These poor right-wingers. You just can't find any coherence in their crankiness. I thought we were supposed to oppose the "soft bigotry of low expectations." Now communist college perfessors are supposed to decide that no one but brainiacs should study physics and chemistry? Oy.
Wow. He is an asshole. Women wanting equal pay is on par with children wanting candy for dinner?
I think he's trolling for attention. He's smarter than this shitstorm.
Why would we want our B students to learn entrepreneurship? "Here, take the great ideas from the A students and turn them into mediocre business ventures."
"his website has earned him millions, while no other comic property has done the same."

Stan Lee's comic properties have made tons of people millionaires. Or, if we just want to talk comic strips? Peanuts as a brand was bringing in 1.1 billion annually, and making Schultz directly 30-40 million/year at the time of his death.

Restricted just to comic websites? I can't speak to how much Mike and Jerry over at Penny Arcade make each year, but their charity brought in 2.3 million just last year. They've personally got revenue streams from ads, merch, collections, video games, a TV show, and probably their two conventions as well.

So, for all his "genius IQ", Adams sure seems to have trouble with research.
He's a douche canoe!
There is no better way to gain attention (and, therefore, money) on the internet than raising the ire of people who think they're smart and principled. One note: pissing off Anonymous is not a good idea.
Also, Paul Constant calling anyone a douche is an amazing case of the pot calling the kettle black. Check out that profile picture!
@6, I would ere on the side of conestoga douche wagon.
@6- I am stealing from you this term "douche canoe". Thank you, very, very much.
@4: I was under the impression that was the entire purpose of American Capitalism. Steal ideas and make the $$$
Oh man, Scott Adams' trollery is making it all the way to Slog. Spend 10 minutes reading his blog and you'll realize the guy is incredibly smart, and offers a ton in the realm of unique and interesting thought experiments.

One of these thought experiments was to "poke the hornets nest" if you will for the Men's Rights movement, in order to see if there is actually honey worth defending at the core. (Spoiler: there is, and he admits it). He genuinely challenges people with new ideas, and has been thoroughly chronicling the way information travels across the net when taken out of context, exactly as we are doing here.

Poor form Paul, and yes, you are the kettle here.
Read the ongoing debate over the worthless-ness of business degrees and schools in the NYTimes this past week.
@12 - Hey Scott! Long time, no see! How's it going?
Douche canoe is actually a Bloggess thing. It is fabulous though.
So ... his act of sock puppetry is to be compared to a holy book freakishly worshiped by millions? My goodness. If ONLY the douchey things *I* did were so sacred.

Something tells me Mr. Certified Genius IQ didn't intend to compare himself to Mohammed. I wonder if he's been re-certified lately?
@3 and @12, that seems about right.
Didn't he lose the ability to speak a while ago and he had to retrain himself by singing? Could he still be suffering from some sort of related brain damage? This is a serious question.
Wow, that comment he made about atheists that you linked to, Paul, that shows Adams has a playground level of understanding atheism. The guy has honestly never heard of or considered negative/weak atheism? Never realized HE was an atheist when it came to believing in the Gods of Olympus or The Flying Spaghetti Monster? Any sensible atheist is an agnostic-atheist to a degree, and Adams is either a moron, or deliberatively misrepresenting us to make us look foolish.

Definitely a douche.
Ah, Adams is the willing sacrificial lamb for those of much less notoriety and stature to use for unfair comparisons and to champion unrelated issues, with an enormous ego, but he is interesting and funny and worth the read. I check in on his blog regularly but I never ever read the comments.

If you have commented here without reading his entire, very long "defense" with the concluding self-interview, you have made his point..... And if you read the entire thing without a single chuckle (Spanx indeed), you take life way too seriously.
Didn't he also make up a fake condition for himself, which he fake-cured, which he also considers a sign of his fake-brilliance?

These events, along with his creationist beliefs make him a totally regressive, unscientific douchebag. Sure, you can get a job as an engineer, but you probably aren't the championed non-idiot you think you are.
@12: "One of these thought experiments was to "poke the hornets nest" if you will for the Men's Rights movement, in order to see if there is actually honey worth defending at the core."

I'm just asking questions, guys!

Guess what, devils' advocacy for misogyny and racism is douchebaggy and cowardly.

Instead of actually bringing up serious issues, he courts the worst elements under the guise of decency and intellectual curiosity. He's not curious, he knows exactly what he thinks, and he's not injecting any positive action into the process. He's lousy and regressive and exactly the same as any other religious creationist conservative in his approach.

Look up the wedge strategy, while again directed towards creationism in schools, the debate strategy is the same. Pseudointellectualism that only appeals to people with much higher opinions of their brains than is earned.
PROTIP: If you are defending Adams, you are a dumb fuck.
There is a kernel of truth to the "smart people study maths" trope, but the truth is that not enough people study advanced maths and hard science. US production of STEM collegiates, graduate students, and professors is about 20% of what will be needed in the next couple decades. And then the whining will switch to "why are all of our professors from India and China?"
There is also this about Scott Adams and the "Men's Rights" "movement":… and the follow-up:…. It would be funny if it weren't so icky.
@12, @20, so you are saying that Adams is just somebody who has figured out how to make money by trolling? Prima facie evidence of douchiness.
I just read his men's rights article and defence, his creationism article and defense and his WSJ article and sockpuppetry defence. If he's not an enormous douchebag, then the word has lost all meaning.
Guys, Adams is correct on this one. A hard truth, but he is.

Oh, and this: "Women wanting equal pay is on par with children wanting candy for dinner?"

No problem. Just do equal work. Trouble is, they don't. They take safer, less strenuous jobs. They work less and for fewer years. That is all documented. So they earn less, as a group, once those variables are accounted for.

Sorry. Everyone fair-minded figured that out about a decade ago. You just are not reading the honest people.

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.

Add a comment

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.