[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

RE: Gurney (my hopefully last statement on this)

 Since Chapman brought up my moniker in his post, I have to respond to a few
of his comments. I'll number them for brevity and convenience.
 1. Chapman says,"I don't think DV does not paint in a vacuum," Thank you! I
find that that type of environment makes me paint faster and my paints don't
dry as quickly.
2. He kind of compares my work to Gurche's. I say, "Say, what?" Gurche is as
"tight" as they come and I'm looser than...(You fill in the blank, but make
it have something to do with prune juice).
 3. I take umbrage with Chapman's frequent use of the word "verbiage" which
I was the first to use in my reply to HIM- although I spelled it
incorrectly. If there is a reply to this, count how many times the word
"umbrage" is used.
 4. Chapman quotes a letter to Brian from Gurney- an ugly situation at best-
in which Gurney says,"we can't dig up our own fossils or restore skeletons
or come up with our own scientific theories." I'll just restrain myself here
and try to forget my many years of fieldwork under the blazing South Dakota
sun and the papers I have coauthored.
 5. From the same letter Gurney says,"it is not right to attack a fellow
artist in the way you did, and it does nothing to further your reputation."
Brian was really stretching his neck out. I think his concerns are quite
genuine and heartfelt, they involve other serious paleoartists, and he acts
on them. That enhances his reputation as far as I'm concerned, pal.
 6. Finally, there was just a tinsy-weensie bit of legal sabre-rattling in
Chapman's post(the word verbiage was brought up again). Hardly the thing to
do when offering an olive branch.
 My apologies to the list for a flippant attitude,
 Dan Varner