Guy McPherson Accused of Abuse of Women in his Position as Grief Counselor

[RE]

So far though, you have not cultivated this aspect of your personality well, so it makes for confusing prose.

RE

Yeah?  How's that?  Care to elaborate?

No, because if I did it would drive an even bigger wedge between us now than already exists.

RE

• Tweet

[Randy C]

https://deepgreenresistance.blogspot.com/2017/08/statement-on-guy-mcpherson.html

More from Mike Sliwa.

• Tweet

[luciddreams]

So far though, you have not cultivated this aspect of your personality well, so it makes for confusing prose.

RE

Yeah?  How's that?  Care to elaborate?

No, because if I did it would drive an even bigger wedge between us now than already exists.

RE

Go for it RE.  I don't much care for assholes and you are an asshole.  I don't see how you telling us all what you think about my prose is going to make our relationship worse. 

I use then/than, to/too wrong, I do the same with other words, I'm not educated enough, I never graduated from college.  I use "I" too much. 

Say what you will RE.  I can communicate well with words.  Maybe its an uneducated "gonzo" style.  So what?  How is my non-cultivation of asshole status making my prose confusing?  I'm still here.  You pissed me off saying I was a martyr and self-centered.  Both of which are not true.  Now my prose is confusing? 

Go ahead:

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/prose?s=t

noun
1.
the ordinary form of spoken or written language, without metrical structure, as distinguished from poetry or verse.

Bring it on "head asshole around here." 

• Tweet

[monsta666]

This whole tirade about assholes/incompetent assholes, whatever was unnecessary and childish RE. I do not consider LD an asshole but it is a pity that yet another thread got derailed for pettiness.

I would say to agelbert that I, like LD, agree with most of your statements. However my issue is I do not think our society is sustainable with ANY energy platform. I say this for the same reason mentioned previously: our economic system is designed only for perpetual growth. It cannot exist any other way. Therefore even if we made the assumption that renewable energy could replace fossil fuels 100% (a big assumption) due to the nature of growth we would soon hit some other limiting factor be it resources or pollution. It was one of the main points raised in the Limits to Growth book. Would you disagree with the topics raised in limits to growth that at some point economic growth is ultimately constrained by one of three limiting factors be it energy, resources or pollution? I think in this area there could be agreement.

The second big point is can we sustain seven billion (and counting) people using only renewable sources? Again in this one I would say no because it is dependent on fossil fuels for transportation and basic inputs for large scale industrial farming such as fertilizers or irrigation. Now I could be wrong and you could be right. But I think, we are reasonable people and even with disagreement it can be done amicably. I think the point I would agree with your philosophy is making a commitment towards sustainability. Even if ultimately unsuccessful there are secondary benefits that can be derived by following this course of action faithfully. The bigger emphasis has to come from reducing our overall consumption and following the ideas of the 3R's which in order of importance are Reduction, Reuse and Recycle with massive emphasis on the reduction bit. Caveat that should be mentioned even if it is obvious is that a serious attempt to reduce consumption will destroy our global economy. It is why no politician or mainstream environmental group is serious about reducing consumption on the aggregate level. This destruction of the economy is the uncomfortable truth and side-effect of reducing consumption. We are hooked like a heroin addict and like all bad drug addictions the decision to go cold turkey could kill us. Even with a slow taper it can still be a long nightmare that never really ends and even when it does end you (humanity) are never the same as before you took the drug. The after effects will haunt us for a long time...

• Tweet

[luciddreams]

This whole tirade about assholes/incompetent assholes, whatever was unnecessary and childish RE. I do not consider LD an asshole but it is a pity that yet another thread got derailed for pettiness.

I would say to agelbert that I, like LD, agree with most of your statements. However my issue is I do not think our society is sustainable with ANY energy platform. I say this for the same reason mentioned previously: our economic system is designed only for perpetual growth. It cannot exist any other way. Therefore even if we made the assumption that renewable energy could replace fossil fuels 100% (a big assumption) due to the nature of growth we would soon hit some other limiting factor be it resources or pollution. It was one of the main points raised in the Limits to Growth book. Would you disagree with the topics raised in limits to growth that at some point economic growth is ultimately constrained by one of three limiting factors be it energy, resources or pollution? I think in this area there could be agreement.

The second big point is can we sustain seven billion (and counting) people using only renewable sources? Again in this one I would say no because it is dependent on fossil fuels for transportation and basic inputs for large scale industrial farming such as fertilizers or irrigation. Now I could be wrong and you could be right. But I think, we are reasonable people and even with disagreement it can be done amicably. I think the point I would agree with your philosophy is making a commitment towards sustainability. Even if ultimately unsuccessful there are secondary benefits that can be derived by following this course of action faithfully. The bigger emphasis has to come from reducing our overall consumption and following the ideas of the 3R's which in order of importance are Reduction, Reuse and Recycle with massive emphasis on the reduction bit. Caveat that should be mentioned even if it is obvious is that a serious attempt to reduce consumption will destroy our global economy. It is why no politician or mainstream environmental group is serious about reducing consumption on the aggregate level. This destruction of the economy is the uncomfortable truth and side-effect of reducing consumption. We are hooked like a heroin addict and like all bad drug addictions the decision to go cold turkey could kill us. Even with a slow taper it can still be a long nightmare that never really ends and even when it does end you (humanity) are never the same as before you took the drug. The after effects will haunt us for a long time...

I agree with all of that, wholeheartedly. 

It is a shame that the thread was derailed, and I take responsibility for that.  I flung the first arrow by calling RE an asshole.  Granted, I didn't think it would be a problem since he's a self proclaimed expert asshole, but I suppose that's besides the point. 

Maybe Agelbert should consider apologizing to RE for not allowing him to be an asshole without taking offense? 

I'm not sure how that works out...it's preposterous.  We're in doublethink land here.  After all, it's an insult to be told that you are an incompetent asshole. 

My apologies...I'll stop with the nonsense now.   

• Tweet

[Surly1]

I hate to have to be the one that points this out, but how did this conversation become about Nicole Foss?

All she did, in this case, was post an open letter that she didn't write or sign to her facebook page where I saw it.  I thought that the community should know that six people who are a part of the NTE community thought it necessary to call him out in public over what he has been doing.

That's all.  I passed it on to RE for him to decide what to do with it.  It certainly was not my intention to get you guys all up in a shit storm with each other fighting over who was the bigger "ass hole," or over what you may think of Nicole Foss.

Wasn't the point guys.  Just thought you should all know that there are some potentially real issues off in NTE land with McP's behavior.  Foss had nothing to do with the open letter other than posting it.  I'm not saying that to defend Foss or what she may or may not believe.

Okay?

-A couple of clarifying points. You did nothing wrong, and contributed materially to the discussion.
-AG has a hard-on for Nicole Foss and TAE stemming from several years back. Her name is akin to a red flag waved at a bull.
-No one here is capable of not taking something personally when the personal is not intended, or possesses the restraint necessary to not derail a thread in pursuit of an agenda. (With the exception of Eddie, with whom I sometimes disagree, but respect as an honest broker.)
-A reminder that Nicole mentioned this behavior to RE several years ago, and that he respected her wishes to not speak/write of it. So whatever has been dogging Guy has been rumored for some time. And where there is smoke there is usually fire.
-Guy's attitudes and behavior have done much to diminish the value of his analysis. This latest set of mutterings is just another log on the fire.

• Tweet

[K-Dog]

I hate to have to be the one that points this out, but how did this conversation become about Nicole Foss?

All she did, in this case, was post an open letter that she didn't write or sign to her facebook page where I saw it.  I thought that the community should know that six people who are a part of the NTE community thought it necessary to call him out in public over what he has been doing.

That's all.  I passed it on to RE for him to decide what to do with it.  It certainly was not my intention to get you guys all up in a shit storm with each other fighting over who was the bigger "ass hole," or over what you may think of Nicole Foss.

Wasn't the point guys.  Just thought you should all know that there are some potentially real issues off in NTE land with McP's behavior.  Foss had nothing to do with the open letter other than posting it.  I'm not saying that to defend Foss or what she may or may not believe.

Okay?

I just read the so-called letter.  My expert opinion concludes that Nichole is a cunt for posting it if she did.

We learned recently that Guy McPherson, with whom DGR has collaborated in the past, has been accused by multiple women of sexually predatory behavior. We have seen screenshots of comments where he calls women vile names (e.g., he calls one woman a "cum-gargling whore"). These accusations have been corroborated from several sources.

At the time we collaborated with Guy McPherson, we had no idea that he was treating women so poorly. Deep Green Resistance has an absolute zero-tolerance policy for abuse and will stand against any predators being allowed access to the movement or anyone who could be harmed. Our hearts go out to his victims.

'multiple women' who have no names have accused is totally unacceptable.  If you are going to accuses a man of sexual impropriety you need to have a name or your name could just as well be the CIA, or Homeland Security a spurned lover or whatever.

Screen-shots of comments is totally unacceptable.  This is quoting trolls.

For Nicole to have posted this on her website (if she did) would make her a cum-gargling whore.  Consider the fact that someone else posted it to make her look bad as well.  Ignore the letter unless at least one of the 'multiple women' grows a name.

Shooting the messenger would be more honorable.

My apologies to Nicole if she has nothing to do with this and a pox on whomever the mud slinger is.

• Tweet

[Surly1]

Color me reassured to know the planet is NOT in crisis? And that we are free to concentrate on what's important here: a really small shitstorm of judgement and self-righteousness rather than the collapse of the biosphere. And does it come with a t-shirt?

This issue seems to be captivating the Sliwas, Jensens, Westenras and Zawackis of the world. At least it lifts our gaze from Trump, if only for a moment.

• Tweet

[RE]

I just read the so-called letter.  My expert opinion concludes that Nichole is a cunt for posting it if she did.

I don't know if Nicole posted this letter.  I assumed it was her because the story is so similar to the one she told me 2-3 years ago.

I agree that if there are "multiple women" involved in this at least a couple of them should come forward with first-person testimony.  It is however often difficult for women to do this, particularly ones who are emotionally fragile to begin with.  Without such testimony though, it remains just a rumour.

As a means to attack Guy's credibility, it's a very good one because a decent number of his fans are women.  If it is untrue, he needs to come out with a self-defense blog and respond to it, not ignore it or shrink away from it.  He should try to find out who actually posted the letter and who the women are who are making this complaint against him.  He needs to confront these women directly.

RE

• Tweet

[Ashvin]

Anyone who doesn't recognize how serious this issue is for the "collapse community" is in serious denial of what they have become a part of. It is THE issue - how easy it is to let extreme Doomerism become a means of exploitation. In this case it happens to be exploitation of vulnerable women seeking counseling, in other cases it could be anyone. I don't think the author of the post about Guy, Nicole or whoever it was, even realizes how seriously that aspect of career collapse preaching affects everyone in its path. We shouldn't need someone to be a licensed counselor before we hold them to a code of ethics, as we should also hold ourselves.

Nicole wrote this as a hit piece on a bonafide climate scientist to discredit his facts and distract from her endless promotion of the fossil fuel industry? I'm sorry but that is grade A delusional. None of these people have enough clout to even be worthy of a major fossil fuel company's payroll. I'm sure they would admit that as well. Whether Guy did this stuff or not, the IDEA of what he is alleged to have done and/or be doing is appalling. The fact that some people here instantly felt the need to change the topic and attack Nicole or whoever else speaks volumes about their priorities and their unwillingness to confront this horrendous IDEA.

• Tweet

[K-Dog]

Innocent till proven guilty and it is a foundation stone of American jurisprudence that one has the right to face one's accuser.

If women have experienced sexual harassment from Guy they need to come forward or forever hold their tongues.  That they might feel embarrassed is of no concern for the damage done to a mans reputation by such allegations far overshadows any temporary embarrassment felt by a few delicate flowers.

The fossil fuel industry has billions by which to sway public opinion.  That they would fabricate rumor to discredit an opponent is a given.  Guy may be wrong in the degree of warming Arctic  methane will cause, but he is not wrong in saying warming will result because of Arctic methane.  The that we know for sure.  Knarf posted a article this week proclaiming such a relationship and that article had nothing to do with Guy.  The only question is only how much warming will result and not will it happen.

• Tweet

[Ashvin]

Innocent till proven guilty and it is a foundation stone of American jurisprudence that one has the right to face one's accuser.

If women have experienced sexual harassment from Guy they need to come forward or forever hold their tongues.  That they might feel embarrassed is of no concern for the damage done to a mans reputation by such allegations far overshadows any temporary embarrassment felt by a few delicate flowers.

The fossil fuel industry has billions by which to sway public opinion.  That they would fabricate rumor to discredit an opponent is a given.  Guy may be wrong in the degree of warming Arctic  methane will cause, but he is not wrong in saying warming will result because of Arctic methane.  The that we know for sure.  Knarf posted a article this week proclaiming such a relationship and that article had nothing to do with Guy.  The only question is only how much warming will result and not will it happen.

Clearly collapse forums aren't, nor have they ever been, courts of law with high burdens of proof, nor have they ever intended to be them, and they probably shouldn't be. If they were, most (often legitimate) accusations of banksters and politicians in our system would fall short. We aren't trying people with a full corpus of constitutional protections here.

I would definitely feel sorry for the Guy if none of the accusations turned out to be true, but as of now he has been indicted to a degree that is not common among collapse bloggers with shared goals (unless of course you believe they are all bought). Furthermore, there is no doubt that the IDEA of using grief over collapse as a means of undue influence and exploitation is real and increasingly common IMO.

One could even say Trump is an example of this, albeit in a different sort of way.

• Tweet

[K-Dog]

Ashvin,

I can respect your opinion that a preponderance of evidence should be considered but 'multiple women' none of whom have a name is more evidence of innocence than of guilt.  We have a preponderance of nothing.  If the alleged accusations had any substance there would be a line of women vying for the limelight.  Women love attention.  As there is no attention stronger than sympathy for a victim of sexual harassment be the victimization real or made up from thin air lack of an identifiable accuser speaks to innocence.

In the case of Bill Cosby women rightly feared a backlash.  He was an iconic black man with a reputation many would defend until enough truth could come out.  Guy in contrast is powerless and someone many love to hate.  There is no backlash to fear.

The willingness of some to post accusation without substance knowing that Guy is not popular enough for anyone to come to his defense and thus find fault with hurtful and baseless accusation demonstrates there is no fear Guy will be defended.

• Tweet

[Ashvin]

Ashvin,

I can respect your opinion that a preponderance of evidence should be considered but 'multiple women' none of whom have a name is more evidence of innocence than of guilt.  We have a preponderance of nothing.

If we're continuing on with the legal analogy, then this post is like an opening statement. It says that people should send them queries and they will provide evidence in support of their claims, so I don't think we can evaluate the case until that is done.

But again, even a preponderance of the evidence standard is asking too much. Most of the evidence of claims presented through online forums would not be allowed in a court of law, since most of it is hearsay not falling under any recognized exception.

If the alleged accusations had any substance there would be a line of women vying for the limelight.  Women love attention.  As there is no attention stronger than sympathy for a victim of sexual harassment be the victimization real or made up from thin air lack of an identifiable accuser speaks to innocence.

That's a bold assumption. I think real victims of sexual abuse may very well choose to remain silent. But beyond that, I think the point was that some of the women involved may not even realize how they had been victimized, but the people working with and around Guy could see it develop over years.

In the case of Bill Cosby women rightly feared a backlash.  He was an iconic black man with a reputation many would defend until enough truth could come out.  Guy in contrast is powerless and someone many love to hate.  There is no backlash to fear.

The willingness of some to post accusation without substance knowing that Guy is not popular enough for anyone to come to his defense and thus find fault with hurtful and baseless accusation demonstrates there is no fear Guy will be defended.

I'll admit I don't follow collapse bloggers anymore, so I have no idea how popular Guy is compared to other ones. I always had the impression he had a decent following, though.

• Tweet

[Randy C]

How about a little simple research.  Nicole did not post this open letter, other than to her facebook page where I saw it and passed the link on to RE.  RE said that Nicole had told him a similar story in confidence two years ago.  The letter in question was posted to the blog "Wrong Kind of Green" and was signed by Michael  Sliwa, Host of the radio show Nature Bats Last from August 2014 to May 2017, Derrick Jensen, Deep Green Resistance, Lierre Keith, Deep Green Resistance, Cory Morningstar, Wrong Kind of Green, Forrest Palmer, Wrong Kind of Green, Luke Orsborne, Wrong Kind of Green.

All these people were working with McP until recently when they withdrew their support from him.  Cory Morningstar stated on Facebook that McP told her he was going to do unspeakable things to her two daughters when they came to visit him in Belize.  Go on Facebook and ask Sliwa to friend you so you can see for yourself what she said.  In my opinion, McP's conduct in this matter has destroyed his credibility.  Ethics matters to me regardless of what others might think.  That is why I directed this open letter to RE for consideration on the Diner.

Again, this recent event has nothing to do with Nicole Foss other than she mirrored the open letter from "Wrong Kind of Green" onto her Facebook page.

• Tweet