14h00 in the foyer of McDonald Hall
The Faculty of Science Deregisters Student Marc Kelly Against His Will
On Wednesday Oct 21st, the Faculty of Science of the University of Ottawa deregistered student Marc Kelly, expelling him out of the semester. An email was sent to Marc Kelly by the Vice Dean Leonard Klein that read "The Faculty of Science has been asked to deregister you [...] The message is to notify you that you are no longer registered [...]"
This is the first time in the history of the University of Ottawa that the administration has deregistered a student against his will. This is a dangerous abuse of power and potentially threatens all students. The administration must not have the power to expel students without cause.
The Department of Physics Arbitrarily Rejects His Research During Closed-Door Meetings
Faculty of Science deregistered Marc Kelly because his research was deemed unacceptable by the Department of Physics. The Department of Physics disagrees with the nature and methods of his research.
The Department of Physics twice rejected his project behind closed doors. Marc was informed of the department's rejections only through official letters that state "It is common sense that [your research] has to use physics tools and physics knowledge".
Marc was never questioned nor contacted. Marc approached the Department Chair Bela Joos to get information on the Department's decision, and the Chair closed his office door in Marc's face. The Department of Physics refuses to have a dialogue.
The Faculty of Science Obstructs Marc Kelly's Research
The Project Coordinator Dr. Peter Piercy corrupted Marc's data and sabotaged his research. Dr. Piercy sent an email message to all Physics Profs discouraging them from participating in Marc's research.
Now the Dean of the Faculty of Science Dr. Andre Lalonde is barring Marc from his research lab, by withholding the keys, preventing him from accessing his research equipment.
********************
THE EXPULSION OF STUDENT MARC KELLY WILL BE CHALLENGED AT THE PHYSICS DEPARTMENTAL COUNCIL MEETING
Oct 24 @ 14h30
McDonald Hall Lounge
This meeting is open to the public in spirit of Vision 2010.
Come support Academic Freedom.
********************
For further information please contact:
Marc Kelly, Physics-Mathematics Student
Email: marckelly.uottawa@gmail.com
Tel.: (613) 562-5800 ext. 6774
Denis G. Rancourt, Research Supervisor
Email: dgr@uOttawa.ca
Tel.: (613) 562-5800 ext. 6774
Fax: (613) 562-5190
Claude Lamontagne, Research Co-Supervisor
Email: clamonta@uOttawa.ca
Tel.: (613) 562-5800 ext. 4300
Fax: (613) 562-5147
Leonard Klein, Vice Dean Academic Faculty of Science
Email: lkleine@uOttawa.ca
Tel.: (613) 562-5800 ext. 6003
Fax: (613) 562-5193
Bela Joos, Chair of the Department of Physics
Email: phychair@uOttawa.ca
Tel.: (613) 562-5800 ext. 6755
Fax: (613) 562-5190
voice.uOttawa@gmail.com
UofOvoice.blogspot.com
20 comments:
Who's organising this?
This press-conference was organized by student Marc Kelly with the help of UofOvoice.blogspot.com.
I wonder what Rancourt and Kelly really did to get Kelly de-registered. Sadly, this blog lies so routinely, it is impossible to tell what has truly happened. Certainly the story as described on this web site is absurdly incomplete.
Perhaps a domain change? RancourtPropaganda.blogspot.com sounds like a good start.
If you would like more information, if you have specific questions, if you seek clarification of the truth, please ask.
Facts are necessarily portrayed without full detail or supporting evidence when compressed into a press conference call-out.
Plenty of additional information was provided at the press conference, and the reality of the insanity was witnessed by all who attended.
The Chair of the Department of Physics, Dr. Bela Joos, publicly confirmed the facts, and the students understood the absurdity of the Department's position.
A member of the DTPC (the committee that rejected my research), Dr. Andre Longtin, slammed his office door in my face. A student rep then crouched down and began heckling him through the mail slot, condemning his complete disregard for collegiality.
It is impossible to tell what truly happened only if you shut your eyes until you are blind.
Look. You want to make the school look like idiots? You think your work has merit?
Get it accepted as a journal paper in a peer-reviewed physics journal, then go back to them.
You'll probably wind up with full credit for the course.
Until then, this is just a lot of noise.
"You think your work has merit? [...] this is just a lot of noise."
I agree. No physics student should be able to get a B.Sc without having published as a first author in a peer-reviewed journal.
Oh, wait, Marc already did: http://www.springerlink.com/content/4250n56r58206682/
Damn, this journal has probably been taken over by DGR followers...
No offense to Marc or anything, and with no intention of suppressing anyones opinion -- I'll leave that to philippe.
If I was going to critic that citation philippe, which I hope you would be able to do yourself by now, I would say first that
this paper looks like a modeling exercise. The 3rd author of that paper is an editor of that journal, which is somewhat unusual. The journal's H index is 39, which seems low for this domain and these conditions.
So one MIGHT raise questions on if it would get into more notable physics journal.
But none of that matters, since one paper does not the man make. Good researchers can do bad work and vice versa.
Welcome to how science works philippe if you have an idea or a paper that one group dismisses as not valid, get it peer reviewed. PROPERLY. Why argue with administrators over physics? Lapen is not doing anyone any favours here, given his track record. I've seen HIS papers.
Give it up, son.
Sorry, I meant Rancourt of course is not doing Mr. Kelly any favours.
And of course you don't need to publish a paper to get a B.Sc. But if you're dead set on demonstrating that valid work is being suppressed by the University, I see few better ways than getting it published in a proper peer-reviewed journal.
I just looked back at my record on suppressing opinions and sadly realized I'm very incompetent at it.
Indeed, if suppression of opinions was an academic department, I'd have a really hard time being admitted.
(I apologize in advance if anyone is irritated by this type of humour. I'm probably done posting here anyway. My last comment about publications also was ironic. People who know that I personally have no publications after 2 1/2 years of grad school probably spotted it.)
I don't think you mean ironic.
Perhaps sarcastic.
Although it might actually be ironic as a result.
Clearly they're letting anyone into Berkeley these days. Good to know.
Agreed.
Maybe Chapela too.
No, I mean they're taking a chance by admitting someone at the doctoral level who has such a tenuous grasp on science and the scientific process, brags about a lack of peer-review publications, and is so poorly educated as to not understand language at a grade 11 level.
And you don't need need a fancy 'conventional' formal education to understand such things by the way. Anyone who on occasion reads books should be able to grasp the distinction between sarcastic and ironic. The same distinction exists en francais, by the way.
I'm all for intelligent people or people who work hard testing boundaries and standing up for causes they believe in.
You sir, are neither.
Whatever 'revolution' you would have us indulge in bears more resemblance to a Beatles hook than to anything Jefferson or his ilk aspired to.
What Terreur would you unleash upon us?
It's a TRAP!!!
SLAPFIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!
If your ideas are so great, then you don't need the validation of some piece of shit school (and uottawa surely fits the bill).
Hey Marc
I read your posted project. Your idea about establishing a mathematical model on scientific dialog is very interesting and ambitious for a fourth year thesis. But why did you use as your example "a university physics student" versus the physics department? What were you thinking? Your paper reads like you were trying to stick it to the man for saying that your project "wasn't physics". It is the duty of the physics department to evaluate the relevancy of every thesis paper that it recieves. Your topic is not traditional physics, and what you've essentially done is to slap the department in the face and then ask them to give you their approval for it.
You need to develop some tact.
You imply that the department heads are cowards who are suppressing your paper because they are afraid that you will uncover some deep secret that will tear down their very institution around them.
That's a very arrogant thing to imply within your 20 page thesis. However I can see that you've done your research in that you have a WHOLE 9 references.
It must have taken you an entire night to do your background reading.
You have severely overestimated the impact of your paper and, furthermore, any scientific merit that your paper may have had takes a backrow seat to the obvious anti-establishment tone. All that you've done here is to pick a fight, and it seems that you are now trying to make yourself out as some sort of martyr. Well your not!
So like I said, your idea is really interesting, but you are really annoying.
Now stop e-mailing me because I don't care anymore.
Post a Comment