|
In Reply to: Why Chancellor chooses to be 'in the middle' by unrepentant oppressors posted by Interests and Incentives on August 26, 2005 at 15:29:12:
Yep, that interview statement explains a lot. This man is fundamentally insecure as an academic researcher, and all he has to stand on is his endorsement by TFI now that the credibility of his work has been publically called into question.
It explains why he won't address the substantive questions about the credibility of his research that have been raised in online discussions at this website and MO. Instead, he questions Jules' credibility as interviewee on Dateline and asks her to put a lid on discussion about him at her website. Why? Very limited speculation at MO that he is comparable to academics who take money from TFI appeared in the context of a more substantial discussion about the limitations of his study. He also complains to Jules about one comment regarding his wife that appeared in a longer thread on this website--a serious discussion that also raised substantial questions about the credibiity of his research.
It's a classic Family tactic for Chancellor to go on the attack by attempting to undermine Jules and discredit serious discussion of his work as little more than irresponsible rumors and slanderous comparisons to well-known acadmic whores. When I first saw the email from him, I wondered someone in TF had written it and signed his name. I simply couldn't believe someone in his position would fall prey to such an outrageous lack of professionalism.
I am hoping the man still has the moral convictions of a Christian Bible College teacher and will search his conscience in the sight of God about the pollution of his integrity by the unclean spirits of his Family friends.
