Do Monarchs need Paul Cherubini?

Patrick Foley patfoley at
Mon Apr 22 21:03:49 EDT 2002


You are mostly or perhaps entirely right. And I apologise to many bored people on
this list.

I think I was most aggravated by Paul when he twisted a quote of mine out of
context on the professional ecologists' list ECOLOG-L.

I am now dropping the subject with this one final question. Why hasn't Paul
Cherubini openly and nonevasively answered my three questions?

Patrick Foley
patfoley at

MexicoDoug at wrote:

> En un mensaje con fecha 04/19/2002 8:10:03 PM Central Daylight Time,
> patfoley at escribe:
> << I want to make it clear that while I disagree with many things Paul says,
> he
>  certainly knows a lot about Monarchs. But I cannot trust anything he says
> until he
>  answers these questions. Can you?
>  Patrick Foley
>  patfoley at >>
> Patrick, Perhaps trusting Paul is important for you, but frankly there is no
> requirement to trust anyone under a peer review system pegged to analyzing
> the science, which includes taking the authors statements in their context.
> The subjectively defined word 'trust' is absolutely comforting, but
> thankfully it is not all there is to it.  Let me speak for myself at least in
> this wonderfully free society and say my soul is with you (and not Cherubini,
> who never should be painted as a devil, as he never has spoken with forked
> tongue as others have), but my mind is clearly convinced that Paul is a great
> counterpoint too commonly missing.  Lest we all end up wallowing in our gut
> feelings...Keep up the good work both of you, and please don't get personal
> about it.  Last time I heard people are people and they are not any less
> devious,simply because they are labeled business or academic.  The real shame
> are the academicians who, like the authorities of the law, have been caught
> fudging or otherwise hypocritically using data under a banner of
> righteousness and influencing public policy and overly stepping on individual
> rights.  They are the bad cops, not the business people.  We know where the
> latter business group's interest's are.  And if Paul really is a paid secret
> agent of the big organized spectre of industry as your questions (which do
> border on personal attacks), boy we can all celebrate.  It just takes a few
> cyberlepsters to neutralize Paul on the list.  What if he hung out around
> Washington lobbying where it really hurt.  A change in attitude would be the
> clincher before Paul gets tired of us and realizes he could really get even
> or make progress getting something done by refocussing his efforts instead of
> educating people like me on this list, who appreciate his incessant knack to
> dig up 'unpopular' data, allowing an interpretation as one wishes and making
> the most diehard defender of wildlife more educated when the dust settles.
> Best.  Doug Dawn
> Monterrey, Mexico


   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit: 

More information about the Leps-l mailing list