Harvey...

[David Flick]

.
.

Climate Alarmists Flooding the Media with Nonsense

.
.

[KeithE]

.
.

Climate Alarmists Flooding the Media with Nonsense

.
.

Nonsense my foot. First note David's article has a cartoon and has no data.

It is true that the frequency of hurricanes have not greatly affected the number of hurricanes in the Atlantic Basin (includes Gulf of Mexico). No reputable climatologist claims otherwise.

But the magnitude of the hurricanes (as measured by the power dissipation index-PDI) have increased and we understand why - the temperature of the sea surface have increased since ~1980 (note the correlation {ups and down} of sea surface temp and PDI).

As of August 23, 2017, the sea surface temp had ~1.5C anomaly (= 2.7F) in the region Harvey traveled over in the Gulf (see map below). Now place that on the plot (orange line in 2017) above with 1950-1990 baseline being ~ 81.8F and the sea surface temp on August 23, 2017 = 81.8F + 2.7F = 84.5F which is off the plot.


And your article claims there has been a “flood” of “alarmist” media articles suggesting global warming is to blame for Harvey. Well your article only gave two examples - the ThinkProgress/Climate Progress article and a San Antonio News article (not exactly a flood!). And reading those articles, they are hardly “alarmist” - both thought Harvey would be a Cat 3 while it actually was a Cat 4 as it landed. I’d say your article is the one that is exaggerated.

Glad to hear, David, you were not vacationing on San Padre Island- I seem to remember it was a favorite spot of yours.

[Haruo]

The deadliest natural disaster in the history of the United States was the Galveston Hurricane of 1900. As I wrote on Facebook,

The Galveston one... Harvey warn't nothing to be all het up about. I remember that Storm we had back in aught aught in Galveston. Now there were a Storm! 117 years ago and I can see it like it was yesterday. Must be the onset of my second greatgrandchildhood... https://youtu.be/qsdfGS7S4wc

[David Flick]

Climate Alarmists Flooding the Media with Nonsense

Nonsense my foot. First note David's article has a cartoon and has no data.


True, my article had no data, but it needed no data to prove my point. The point I made was that climate change alarmists were jumping to the nonsensical conclusion that Harvey was caused or influenced by climate change hours before the huricane even hit the shore.


. . . . . . . . .[...]

And your article claims there has been a “flood” of “alarmist” media articles suggesting global warming is to blame for Harvey. Well your article only gave two examples - the ThinkProgress/Climate Progress article and a San Antonio News article (not exactly a flood!). And reading those articles, they are hardly “alarmist” - both thought Harvey would be a Cat 3 while it actually was a Cat 4 as it landed. I’d say your article is the one that is exaggerated.


I'd say your conclusion that my article was greatly exaggerated is false. After quick search, I located 23 articles which delineated that Harvey was caused or influenced by climate change. I have no illusion that you will read each article, but the media is indeed flooded with such articles.


1. What does Hurricane Harvey say about climate change?
   
2. Did climate change make Hurricane Harvey worse?
   
3. Is Hurricane Harvey Related to Climate Change? Scientists Have a Better Answer
4. Our Many Fears of Hurricane Harvey
5. Hurricane Harvey: Texas braces for 'significant disaster' as storm intensifies
6. Hurricane Harvey's deadliest threat is just beginning
7. Neil deGrasse Tyson uses Harvey to take jab at climate change deniers
8. And Here We Go: CNN Host Wonders If Hurricane Harvey's Rainfall Totals Are Due to Climate Change
9. What you can and can’t say about climate change and Hurricane Harvey
10. Hurricane Harvey 2017
11. Hurricane Harvey will bring some of the heaviest downpours anyone has ever seen
12. Could Hurricane Harvey Damage Spur Climate Change Action in TX ?
13. The Relationship Between Hurricanes and Climate Change
14. Hurricane Harvey is hitting Texas even harder than expected. Here's what you need to know.
15. Climate Change Advocates Use ‘Harvey’ to Tout Global Warming
16. Climate Change Makes Storms like Harvey More Severe
17. Did global warming cause Hurricane Harvey?
18. CNN anchor tries to tie Hurricane Harvey to climate change — then scientist shuts him down
19. Surprise: Hurricane Harvey Blamed On ‘Climate Change’
20. Climate Change Advocates Use ‘Harvey’ to Tout Global Warming,
21. Harvey, Amplified by Climate Change, Threatens Texas
22. Leftist Climate Change Advocates Use Hurricane ‘Harvey’ to Push Political Agenda
23. Harvey and 'climate change'
There are many more articles which attempt to tie climate change to Harvey. It has been only a little more than 24 hours since the hurricane came ashore. There will no doubt be many, many more attempts by the alarmists to blame climate change for causing or strengthening Harvey.

The climate change alarmists have no sense of the history of Texas hurricanes. Their notion that non existing global warming could suddenly arise in the past decade or so to have influence on Harvey without considering that the number of hurricanes to hit Texas since the 1850 is at least 64. (Source...) The Galveston Hurricane of 1900 was the deadliest natural disaster in American history. That horrific hurricane slammed into the city with wind speeds that surpassed 135 miles per hour, making it a category 4 on the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Wind Scale. Storm surges rose 15 feet and, within hours, estimates of 6,000 to 12,000 unwary people were killed and over 3,600 buildings were destroyed. The Galveston Hurricane remains the deadliest natural disaster in United States history. (Source...) Are you trying to join the rest of the modern day climate change alarmists in thinking that so-called global warming is drumming up a disaster that exceeds a hurricane that occurred 117 years ago? Do you somehow think that Harvey is going to even approach the level and strength of that hurricane. Pray tell what caused the Galveston hurricane to be so strong and deadly? Was it global warming?? Nonsense. Baloney cheese. Those who are trying to convince us that global warming is the cause or the major influencing factor in making Harvey stronger are off their rockers. They are crazy. But I guess you couldn't expect less from those people...


Glad to hear, David, you were not vacationing on San Padre Island- I seem to remember it was a favorite spot of yours.


Padre Island was indeed a favorite spot for me. I went there on four successive years (2001, 02, 03 & 04). I camped at basically the same spot about 20 miles down the island from the visitor's center. The Visitor's center is about 15 miles down the island from South Padre Island village. Here are four photos: The first year I didn't have a tent. Second year i did have a tent. Third & fourth year, the same tent. The highlight of each trip was getting to visit and fellowship with Ralph Storm. Sure miss that man.

I wonder what is going on out there today. No doubt the whole Island is torn asunder.

[KeithE]

Climate Alarmists Flooding the Media with Nonsense

Nonsense my foot. First note David's article has a cartoon and has no data.


True, my article had no data, but it needed no data to prove my point. The point I made was that climate change alarmists were jumping to the nonsensical conclusion that Harvey was caused or influenced by climate change hours before the huricane even hit the shore.


. . . . . . . . .[...]

And your article claims there has been a “flood” of “alarmist” media articles suggesting global warming is to blame for Harvey. Well your article only gave two examples - the ThinkProgress/Climate Progress article and a San Antonio News article (not exactly a flood!). And reading those articles, they are hardly “alarmist” - both thought Harvey would be a Cat 3 while it actually was a Cat 4 as it landed. I’d say your article is the one that is exaggerated.


I'd say your conclusion that my article was greatly exaggerated is false. After quick search, I located 23 articles which delineated that Harvey was caused or influenced by climate change. I have no illusion that you will read each article, but the media is indeed flooded with such articles.


1. What does Hurricane Harvey say about climate change?
   
2. Did climate change make Hurricane Harvey worse?
   
3. Is Hurricane Harvey Related to Climate Change? Scientists Have a Better Answer
4. Our Many Fears of Hurricane Harvey
5. Hurricane Harvey: Texas braces for 'significant disaster' as storm intensifies
6. Hurricane Harvey's deadliest threat is just beginning
7. Neil deGrasse Tyson uses Harvey to take jab at climate change deniers
8. And Here We Go: CNN Host Wonders If Hurricane Harvey's Rainfall Totals Are Due to Climate Change
9. What you can and can’t say about climate change and Hurricane Harvey
10. Hurricane Harvey 2017
11. Hurricane Harvey will bring some of the heaviest downpours anyone has ever seen
12. Could Hurricane Harvey Damage Spur Climate Change Action in TX ?
13. The Relationship Between Hurricanes and Climate Change
14. Hurricane Harvey is hitting Texas even harder than expected. Here's what you need to know.
15. Climate Change Advocates Use ‘Harvey’ to Tout Global Warming
16. Climate Change Makes Storms like Harvey More Severe
17. Did global warming cause Hurricane Harvey?
18. CNN anchor tries to tie Hurricane Harvey to climate change — then scientist shuts him down
19. Surprise: Hurricane Harvey Blamed On ‘Climate Change’
20. Climate Change Advocates Use ‘Harvey’ to Tout Global Warming,
21. Harvey, Amplified by Climate Change, Threatens Texas
22. Leftist Climate Change Advocates Use Hurricane ‘Harvey’ to Push Political Agenda
23. Harvey and 'climate change'
There are many more articles which attempt to tie climate change to Harvey. It has been only a little more than 24 hours since the hurricane came ashore. There will no doubt be many, many more attempts by the alarmists to blame climate change for causing or strengthening Harvey.

The climate change alarmists have no sense of the history of Texas hurricanes. Their notion that non existing global warming could suddenly arise in the past decade or so to have influence on Harvey without considering that the number of hurricanes to hit Texas since the 1850 is at least 64. (Source...) The Galveston Hurricane of 1900 was the deadliest natural disaster in American history. That horrific hurricane slammed into the city with wind speeds that surpassed 135 miles per hour, making it a category 4 on the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Wind Scale. Storm surges rose 15 feet and, within hours, estimates of 6,000 to 12,000 unwary people were killed and over 3,600 buildings were destroyed. The Galveston Hurricane remains the deadliest natural disaster in United States history. (Source...) Are you trying to join the rest of the modern day climate change alarmists in thinking that so-called global warming is drumming up a disaster that exceeds a hurricane that occurred 117 years ago? Do you somehow think that Harvey is going to even approach the level and strength of that hurricane. Pray tell what caused the Galveston hurricane to be so strong and deadly? Was it global warming?? Nonsense. Baloney cheese. Those who are trying to convince us that global warming is the cause or the major influencing factor in making Harvey stronger are off their rockers. They are crazy. But I guess you couldn't expect less from those people...


Glad to hear, David, you were not vacationing on San Padre Island- I seem to remember it was a favorite spot of yours.


Padre Island was indeed a favorite spot for me. I went there on four successive years (2001, 02, 03 & 04). I camped at basically the same spot about 20 miles down the island from the visitor's center. The Visitor's center is about 15 miles down the island from South Padre Island village. Here are four photos: The first year I didn't have a tent. Second year i did have a tent. Third & fourth year, the same tent. The highlight of each trip was getting to visit and fellowship with Ralph Storm. Sure miss that man.

I wonder what is going on out there today. No doubt the whole Island is torn asunder.

Notice that to increase the number of articles he could claim is caught up in some global warming media over-alarmism, David changed his description of articles to discredit by saying an article is bad if it says Harvey "was caused or influenced by climate change". He then went on to list 23 such articles he claims suffer from over-alarmism.

Well I woke up this morning early, and to get my mind off of other things, I read those 23 articles. I categorized them into 7 types with my assessment of each type in parentheses ( ).
A. Articles that reasonably point out tha Harvey was made worse by the increased Gulf temperature and thus availability of rainwater (I find these articles well reasoned, popularly written, and accurate, media doing a good job): 1,2,3,5,6,9,10,11,13,16, 21 fall into this category

B. Articles that says global warming has decreased frequency of hurricanes slightly, but intensity has gone up (interesting hypothesis which I will check out): 17, 18

C. Article claimed that the effects of Harvey have been “doubled” by Global Warming (unsubstantiated to get so quantitative,imo): 4

D. Incomplete article about Neil De Gasse tweet (bad, short article,imo): 7

E. Speculation on what will happened politically in Texas due to Harvey (interesting but addresses different subject): 12

F. Purely descriptive of Harvey's effects: 14

G. Global Warming “skeptical" articles (countering David’s case of a rush to overly alarmist articles, but instead demonstrates sarcastic, dataless extremist rhetoric much like David’s original link): 8,15,19,20,22,23.

18 also has elements of this kind of Category G rhetoric as well but does possibly have one redeeming factoring citing:

In their intriguing analysis published in the Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics, the four-member research team of Rojo-Garibaldi et al. developed a new database of historical hurricane occurrences in the Gulf of Mexico and the Caribbean Sea, spanning twenty-six decades over the period 1749 to 2012.

Statistical analysis of the record revealed “the hurricane number is actually decreasing in time,” which finding is quite stunning considering that it is quite possible fewer hurricanes were recorded at the beginning of their record when data acquisition was considerably worse than towards the end of the record.

I’ll have to check that out for just the global warming period of 1970-2017 vs earlier trend. Not really seeing any negative trend in the data below:



As for Galveston, Harvey (also a Cat 4) will not be nearly as catastrophic because of better building today (e.g. strict, regulated building codes, no Galveston sea wall) and the landfall of Harvey is a less urban setting. No one is saying Harvey will be as bad, but that has not stopped David from hoping someone will (and lambasting them, Don Quixote comes to mind). But Harvey has been “catastrophic” to those affected.

But for now better get ready for Promo Day for The Discovery Center for our classes starting Sept 10 which btw has 2 lectures on the Global Warming - both Consensus and Skeptics Views - within our Science and Religion Series.

[David Flick]

As for Galveston, Harvey (also a Cat 4) will not be nearly as catastrophic because of better building today (e.g. strict, regulated building codes, no Galveston sea wall) and the landfall of Harvey is a less urban setting. No one is saying Harvey will be as bad, but that has not stopped David from hoping someone will (and lambasting them, Don Quixote comes to mind). But Harvey has been “catastrophic” to those affected.

My Prediction Comes True...

[Rvaughn]

Leaving the climate argument for a bit...

"A sociology professor at the University of Tampa published a tweet on Sunday afternoon suggesting that Texas residents deserve the death, destruction and suffering caused by Hurricane Harvey because a majority of Texas voters supported Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election."

http://dailycaller.com/2017/08/29/profe ... for-trump/
Professor: Texans ‘Deserve’ Harvey Because They Voted For Trump

Professor Storey perhaps failed to notice that "Lake" Harris County, where Houston is, went 54% for Hillary Clinton (as you might expect all the larger cities of Texas would). On the other hand, Potter County, which went 68% for Trump, is high and dry. Maybe he's praying they get a tornado or something.
https://www.texastribune.org/2016/11/09/see-which-counties-texas-trump-and-clinton-won/

[KeithE]

As for Galveston, Harvey (also a Cat 4) will not be nearly as catastrophic because of better building today (e.g. strict, regulated building codes, no Galveston sea wall) and the landfall of Harvey is a less urban setting. No one is saying Harvey will be as bad, but that has not stopped David from hoping someone will (and lambasting them, Don Quixote comes to mind). But Harvey has been “catastrophic” to those affected.

My Prediction Comes True...

David has continued his search for "climate change alarmists (that) will continue to flood the media with nonsensical articles that credit human-caused global warming/climate change for either causing or intensifying the hurricane”. I find the articles he has identified to be sane discussions usually about Harvey’s rainfall creation being enhanced by the increase Gulf sea temperatures which is a multiply measured fact. The temperature increase is due to increased Greenhouse gases (ghgs) well beyond the natural cycles and continuing to grow trapping re-radiated earthshine. Take the ghg CO2:



And it is now over 400pm

Have fun searching David, but try break down your biases and learn something along the way.

[KeithE]

Leaving the climate argument for a bit...

"A sociology professor at the University of Tampa published a tweet on Sunday afternoon suggesting that Texas residents deserve the death, destruction and suffering caused by Hurricane Harvey because a majority of Texas voters supported Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election."

http://dailycaller.com/2017/08/29/profe ... for-trump/
Professor: Texans ‘Deserve’ Harvey Because They Voted For Trump

Professor Storey perhaps failed to notice that "Lake" Harris County, where Houston is, went 54% for Hillary Clinton (as you might expect all the larger cities of Texas would). On the other hand, Potter County, which went 68% for Trump, is high and dry. Maybe he's praying they get a tornado or something.
https://www.texastribune.org/2016/11/09/see-which-counties-texas-trump-and-clinton-won/

Here is what the Professor Storey actually said in quotes (according to the link rvaughn supplied)

“I don’t believe in instant Karma but this kinda feels like it for Texas. Hopefully this will help them realize the GOP doesn’t care about them,” Storey wrote in one tweet.

When another Twitter user responded that Texas is home to “good people” and that Storey “may want to rethink” the tweet, Storey doubled down.

“Well, the good people there need to do more to stop the evil their state pushes. I’m only blaming those who support the GOP there,” Storey wrote.

Insensitive remarks for sure and misplaced blame (in my view); but he did apologize.

But the linked article clearly exaggerated when it said in the lead-in paragraph:

A sociology professor at the University of Tampa published a tweet on Sunday afternoon suggesting that Texas residents deserve the death, destruction and suffering caused by Hurricane Harvey because a majority of Texas voters supported Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election.

He said no such thing. The Daily Caller is the source of rvaughn’s link.

That was an interesting county vote map, Rvaughn. Largest cities went for Hillary.

[Haruo]

Well, I don't see an apology in what Keith quoted, but I also see a great deal of exagerration of what Storey said in what the Daily Caller rephrased it as. It would be nice if people would be nice. I agree that the comment was insensitive and the theology badly flawed.

[KeithE]

Well, I don't see an apology in what Keith quoted, but I also see a great deal of exagerration of what Storey said in what the Daily Caller rephrased it as. It would be nice if people would be nice. I agree that the comment was insensitive and the theology badly flawed.

The apology was in the link.

It said

"I deeply regret a statement I posted yesterday. I never meant to wish ill will upon any group. I hope all affected by Harvey recover quickly"

5:02 PM - Aug 28, 2017

I agree that the theology was bad as well as the misplaced blame. Then again I don’t know if Prof Storey is into theology.

[Sandy]

The Daily Caller. That's never a factual source.

Well, how much different is this than Pat Robertson's declaration of having prayed a hurricanes away from Virginia Beach, because his empire built on the backs of little blue haired ladies is there. So the one that got some attention wound up hitting the mid-atlantic and New England, and did about $900 million in damage, including to George H.W. Bush's home at Kennebunkport, Maine. Oops. Or John Hagee's claim that Katrina was a punishment from God against New Orleans and its "Southern Decadence" weekend at Labor Day. Of course, the brunt of the storm hit the Mississippi Gulf Coast, and ravaged that God fearin' state all the way up to Meridian. Maybe it was the casinos there.

Yes, the comment, the real one, not the exaggeration in the Daily Caller, was insensitive. The kind of attention Texas should be getting now isn't second guessing their voting motives, and the Daily Caller should have exercised something it really doesn't have, discernment, good judgement and common sense, by deciding not to put this out there instead of their calloused attempt to capitalize on "the bad, bad left." And the whole idea of natural disaster judgements for the collective sin of a particular place is contrary to the covenant God makes with his people through Christ, unless you believe in collective Redemption.

[Rvaughn]

But the linked article clearly exaggerated when it said in the lead-in paragraph:

No doubt, though not something The Daily Caller has a copyright on. Bogus headlines and dramatic lead-ins seem pretty much staple for internet news (not saying it is a good thing, just a thing). But it appears that the bulk of the article probably got most things close to right.

That was an interesting county vote map, Rvaughn. Largest cities went for Hillary.

Yea, that is a pretty nice resource. It is, of course, not surprising to those familiar with Texas politics, but may be unexpected for those who are not. Our capital city, Austin, is often dubbed "the most liberal city in Texas."

[KeithE]

That was an interesting county vote map, Rvaughn. Largest cities went for Hillary.

Yea, that is a pretty nice resource. It is, of course, not surprising to those familiar with Texas politics, but may be unexpected for those who are not. Our capital city, Austin, is often dubbed "the most liberal city in Texas."

Large university towns are usually more left leaning.

[Haruo]

The professor apparently got fired over his remark. I think that's overreaction on the University's part, though I think some form of censure would have been appropriate. And if the folks who fired him are also ones who supported Trump's "end to political correctness" stuff, then it's doubly ironic.

[Sandy]

The professor apparently got fired over his remark. I think that's overreaction on the University's part, though I think some form of censure would have been appropriate. And if the folks who fired him are also ones who supported Trump's "end to political correctness" stuff, then it's doubly ironic.

My guess is that he's already found an excellent lawyer, and will settle with the University for an amount equal to an early retirement.

[Rvaughn]

The professor apparently got fired over his remark. I think that's overreaction on the University's part, though I think some form of censure would have been appropriate. And if the folks who fired him are also ones who supported Trump's "end to political correctness" stuff, then it's doubly ironic.

Yes, I noticed that the link to his page at the universtiy web site didn't work yesterday. Censure is appropriate, since the comment was quite public and very "out there" (and on the other hand, he did apologize).

But, if we all got fired for saying stupid stuff on the heat of the moment, lots of folks would be out of jobs.

[Rvaughn]

Harvey horror: Shivering tot found clinging to drowned mom
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/harvey-horror-shivering-tot-found-clinging-drowned-mom-063308807.html

Authorities found a shivering toddler clinging to the body of her drowned mother in a rain-swollen canal in Southeast Texas after the woman tried to carry her child to safety from Harvey's floods.

[Haruo]

Harvey horror: Shivering tot found clinging to drowned mom
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/harvey-horror-shivering-tot-found-clinging-drowned-mom-063308807.html

Authorities found a shivering toddler clinging to the body of her drowned mother in a rain-swollen canal in Southeast Texas after the woman tried to carry her child to safety from Harvey's floods.

Weird that Yahoo calls that "Finance" news. Or maybe they see all natural human disasters in monetary terms?

[KeithE]

The professor apparently got fired over his remark. I think that's overreaction on the University's part, though I think some form of censure would have been appropriate. And if the folks who fired him are also ones who supported Trump's "end to political correctness" stuff, then it's doubly ironic.

Yes, I noticed that the link to his page at the universtiy web site didn't work yesterday. Censure is appropriate, since the comment was quite public and very "out there" (and on the other hand, he did apologize).

But, if we all got fired for saying stupid stuff on the heat of the moment, lots of folks would be out of jobs.

Trump would be out of a job 10’s of times.

[KeithE]

Leaving the climate argument for a bit...

"A sociology professor at the University of Tampa published a tweet on Sunday afternoon suggesting that Texas residents deserve the death, destruction and suffering caused by Hurricane Harvey because a majority of Texas voters supported Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election."

http://dailycaller.com/2017/08/29/profe ... for-trump/
Professor: Texans ‘Deserve’ Harvey Because They Voted For Trump

Professor Storey perhaps failed to notice that "Lake" Harris County, where Houston is, went 54% for Hillary Clinton (as you might expect all the larger cities of Texas would). On the other hand, Potter County, which went 68% for Trump, is high and dry. Maybe he's praying they get a tornado or something.
https://www.texastribune.org/2016/11/09/see-which-counties-texas-trump-and-clinton-won/

What do ya’ll make of this story.

[Haruo]

Natural disasters are not closely driven by election results or sexuality.

[Sandy]

What do ya’ll make of this story.

Either God has a sense of humor, or he isn't a big fan of self-appointed "Prophets".

[Jim]

The supreme irony lies in the fact that 95% or so of academia considers freedom of speech as a Constitutional right until someone—anyone—says something the institution doesn't like and is either fired, excoriated or cancels a speech by a conservative (especially if either the loony-tunes faculty or the dumb-as-a-gourd students insist). The professor had a right to say what he did as long as he was speaking for himself and not the institution. It's gotten so bad that people can't even make fools of themselves anymore.

[Sandy]

Specifically, here's the tweet from Professor Storey:
"I dont believe in instant karma but this kinda feels like it for Texas. Hopefully this will help them realize the GOP doesnt care about them."

Then a follow-up:
"Good people need to do more to stop the evil their state pushes." He continued: "I'm only blaming those who support the GOP there."

Not exactly what the conservative propaganda websites claim that he said, but they're not interested in truth, they're just interested in using things like this to push their agenda. And his statement would probably not have gone anywhere had it not been for the holy horror put up by conservatives in this case, based on false and misleading statements made by conservative media. The University of Tampa is a private university, about 8,000 students enrolled in mostly business-related majors and minors. The conservative media sites marshalled their supporters to inundate the University with calls, posing as parents, threatening to withdraw students or not send them, demanding he be fired. Conservatives consider freedom of speech as a constitutional right until someone--anyone--says something they don't like about Donald Trump, then they excoriate the professor and demand he be fired.

Professor Storey was apparently pretty gracious with the university. He wasn't fired, he was asked for his resignation in the face of a libelous assault on his character by some loony-tunes, dumb-as-gourd Trump supporters, and he agreed. No details are offered of that particular agreement, but I'm guessing there was a check attached to it with an amount similar to what they'd have to pay both he and his attorney if he sued. Perhaps he's considering a very justifiable libel suit against the conservative websites that attacked him falsely and distorted his words. It would probably be easy to guess that one or two of the university's prominent, large donors got upset and put pressure on the school to terminate him, since he was only adjunct, but even though that's an unknown, this isn't an attack on free speech by "academia," code word for "the left." This was a right wing conspiracy, through and through.

http://www.tampabay.com/news/education/ ... te/2335504