This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or
poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially
libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to
this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to
join the project and
contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the
documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the
project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of Oxford, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
University of Oxford on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.University of OxfordWikipedia:WikiProject University of OxfordTemplate:WikiProject University of OxfordUniversity of Oxford articles
This article has been
automatically rated by a
bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the
project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Energy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnergyWikipedia:WikiProject EnergyTemplate:WikiProject Energyenergy articles
There seems to be a major cancer across wikipedia with editors drinking the kool-aid and describing Amory as a physicist. Yet even here in the article it spells out rather cloakingly of course, but nonetheless, between the lines you see that "he is a college drop-out", that simply publishes advocacy pamphlets for hire, pamphlets which no actual physicist takes seriously.
I'm too busy right now to deal with this disturbing dogma-guru-man and their influence but at the least, you need to start describing Lovin's as something based in fact, such as an energy advocate. Or something like that. As even the moniker "analyst" would be too much, as for example, someone who advocates for lobotomies as a cure-all are nowadays not called a medicine analyst, now are they? When no one in the scientific literature continues with that "cure-all", now do they?
So what is Lovin's but akin to the other hugely popular homeopathy selling "Dr."
mercola? [Who isn't a doctor either, who would have thought?]
By the way, this isn't me calling him this, it is actually but reputable secondary sources which describe him as a "college drop-out" etc.
Checking the archive here on this talk page, shows that this "he's a physicist" issue is not new. Yet, what do you know 9 years later and it's still an issue. With fans of theirs pushing fake "dr"/"physicist" labels.
I mean "soft energy"...wtf does that even mean? Other than the common guru-phenomenon of inventing a False-dichotomy? Is it that you'd have to be Soft-in-the-head to believe such a thing exists. What next? Fluffy-energy? Cuddle-some-energy?
Boundarylayer (
talk)
19:18, 15 January 2019 (UTC)reply
Other editors have been bringing this clear case of self-promoting up for close to a decade on the talk page, with the article then somehow, really who would have thought, repeatedly finding its ways back to describing Lovins as essentially, identically as his fanclub does.
Yet anyone who does a basic search will find, Lovins' entire education history and cultivation of their 'environmental cred' is, to put it mildly, really, really not what they self-promote.
An
| Actual physicist Alexander DeVolpi, in an identical fashion went thru the same realization, in an exchange he had with him in a magazine, Amory is not a physicist. As much as anyone else who drops out of college is a physicist. Is this the new-age way? Especially if they then start essentially down the same path as the likewise infamous Dr. Mercola. Making prognostications about human health and in Lovins case, pontificating about energy systems that likewise are affecting government policy/human health?
I also hope I don't need to make it obvious that the listing of honorary degrees is genuinely not some more disturbingly transparent hand-waving, as in what world does the receiving of college campus-popularity-contest-prizes, make anyone anything else, but popular in what is the deeply ideological-crazed domain of, the college campus? What metric of expertise does that convey, other than the ability to con impressionable youth?
Ok?...Lovins wants us back in the caves, with just enough electricity to read his wikipedia article then, we take it? Yet in this article, no mention to any of these bizarre beliefs are made, nothing about how he isn't an accredited physicist, noting about how he openly advocated and advertised for increased coal usage, none of it is ever mentioned. You're told he is a physicist, a professional of high-standing, who influences the world. Wait, but isn't that just like how fans of Dr.
Mercola, would describe him, then?
FYI an MA from Oxford is roughly equivalent to a BSc or BA elsewhere (except more than that, since it's from Oxford, which is far more prestigious). They don't just hand them to you for enrolling! A friend of mine's brother got an MA, but he was doing a PhD in Chemistry, but in the last few weeks his entire experiment detonated, and so he couldn't finish his research. He went 'fuck it', and left, and got an MA as a consolation. But you don't just get it for enrolling. ;)
GliderMaven (
talk)
04:25, 23 January 2019 (UTC)reply
I don't know where Rod Adams got that particular piece of information from, however the story of Lovins' education is on very shaky ground. As per his research. Moreover, there is also the possibility that in the sixties in which this is said to have occurred, 'Oxford' could very well have had a consolation enrollment policy...that let's say...could have been very different in the handing out of MAs than your modern anecdotal case, conveys. All we know is secondary sources have put a lot of question marks over this 'physicist' description that seems to be everywhere, yet no actual evidence for it exists. There also seems to be this, a quote by Lovins, himself?
Lovins makes his living as the C.E.O. of [XYZ energy advocacy company, and hey look it's located in guitarist, John Denver's old haunt, yo how 'rad' man]...it now employs more than fifty people
Employing fifty people to promote your brand of clearly nonsensical 'soft-energy', would fairly obviously mean, there is something of a major conflict of interest when say actual accredited scientists or agencies come along, as they routinely do and publish things that as a 'guru', would know, could upset the apple-cart of their business? Does it not? Something that is a little concerning.
Life as, the fossil fuel funded, 'soft-energy' guru
Though no mention to his source of income in the seventies, work for an organization set up by an oil tycoon and beginning of Lovins as the anti-nuclear spokesman, shall be made in this article?
This debacle just sucks. One thing comes to mind when mentioned waking up Sunday morning hearing the crews putting in a bike lane. If street parking was so important, how did they manage to stripe bike lanes with cars parked there? Was there even one single car parked there that day? Sounds like not. People just want their damned “just in case” parking spot. You never know how much parking you’ll need! What if I have a big party with all my multi-generational extended family and friends?
Looking forward to the supposed middle ground solution that is somehow in the middle between the bare minimum (pained lines) and nothing. As Watts (I think) suggested, maybe speed bumps. Speed bumps and sharrows I bet. Or maybe just painted speed bumps.
173.164.116.25 (
talk)
03:27, 15 December 2023 (UTC)reply