Pres Finalist

This guy is from one of the most liberal public universities in the country. He may be the second coming of Crecine in the end. But yes, I didn't want the RPI woman either.

you should read his resume, it its stacked with hardcore well-known research background

went to Kansas State and then spent about 20 years at Texas A&M, and then at Johnson Space Center

sounds like a real "liberal" (whatever that means)

what does "liberal university" mean? you mean liberal arts, or that they are not conservative? how can a university be conservative?
 
The new Pres has an amazing resume. The only concern was short tenure at Boulder. But, if you look at the liberal arts community in Boulder and see his background, he was made to lead a place like Georgia Tech, not the Buffaloes.

I was impressed with his publications, credentials, extra-curricular, and personal highlights. This guy is into theories of heat transfer and was a Big 8 starter at K State as a football walk-on, who has raised four kids and been a foster parent to NINE others.

Surely Stingtalkers can not take issue with this guy yet. However, I fear someone will call his hiring "Chanesque" within the week.
 
Surely Stingtalkers can not take issue with this guy yet. However, I fear someone will call his hiring "Chanesque" within the week.

Given some of the AD goings on discussed recently let's hope it doesn't turn out to be Brainesque instead.
 
you should read his resume, it its stacked with hardcore well-known research background

went to Kansas State and then spent about 20 years at Texas A&M, and then at Johnson Space Center

sounds like a real "liberal" (whatever that means)

what does "liberal university" mean? you mean liberal arts, or that they are not conservative? how can a university be conservative?

Yes I read it and I like the hire personally. But , Colorado and Georgia Tech are on two opposite poles for college communities.

You ask a good question however. How can a university be conservative? Really a research university can't be conservative I guess.

However, and I'm sure I don't really have to say this, the community of folks that make up the university are famously liberal at Colorado and somewhat famously conservative at Georgia Tech. I have no clue why Colorado is what it is but I do know why Tech grads are very conservative: They are taught to think, examine a problem, solve and move on. Conservatives are more black and white, liberals more grey and we just aren't taught to think grey very often.

I can see a statics problem now at Tech (otherwise):

Design a bridge across a river. Keep in mind animal rights for cows being afraid to cross a bridge too high.

(By the way, did you know that in Europe, cattle are often raised in a standing position on a grate for life.)
 
Yes I read it and I like the hire personally. But , Colorado and Georgia Tech are on two opposite poles for college communities.

You ask a good question however. How can a university be conservative? Really a research university can't be conservative I guess.

However, and I'm sure I don't really have to say this, the community of folks that make up the university are famously liberal at Colorado and somewhat famously conservative at Georgia Tech. I have no clue why Colorado is what it is but I do know why Tech grads are very conservative: They are taught to think, examine a problem, solve and move on. Conservatives are more black and white, liberals more grey and we just aren't taught to think grey very often.

I can see a statics problem now at Tech (otherwise):

Design a bridge across a river. Keep in mind animal rights for cows being afraid to cross a bridge too high.

(By the way, did you know that in Europe, cattle are often raised in a standing position on a grate for life.)

i was born in Europe and have never seen cattle on crates. i used to ride the cows that would graze on the large pasture next to my dads mountain home in Austria, though.

Conservative literally means to preserve the good of what currently is existant. And cows actually are part of that, so you might think that a true conservative should be a conservationist.

for some reason, conserving natural resources and preserving good things that are hard to quantify monetarily in America is a "liberal" agenda -- seems weird to me

true conservatism would value conservationism, and not deride it as a liberal scam while ruining our world for the sake of profits

and if you are not aware of it, most any major construction project requires a study of the environmental impact because its good policy to do so, not because its stupid. take the atlantic station develpment, im glad they had to do remidiation on that site to try to get rid of some of the poison that had been deposited there for many years. Seriously poisonous industrial waste.

would you like that stuff to be seeping into the ground water if you lived over there?
 
Georgia Tech may be more conservative, in part because its in the south, but Engineering schools in general are usually apolitical. He won't have any problems due to his politics, regardless of what they are.
 
i was born in Europe and have never seen cattle on crates. i used to ride the cows that would graze on the large pasture next to my dads mountain home in Austria, though.

Conservative literally means to preserve the good of what currently is existant. And cows actually are part of that, so you might think that a true conservative should be a conservationist.

for some reason, conserving natural resources and preserving good things that are hard to quantify monetarily in America is a "liberal" agenda -- seems weird to me

true conservatism would value conservationism, and not deride it as a liberal scam while ruining our world for the sake of profits

and if you are not aware of it, most any major construction project requires a study of the environmental impact because its good policy to do so, not because its stupid. take the atlantic station develpment, im glad they had to do remidiation on that site to try to get rid of some of the poison that had been deposited there for many years. Seriously poisonous industrial waste.

would you like that stuff to be seeping into the ground water if you lived over there?


I knew this would occur if the Steelers won the Super Bowl.

We have family relatives that are pig farmers in n.w. Germany (the family farm dates to as far back as the churches can find and possibly to the 1200's). They are considering changing to cows and if they do, they will raise them on grates for their whole life (like others do in the area now).

According to dictionary: Conservative: 1) Favoriing Preservation of the existing order. 2. Moderate, prudent, cautious. 3. Traditional in manner or style. 4. Tending to conserve;preservative.

I dont see many Tech grads arguing to not clean up poisonous spills in the earth. What you are trying to expand is the Tech grads arguments that global warming is just not a proven science and that global warming and cooling occurred many times in our past without mechanical engines and other modern inventions/uses.

Liberals came out with second hand smoke as cancerous in order to shut down tobacco. Now I personally enjoy the smokefree bars of today, but all the newer studies showed that second hand smoke for the vast majority of claims by Clinton was just not true. But he got what he wanted.

I personally don't like being led around my deceiving people. You know the kind that claim that they'll only hire solid untarnished citizens and work bipartisanly on our problems only to do neither the first chance they had.

What we do know is that education is a very good investment. Instead we're investing billions in the greening of America when in reality global warming is probably due to sun spots activity.

Your environmental attack on conservativism just doesn't hold water. A conservative on the east coast beaches that wants to put up a coal plant to compete with China just wants to know why he has to spends hundreds of millions to clean the air that drifts away, when China is polluting the air ten fold and which drifts right toward America.

(unfortunately I have to run so I can't clean this up a bit. I'll be back).
 
psst... a lot of our EAS guys are working on climate change stuff.

http://climatesummit.gatech.edu/

Science should try to stay above politics, and focus on the science. Tech grads may lean one way or the other, but there is very little actual activism or even political dialogue on campus. We are too busy with our labs to really care much.
 
However, and I'm sure I don't really have to say this, the community of folks that make up the university are famously liberal at Colorado and somewhat famously conservative at Georgia Tech.

I've never really heard this. I always thought Georgia Tech was considered a very liberal place, whereas U[sic]GA was the prototypical conservative school. Georgia Tech is in the heart of a city, large population of scientists looking to move forward and change things, and a large foreign population. Plus the vibe I got when I was there, other than outside some of the frat houses, was one of liberalism. Not from every person of course(we are still in the south), but overall.

Just my view.
 
I knew this would occur if the Steelers won the Super Bowl.

We have family relatives that are pig farmers in n.w. Germany (the family farm dates to as far back as the churches can find and possibly to the 1200's). They are considering changing to cows and if they do, they will raise them on grates for their whole life (like others do in the area now).

According to dictionary: Conservative: 1) Favoriing Preservation of the existing order. 2. Moderate, prudent, cautious. 3. Traditional in manner or style. 4. Tending to conserve;preservative.

I dont see many Tech grads arguing to not clean up poisonous spills in the earth. What you are trying to expand is the Tech grads arguments that global warming is just not a proven science and that global warming and cooling occurred many times in our past without mechanical engines and other modern inventions/uses.

Liberals came out with second hand smoke as cancerous in order to shut down tobacco. Now I personally enjoy the smokefree bars of today, but all the newer studies showed that second hand smoke for the vast majority of claims by Clinton was just not true. But he got what he wanted.

I personally don't like being led around my deceiving people. You know the kind that claim that they'll only hire solid untarnished citizens and work bipartisanly on our problems only to do neither the first chance they had.

What we do know is that education is a very good investment. Instead we're investing billions in the greening of America when in reality global warming is probably due to sun spots activity.

Your environmental attack on conservativism just doesn't hold water. A conservative on the east coast beaches that wants to put up a coal plant to compete with China just wants to know why he has to spends hundreds of millions to clean the air that drifts away, when China is polluting the air ten fold and which drifts right toward America.

(unfortunately I have to run so I can't clean this up a bit. I'll be back).

+1

This has been my argument for a while now.
 
I knew this would occur if the Steelers won the Super Bowl.

We have family relatives that are pig farmers in n.w. Germany (the family farm dates to as far back as the churches can find and possibly to the 1200's). They are considering changing to cows and if they do, they will raise them on grates for their whole life (like others do in the area now).

According to dictionary: Conservative: 1) Favoriing Preservation of the existing order. 2. Moderate, prudent, cautious. 3. Traditional in manner or style. 4. Tending to conserve;preservative.

I dont see many Tech grads arguing to not clean up poisonous spills in the earth. What you are trying to expand is the Tech grads arguments that global warming is just not a proven science and that global warming and cooling occurred many times in our past without mechanical engines and other modern inventions/uses.

Liberals came out with second hand smoke as cancerous in order to shut down tobacco. Now I personally enjoy the smokefree bars of today, but all the newer studies showed that second hand smoke for the vast majority of claims by Clinton was just not true. But he got what he wanted.

I personally don't like being led around my deceiving people. You know the kind that claim that they'll only hire solid untarnished citizens and work bipartisanly on our problems only to do neither the first chance they had.

What we do know is that education is a very good investment. Instead we're investing billions in the greening of America when in reality global warming is probably due to sun spots activity.

Your environmental attack on conservativism just doesn't hold water. A conservative on the east coast beaches that wants to put up a coal plant to compete with China just wants to know why he has to spends hundreds of millions to clean the air that drifts away, when China is polluting the air ten fold and which drifts right toward America.

(unfortunately I have to run so I can't clean this up a bit. I'll be back).

i somewhat agree with your argument and somewhat disagree.

for example, just b/c human may not be the MAJOR cause of global warming doesnt mean that we shouldnt be doing things to lessen our impact (and CLEARLY there is impact). also about 80% of the scientific community agrees world wide that human are a major contributing factor.

in any case, there is only one way to really stop the problems that humans are causing on earth and it is not a popular one. POPULATION CONTROL.

even if we do everything that the Kyoto treaty asks, in 50 years due to the population growths the net effort would be basically negligible.

but saying that we should be able to pollute just b/c China does is not a good argument. to be a nation that leads the world in a responsible manner, we have to do things that others are not willing to. also, we already had out 100 years of polluting the earth, now its their turn.
 
Last edited:
Liberals came out with second hand smoke as cancerous in order to shut down tobacco. Now I personally enjoy the smokefree bars of today, but all the newer studies showed that second hand smoke for the vast majority of claims by Clinton was just not true. But he got what he wanted.

As a physician, I am intrigued by your slander of physicians in calling us liberals. ;) Also, I am intrigued by these "newer studies" you reference -- could you show them to me? Because the only study I know of that was not suggestive of secondhand smoke being harmful was the 2003 study published in the BMJ -- and this study was funded by the tobacco companies. Could you please cite me the studies you are talking about? [Note, I am not one who thinks spending 20 minutes a day with a smoker is harmful -- however, I am one who thinks working in a smoke environment or living in a smoke environment is harmful. There is a difference -- having restaurants smokefree is more for the employees than for other diners, imo.]

Here are a few recent studies I found on Second hand smoke (also trying to find international studies, as to avoid that Clinton bias you are talking about):
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/abstract/338/feb12_2/b462 2nd hand smoke makes you dumber -- 2009 study.
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/abstract/331/7525/1117 workers in smoke free environments had less respiratory symptoms than workers in smoke environments. 2005 article
http://www.iarc.fr/en/Media-Centre/...ares-second-hand-smoke-carcinogenic-to-humans IARC declares secondhand smoke bad

Finally, an American report--but done by Surgeon General in 2006 (under Bush) http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/secondhandsmoke/
 
+1

This has been my argument for a while now.


too bad the argument is wrong. it is revisionist history to believe that second hand smoke is not clearly linked to cancer

read here for the truth: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/2053840.stm

also, you guys that think its a conspiracy of the "liberals" WHAAAA????

not everything that limits the actions of the greedy few to profit themselves at the expense of others is a conspiracy, nor is it a liberal agenda
 
Georgia Tech may be more conservative, in part because its in the south, but Engineering schools in general are usually apolitical. He won't have any problems due to his politics, regardless of what they are.

Well put. GT is apolitical and from my experience, more libertarian than conservative. I'll put it this way. At GT I was considered liberal. At law school, people called me a "Pat Buchanan-conservative." And I went to a law school known for hiring conservative faculty. Of course, compared to U[sic]GA we are liberal, at least in the classical sense.

Crazy liberals and crazy conservatives are both like fish out of water at GT. This drove the crazy conservatives up the wall given that they weren't so far out of the rural/suburban Georgia mainstream.

UCBoulder isn't nearly as crazy as some of you are cracking it up to be. Some of its professors are (were), but as a whole, it is not as bad as some are claiming.

As far as "conservative" and "liberal" Universities go, if the university wants to do well, it will jettison politics and go where the research grants are.
 
Back
Top