[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: A few notes...
>From: Ralph Chapman <MNHAD002@SIVM.SI.EDU>
> Now, with that said, it is irresponsible for someone to represent a
> unsupported theory as fact to the general public. Some context must
> be given. This macho form of science - huffing it out because it's your
> theory without pointing out the flaws and lack of data - is not good for
> anyone, especially the jerk doing it. Now, I did not hear Bakker's talk
> (or e-mail thing) so I won't say he was doing this but all of us who do
> science have to be better at showing the public how it's done, including
> the negative side to theories. The media are bad about presenting these
> but we shouldn;t be. The optimum way to present a line of reasoning is
> with both the support for and problems with up front and let the scientific
> and non-scientific community use their head (I'm lost in making subject
> and verb agree by now).
Thanks. I was trying to find a way to say this clearly in response
to Jeff Poling's last letter. You have done an admirable job.
I certainly always try to present thing fairly, even when I am
*sure* I am right. (That is one reason why I am getting somebody
else to write part of the discussion of cladism in my upcoming
Web page - so I can present a balanced view).
I would like to add that no matter how well or poorly science is
taught in school, unless scientists are responsible in their
presentation there is going to be confusion and misunderstanding
about what is the case.
[And I *do* agree with Jeff that science is *suaully* taught
*very* poorly at the pre-college level].
> Anyway, let's give RR a chance and see how we like it, as well as Crichton's
> Lost World in late September and Dinotopia II
As far as the *book* is concerned, I have an open mind.
And plugging the book on the AOL forum was quite appropriate,
given the nature of the event.
The peace of God be with you.