Full story here.
Here’s the official quote:
As you’ve correctly noted, at this time the individual is not a Princeton University employee. We will review all available information and determine next steps.
And here’s what Kim has to say:
I’m gathering evidence and relevant information so I can provide a single comprehensive response. I will do so at my earliest opportunity.
I get it, but this is piling on and in bad taste. Unusually poor form for this outlet.
Matt:
Perhaps . . . but the behavior of data faking, followed by extreme publicity of false claims, seems to me to be destructive of the sort of trust that is central to science. I think it’s appropriate for violators of the public trust to be mocked and mocked and mocked. If it was someone working quietly in his lab, making an unfortunate error, that would be one thing. None of us is perfect, after all. But if it’s someone knowingly and actively publicizing false claims . . . well, I think that’s what’s poor form and in bad taste.
I feel the same way about the other people I mock on this blog, the Ed Wegmans and Dr. Anil Pottis and David Brookses and the rest: they betray the public trust and profit from it, and to me the appropriate response is to not take them seriously, to take away the cover that they have attained from their institutional affiliations.
So I guess this isn’t about Kim Jong Un then…
Any resemblance to real persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental.
I like it
His appointment doesn’t start until July. He would not be an employee at this time irrespective of his status in the fall. This statement does not confirm un-hiring.
Bea:
I checked the webpage and I see no mention of Kim. But, I agree, anything could happen between now and September.
Photoshop?!? Ugh. A good fake requires that you get the radiative transfer right, e.g., http://dirsig.org/