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

Re: The subject for the day is *science*



> 
> 1) Make vague accusations against people, institutions and/or
> professions.
> 
It seems to me that it's ok for people to like someone, (I. E. Bakker),
but when people don't agree with his science values (?) we should just
keep our mouth shut.


> 2) Complain that individuals or ideas aren't getting the respect they
> deserve (especially if you're not even going to present an argument
> about why they deserve this respect -- note: referring to other
> people's arguments as justification is insufficient here because if
> those arguments were sufficient then you wouldn't need to say anything
> at all).
>
No fredoms here.
 
> 3) Attempt to rile up others on the list in the apparent hope of
> converting them to your own point of view (whatever it is) with
> respect to the social aspects of dinosaur science.
>
This I TOTALLY agree with!!!
 
> I don't know how many times I can keep writing this, but let me try at
> least one more time.  The purpose of this list is to discuss science.
> If you want to discuss how people act and/or what you presume
> motivates people please do it elsewhere (I will throw in as an aside
> that this also includes Steven Speilberg and Michael Crichton; I never
> again want to see people writing to this list about what does or
> doesn't make them tick.  Expect this to be echoed when the next JP
> movie or book comes out...).  If you find a particular action to be
> inappropriate, please take it up with either the perpetrator of the
> act, or someone or group that is in a position to provide oversight in
> such matters.  This list is not the place for such things.
>
Even when they purposely make a totally incorrect view of dinosaurs, and
we, the informed have to corret it over and over again, just have to
keep our mouths shut?
 
Tracy