He was fired from a state-owned television station for writing a book. The state didn't ban the book, but they certainly took adverse action against him for writing it.
Top French Weatherman FIRED for Writing a Book Critical of Climate Change Dogma
- Thread starter The Tradition
- Start date
He was fired from a state-owned television station for writing a book. The state didn't ban the book, but they certainly took adverse action against him for writing it.
How does what apply? Reading? Are you trying to say that the Catholic Church didn't try to crush decent by imprisonment and other, more nefarious, means?
The list of things that can't be reasons for termination is growing larger every day. As long as we have such a list at all, then we can rightfully argue what should and should not be on this list.
So, I assume you support prohibitions on employment discrimination on the basis of race, sex, age, disability and so forth. What about political leanings? What about off duty behaviors? What about what groups you associate with or what causes you support?
Your reading comprehension fails you again. I know the Galileo story. How do you think that applies here?
"French media reported that the network said Verdier had violated ethical rules. Many media organizations have guidelines about journalists publicly expressing personal opinions on subjects they cover."
Again, are you absolutely, positively sure that he did not violate something within his contract?
Absolutely! You don't think business owners' wives haven't instigated the firing of many pretty secretaries over the years?
No, I'm not positive about that at all, but I would find such contractual language to be unconscionable, and would strongly dispute that his book had anything to do with the subject that he covers in his weather forecasts.
Then go complain to France 2. I really don't care that he got fired.
Do you mean besides the parallel stories? Galileo disagrees with the Catholic Church and they ruin his life by confining him to house arrest. This guy disagrees with the global warming people and they ruin his life by firing him and probably blackballing him. It's the same story, just hundreds of years apart.
Edit: Oh yeah, and your backtracking and failure to enunciate your point is not my fail at reading comprehension.
Natural you know it's an attempt to shut down speech. The left cannot win an argument. It's their only course of action
Prove it.
How do you know that he did not violate something within his contract that could warrant the firing.
Show your work.
Of course there is nothing parallel about the stories. If you had any of those libertarian principles you would for the right of an employer to terminate the agreement. Please tell us what government regulations you would like to see to prevent this. While you're at it, explain why a church can't kick a member out for preaching against dogma? Boy you do like big government when it fits your cause.
Dear we've already won this argument. It's now just a litmus test for crazy people. Much like evolution it's a topic that reveals a weak mind.
Heck, a woman in Iowa was fired for being too attractive, believe it or not. And the courts upheld her firing!
Perhaps he 'wrote his book' on company time, or used resources at the station to generate graphics, etc for it.
Then they fired him for illicit and inappropriate use of their resources and nothing to do with the content of his book. He could have written a children's story, and inappropriately used company property and time to do it and ended up on the street....
They DIDN'T shut down his speech!!
This isn't even that hard to understand. His book is PUBLISHED, They simply severed their ties with him - he's still free to say anything he wants...promote his book as much as he wants. I don't understand why you have such a problem with this.
No, they didn't shut down his speech, but they definitely punished him for it.
It's just the typical wingnut paranoid delusion that the world is out to get them manifesting itself again.
Yes you do. It's because the topic of the book questions AGW. If it had been about most any other topic the cons would agree the employer was within their rights. Hell if the employer just fired him for being French the cons would have defended it.
No; they fired him for an ethics violation, and it is MUCH more likely that he used company resources and company time to publish his book, against company policy.
He is simply using the mantra that 'they are silencing me' for media attention, and to drive sales for his book.
The ethics claim is speculation - it didn't come from France 2. The company time and resources thing is pure fantasy. Haven't seen that anywhere except here.
@The Tradition:
We don't know what those 'ethical rules' are, but it is quite standard that if you work on a personal project while you are under the employment of another entity, you do it:
A) on your own time
B) using your own personal resources
YOU are speculating they are 'silencing him based on the content of his book' as much as I am that he used company resources to write it. And it is FAR more likely that the latter is the case here, because it is a very common cause for termination.
Thanks, the CNN story didn't say that the France 2 said anything like that. It said they turned down CNN's request for comment.
If you google it I'm sure you can find examples. How is this my burden? If this was an oil exec getting fired for detailing how oil was killing us in a book I don't believe you would be hear going to the mattresses to defend him. You would recognize he was expressing views that made doing his job difficult and put his employer in a bad light.
If it was the spokes lady for Wisconsin dairy getting fired for putting out a book that dairy was bad for us, you would get it.
If the church kicked out a pastor for a book that claimed Jesus was fictional, you would get it. Here, you just don't want to.
Okay, here's a story about a man getting fired for writing a faith-based book critical of homosexuals.
http://www.firerescue1.com/fire-chi...nta-fire-chief-fired-over-controversial-book/
I'm going to say that the city was wrong to fire the guy for this.
You are moving the goalposts miles away from where you started. This guy NEVER MENTIONED his company in his book, much less saying they were full of dick.
The proper analogy (and it's obvious why you changed it) is that you work for Chic and Tweet that you are happy a bill got passed legalizing gay marriage. That's essentially what he did. And you think that's a fireable offense. We disagree there. But it's obvious you know you aren't standing on firm ground and have painted yourself in a corner as you continuously try to change the incident to make it look like some sort of major offense against his company. He called out people that have nothing to do with who he works for and got fired. He didn't come close to saying his company was full of dick, and you know it.
Well, technically... he DID call out some French politicians, and since the TV station is state-owned, he was in fact ultimately criticizing his employers.
So, if people are taking bribes, it shouldn't be reported? What does that have to do with science? You are all over the place here.
Bottom line is you think that corruption = indisputable science that shouldn't ever be questioned or pointed out. And that's a silly belief.
Nobody's questioning his right to write what he wrote (I love the alliteration
). The issue appears to be that he did so in a manner that likely was in violation of his contract.There are plenty of people writing about contradictory evidence to climate change, or some of the malfeasance among some climate change scientists and politicians. That's fine to present those opinions and exposés. As a scientist I certainly welcome alternative viewpoints and explanations.
Nobody's questioning his right to write what he wrote (I love the alliteration
There are plenty of people writing about contradictory evidence to climate change, or some of the malfeasance among some climate change scientists and politicians. That's fine to present those opinions and exposés. As a scientist I certainly welcome alternative viewpoints and explanations.
If he violated his contract I'm all for him being gone, but I haven't seen that case made.
It's been reported that he 'violated ethical rules' and used his status as a meteorologist for France 2 in the promotion of his book. The implication being that France 2 endorsed his book. I'm not sure of all the specifics, but those are a couple of things I read about the case.
Plus, this is in France. Their employment laws may be somewhat different than ours.
Again...there is no indication that anyone was 'beaten down with brute force'. The indications are that this individual violated ethics rules (e.g. doing his book using his company's resources on company time, or banging the janitor - we don't know). He is simply using his book as a convenient excuse.
You're moving the goalposts. To be analogous I would need to be someone of note in the Chic organization. I would need to have a job that specifically backs their marriage position and then come out against it in private. This weather guy wasn't some back room meteorologist compiling forecasts. He was the face of the company, a celebrity. And he absolutely was saying the company was full of dicks, he was all but calling them corrupt and/or fools.
What's obvious to me is that you can't see past your own bias on this topic. If this had been a spokesman at the Louis Pasteur company and he wrote a book that pasteurized milk was bad, you would have no trouble removing him as a spokesman. If it was the director of the French Holocaust museum writing a book that the holocaust was a myth, you would see the logic. If he was working for the Marie Curie laboratories and wrote a book that ingesting radiation was healthy, you would have no issue with dismissing him. I suspect its only because many of you are biased on this topic that many posters come to his defence here. The principle that your outside conduct should have no bearing on your employment isn't sound. I bet if you get arrested for drunk driving, you might rightfully risk your position coaching children.
Last edited:
My own bias? What's my bias here? I'm not a denier. Never have been. It's you that clearly has a bias here. You keep re-inventing who this guy is and what he is guilty of.
Latest posts
-
-
-
COMMIT: Iowa Lands 2026 Iowa City West, Three-Star OL Colin Whitters
- Latest: clayborn_94
-