Heh. It's just like that episode where Buffy sued the Master after he said she had a fat backside.
Like Mark says, just what more does this hag want? She's had an insanely pampered life, but now she's the Rosa Parks of science? Clearly, those beasts at the Royal Society were so keen to fire a lady director, they had to go to the trouble of hiring one in the first place just so they could sack her, but only after keeping her on for four years to hide the true nature of their evil plan.
You know, with deep thinkers like that on the bridge, it's a wonder British science is sinking so fast.
As it happens, there may be one other reason why she got the ol' heave ho:
It's not as if there isn't evidence of pilot error:
All in all, you have to have some sympathy with the Royal Society.... but only if you're stupid. Greenfield's whole schtick is and always was professional victimhood (try this for a 2002 example). These guys must have known right from the off that they were hiring a divisive femiloon but they were prepared to go along with that as long as she aimed her unhinged rants at everyone else.
To the point: no less a scientist than Newton claimed to be 'standing on the shoulders of giants' - meaning he recognised the contribution of those who had come before him. Femiloon ideologues go the other way: everything that came before is a product of the Patriarchy and therefore bad, Bad, BAD! They insist we all hail them as the First Woman To.... , then they goose-step in and announce the need to modernise everything in the whole world, until it all goes horribly wrong and then they claim the worker bees let them down.
The Royal Society has sown the wind and they can reap the whirlwind: Death to the Manginas!
Like Mark says, just what more does this hag want? She's had an insanely pampered life, but now she's the Rosa Parks of science? Clearly, those beasts at the Royal Society were so keen to fire a lady director, they had to go to the trouble of hiring one in the first place just so they could sack her, but only after keeping her on for four years to hide the true nature of their evil plan.
You know, with deep thinkers like that on the bridge, it's a wonder British science is sinking so fast.
As it happens, there may be one other reason why she got the ol' heave ho:
Lady Greenfield's removal comes after the Royal Institution incurred huge losses during a major refurbishment project she masterminded. The £22 million project left the body so short of funds that its auditors raised questions about its ability to continue operating.Steering your organisation into a £3 million sized hole is bad. Not seeing why that could be a problem really should be a sacking offence.
The body's trustees decided that the position of a full-time director was no longer affordable in the light of funding problems that has left it more than £3 million in the red.
It's not as if there isn't evidence of pilot error:
Supporters of Lady Greenfield say she had modernised the charity, which aims to connect the public with the world of science, but had been regarded by some as too stuffy and outmoded.Is it just me, or has anyone else noticed how often modernisation precedes total disaster? I guess keeping track of the red ink isn't part of the New Girl Order.
All in all, you have to have some sympathy with the Royal Society.... but only if you're stupid. Greenfield's whole schtick is and always was professional victimhood (try this for a 2002 example). These guys must have known right from the off that they were hiring a divisive femiloon but they were prepared to go along with that as long as she aimed her unhinged rants at everyone else.
To the point: no less a scientist than Newton claimed to be 'standing on the shoulders of giants' - meaning he recognised the contribution of those who had come before him. Femiloon ideologues go the other way: everything that came before is a product of the Patriarchy and therefore bad, Bad, BAD! They insist we all hail them as the First Woman To.... , then they goose-step in and announce the need to modernise everything in the whole world, until it all goes horribly wrong and then they claim the worker bees let them down.
The Royal Society has sown the wind and they can reap the whirlwind: Death to the Manginas!
3 comments:
> Newton claimed to be 'standing on the shoulders of giants' - meaning he recognised the contribution of those who had come before him.
Popular misconception, that. What Newton meant was "You're a shortarse, Robert Hooke." He could be a bit of a bastard at times.
Squander Two - I never knew that. Presumably, Galileo's famous 'But still it moves' is a comment on some personal rather than cosmological matter?..
"the charity, which aims to connect the public with the world of science, but had been regarded by some as too stuffy and outmoded. "
And all the smart money in science recently has been chasing the perfectly reasonable idea that four wheel drives are chasing polar bears up tree whose rings are too small?
How can actual science seem interesting to the rest of us compared with 'the end of the world is at hand, please give me billions of pounds of tax to not build anything at all?'
"Clearly, those beasts at the Royal Society were so keen to fire a lady director, they had to go to the trouble of hiring one in the first place just so they could sack her, but only after keeping her on for four years to hide the true nature of their evil plan."
Oh maaann, that's good.
Post a Comment