"...or good people do when they are exasperated by goofs."
That seems like a last resort, name calling when you've been found wrong. Grow up, Paul.
It hasn't been a good week for you, has it Paul? At NAFPS the person you vouched for as "good people" and thought was a Lakota minister turned out to a white guy posing as Lakota, doing Lakota ceremony he had no right to do, lying about it, and then pressuring the white people he's been leading on in his online spirituality group to say nothing.
You yourself admitted you looked silly taking this position at NAFPS and vowed to stop, then reversed yourself and appeared even sillier. You imagined Onehawk was me, then became embarassed when even your ally Backatya said that wasn't true.
On Indianz you kept embarassing yourself. You accused John Bishop of being me, and that turned out to be more of your paranoia. Bishop has been around on the net forever. Jana, who is no fan of mine, even found his yahoo profile.
Just like John Martin made himself look like a fool (for about the 11,937th time) by imagining Danny Moon to be me. I mean, you and Martin are a lot alike. You both bluster and bully when you know you're losing and look like fools, which just makes you look more foolish.
You both pull this phony tough guy act that absolutely no one buys, that just shows you feel your manhood is threatened, and makes you both look like either a 12 year old on the playground who thinks empty threats make them look like a man, or that you're both doing a very poor pro wrestler imitation. But I don't think you're the same people. Hanging around a professional imposter like Yeagley and a habitual liar and imposter like Martin/Siouxwannabe makes you think everyone is like that.
You say this is about your annoyance over what happened to Benson. But any blame for any embarassment over his wrongdoing being exposed ultimately falls on Benson and his defenders.
You openly say some of this conflict between us is your professional hostility, "hard science" vs the social sciences. Well...
1. Not being able to judge the facts
2. Deliberately ignoring facts
3. Avoiding facts you don't like
4. And worst of all, repeatedly inventing facts, sometimes out of paranoia...
All of those are sure not signs of a good scientist like you claim to pride yourself on being.
And you've stayed completely silent on the most troubling ethical issue of all. Doesn't it bother you that your number one fan is an in your face racist and repeated troll and imposter, John Martin/LakoDUH Siouxwannabe? He's up to, what, over two dozens racist posts, several threats, and trying to disrupt a thread honoring the memory of Floyd Red Crow, all in the past few days.
Not only that, you know full well he's an imposter, habitual liar, and violent racist, and yet you still do all you can to help him out at Indianz and NAFPS. You know full well that John Martin has claimed in the past six months to be:
Tallsoldier
A Gulf War vet
An Airborne vet
LakotaSiouxperman
Lakota and Oneida
A Cherokee plumber from Florida
A white fundamentalist
and an elderly woman living on Pine Ridge
You personally witnessed the last four at NAFPS, yet you say nothing about it, and do everything you can to help Martin knowing full well what he's done.
Or were you absent from NAFPS for awhile? I remember you got pretty quiet for awhile when you got so much criticism for your little bit of gay bashing.
Ironically I'm not the only one to think that Martin seems to have an unrequited gay crush on you. Yeagley will be so jealous over losing his boytoy, that is unless something unlikely happens, like the three of you are into daisy chains.
Again, for someone who prides himself on being an objective scientist, you pick and choose what facts to ignore, and you show poor judgement in what "facts" you choose to accept.
And it never occurs to you that buddying up to a violent racist (one who treated you like trash, calling you every vile insult in the book) and hanging out on a white supremacist/apple forum like Badeagle might not be the smartest career move, or show the best professional or scientific judgement? You originally went to Badeagle to challenge their line of BS, but there's little sign of that now.
It never occurs to you that the members of your professional groups or your supervisors might find this lack of judgement very interesting? You took what I said earlier as a threat, but it's plain and simple advice: It's just a matter of time until some jealous conservative white sees what you've done and your questionable judgement at NAFPS and Indianz as a chance to take down a rival a peg, get themselves the promotion or position you wanted.
Think about it.
I apologize to those of you who are shaking their heads over names they never heard over at another board. I wouldn't have had to if Paulie hadn't brought this over here.
