# Lawrence Krauss accused of sexual harassment **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [March 2, 2018, 12:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawrence-krauss-accused-of-sexual-harassment/809862 "2018-03-02T00:58:35Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![SamuelA](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c77e96/32.png) [@SamuelA](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SamuelA)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2018, 12:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawrence-krauss-accused-of-sexual-harassment/809862/21 "2018-03-03T00:50:27Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > It’s free market forces. Humans are fickle creatures and as soon as one buinessman punches them in the face they happily take their business elsewhere. Honestly it makes no sense, but people still do it. Except it’s more like “I heard that businessman punched Timmy in the face”. Timmy has no visible injury but \*says \*he was punched in the face with brass knuckles. There’s no videotape or any objective proof. Timmy says he met with the businessman on a later occasion after supposedly getting face punched with brass knuckles. The businessman says he didn’t punch anybody. And other people met with him in private and say they weren’t punched. One says they got slightly slapped. But it wasn’t that bad and they were asking for it. " People are unreliable witnesses in the best of cases, and you’re talking about 2 parties view of what happened during an emotionally charged, drunken attempt at a hookup in a hotel room usually. And everyone always assumes the worst, that it was exactly like the supposed victim claimed and there were no signals made by the woman that might lead the man into thinking that was what she wanted. Even though these were almost always meetings in intimate settings between adults of age and a man who is a celebrity who probably had successful hookups with 10 other women the same year. And the reason I mention “brass knuckles” is that if you take these salacious accounts, assume maybe it was a little more tame than described, and you end up with normal behavior. ---
**Author:** ![Tzigone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Tzigone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tzigone)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2018, 12:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawrence-krauss-accused-of-sexual-harassment/809862/22 "2018-03-03T00:55:21Z")
> [@](#): > > Flip it the other way. Let’s assume the accusations are all true. How does this make Lawrench Krauss a less credible speaker? Why shouldn’t we continue to listen to him? No. _If the accusations are true_, we should not continue to listen to him. Others can undoubtedly speak just as well and not harass people. Moreover, by continuing to hire him for events or promote him in interviews, you alienate the people who might agree with atheism and skepticism, but find sexual harassment unacceptable (like myself). You send a message to the women that them being harassed isn’t important to people who set up such events and promote skepticism and so on. You send a message that their comfort or participation isn’t important,. Pretty much that they aren’t as important as the men who harass them. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2018, 1:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawrence-krauss-accused-of-sexual-harassment/809862/23 "2018-03-03T01:02:50Z")
> [@SamuelA](#): > > Except it’s more like “I heard that businessman punched Timmy in the face”. Timmy has no visible injury but \*says \*he was punched in the face with brass knuckles. There’s no videotape or any objective proof. Timmy says he met with the businessman on a later occasion after supposedly getting face punched with brass knuckles. > > The businessman says he didn’t punch anybody. And other people met with him in private and say they weren’t punched. One says they got slightly slapped. But it wasn’t that bad and they were asking for it. " > > People are unreliable witnesses in the best of cases, and you’re talking about 2 parties view of what happened during an emotionally charged, drunken attempt at a hookup in a hotel room usually. And everyone always assumes the worst, that it was exactly like the supposed victim claimed and there were no signals made by the woman that might lead the man into thinking that was what she wanted. Even though these were almost always meetings in intimate settings between adults of age and a man who is a celebrity who probably had successful hookups with 10 other women the same year. > > And the reason I mention “brass knuckles” is that if you take these salacious accounts, assume maybe it was a little more tame than described, and you end up with normal behavior. I thought you said, explicitly, that we were to assume the accusations are all true. It was like your second sentence. And generally speaking everyone assesses claims based on their own biases. It is, to be frank, _really plausible_ that a man in power exploits that power. Especially when there are several independent claims and the industry they’re in is known for its sexism and power imbalances. Does this mean that every person guesses correctly when they assess the honesty of their accusers? No. But we’re not talking about a court of law or prison time here. We’re talking about taking business elsewhere. There’s not a high standard of proof for that at the best of times. And in any case, your belief that the accusations are implausible is no more defensible. ---
**Author:** ![x-ray\_vision](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/x-ray_vision/32/351_2.png) [@x-ray\_vision](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/x-ray_vision)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2018, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawrence-krauss-accused-of-sexual-harassment/809862/24 "2018-03-03T01:51:23Z")
> [@SamuelA](#): > > Flip it the other way. Let’s assume the accusations are all true. How does this make Lawrench Krauss a less credible speaker? Why shouldn’t we continue to listen to him? > > It bothers me that we have decided that “acts like some significant percentage of all men in a way that is not illegal” means “no longer employable” I didn’t even finish reading all of the article in the first link in the OP, and the first accusation (fifth paragraph) was clearly illegal. ---
**Author:** ![nachtmusick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/ac91a4/32.png) [@nachtmusick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nachtmusick)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2018, 8:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawrence-krauss-accused-of-sexual-harassment/809862/25 "2018-03-03T08:02:01Z")
> [@commasense](#): > > The article is not 100% objective. No article is. Do you feel that its viewpoint impeaches its claims? Do you think that women shouldn’t be trying to bring feminist perspectives to this largely white male bastion? When you say that the three women have been met with “skepticism,” do you understand that in fact they’ve been met with death threats and rape threats? Is that appropriate? > > I have been a member, of sorts, of the skeptic community, and the views expressed in the article seem quite accurate. A frequent charge against atheists and skeptics is arrogance, and I have seen and heard many male skeptics, often libertarians, be extremely callous and unsympathetic, sometimes to the point of rudeness and hostility, toward people whose life experiences didn’t line up with their own. Yes the claims of the article are impeached by its viewpoint. Buzzfeed aspires to be a reliable source of news, and shouldn’t have a viewpoint. Yet it demonstrably does. There is no feminist perspective to skepticism. It has no gender. No, it isn’t appropriate to pretend that anyone would bring “death and rape threats” into a sensible conversation about policy. Why would anyone give any credence to such nonsense? I don’t know how to answer the charge of arrogance. Being correct in a gentle way is a quality of politicians, philosophers and healers. Not skeptics. Everybody has their limitations. ---
**Author:** ![nachtmusick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/ac91a4/32.png) [@nachtmusick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nachtmusick)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2018, 10:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawrence-krauss-accused-of-sexual-harassment/809862/26 "2018-03-03T10:00:41Z")
> [@Banquet\_Bear](#): > > …as somebody who has been involved with the skeptics circle since 2002 the reason why women have been actively trying to “introduce a feminist/social justice plank into the platforms of skeptic organizations” is because “skeptic organizations” are chauvinistic as fuck. And I have to admit I bought into that chauvinism for a little while. So it shouldn’t come as any surprise that the people that are speaking out are the people that have a platform and that are people who have “less to loose.” There are some industries like “showbusiness” where #metoo opened the floodgates. But there are other industries, like the gaming industry, like tech, like skeptics organizations, where things aren’t moving as quickly. > > So no: I don’t think its fair to attempt to dismiss the article based on that fact that “the accusers” all are strong believers in social justice. If you don’t want to believe, then just don’t believe. Don’t use their political views as an excuse. I dismiss the article because it did not report to me all the things you object to. I dismiss it because I had to find those things out for myself. I dismiss it because it panders to the political views of people like yourself. I do not dismiss the facts it presents, nor do I dismiss the view you present in your post. ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2018, 11:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawrence-krauss-accused-of-sexual-harassment/809862/27 "2018-03-03T11:09:43Z")
> [@nachtmusick](#): > > I dismiss the article because it did not report to me all the things you object to. …what things do I object to? > [@](#): > > I dismiss it because I had to find those things out for myself. What was it you had to find out for yourself? > [@](#): > > I dismiss it because it panders to the political views of people like yourself. Would you care to explain to me exactly what my political views are? And how the article “panders” to the likes of me? > [@](#): > > I do not dismiss the facts it presents, nor do I dismiss the view you present in your post. But you do dismiss it because “the accusers” all are strong believers in social justice, correct? ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2018, 12:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawrence-krauss-accused-of-sexual-harassment/809862/28 "2018-03-03T12:06:41Z")
**nachtmicht** , the fact that something makes you feel uncomfortable does not make it untrue. This is a key component of skepticism and rationalism. As far as I can tell, the statements that you are objecting to are true. There are links to back them up in the article, and they fit with my own observations of the skeptic community. There is indeed a fracturing of the online skeptic community, and it is over a subset that are pushing an anti-social justice, anti-feminist, pro-sexism agenda. I have seen first hand the alt-right atheists coming in and disrupting skeptic communities. It’s a constant struggle for the legitimate skeptics who aren’t pushing this agenda to not allow themselves to be identified with this aspect. You have heard of [the Amazing Atheist](https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/TheAmazingAtheist), haven’t you? Not only is he an excellent example, with tons of followers who agree with him, but you can also just read about how big an asshole he is. No one can be nice all the time, but that’s not what people mean when they call these people assholes. Here’s an [article from Vice](https://www.vice.com/en_nz/article/a3z4mk/a-reminder-internet-atheists-fucking-suck), which is written by an ex-Muslim and his perceptions of the online skeptic community. He even interviews a bunch of other people. And, yes, he’s received threats. You may want to believe that the skeptic community doesn’t have this problem, but it very much does. Buzzfeed reporting on it shows no more bias than any other news organization which would have mentioned the same thing. Pointing out that Klaus was NOT one of that group makes sense, to show how surprising the allegations are. To be honest, you seem to be using logical fallacies as an attempt to discredit the article. That’s not very skeptical of you. ---
**Author:** ![nachtmusick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/ac91a4/32.png) [@nachtmusick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nachtmusick)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2018, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawrence-krauss-accused-of-sexual-harassment/809862/29 "2018-03-03T14:28:46Z")
> [@Banquet\_Bear](#): > > But you do dismiss it because “the accusers” all are strong believers in social justice, correct? I don’t dismiss the article. You were the one who first used the “dismiss” term. I just riffed on that. I question the journalistic integrity of the article because it did not acknowledge that it was agenda-driven. And it was. No response in this thread has disputed that. ---
**Author:** ![nachtmusick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/ac91a4/32.png) [@nachtmusick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nachtmusick)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2018, 2:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawrence-krauss-accused-of-sexual-harassment/809862/30 "2018-03-03T14:36:01Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > **nachtmicht** , the fact that something makes you feel uncomfortable does not make it untrue. This is a key component of skepticism and rationalism. > > As far as I can tell, the statements that you are objecting to are true. There are links to back them up in the article, and they fit with my own observations of the skeptic community. There is indeed a fracturing of the online skeptic community, and it is over a subset that are pushing an anti-social justice, anti-feminist, pro-sexism agenda. I have seen first hand the alt-right atheists coming in and disrupting skeptic communities. It’s a constant struggle for the legitimate skeptics who aren’t pushing this agenda to not allow themselves to be identified with this aspect. > > You have heard of [the Amazing Atheist](https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/TheAmazingAtheist), haven’t you? Not only is he an excellent example, with tons of followers who agree with him, but you can also just read about how big an asshole he is. No one can be nice all the time, but that’s not what people mean when they call these people assholes. > > Here’s an [article from Vice](https://www.vice.com/en_nz/article/a3z4mk/a-reminder-internet-atheists-fucking-suck), which is written by an ex-Muslim and his perceptions of the online skeptic community. He even interviews a bunch of other people. And, yes, he’s received threats. > > You may want to believe that the skeptic community doesn’t have this problem, but it very much does. Buzzfeed reporting on it shows no more bias than any other news organization which would have mentioned the same thing. Pointing out that Klaus was NOT one of that group makes sense, to show how surprising the allegations are. > > To be honest, you seem to be using logical fallacies as an attempt to discredit the article. That’s not very skeptical of you. I’ve never liked you. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2018, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawrence-krauss-accused-of-sexual-harassment/809862/31 "2018-03-03T15:24:47Z")
> [@Darren\_Garrison](#): > > There are people who believe that atheism is simply a passive lack of belief or active belief in the lack of existence of gods. But then there are “movement atheists” who sneer at the first group, calling them “[dictionary atheists](https://www.google.com/search?q=%22dictionary+atheists%22&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b-1)” and believe that [atheism should be a movement with an activist approach to social justice issues](http://archive.fo/KjCcJ), [not simply a stance on the existence of the supernatural](https://www.google.com/search?source=hp&ei=pHSZWrqHI4j-jwSQ872ADw&q=%22atheism+plus%22). > > Myself, I’m firmly a dictionary atheist. While I believe in not being a jerk to women/minorities, I have no interest in making advocacy for social justice issues part of that atheist identity. (I have no opinion on the guilt/innocence of Lawrence Krauss because I honestly can’t remember having ever heard of him before the recent headlines.) That’s not how I see the disagreement – the way I understand it, some folks want to actively prevent any social justice issues from being a part of atheist organizations and advocacy, and others advocate that they be included. I’m with the second group – I think it’s reasonable and good for atheist/skeptic/non-religious groups to also advocate for good things for society (i.e. social justice). I don’t think it’s about identity, but about these various groups, that the “two sides” disagree on. ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2018, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawrence-krauss-accused-of-sexual-harassment/809862/32 "2018-03-03T15:32:12Z")
> [@Urbanredneck](#): > > I was having a meeting with 2 women the other day and lo and behold, some sexual thoughts came into my mind about one of the women. She wasnt particularly attractive or anything and the meeting was professional but the thoughts did cross my mind. Now I dont say or do anything and dismissed them from my mind as quick as I could. > > So I say, deep down, we men can think of some bad things in regards to women. If we have any morals at all we never, EVER act on them - not even in thought. We need to train ourselves to dismiss quickly any such ideas. > > But, they still happen. It happens to almost all men regardless of IQ or status. It is even harder when your working with women in close proximity and you do become friends. Sadly many men either dont have the morals or willpower to do such things and indeed, act on such impulses. I’m not so sure the “bad thoughts” are sexual thoughts _per se_, but predatory thoughts. The problem isn’t men thinking of women as sexually desirable but thinking of them as _prey_. ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2018, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawrence-krauss-accused-of-sexual-harassment/809862/33 "2018-03-03T17:02:26Z")
Also in the case of misbehavior towards women among the atheist/skeptic “sausage fest” crowd, they may falling into the fallacy of convincing themselves that\* “mine being a rational, scientific mind, my desires and behavior are of course rationally and scientifically justifiable”\*. Basically a failure to check privilege. > [@iiandyiiii](#): > > That’s not how I see the disagreement – the way I understand it, some folks want to actively prevent any social justice issues from being a part of atheist organizations and advocacy, and others advocate that they be included. I’m with the second group – I think it’s reasonable and good for atheist/skeptic/non-religious groups to also advocate for good things for society (i.e. social justice). I don’t think it’s about identity, but about these various groups, that the “two sides” disagree on. Or maybe it is about a different sort of identity… Ideally, an atheist/skeptic/rationalist grouping would be able to \*equally \*encompass social progressives \*\*and \*\*social conservatives \*\*and \*\*social indifferentists/apathetics alike. But a challenge to open up to social questions and to outsiders may create apprehension among those who fancy themselves a “skeptic community” that they will be forced to _pick sides_ to continue identifying so. And while out in the believer community, there are hardass conservative-reactionary hellfire&brimstone strict-doctrine fundamentalists, AND fuzzywuzzy progressive-inclusive peace-and-love do-your-own-thing liberal denominations, and everything in between, all calling themselves believers, many skeptic/atheists both inside and outside the establishment would be unsatisfied with an outcome that does not support one position as the rational conclusion. ---
**Author:** ![Dangerosa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Dangerosa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dangerosa)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2018, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawrence-krauss-accused-of-sexual-harassment/809862/34 "2018-03-03T18:10:55Z")
> [@Urbanredneck](#): > > I was having a meeting with 2 women the other day and lo and behold, some sexual thoughts came into my mind about one of the women. She wasnt particularly attractive or anything and the meeting was professional but the thoughts did cross my mind. Now I dont say or do anything and dismissed them from my mind as quick as I could. > > So I say, deep down, we men can think of some bad things in regards to women. If we have any morals at all we never, EVER act on them - not even in thought. We need to train ourselves to dismiss quickly any such ideas. > > But, they still happen. It happens to almost all men regardless of IQ or status. It is even harder when your working with women in close proximity and you do become friends. Sadly many men either dont have the morals or willpower to do such things and indeed, act on such impulses. I happens to women as well. I had an intern who worked for me who had me thinking impure thoughts on a regular basis. But I really hope I never let that on to him, or treated him differently. And here is a big difference between me at nearly 50 and 22 year old intern and my former 50 year old boss and me as a 22 year old administrative assistant. I NEVER considered his body there for my pleasure, viewing or otherwise. I never thought I was entitled to touch him, or make comments to him (or about him - although I did have to field a few comments about him from other women) about his sexual appeal. I never considered for a single second perhaps implying that his job was at risk if he didn’t put up with my caressing of his biceps. I never engineered an excuse to have him crawl under my desk so I could look at his ass. I never had him work late and then spent the time “showing him” some numbers while looking over his shoulder and breathing in his ear with no one in the office. That would have been creepy and inappropriate. ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2018, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawrence-krauss-accused-of-sexual-harassment/809862/35 "2018-03-03T18:19:51Z")
Dammit. I’ve recently been enjoying some of his many lectures and debates on physics and atheism on youtube. Beware of your heroes, indeed. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2018, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawrence-krauss-accused-of-sexual-harassment/809862/36 "2018-03-03T18:46:19Z")
> [@QuickSilver](#): > > Dammit. > > I’ve recently been enjoying some of his many lectures and debates on physics and atheism on youtube. > > Beware of your heroes, indeed. Fortunately, I’ve seen all his stuff, and it seems that in the last few years, he’s not had anything original, just repeats of pretty much the same lectures. I used to be a big fan, but not so much anymore. Not because I didn’t like his lectures, just because they weren’t really ever anything new or different than the last. I do wonder what will become of the Origin’s project. He is certainly very central to that, but it also has a bit of a life of its own. ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2018, 11:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawrence-krauss-accused-of-sexual-harassment/809862/37 "2018-03-03T23:07:11Z")
> [@nachtmusick](#): > > I don’t dismiss the article. You were the one who first used the “dismiss” term. I just riffed on that. …how does the fact that “the accusers all are strong believers in social justice” change the facts in the article? Does the fact that I’m a strong believer in social justice mean that I can’t be trusted on certain issues? > [@](#): > > I question the journalistic integrity of the article because it did not acknowledge that it was agenda-driven. And it was. No response in this thread has disputed that. I dispute that. What agenda do you think the article had, other than “Lawrence Krauss is a well-known problem”? And I’m still curious as to what you believe my political views are? ---
**Author:** ![Asimovian](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asimovian/32/172_2.png) [@Asimovian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Asimovian)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2018, 12:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawrence-krauss-accused-of-sexual-harassment/809862/38 "2018-03-04T00:37:19Z")
> [@nachtmusick](#): > > I’ve never liked you. I’m sure you’re aware that a comment like this has no place in this forum. Please don’t do this again. ---
**Author:** ![nachtmusick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/ac91a4/32.png) [@nachtmusick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nachtmusick)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2018, 9:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawrence-krauss-accused-of-sexual-harassment/809862/39 "2018-03-10T09:30:54Z")
> [@Asimovian](#): > > I’m sure you’re aware that a comment like this has no place in this forum. Please don’t do this again. I really hate bumping this thread, but I owe **BigT** an apology. When I made the comment I was too tired to really address the post and briefly thought that others would understand that I was just acknowledging the points made and punting. I realized pretty quick that no one else would see it that way, but not quick enough to retract my response. For the record **BigT** , I think you post a lot of worthwhile content and I don’t dislike you at all. ---
**Author:** ![Novelty\_Bobble](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Novelty\_Bobble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Novelty_Bobble)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2018, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawrence-krauss-accused-of-sexual-harassment/809862/40 "2018-03-15T18:35:00Z")
Worth bumping this. [Laurence Krauss has responded](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1IgAGpkAa2vwSMOtFD4iAfwfryTNJbJ_5/view), (warning pdf) in full (very full) to the “article”. Having read both I have put the “article” in quotes because it comes across as a lazy hatchet-job by someone with an agenda rather than anything resembling investigative reporting. Krauss’s response puts the buzzfeed article to shame in terms of completeness and verifiable facts and the glaring omissions in the Buzzfeed article put it in a bad light. If what he says can be readily confirmed then Buzzfeed are either incompetent or malicious. In the response Krauss comes across, as he normally does, as an extrovert, garrulous character, liable to strong opinions and occasional arseholishness and I have no doubt he annoys and upsets some people and though I’m a fan of his work I’m sure I’d quickly find him tiresome in person. So I’m left with no worse opinion of him than when I started and a big mental red flag against Buzzfeed for the future (I hadn’t really come across them much before) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawrence-krauss-accused-of-sexual-harassment/809862.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawrence-krauss-accused-of-sexual-harassment/809862.md?page=3)