly odd tilting at Baron-Cohen contradicting reporting of his views when the JABS folk tilted at the reporting.

Don Quixote, what did he say?

Maria said...

Loving your work, Becky!

millipede said...

Now we have Dr.Struthers insinuating that Anthony Cox should be shot:

Dr Anthony R Cox PhD has written another riotous blog about Chinese regulatory failure and the capital scapegoating of those the regulaters failed to regulate.

http://www.blacktriangle.org/blog/?p=1882

Doc Cox whispers pompously that the Chinese are not possessed of that "regulated and attenuated capitalism accomodated in Western countries." LOL.

Has Dr Anthony not heard of Bernard Madoff, the Vioxx poisoners, Lehman Brothers, the crooked Olanzapine merchants, the rape of Gaza, the massive Statin scammers and the great MMR and HPV vaccine safety hoaxers?

I now have a capital idea ... on how to deal with failed safety regulators ... and such little escaped goats ... as Dr Royston Cox PhD. Remember that your family will have to pay for it: a chinese bullet for your thoughts, Tony?


I wonder what it said before it was edited?

DavidJ said...

Amazingly stupid it seems. This is his latest gem:

"The Herald Magazine.

http://www.theherald.co.uk/search/display.var.2484124.0.we_thought_it_was_the_end_of_the_journey_it_was_only_the_start.php

Saturday’s Herald magazine written by a journalist who has an autistic son. The piece is partly a plug for the National Autistic Society and there are quotes from Simon Baron-Cohen.

Here is a short extract with one quote from S B-C:

‘When I ask him (S B-C) for an off-pat definition of autism, Baron-Cohen adds a fourth element: “Its only if those behaviours or features are interfering with the child’s life that its relevant to think about a diagnosis. Because autism is a medical diagnosis, it shouldn't be given out lightly; it should only be given out if a child or adult is suffering to some degree.”

This quote requires explanation from S B-C. If autism is a medical diagnosis why is there no protocol of medical testing in place---blood/urine/stool/hair? "

Becky said...

@DavidJ:

Just seen your comment after I made a post on that very subject. Great minds think alike, and all that. (Although my mother used to tell me: "yes - and fools seldom differ" - which pretty well sums JABS up.) :-)