Please Help the World's Rarest Butterfly

[Neil Jones]

In article <200007281658.JAA44242 at trifid.u.arizona.edu>
           jbwalsh at u.arizona.edu "Bruce  Walsh" writes:

You have defended Paul Cherubini a number of times. No doubt you regard
him as a friend. However this time his abusive behaviour is indefensable.


> My impression is that we want to tone down personal attacks here in
> leps-l.  In particular, poor Paul Cherubini gets a lot of "hits".  What is his
> crime?

His crime in this instance is being a particularly nasty BULLY.

We have a situation here where an honest caring and upstanding citizen
makes her first ever public posting on the internet. She is completely new
to public fora. However, her posting should not be contraversial, she
is making a plea on behalf of an endangered species to a group that
from its name should be full of people who care.

It is met by a response from Mr Cherubini full of hate, with the vile
unfounded and defamatory allegation that she is making this
genuine and heartfelt plea purely for financial gain.

This is bullying and it is my moral duty to respond.
 
> One, he is opinionated, and often with a different opinion from many. 
> However, there are lots of opinionated folks her on leps-l, so that it no
> reason for personal attacks.

It is not that he is opinionated that is the problem. He makes statements
that are offensive, defamatory and unfounded. 

What is worse, and this really demonstrates the putrescence of his morals,
is it is clear that he does so to prevent help being given to an
endangered butterfly.

> Second,   he often asks for information to back up our claims.  For
> example, if action X is so drastic, it should be easy to indeed provide
> information that it is so.  This is simply science.  Now, one can make the case
> that by actually asking us to show that something is a major factor, rather
> than simply ASSUMING it is, that this is somehow bad. 
>
> This is odd logic.

Your argument is odd logic. I  hope that that a scientist of your
undoubted calibre can see that the logic is faulty.

He is NOT asking questions. He is NOT debating science. He is NOT
questioning assumptions.  He is repeatedly making offensive, defamatory
bullying remarks about person who is only motivated by the noblest of
emotions. It is part of an odd view of the world that sees everybody
as only motivated by money. 

We could have debated the status of the PV Blue both in terms of 
population and taxonomically. We could have debated the ethics of 
conservation as I have been happy to do in the past.
We have not. Instead we have these weird and offensive conspiracy theories
fired off from a man who appears to be neurotically obsessed.

>  We may not like Paul always asking for further information or details,
> but this is the basic nature of science. 

I wouldn't have a problem with him asking for further information.
This is not what he did. He spewed out vitriolic and false statements
impugning the reputation of a solid and moral person. I am reliably informed
that this is his style off the net too.

> If we regard ourselves as
> scientists, rather than just persons with strong opinions, we should welcome the> chance to make our case.  I'll close by simply saying that as one who as
> served as an associate editor for many of the major journals in population
> biology (Genetics, Genetical Research, Evolution, The American Naturalist,
> Theoretical Population Biology) and as a reviewer for all the rest, that
> I often ask authors to respond questions along the lines of what Paul is
> asking, EVEN WHEN I FULLY AGREE with the authors.

I am sure that YOU do not make unfounded accusations that
your colleagues are FALSIFYING their research for personal financial gain.

Mr Paul Cherubini has done this numerous times repeatedly in a vile and
vicious manner both here and on other lists.

I am glad to have questions
asked of me. If you look back in the archives you will see that as
a result of discussions here I have changed my views. 

However I have always and will always speak out against people who make
wild unfounded and vicious allegations about people who selflessly devote 
their time and efforts for the benefit of lepidoptera or of the lepidopterist
community. It is my duty as an citizen to do so.

> Peace
> 
> Bruce

 For those few of you yet to visit. The web site
at the centre of all of this controversy is
at http://www.wildlifewebsite.com/pvblue/

-- 
Neil Jones- Neil at nwjones.demon.co.uk http://www.nwjones.demon.co.uk/
"At some point I had to stand up and be counted. Who speaks for the
butterflies?" Andrew Lees - The quotation on his memorial at Crymlyn Bog
National Nature Reserve