A hit piece on Barrett, but look at the last paragraph where he suggests that debate, rather than Kevin's dismissal, is the best way of silencing him. Isn't that what Kevin, Charlie Sheen, and everyone else wants? To be debated on the facts?

The author of this article seems to be a big proponent of debate and the Truth, feel free to test him on this. His email address is: schapman@tribune.com:

http://www.chicagotribune.com

...
But their dollars are really going to a broader and entirely worthy purpose, namely open inquiry in the pursuit of truth. Barrett and Butz have reached crazy and offensive conclusions, but just as bad movies can heighten our appreciation for good ones, their errors can sharpen our perception of the truth. Besides, silencing them doesn't refute their arguments. You can't refute an argument without first hearing it.

To remove them from teaching is to lend them credence by suggesting we're afraid they may change minds. In fact, the best antidote to error is unbridled, vigorous and searching debate. When that sort of debate occurs, the truth has nothing to fear.

Thanks to Edward for sending this in.