Endless Summer

The Edmonton Oilers arrived in California and fed the Ducks with some solid hockey. Stars included Connor McDavid, Leon Draisaitl, Ryan Nugent-Hopkins, Zack Kassian, the penalty kill and Oscar Klefbom. Happy for Patrick Russell, who grabbed the first point of his NHL career in the shadow of the happiest place on earth. A nice Mom’s trip.

THE ATHLETIC!

The Athletic Edmonton features a fabulous cluster of stories (some linked below, some on the site). Great perspective from a ridiculous group of writers and analysts. Proud to be part of The Athletic, less than two coffees a month offer here.

  • New Lowetide: What’s going on with the Bakersfield Condors?
  • New Daniel Nugent-Bowman: Ryan Nugent-Hopkins shines, mad props for Leon Draisaitl and more to like as the Oilers beat the Devils
  • New Daniel Nugent-Bowman: What inexperienced defencemen like the Oilers’ Joel Persson must do to gain their coach’s confidence
  • Lowetide: Oilers are closer to having an effective second line than a year ago, but few have noticed
  • Daniel Nugent-Bowman: The beauty of a good night’s sleep can be elusive for many NHL players
  • Jonathan Willis: Why the Oilers were wise to gamble on Tomas Jurco, even though it didn’t pan out
  • Jonathan Willis: The unlikely goalie performances underpinning the Oilers’ hot start
  • Lowetide: How far away is Evan Bouchard and what role will he play with the Oilers?
  • Scott Wheeler: Analyzing Jesse Puljujarvi’s play in Finland to see what he could offer as an NHLer
  • Jonathan Willis: Oilers right to wait until they’re sure before recalling Kailer Yamamoto, Tyler Benson
  • Lowetide:  Can Leon Draisaitl score more than 50 goals this season?
  • Lowetide: Bakersfield Condors coaching staff continues to mold unheralded players into legit NHL prospects.
  • Daniel Nugent-Bowman: Oilers Mailbag: Fixing the forward depth, slotting the big three, a Puljujarvi trade and more
  • Minnia Feng: The 2019-20 Oilers fan guide to emotions and stressful circumstances
  • Jonathan Willis: How much will the Oilers have to pay to keep pending free agent Zack Kassian?
  • Lowetide: Oilers top 20 prospects summer 2019.

OILERS AFTER 19 GAMES

  • Oilers in 2015: 6-12-1, 13 points; goal differential -12
  • Oilers in 2016: 10-8-1, 21 points; goal differential +2
  • Oilers in 2017: 7-10-2, 16 points; goal differential -10
  • Oilers in 2018: 9-9-1, 19 points; goal differential -6
  • Oilers in 2019: 12-5-2, 26 points; goal differential +12

This is new. I mean you can see it in the numbers here but the games themselves are proof. There is structure, there is calm, there is purpose. That was one of the truly impressive games I’ve seen this team play in a long time. Ebenezer Scrooge would have a hard time finding a downbeat from last night’s game.

OILERS IN NOVEMBER

  • Oilers in November 2015: 2-3-0, four points; goal differential -3
  • Oilers in November 2016: 2-2-1, five points; goal differential -3
  • Oilers in November 2017: 3-2-0, six points; goal differential 0
  • Oilers in November 2018: 2-3-0, four points; goal differential -3
  • Oilers in November 2019: 3-1-1, seven points; goal differential +7

It’s been a long time since the Oilers piled up a giant point total in any November. We are early days and there is struggle ahead. Still, this is something else.

WHAT TO EXPECT IN NOVEMBER

  • On the road to: PIT (Expected 0-1-0) (Actual 1-0-0)
  • At home to: ARI, STL, NJD (Expected 2-1-0) (Actual 1-1-1)
  • On the road to: ANA, SJS (Expected 1-0-1) (Actual 1-0-0)
  • At home to: COL, DAL (Expected 1-1-0)
  • On the road to: SJS, LAK, VEG, ARI, COL (Expected 2-3-0)
  • At home to: VAN (Expected 1-0-0)
  • Overall expected result: 7-6-1, 15 points in 14 games
  • Current results: 3-1-1, 7 points after five games

It was a big win because it’s a division game and because several Pacific clubs have lost in the last 48 hours. San Jose has three wins in a row entering tomorrow night’s game, so winning against Anaheim was important.

OILERS 2019-20

As we approach the 20-game mark, it’s fun to multiply everything by four and look for career seasons. It’s also true the checking line hasn’t scored. The goaltending is solid as a rock and that’s a major thing. All numbers five-on-five unless noted and all via NST.

LINE 1 Leon Draisaitl-Connor McDavid-Zack Kassian played 13:12, going 11-20 Corsi, 7-14 shots, 2-1 goals and 5-5 HDSC.

Leon Draisaitl had two assists (plus two power play) two shots, one HDSC and a giveaway plus takeaway. Connor McDavid scored two goals at five-on-five and added a third on the power play. His most brilliant goal looked like the All-Star scoring competition with Ducks for props. Zack Kassian had a strong game, scoring a big goal and grabbing two assists. Four HDSC! Man what a line.

LINE 2 James Neal-Nuge-Alex Chiasson played 11:12, going 19-6 Corsi, 11-3 shots, 1-0 goals and 6-0 HDSC.

James Neal had two shots, two HDSC and a giveaway he was a key i the lead-up to the Nuge goal but received no assist. Nuge was a big story early in the game with his terrific goal (plus a PP marker later), four shots, 2 HDSC and a takeaway. Wonderful game. Alex Chiasson had one shot and two HDSC’s. This line is hammering opponents lately, those possession numbers are crazy good.

LINE 3 Markus Granlund-Gaetan Haas-Patrick Russell played 9:46, going 4-8 Corsi, 1-3 shots, 0-1 goals and 1-1 HDSC.

Markus Granlund had one shot and played over two minutes on an effective PK, but was most noticeable for not doing anything really on the second goal. Gaetan Haas drew two penalties and was around the puck a lot. He’s making Granlund look bad he’s around the disc so much. Patrick Russell got an assist and worked hard all night again.

LINE 4 Jujhar Khaira-Riley Sheahan-Josh Archibald played 8:34, going 4-6 Corsi, 2-3 shots and no goals, 1-0 HDSC.

Jujhar Khaira was good on the forecheck and PK, he is good in a fourth line role. Sheahan had the line’s only HDSC but made a couple of nice passes and Archibald had his best chance to score via a shot less than 10 feet from the net. Most of his shots have been long rangers. He was more involved, spent more time with or near the puck, than I’ve seen. Good sign.

PAIRING ONE Oscar Klefbom and Joel Persson played 16:19, going 15-17 Corsi, 11-10 shots, 0-1 goals and 4-1 HDSC.

Oscar Klefbom had two PP assists, and at five-on-five two shots a takeaway and three blocks. Joel Persson made a poor decision on the first GA, had three shots and one hammer that missed the net but sounded like a rocket. Persson is in danger with Adam Larsson close to his return.

PAIRING TWO Darnell Nurse and Ethan Bear played 13:33, going 12-10 Corsi, 5-7 shots 3-1 goals and 5-4 HDSC.

Darnell Nurse used his speed and size effectively during the evening. He crushed sorties at the blue line and used his speed to retrieve pucks and send them the other way quickly. Bear helps him a lot. Ethan Bear had an assist, but also two giveaways. He recovers well when making a miscue, and Nurse helps him, too. Solid pair. Bear’s passing changes the equation when he’s on the ice.

Pairing Three Kris Russell and Matt Benning were 8-12 in 12:07, 4-5 shots, 1-0 goals and 3-1 HDSC. This pairing had 2 defensive faceoffs, compared to 3 for Nurse-Bear and 4 for Klefbom-Persson. This pairing had 0 offensive zone faceoffs, compared to 2 for Nurse-Bear and 6 for Klefbom-Persson. Tippett does more active coaching than McLellan, in several areas. This is one.

Kris Russell blocked a couple of shots and defended aggressively but there wasn’t much danger for this pairing. In a game like this one Russell is effective without getting noticed. Probably one of the reasons he is underrated by some. Matt Benning had a couple of giveaways that came to no harm and passed the puck well. A quiet night for this pairing but 12:07 TOI at five-on-five says they were giving the top-4D some rest and that’s a solid.

GOALIE Mikko Koskinen stopped 31 of 33, .939 save percentage. NST says he stopped eight of 10 high danger chances, I’m not sure of that total but do know he was splendid when the game was still in doubt.

REMEMBRANCE DAY

Of all the things I thought would never be controversial, the poppy is up there. Oh well, we live in conflicted times. I’m not going to address either news item beyond saying Canadians fighting over our war dead and their symbol is just about the most distasteful thing I’ve had to witness.

My Dad was in the war, rarely talked about it and only showed emotion when talking about his brother Roy. Roy is in Holten this morning and we remember his sacrifice today. This is important stuff. People the age of my children and younger boarded the train in their communities decades ago and did not return. They left their farms, their parents, their futures on the platforms of those train stations.

My neighbour and his wife served in the military; he is now a fireman here back home. I will walk over to his house today and thank him for his service. That’s such a small thing to do but it’s important. His sacrifice, her sacrifice, allowed my children to grow up in a peaceful world. They are the best of us. If you see someone from the military past or present today or a police officer or someone who works in a hospital or healthcare, thank them for their service.

You live in Canada. You won the lottery. Pay respects to our fighting men and women today, responsible for over 100 years of keeping war from our doorstep. Now, more than any time in my life I value the words “lest we forget” and that in and of itself is an alarm. If you have no idea what I’m talking about, read the books on World War 2. Look at the photos. Find the knowledge. Your questions will be answered.

In Flanders fields the poppies blow
Between the crosses, row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.

We are the Dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved and were loved, and now we lie
In Flanders fields.

Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.

-Lieutenant Colonel John McCrae

written by

The author didn‘t add any Information to his profile yet.
Related Posts

629 Responses to "Endless Summer"

« Older Comments
  1. Material Elvis says:

    godot10: Depends what he will sign for and the duration, and on his performance this year and next (i.e. whether last year was an aberration).

    Would you sign him longer than two years, though? I’m sure his agent would find him a 3 or 4 year deal on the open market — that’s a risky contract.

  2. jp says:

    JimmyV1965: I have no issue with the peer review process – as long as we recognize there are some flaws. It’s not perfect. I didn’t say it was useless. I was originally responding to a commenter critiquing Susan Crockford simply because she didn’t do field studies or peer reviewed research.

    Oh absolutely it has flaws and it’s not perfect. Some others seem to think it is useless. And the Susan Crockford talk started when she was called a “leading scientist” which may be something of a stretch.

  3. Munny says:

    Ryan: I would say that the systemic publication bias towards positive results along with post hoc data dredging are at the forefront of salient issues. With the rebranding of statistics as “data science” this issue will only get magnified.

    I one hundred percent agree.

  4. JimmyV1965 says:

    jp: Oh absolutely it has flaws and it’s not perfect. Some others seem to think it is useless. And the Susan Crockford talk started when she was called a “leading scientist” which may be something of a stretch.

    In Canada, for all intents and purposes, virtually all government funded polar bear research is vetted through two scientists. Basically two gatekeepers. If you challenge their positions, funding will be very difficult to come by. It might not be impossible, but challenging to say the least. They might not allocate the dollars directly, but they are very influential.

  5. jp says:

    godot10:
    Atlantic Canada has as many seats as Alberta and half the population.The 40 seat lead the Liberals have would only be 20 if that were not true.It gave Trudeau the majority in 2015, whereas it would have only been a minority if there was not this embedded extreme violation of population per riding in Atlantic Canada.

    Both parts of your first sentence are exaggerated though it’s true seats are disproportionately allocated. In fact, each of the 4 largest provinces are underrepresented (Quebec just barely) in the house of commons while every other province and territory is overrepresented.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Commons_of_Canada

  6. godot10 says:

    knighttown: I always find this “speech” so interesting because of all the things JT is, a racist and a misogynist are the most unlikely. It’s like calling McDavid a poor skater. His record in promoting equality in his government and elsewhere is excellent and in fact one of the most common criticisms is that he’s too “woke” and he’s even accused of tokenism; giving visible minorities and women positions that aren’t warranted.

    As someone eloquently stated earlier, if you want a reason to vote out Trudeau you’ve got one withSNC which was absolutely abhorrent.

    So why go to this Sun media drivel?

    But let’s give you the benefit of the doubt and assume racism and misogyny and LGBTQ rights is your one and only election issue. You sir, are a one-issue voter. In this case I can absolutely see voting out Trudeau because he doesn’t meet your expectations as a leader in this crucial-to-you topic. So by that logic I’d have to assume you voted Jagmeet and the NDPs who would have the strongest record on social justice and equality. If that’s you, I applaud your stance with full honesty.

    But I have a sneaking suspicion you voted for the party of old white guys and this is all a smokescreen.

    Trudeau’s wokeness is just a mask, just like it was with Ghomeshi (and Clinton).

    I have critiques of Trudeau on mulitiple issues. I responded with this one, become someone claimed that he was not a racist. Racist is as racist does.

  7. godot10 says:

    Harpers Hair: Donald Trump.

    It’s not what you start with, it’s how you finish.

    J. Robert Oppenheimer was a classically educated physicist who, while a chain smoker, avowed Communist and noted philanderer only published 5 papers in his life and had short shrift for academic life.

    He came into his own after he read the Bhagavad Gita in the original Sanskrit, and later he cited it as one of the books that most shaped his philosophy of life.

    “I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds.”

    I doubt he had that peer reviewed.

    Oppenheimer had a unique skill. He could herd scientists, in the old days, when scientists were not grant-grubbing sheep, but free-thinking strong-willed anti-authoritarians.

  8. jp says:

    JimmyV1965: In Canada, for all intents and purposes, virtually all government funded polar bear research is vetted through two scientists. Basically two gatekeepers. If you challenge their positions, funding will be very difficult to come by. It might not be impossible, but challenging to say the least.They might not allocate the dollars directly, but they are very influential.

    I don’t know about that but I’d say that’s a very unusual situation. Do you mean funded through national granting agencies? Or directly “government funded research”? I can guarantee you the large majority of science isn’t subject to that kind of influence by a couple of people, and I agree that’s not right at all.

    What you’re describing isn’t normal peer review at all either by the way. In my field at least a paper is assigned at least 3 “peer” reviewers at a time, they’re generally not the same people for each paper, and individual reviewers who are being unreasonable can be overruled by the journal editors who oversee the process. Funding applications get similar treatment. It’s not perfect, but it’s not terrible.

    On Susan Crockford, it seems she has never been a full time researcher at a university (aside from when she was a student). She has never published a scientific paper about polar bears. I’m not sure how or why she’d expect to be funded by anyone do polar bear research any more than you or I. That’s not to say her conclusions are wrong, just that they should rightfully (IMO) be taken with some skepticism.

  9. Numenius says:

    defmn: It’s the same as here but I should warn you that I am a little bit past cranky about the federal election that just took place so I may not be as much fun as I could be right now.

    Haha, well I just took a quick look and was sold when I saw the reference to the late, great Mr. Bloom. I figured from your comment he could be in the background. I studied in undergrad with one of his students, and eventually ended up doing a PhD in ancient and medieval philosophy. One doesn’t have to agree with everything he says to appreciate his overall case for great books education and for ideas like the Nietzscheanization of the left and vice versa, as I think you were referencing above.

  10. Numenius says:

    This is on my list as among the greatest Lowetide threads ever — an intelligent and respectful discussion/debate about politics, religion, social science, science, academia, philosophy, and, of course, hockey.

    Thank you, veterans, for making it possible.

  11. BONE207 says:

    Andy Dufresne: + 1 to the power of 20

    Tsk tsk…on a mathy type of blog. 1to the power of 20 is still 1…🤯

  12. JimmyV1965 says:

    jp: I don’t know about that but I’d say that’s a very unusual situation. Do you mean funded through national granting agencies? Or directly “government funded research”? I can guarantee you the large majority of science isn’t subject to that kind of influence by a couple of people, and I agree that’s not right at all.

    What you’re describing isn’t normal peer review at all either by the way. In my field at least a paper is assigned at least 3 “peer” reviewers at a time, they’re generally not the same people for each paper, and individual reviewers who are being unreasonable can be overruled by the journal editors who oversee the process. Funding applications get similar treatment. It’s not perfect, but it’s not terrible.

    On Susan Crockford, it seems she has never been a full time researcher at a university (aside from when she was a student). She has never published a scientific paper about polar bears. I’m not sure how or why she’d expect to be funded by anyone do polar bear research any more than you or I. That’s not to say her conclusions are wrong, just that they should rightfully (IMO) be taken with some skepticism.

    Anyone truly interested in learning about Susan Crockford should check out this link. She’s studied zoology of the North extensively and has many publications, although not directly about polar bears.

    https://polarbearscience.com/2015/03/12/on-being-a-polar-bear-expert-among-other-things/

  13. defmn says:

    Numenius: Haha, well I just took a quick look and was sold when I saw the reference to the late, great Mr. Bloom. I figured from your comment he could be in the background. I studied in undergrad with one of his students, and eventually ended up doing a PhD in ancient and medieval philosophy. One doesn’t have to agree with everything he says to appreciate his overall case for great books education and for ideas like the Nietzscheanization of the left and vice versa, as I think you were referencing above.

    If you don’t mind me asking which of Bloom’s students did you study under?

  14. jp says:

    JimmyV1965: Anyone truly interested in learning about Susan Crockford should check out this link. She’s studied zoology of the North extensively and has many publications, although not directly about polar bears.

    https://polarbearscience.com/2015/03/12/on-being-a-polar-bear-expert-among-other-things/

    Her own blog? I spent more time looking at this than I should have and I’m more convinced now than I was that her work is not legitimate. The publications are not “real” publications.

    The most substantive polar bear work she’s done is producing reports for the Global Warming Policy Foundation who lobby against global warming.

    She has no credentials. At least not any that are recognized by the field she claims to be part of. Not many people would take medical or legal or financial advice from someone without credentials. They wouldn’t hire a plumber or an electrician without credentials. This shouldn’t be any different, unless one is looking for a “Dr” who’ll tell them what they want to hear.

  15. striker says:

    Headline: Don Cherry Fired

    Lowetide.ca

    Crtl+F cherry

    Reads comments, disheartened

    Reads further comments, spirits lifted

    Remembers a tune from some good old prairie boys

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xva-cdBi8E

    Bless you LT, for this forum, but also for being you. The question was rhetorical boys and girls.

  16. Bag of Pucks says:

    smellyglove:
    Cherry was just let go by Sportsnet. Good, but too bad he didn’t just go off silently into the night.

    I’m one of the people who was offended by what he said and wrote into Rogers to complain, an act that people here are throwing shade at, “social media virtue signallers who should be put out to pasture,” says barn aggressor Bag of Pucks.

    You can be respectful of a national culture without taking part. You can support soliders and veterans without showing anything on the exterior. You can take part in Remembrance Day in many ways. That tradition means different things to different people. To some it is about celebrating nationalism. To others it is about celebrating militarism. To others it is about remembering the fallen. To others it is about remembering the victims of war, most often the most vulnerable.

    But to devalue people on the basis of their origin or skin colour, for how they do or not celebrate Remembrance Day is wrong.

    Recognize the tradition or do not. That is your freedom.

    You’re fully entitled to your opinions and actions in regards to Don Cherry. These are the freedoms you enjoy as a result of the sacrifices of previous generations. There is a pattern of behaviour with Cherry that undoubtedly led most HNIC viewers to conclude that they’d had enough and that’s completely understandable.

    But your ad hominem attack on me, referencing an isolated incident from a year ago in an attempt to marginalize my views while simultaneously scoring points for your soapbox speech to follow encapsulates much of what is wrong with cancel culture and virtue signaling imo. It’s a movement that claims empathy while also showing a demonstrable lack of forgiveness and a mob mentality push to permanently demonize any and all who dare to voice a dissenting opinion.

    I applaud CBC for offering both Maclean and Cherry the opportunity to apologize for their comments or endorsement of same. I would have been disappointed if we were becoming the kind of country that did not allow people to acknowledge, admit and come back from their mistakes. Having watched them over the years, it doesn’t surprise me in the least that this is the hill Cherry chose to die on.

    Lest we forget however, the suppression of dissenting thought, expression and speech is precisely where the seeds of fascism germinate. Vigilance against hate speech is a worthy endeavour of us all, but that is not where this cancel culture movement begins and ends. Big Brother is alive and well and virtue signaling like a mofo, and there’s an undeniably blurred line between hashtag activism and mob rules.

    Social justice is an oxymoron, because nothing about it represents our justice system and due process. It is pitchforks and celebratory chest beating after the latest witch is hung.

  17. ArmchairGM says:

    knighttown:
    But I have a sneaking suspicion you voted for the party of old white guys and this is all a smokescreen.

    Racism is not cool, KT.

  18. barry.moore23 says:

    AussieOil:
    Hi Lowetide Community, long time lurker, who comments rarely. But a question for those who have followed the team on the Road. My partner and I are going to games in SJ, LA and LV (woo hoo!), and was wondering any tips on road games. In particular was wondering if it is possible to watch the team practice?

    Lowetide thanks for the Blog, part of my morning routine to get a coffee and read the blog and comments!

    I live in Glendale and have tried to contact Gila River Arena about watching the Oilers practice here abut have never gotten a response. Maybe you’ll have better luck where you are headed. Get there early for the pregame skate. That’s my favorite part. Seeing the guys up close is amazing. have fun.

  19. meanashell11 says:

    Many years ago I reached out through the Oilers ticket office and they passed my message along to management. I told them the story of raising my kids as Oiler fans in the heart of Leaf Nation and when I went to Edmonton for a game we were invited to the locker room after the game. Highlight of my oldest son’s early childhood! Had to use a lot of flattery and begging!

  20. Lowetide says:

    For The Athletic: Analyzing Dave Tippett’s defensive usage and what the Oilers will do when Adam Larsson returns

    https://theathletic.com/1366932/2019/11/12/lowetide-analyzing-dave-tippetts-defensive-usage-and-what-the-oilers-will-do-when-adam-larsson-returns/

  21. OriginalPouzar says:

    With Joel Persson playing some “unever hockey” as of late, it seem fairly easy – he’s waivers exempt so Joel goes down for a stint and we go with:

    Nurse/Bear
    Klefbom/Larsson
    Russell/Benning

    Manning

    Is anyone else excited to see how Adam Larsson plays without having to handle all the tough minutes? The last time he had this type of 1A/1B set-up and help with the tough minutes was 2016/17 when Klefbom/Larsson, as 1A, was very good and Larsson was fantastic.

  22. Fuhr and Lowething. says:

    stephen sheps:
    Fuhr and Lowething.,

    Where did you plan to share it? I’m a bit leery about that, in part because of my family’s personal details and in part because of the fact that I am writing a post-script to a forthcoming book chapter on this very subject and kinda test drove part of my draft in that post.

    I think if you block out the names it’ll be ok, depending on where you decided to share it. Send me an email or twitter DM and we can sort that all out

    (stephensheps (at) gmail (dot) com)

    Honestly, I’m a little embarrassed to admit that when I originally asked my intent was to paste it on a friend of mines Facebook thread discussing the issue. I decided to go a different route anyways, but thank you either way. That being said, I think your perspective should be required reading for every person that has an opinion on the matter. I’m so thankful for you (and everyone else that takes the time to contribute here in meaningful ways) sharing your insights, and IMHO, as LT would say, “not a word out of place’.

  23. Cassandra says:

    defmn: If you don’t mind me asking which of Bloom’s students did you study under?

    I am also curious about this.

  24. Genjutsu says:

    Harpers Hair: And yet…none of those drones changed a thing…go figure.

    Except they did someone else just took the credit fame and money. They are still the people that actually changed the world.

  25. JimmyV1965 says:

    jp: Her own blog? I spent more time looking at this than I should have and I’m more convinced now than I was that her work is not legitimate. The publications are not “real” publications.

    The most substantive polar bear work she’s done is producing reports for the Global Warming Policy Foundation who lobby against global warming.

    She has no credentials. At least not any that are recognized by the field she claims to be part of. Not many people would take medical or legal or financial advice from someone without credentials. They wouldn’t hire a plumber or an electrician without credentials. This shouldn’t be any different, unless one is looking for a “Dr” who’ll tell them what they want to hear.

    She hasn’t published any polar bear research. That’s already been established. The link I sent was written because she is always critiqued in the same way you have just done. That’s the entire point of the article. Let’s not comment on the substance of what she says. Let’s comment on her lack of field work. There’s maybe a handful of published polar bear researchers in Canada. I guess they’re the only ones allowed to speak in the issue.

  26. defmn says:

    Cassandra: I am also curious about this.

    I’m thinking maybe Heidi?

  27. jp says:

    JimmyV1965: She hasn’t published any polar bear research. That’s already been established. The link I sent was written because she is always critiqued in the same way you have just done. That’s the entire point of the article. Let’s not comment on the substance of what she says. Let’s comment on her lack of field work. There’s maybe a handful of published polar bear researchers in Canada. I guess they’re the only ones allowed to speak in the issue.

    She should be allowed to speak, she IS allowed to speak. No one ever said she shouldn’t be. That’s what her blog is for.

    The question is why should anyone listen? And why would anyone facilitate a platform for specifically her ideas? Seriously, would you choose to take the advice of some medical blog, not written by a practicing physician, that disagrees with the consensus of the medical community? Maybe you would.
    And yes, there are examples of that (metaphorical) blog being right and the medical community being wrong, but your chances of hitting on those are damned low.

    And why shouldn’t she be critiqued? Don’t we critique practitioners of every profession? That’s what resume’s are for. Her’s looks good if you don’t know the profession, but it’s a lot of fluff.

    To the 2 polar bear science gatekeepers, as I said that’s a very very unusual situation (which I think we should also acknowledge we don’t know is completely true one way or the other). Science and the peer review process should not and do not work that way in 99% of the cases. It really isn’t like this.

    And in terms of field work, yes not easy to get access too (maybe that’s unfair, but again no one would give you or I money to go do polar bear field work).

    What I am holding against Dr. Crockford is that she hasn’t published on her polar bear work (let me explain). What she’s doing, “reviewing” other peoples published work and summarizing or re-analyzing it, is totally legitimate. Scientists do this all the time and publish those kind of papers. There’s no reason that if her work is seen as legitimate by other scientists she couldn’t publish it. There are literally thousands of journals of various quality to choose from. No small group of people can control or influence them all (ie the gatekeepers may be able to prevent her from getting Canadian government funding and doing field work, but they can’t prevent her from publishing). That she hasn’t tried (or hasn’t been able to) publish any of her work on polar bears is a major red flag for me.

  28. Numenius says:

    defmn: If you don’t mind me asking which of Bloom’s students did you study under?

    His name was J.R. Muir and taught in Winnipeg. He wasn’t a long time (or famous) student, but he did do a directed readings course with Bloom in Paris and knew others of his students personally. To get a flavour of his thought, you may be interested to check out his article, “The Strange Case of Mr. Bloom,” in which he defends attacks on Bloom from the right and left.

    What’s your connection with Bloom, if I may ask? (May not be the best forum to pursue this)

  29. defmn says:

    Numenius: His name was J.R. Muir and taught in Winnipeg. He wasn’t a long time (or famous) student, but he did do a directed readings course with Bloom in Paris and knew others of his students personally. To get a flavour of his thought, you may be interested to check out his article, “The Strange Case of Mr. Bloom,” in which he defends attacks on Bloom from the right and left.

    What’s your connection with Bloom, if I may ask? (May not be the best forum to pursue this)

    Oh, I think this thread is pretty dead now so I doubt we will attract much attention.

    My thesis advisor was a Straussian and, of course, Bloom was one of, if not his most famous, students.

    Bloom’s translation and commentary on The Republic is still the standard although The War Lover by Leon Craig is a personal favourite with a different perspective if you are ever interested.

« Older Comments

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!
© Copyright - Lowetide.ca