Not that Andrew Cline
So today I get this e-mail from “Jay sun”:
Mr. Kline,
Since when do you think you know more than PHD’s in Physics, Engineering and Forensics?
Remember getting your (useless) PHD in jounalism? Remember how difficult that was?
Now think about those who have put their very career on the line to expose the truth about 9/11.
Take notice, sir. Quoting NIST does not add validity to your rebuttal.
I think you are just scared.
Have a nice day.
Hmmmmmm…where to begin. How about WTF?
As it turns out, this yahoo actually means to contact another Andrew Cline–the editorial editor of the Union Leader. Which is all very odd in a personal sort of way because in a past life I was a (liberal) conservative and dreamed of being an editorial page editor. My correspondent was apparently reacting to a column in which this other guy was dissing on 9/11 conspiracy theories (of which I have taken no official position here because it is outside the scope of this blog–but, for the record, I don’t think Bush had anything to do with it other than failing to heed warnings–but, what do I know?–I only have an easy-to-get and useless Ph.D in rhetoric–not journalism).
So why am I telling you all of this, dear reader? I don’t know. I’m somewhat amused by it. And I thought it was time to mention this other dude. According to Google, I’m still #1 
This other guy comes in third behind an Associate Insect Biosystematist.
Have a nice day.
HAHAHA … Andy, that sounds like when you googlestimise the name Jeff Gannon, the disgraced White House non-reporter you get a bunch of sites for gay escort services…
Oh … wait a minute .. that actually *IS* Jeff Gannon ….
There’s just no respect for the humanities or social sciences.
Without knowing the exact context of your readers criticism (nor really caring that much): NIST (and SI) for a large category of scientific subjects are legitimate authorities to appeal to in supporting an argument. Assuming the appeal to the authority of NIST or SI was appropriate, there is no counter argument to evoke a disputed authority based on a PhD awarded by an academic institution. In terms of scientific definitions, NIST and SI outrank academic institutional credentials (but, but, but… I’ve got my PhD from MIT!).
If your reader has a reasonable cause to believe you’ve incorrectly used an argumentum ad verecundiam appeal to NIST, then said reader should explain. Otherwise, the complaint is without clear merit.
Another point. The possession of credentials in a particular field does not imply a monopoly or unique knowledge, as the degree is simply certification that institution X vouches for a degree holders qualification. I myself have a PhD in Physics from the San Juan Hair Stylists Institute, but does this really mean I know much about physics? Maybe, but probably not. Likewise, an individual who attended MIT and studied Physics for a decade but never bothered to satisfy all the degree requirements MIT wants prior to awarding a PhD. The point is that a degree does not necessarily entail either ignorance or expertice without further qualification.
This said. Are there really PhD’s in journalism?
ASC- Yes, you can get a Ph.D. in journalism.
re: your points about PhDs
I agree.
I think its amazing that in our society we can now rank our selves by a google search. I’m not saying its bad, just pointing out the change.