The former Arizona State University physicist reported in 2018 this advice from his “religious right wing law professor brother” [that’s Krauss’s description, not mine]:

Therefore i think you should pursue a mixed strategy. On the one hand, you should non-aggressively, soberly, suggest that the groping allegation is exaggerated but likely the result of a good faith misunderstanding. At the same time you should acknowledge that all these accusations have woken you up. You had never fully realized how vulnerable women are, and how the “me-too” campaign reflects decades of oppression and exploitation. You were blindly ignorant of, and insensitive to, this reality. this blind ignorance was all the more inexcusable in that you yourself have a daughter. You absolutely pledge that all your future behavior will reflect this newfound realization. You pledge to enroll (and indeed you should find and enroll in before making this pledge) in a program designed to educate and sensitize men to the pervasive atmosphere of sexual assault and harassment. You pledge to devote the rest of your career to this goal and to change your behavior to reflect this new realization. You pledge never ever again to make gestures that even have a slight chance of being perceived as harassing to females. You apologize profusely for all your hurtful gestures in the past, and recognize that the women who have complained about you are not making their complaints up. You were too physical in the past, you were blind to the vulnerability of women exposed to men in positions of power and influence, you abused that position and their trust even though you were sure at the time that you were doing nothing wrong. You know better now, because you understand women’s vulnerability in ways you didn’t before. You humbly ask Arizona State, or indeed any university that is interested, to give you another chance to show that you are in fact nothing but a caring, active physicist who is now more respectful of women. You are absolutely dedicated to pursuing your academic aspirations without future distractions. Importantly, you should do something dramatic, such as offer 100% of the royalties from your next book to some foundation that assists women who have been victims of harassment.

Jeez, what an asshole, to recommend that the “caring, active physicist” bring his daughter into his P.R. strategy.

In any case it seems that Krauss did not follow his brother’s advice. Not only does Krauss express no remorse about his own behavior, he hedges his bets on Jeffrey Epstein, referring to the financier’s “alleged criminality.” (Elsewhere he wrote that “everyone was a victim, including Jeffrey here.”)

Scroll down below Krauss’s linked post and here are the other things they recommend you read:

“Why We Need to Talk About Transgender School Shooters,” indeed. On the other hand, it seems that this is only the 325th most important thing they needed to talk about, so maybe that need wasn’t so great.

And here’s the second of those links:

I agree with sub-heading on this one. The paradox is that Arizona State, Harvard, and other Epstein-associated universities were themselves “rewarding those who exemplify and cultivate intellectual vices.”

And, yes, I’m saying intellectual vices, not just financial and sexual vices. To the extent that Epstein stood for anything intellectually, it was the principle of recirculating B.S. from well-placed elites (as here). Also the above proposed parade of insincerity (oh, sorry, the “mixed strategy”) is an intellectual vice. For that matter, I think it was an intellectual vice for Biggar to misrepresent the position of someone with whom he had an academic and political dispute.

That’s fine. Biggar can be correct in his larger point even if he does not always live up to these ideals himself, and it’s not his fault that he happened to have published on the same website as someone who is a kind of negative illustration of his point. It’s just interesting to see the juxtaposition.

But, hey, for a mere $4500 you can go on a one-week cruise with this guy (that’s Krauss, not Biggar). I think that part of what you get for this equivalent of 3130 Jamaican beef patties is the right to come up to him on the boat and say, “Hey, Lorrie, what’s your position on the statement, ‘You had never fully realized how vulnerable women are, and how the “me-too” campaign reflects decades of oppression and exploitation. . . . You absolutely pledge that all your future behavior will reflect this newfound realization. . . . You pledge to devote the rest of your career to this goal’?” For $4500, the least he can give you is a straight answer.