CJ Werleman’s Biggest Fan: ‘@Women4Atheism’
by DeepFicus
Many people have noticed the suspciously close connection between the twitter account @Women4Atheism and the writer CJ Werleman.
Here are the reasons that suspicion is justified:
Five years ago a twitter account called @ShitMyJesusSays is created. The first tweet is to CJ Werleman’s former account:
It’s followed by more jokes of a similar style:
Other similar tweets can be found here:
Sometime before March 28 2010, the username is changed to @Women4Atheism. The more vulgar tweets are deleted, presumably because the owner of the account deems them unbecoming of Ladies For Godlessness.
They’re followed by tweets like this:
More of the same can be viewed here:
http://favstar.fm/users/Women4Atheism
And here:
https://twitter.com/Women4Atheism/with_replies
It’s worth noting that Werleman Favorites and Retweets almost every tweet @Women4Atheism makes. And why not? They have so much in common. A shared love of “midget” jokes:
Then on the 17th of October, Werleman is accused of plagiarism on Godless Spellchecker’s blog: http://www.gspellchecker.com/2014/10/is-cj-werleman-a- plagiarist/
When in doubt, insult Sarah Palin:
…in response to the following paragraph from Harris’ blog:
There’s one final interaction between Werleman and @Women4Atheism. All you unforgiving atheists could learn a thing or two from this man:
Hmmm…
You can accuse CJ Werleman of plagiarism, opportunism, and intellectual dishonesty, but don’t ever accuse him of being too hard on himself.
Thank you for this. I was so hoping someone would compile the evidence of Werleman’s crimes. As an off and on follower of his work, the first concerning trait I noticed in him was his continuous intellectual dishonesty, which became well known after his infamous TYT appearance and his absurd statements and tweets that followed. I then began to notice that he was continuously deleting critical comments on his Facebook page (although now there is such an avalanche of negative comments that he is having a hard time keeping up). When he was outed as a serial plagiarizer, I can’t say I was that surprised. Nearly *twenty* instances of obvious plagiarism have been discovered; I wonder if the actual number hits the triple digits.
And then he attempted to slander Harris with completely false accusations, taking things to a whole other level. I hope anyone reading this blog takes the time to carefully go through it all and click on the links (especially to the blog that provides examples of and links to all of the plagiarism) to fully appreciate how twisted this guy is. Creating multiple blog, Twitter and Facebook identities and using them to market oneself while attempting to destroy another’s reputation is truly sickening behavior. Lies on top of lies on top of lies… Did he really think he could get away with it? I suppose the answer is yes, and that he still does. The guy is sick and in need of help; I hope he gets it. I also hope he is never able to work for a legitimate journalism outlet again. He is a disgrace to the profession.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Oh wont you just spell it out, the suggestion made here is that women4atheism is a ‘fake’ account in the hands of cj werleman.
I find the evidence severely lacking though. Instead of this conspiracy of three fake accounts, what I find way more believable is the OBVIOUS reality that cj werleman has a more or less captivated fangirl on his hands that is attracted to his writing and – admittedly – good looks. She is simple doing the female equivalent of white-knighting. Doesnt this happen al the time?
Werleman himself made the suggestion Steyn and Harris had comparable writing, women4atheism/stephaniecranston jumped on that thought and hastily scanned the books in order to give this some more publicity to even out the balance of critique in defense werleman.
No i’m not werleman, actually a big fan of Harris (agree 99%) and I find the hostile atmosphere against these individuals not just unpleasant on itself but actually and potentially damaging the reputation of Harris.
I’m sure many Harris supporters agree with me.
LikeLike
You seemed to have missed a bit: “CriticalCranson” already admitted that “she” was behind the the “Women4Atheism” account. And the connection between CJ and “CriticalCranson” is solid. “She” knew things only CJ could’ve “known” (details about Harris’ alleged plagiarism). So yea, I’m afraid this deal is closed.
LikeLike
I think the “fan girl” theory is more likely than CJ himself creating the fake accounts. Although having knowledge of the details of the alleged Harris plagiarism suggests it’s someone who knows CJ personally, or at least is in regular contact with him.
LikeLike
No, I didnt miss that all, sorry if I was unclear on that.
What details of the alleged plagiarism are you reffering to? what could only cj have known here? sadly the criticalcranson tweets have been deleted but she mentioned her writing a blog AFTER the fact cjwerleman mentioned seeing a connection between steyn and harris. Now, anyone with some basic google and CTRL-F skills can read up on the digital texts of all mentioned authors and books, its not that hard. She could have spared herself a whole lot of trouble if she just searched ‘the end of faith’ as well for the list of conflicts section, which took me no more then 5 minutes.
Also, I expect even a cj werleman to have the required research skills to be able to spot this fact.
LikeLike
There is a “hostile atmosphere” because Werleman has gone off the rails and exposed himself as a fraud–serial plagiarizing, constant lying, deleting comments, and so very obviously masquerading under multiple online identities to promote himself and try to destroy the reputation of someone else. If you desperately want to come up with another explanation, you can spin one, but it’s painfully clear if you thoroughly go through all of the evidence.
I liked CJ when I first discovered him months ago. I wish none of this was happening and that he wasn’t this messed up person. But he is, and to not acknowledge that makes you willfully ignorant (or it makes you CJ himself). Read it over again, observe how similar the language is among his various identities, click on the links and read through all of the plagiarizing, his excuses for it, etc.; you will see what’s really happening here, and you will hopefully come to understand how important it is that plagiarizing on a grand scale and attempting to destroy another author’s reputation NOT be taken lightly.
LikeLike
Ha…”admittedly good looks.” Good one, CJ. “Actually a big fan of Harris,” you really threw everyone off your trail now.
LikeLike
Deflections like this are the giveaway:
“I find the hostile atmosphere against these individuals not just unpleasant on itself but actually and potentially damaging the reputation of Harris. I’m sure many Harris supporters agree with me.”
He’s begging for this to stop. This whole thing is getting way too Lindsay Lohan.
LikeLike
Well how typical to suspect another CJ persona. I thought about posting my twitter handle but I don’t think that will convince.
This whole theory of fake accounts and fake persona’s layered upon each other is looking like a sand castle to me.
Theory 1: ‘highly unethical, mentally ill pseudo-intellectual narcissist’ setting up an account, posing as a girl, fawning over himself for years, then setting up a new one to promote the blog post, once that’s been debunked reverting to the old one with even more fawning, apologizing to himself, pouting at detractors and pleading Sam Harris to take back the insinuation she’s a fake.
(yes im plagiarising Matt Orchard)
Theory 2: White-knighting fangirl screws up
LikeLike
Funny. He’s so good looking that some poor girl has gone off the rails. Is that your theory?
LikeLike
no
LikeLike
So what?….. Get to the point where is your scientific proof of God ?
LikeLike
I don’t believe in god. Is it wrong to point out someone’s unethical behaviour simply because they share a lack of belief in something?
LikeLike
I agree with thp and I too am a huge Harris fan, though I do appreciate you taking the time to lay out the case and some of the timing is odd…
As thp says though, a far more obvious explanation is that CJ has an obsessed fan-girl whom he encourages through favouriting her tweets as a function of his massive narcissism.
Her hero and crush suffers a possibly career shattering blow and so she rushes to his defense and puts together a sloppy blog that gets debunked within hours.
One thing lending to your theory here – I don’t see why she would have to start another twitter account as her current one was already anonymous…eh, chalk it up to daftness.
Main reason to doubt the conspiracy: Werleman may be a highly unethical, pseudo-intellectual narcissist but he doesn’t come across as mentally ill, which I think would almost be a pre requisite for these allegations to be true.
I mean setting up an account, posing as a girl, fawning over himself for years, then setting up a new one to promote the blog post, once that’s been debunked reverting to the old one with even more fawning, apologizing to himself, pouting at detractors and pleading Sam Harris to take back the insinuation she’s a fake.
It’s just too much. I’ll be gob-smacked if it ends up being true, and I think if a lot of fellow Harris fans put their dislike of CJ aside for a moment, take a deep breath and reflect on what would be required for these allegations to be true you’ll see how far fetched it is too.
LikeLike
You make some interesting points. But I’m curious: what explanation would you give for the account’s origin as @shitmyjesussays? Do the tweets from that account come across as fangirl-like to you? Are they not remarkably similar to some of Werleman’s jokes? Since collating this piece, I have since come across an old tweet by Werleman suggesting his followers follow @shitmyjesussays. Nowhere can I find the kind of fangirl excitement you would expect this to engender in return. If you can, please share it.
LikeLike
Can you direct me to this old tweet by werleman mentioning @ShitMyJesusSays? I’m unable to find it.
With regards to the similarity, I’m not really seeing it, but even if, lots of people share a sense of humor I guess, even weird ones, maybe that’s part of the attraction and not higly suspicious at all.
LikeLike
Someone on twitter has screen capped it: https://twitter.com/Impecuniated/status/524403608889360384
LikeLike
I’ve looked into that screencap and @ZippyBippy is someone @cjwerleman follows, so this would be something that he would see without ‘seeking it out’ or other special monitoring. Again, not that big a deal.
LikeLike
I’ve only skimmed the tweets so forgive me if I’m missing some really important stuff but:
Possible that she started her obsession with Werleman after getting some attention from him? Overt fawning doesn’t begin until well after the handle change I believe? In regards to the humor, his was never very original to begin with so that’s not too odd.
Again, a lot of stuff is suspect here so maybe you guys are right. I’ve been enjoying the train wreck the past few days so a mean part of me kind of hopes you are. My main skepticism is still rooted in CJ just not coming across as a grade-a psycho as opposed to just a ‘2nd rate hack’ as Dawkins would say.
LikeLike
Love it, but speaking as a former Red Cross volunteer, you may want to pick a better charity. Or at least do a little googling on the mismanagement and outright malfeasance with donated funds. They do less good per dollar than you can imagine. Blood yes, cash no.
Habitat for Humanity, Planned Parenthood, Doctors without Borders…there are some truly great ones out there that could use the money a whole lot more.
LikeLike
It’s not a conspiracy. Private citizens sometimes create multiple online accounts in order to remain private, make comments in forums without having to provide identifying info, etc. For a public figure like CJ, who has proven himself to be more dishonest than any author/speaker I’ve ever followed, creating a bunch of online identities and using them to promote himself and slander someone else probably came as easy to him as all the other forms of lying he engages in. And what really gives it away is the strikingly similar language among them all. Give it a good read though again. It becomes obvious pretty quickly.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The word ‘conspiracy’ is cheerfully withdrawn. I still think that CJ being a shameless liar doesn’t justify concluding he is crazy and severely sub-intelligent. Again I think those two traits are pre-requisites for the alleged twitter behavior.
Can you give me a CJ article rec for language comparison?
LikeLike
I agree that if all allegations regarding the fake accounts are true, it is a matter of full-fledged sociopathic behaviour, and that this in itself should lead one to consider giving Werleman the benefit of the doubt.
On the other hand, the evidence just seems overwhelming: The “fan-girl” having read all of his books, the matching spelling errors. I also found the comment “As an exercise I read all of Werleman’s 55 Alternet/Salon articles.” in the original criticalcranson blog post pretty damning.
LikeLike
1. I have read all sam harris books, articles, blogs, seen pretty much all his debates and interviews etc since the release of the end of faith
2. … misspelling lightning.. really? thats evidence?
3. boast is obvious boast
LikeLike
It is obvious that women4atheism is also CJ. At this point, I suspect thp is CJ as well. The guy just doesn’t know when to quit.
I would love to get experts to compare writing styles of the criticalcranston/women4atheism blog to CJs writings and to thp comments, but at this point it is just morbid curiosity.
LikeLike
UPDATE: More significant evidence:
https://twitter.com/Impecuniated/status/524403608889360384
LikeLike
Another explanation: cjwerleman does follow zippybippy and thus would see the tweet, liked it, favorite it.
LikeLike
Spell the thing you see in the sky before you here thunder
LikeLiked by 1 person
If Werleman was indeed following zippybippy, and @shitmyjesussays also just happened to start following zippybippy, that would be a remarkable coincidence given everything else that has occurred.
LikeLike
Wouldnt @zippybippy already be following @shitmyjesussays in order to see her tweet? So are we pulling @zippybippy into this conspiracy (for lack of a better word) ?
LikeLike
You can’t assume that. Someone notified of a new follower can go look at that followers tweets without having to follow them.
The bigger point is this: zippybippy is by no means a public figure. And yet he was followed by both Werleman and by @shitmyjesussays. Yet another remarkable coincidence. Zippybippy is also from Los Angeles correct?
You may like to read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance
LikeLike
I did use some stylometry software to compare CJ’s and Cranson’s writing, but Cranson has done too little writing to make a good comparison. If they write more, it may become evident.
As for method, I collected seven of CJ’s known articles from Salon(the Alternet ones were already pulled) totaling 8,214 words, and then Cranson’s post with 1,749 words, and lined them up with Signature(freeware). I could easily make screen shots, but the data suggests there may be no connection. Then again, as I said, that could simply be because Cranson has written so little at this point, and the software gets more accurate with more examples of a writing style. It is very difficult to cover up one’s writing ticks, and the human brain makes for a good styometric analysis tool on its own. E.g., the similarity in CJ and Cranson’s lightening/lightning errors, and pejorative references to little people as midgets.
LikeLike
Did you pull out all of the plagiarism before doing the compare? I know that would take a long time and probably wouldn’t leave much, but it may provide better results. 😉
LikeLike
How does this dude keep up with his numerous personas? He probably has full blown debates between all his alter egos while sat on the toilet. Mass debates.
LikeLike
I was part of the crew tracking this (thanks for compiling this btw). CJ just removed/blocked all of my comments on his facebook page. Everything i commented was public and not even harsh or attacking of CJ. In fact by blocking me he eliminated a really good conversation i got into with another commenter about the role of religion in the israel/palestine conflict.
But to the point that this derision is bad for the community and this seemingly ugly back and forth is harmful to the image etc… i have to put in a strong word here.
We must be this aggressive to CJ’s sort of behavior to ensure intellectual honesty in the athiest conversation. I tweeted it a few times yesterday that I think cj was not (and clearly still is not) understanding that I’m not upset about his plagiarism (i mean that is totally shitty and revealing about his integrity) but rather I am upset that he fails to understand (and the commentators deriding the backlash against him) how DANGEROUS his approach to his writing is.
I think we all know that the conversation that we need to have as rational thinkers is with the right wing, the ones who think “god is on our side” You know Sam and the best thinkers we have used to debate creationists and religious wackos a lot more. (remember those days?) But now, before we even get to that point people like CJ and Reza and Affleck and Glenn and Kristoff etc… have dragged us back to claim “no one takes god seriously anyway”.
This is a very important discussion to have. They could be right, they could be wrong. It is vitally important debate to have. Although if it were honest it would be quite short. But guess what, this debate has NOT been honest. Because people like CJ are getting involved and, in his case, INTENTIONALLY misrepresenting the argument he wants to disagree with. I don’t know how Sam can repeat himself so many times without snapping. But he NEVER says that unethical actions are SOLEY caused by religion. He and every rational thinker freely admits that politics plays a role. The debate that needs to happen is to measure the weight of those motivations (politics vs religion). But if people like CJ continue to operate the way they do? Guess what, were going to be stuck repeating ourselves and being accused of holding a position which no one freaking holds.
CJ deserves all the exposing he is due.
Jay
LikeLike
I practically burst into applause reading your comment. I couldn’t agree more.
LikeLike
Not to mention all the accounts “Stephanie Cranson” is following on twitter are all Los Angeles based, which twitter suggests you to follow based on your location, which is same location as CJ (Southern California). And she/he puts “Just a New York Girl” on the blog, but tweets about just waking up at 2pm NYC time.
LikeLike
Maybe she woke up at 2pm because she was tired from reading 60,000+ words and compiling statistics on the number of quotations and studies referenced “as an exercise,” before then cross-referencing them with a book by a hard-right-wing writer she just happened to have on her shelf.
LikeLike
This is the strongest piece of evidence I have read so far, although, who actually follows anyone simply because twitter suggests it?
LikeLike
I have checked, and currently when you sign up for twitter, you must select a number of accounts to follow before you can proceed. Twitter will choose these accounts for you if you don’t want to do the choosing yourself. It will do this based on the user’s location.
LikeLike
CJ issued another absurd “apology” on his Facebook page, has received a ton of negative comments, and is deleting ALL of them! Anyone who comes across his page without knowing much about him and reads the comments must think he’s extremely well liked, which is beyond laughable to anyone familiar with his actions. He is essentially a fraud. I guess the liberal principles he espouses like “free speech” don’t apply to him. Here’s a fitting new moniker: Censorship CJ!
LikeLike
[…] In what is surely the weirdest part of this incident, it appears that Werleman engaged in three instances of sockpuppeting to support himself, using a Twi**er handle “@Women4Atheism,” a later version of an earlier feed called […]
LikeLiked by 1 person
Isn’t it true (perhaps I’m wrong) that CJ doesn’t follow Women4Atheism? If so, that makes it even more suspicious.
LikeLike
[…] and then later another apology which while more extensive still reeked of insincerity. Then came news that he was possibly using another Twitter account another a different guise to promote his […]
LikeLike
You forgot to mention the tweet where “Stephanie Cranston” asked “Women4Atheism” to “please follow me.” (it was deleted but someone out there has a screen cap of it on Twitter). To me, that settles it…
LikeLike
You forgot to mention the tweet from “Stephanie” to “Women4Athesim,” asking “her” to “please follow me.” There is a screen cap for it somewhere on Twitter… As you mentioned, it doesn’t make any sense that Women4Atheism, already being an anonymous account, would create a separate anonymous account just for the sake of tweeting a link to the blog… However, why would she also think that there would ever be the slightest possibility that both Women4Atheism and CriticalCranston would be connected as the same person in the first place (presumably the reason she would tweet to herself)? Tweeting from one account to the other in an effort to legitimize it doesn’t make any sense and can’t be chalked up to just daftness. It seems far more likely that both are phony and that the person behind them both (CJ) was trying to create the illusion that they are each legitimate and separate accounts.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Guys, you are out of control. As a fellow Atheist who cares about the movement, please get a grip. The followers of Harris are making us look awful! When did Sam Harris become a deity that fanboys love the same way 15 year old girls love “One Direction”? I like most of what Sam Harris has to say, but Jesus fucking Christ I’m sick of his fans.
LikeLike
Not trying to pick a fight; we’re all Atheists here. After further reflection, my last statement was harsh and made out of frustration. I just think we can, and should, do better than focusing on petty in-fighting and conspiracy theories. It would serve us well to stay away from the “angry Atheist” stereotype.
LikeLike
Conspiracy theory?? The reality is plain as day to anyone willing to look.
Yes, I’m angry…angry at a writer I once liked who has proven himself to be a major liar and fraud. Stereotype me all you want, but I would be angry at ANY writer who did the things CJ has done. I feel cheated and disgusted by him, and I don’t feel he should ever have a platform as a journalist again. Most rational people who know the truth feel this way.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You still don’t get it, do you? This guy got widespread coverage attacking other people. CJ is the angry ahteist. His constant lies, straw men and attacks were getting really bad.
LikeLike
Actually, I want to go one step further than I did in my last post. I re-read the article, and though I still find it unlikely, I think it is worthy of further review. I apologize to everyone. I feel my last apology went far enough, but I shouldn’t have said anything other than I was wrong because I’m sure someone will have an issue with something I said. I feel the need to say this, not just because people were offended by what I said, but because I don’t want that post to represent who I am(and I was dumb enough to put my real name on it).
Hopefully there isn’t any need for any further apology. In addition to re-reading the article, I re-read my first post. Though as far as internet comments section, I feel my post was not that inflammatory, but I should not have posted it. My first post does not represent who I am and was made in haste. It was sloppy, mean-spirited, and made sweeping generalizations. Like I said in my previous apology, I instantly regretted hitting “post comment”.
If that doesn’t go far enough, not sure what else I can say.
LikeLike
This sock puppet thing is a real interesting and fascinating case, and I fail to see how discussing it ,given the evidence, is a bad thing. This charge of “deity” and “fanboyism” is nonsense and a cheap insult.
And another thing, people who do not subscribe to unfounded believes should stop saying stuff like “making us look awful”, as if non believers belong in some special group. People are not going to group non astrologers together and use the terms ‘us’ or ‘them’ to describe people who do not practice astrology. The word atheism should not even be used.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Claiming that anyone who criticizes the sockpuppeteer is a “Harris follower” i just pathetic. This has got nothing to do with Harris as such. It has got to do with a serial sockpuppeteer using lies and straw men against other people.
Go away.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I apologize to all. I apologize for claiming that Harris has a small number of followers that act like assholes. Apparently, this has “nothing to do with Harris”. I am sorry I said that this helps reinforce the “angry atheist stereotype”. My post was a result of weeks of watching this episode unfold, and biting my tongue, while the anger built. It was unfair to unload on this blog.
I apologize to Brenda, for calling this a conspiracy theory. Apparently, the truth is plain to see, but I don’t see it. Still doesn’t mean that it couldn’t be true. I truly apologize. But, you have to be able to see how this might look on the outside looking in? I was not trying to stereotype you, perhaps what I was saying doesn’t even pertain to you. I just feel like there are a vast number of Harris followers (sorry I used that term) that have been very unpleasant over the past couple of weeks. But as I said before, this apparently has nothing to do with Harris, so I am wrong. I am sorry if you feel I was stereotyping you.
I apologize to SCCC, because I apparently don’t get it. I’m not apologizing for CJ. In a lot of ways, I get the anger. Obviously, he didn’t come out well in this and his career is now on life support. My point was that this theory seems far-fetched, but maybe it’s not. I understand why Harris is mad, but I’m still having problems figuring out why so many people on the internet seem to be far more angry than he is. I apologize that I came off as “pathetic” because I characterized people as Harris followers. I must admit, I had to look up all the sock puppet references. I assume this is what you mean (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sockpuppet_%28Internet%29).
To ofia, the charge of fanboyism may be a cheap shot in some respects, and for that I apologize. I tried to clear this up in my second post, but I guess no one saw that. Maybe I’m wrong. Perhaps Harris doesn’t have a small, but very vocal group of followers that act like dickwads. And if they do exist, perhaps they aren’t as big as the internet makes it seem like. I guess I should also apologize for saying “making us look awful” because apparently non-believers are not a group. Are you saying the word “Atheism” should not be used in this context, or at all? I strongly disagree with on your last couple of sentences about how non-believers can’t be grouped because you can’t group people by something they don’t believe in. There are many Atheists groups around this country that I believe would disagree with you. However, your point is taken and I will try not do this again.
Once again, I apologize to everyone and anyone that was offended. As a fan of Harris and CJ, this whole situation has made me sick. From what I’ve seen, I feel that there is a number of people (once again, this might not be you), who are obsessed with this issue and have acted very poorly. Perhaps I’m wrong, as has been pointed out. Maybe Harris is irrelevant to this situation. Maybe the people that are leading this charge don’t even care about Harris and this is all about journalism integrity. As has been pointed out, it’s not fair to characterize people as “Harris followers” or apparently even Atheists.
I made a statement out of anger at the situation. I was not to defend CJ. That’s almost impossible to do at this point, but I’ve been reading a little too much about the situation lately, and I’ve found a lot of what has been said to be ugly, internet bullshit, much has been done (at least indirectly) as a defense of Sam Harris. Not saying that this is any of you, and once again, I apologize for anything that I said that offended anyone.
Though I don’t completely disagree with what I said, I do disagree with how I said it. I took out anger that had been building for weeks out on this post. As soon as I hit “post comment”, I instantly regretted it. I couldn’t find a way to delete it, so I posted again, trying to clear up what I said but it obviously didn’t work. I guess we are not supposed to say things like this, but I don’t want to fight with fellow Atheists/non-believers.
Though we may disagree, I appreciate how civil it stayed for the most part. I hope I helped clear up the situation and you all will accept my apology (though I fear I may have just angered some of you more). The only comment that I thought was ugly was the “go away” comment. It’s not constructive, dismissive and insulting. But I will listen to your demand and go away.
LikeLike
@jaketribble
Your non-pology sounds eerily similar to something CJW would have written. Similar with your misrepresentations of what I wrote.
Whether Harris has any fans who act like assholes or not is irrelevant. One, because being an asshole doesn’t automatically make you wrong, and two, because you basically tried to deflect any and all criticism against CJW in this post by claiming that “the followers of Harris are making us look awful.”
CJW is getting his ass handed to him because he stepped across the line and was busted in several different ways. Apparently you think his behaviour (lies, attacks, misrepresenting arguments, sock-puppetry, etc.) was perfectly fine. It is only when people start exposing him that you blow up in anger.
Hypocrisy, in other words. Somehting you see with CJW himself as well.
LikeLike
Jerry Coyne has written a comprehensive timeline for this sorry mess, of which this blog is just one part. You can read it on his WhyEvolutionIsTrue blog here:
http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2014/10/23/beyond-belief-the-werleman-mess-is-worse-than-you-can-imagine/
LikeLike
I’m so convinced CJ Werleman made up Stephanie Cranson, that I’ll give $5,000 to the American Red Cross if she’s real: https://twitter.com/johnholland/status/525657321616060416
LikeLiked by 1 person
You, my friend, are awesome. Steph, surely you won’t stand in the way of helping those desperately in need…right? …Steph?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Love it, but speaking as a former Red Cross volunteer, you may want to pick a better charity. Or at least do a little googling on the mismanagement and outright malfeasance with donated funds. They do less good per dollar than you can imagine. Blood yes, cash no.
Habitat for Humanity, Planned Parenthood, Doctors without Borders…there are some truly great ones out there that could use the money a whole lot more.
LikeLike
I don’t buy the notion that CJ is behind the W4A account. The only connections appear to be that they follow and star some of the same tweets and that W4A has apparently voiced CJ’s accusation of Harris’ plagiarism. This is a rather weak case. Rather is prefer the statement at the top of the blog that the accounts are “suspiciously linked.” The evidence presented could easily be explained by W4A being some long time obsessive fan of CJ. He’s charismatic and gives off an aura of self importance so it doesn’t surprise me he might cultivate a relationship like this. In fact, it seems more likely to me that CJ acquired such a fan than that he himself is deranged (which is what would be required for him to be behind this whole thing).
Even though CJ is dishonest, unethical, and driven by ego, I do not think he is either stupid or insane enough to have sock puppeted in this way. Why would he sock puppet a sock puppet? The entire entrance of the W4A account into the situation was unnecessary and purposeless if CJ was pulling the strings. He could have just left it at the criticalcranson layer without any addition consequences. Revealing W4A accomplishes nothing. If CJ was smart, he would use either the new sock puppet or the old one, but not both. The way things went down make sense if W4A is an actual person who thinks she has a relationship with CJ.
I don’t think the overall theory isn’t worth investigating, as there was a lot of fishy stuff that happened with these accounts, but I feel it should be beneath the engagement of Harris, Dawkins, and Coyne until something solid emerges.
LikeLike
Oh, until I’m writing that check to the American Red Cross, my theory is that CJ Werleman enjoys roleplaying as woman online.
LikeLike
He couldn’t have just left it at the “Cranston” level, because everyone was pointing out how obviously phony that Twitter account and blog were. Suddenly, in steps W4A to take the heat off. You’re right, maybe W4A is just a CJ super fan, but I’d wager not. Either way, CJ was “Stephanie Cranston.” No alternative makes sense.
LikeLike
Revealing W4A accomplishes nothing because it is also anonymous. So, yes, CJ would leave it at the Cranson level if he was behind it. He would use one account or the other, but not both, to take credit for the blog. There’s no way W4A and Cranson are two separate people, that idea makes the least sense of all.
LikeLike
Further evidence of dishonesty in the service of self-promotion, for anyone still unsure:
https://somewhatmorecriticalcranson.wordpress.com/2014/10/25/smoke-and-mirrors-the-cj-werleman-story/
LikeLike
“Stephanie Cranson” was only active for week. The account has no new tweets or blog posts since the whole thing backfired.
LikeLike