Re: preposterous

From: John W Burgeson (
Date: Tue Apr 03 2001 - 14:27:35 EDT

  • Next message: John W Burgeson: "Re: preposterous"

    Jonathan scolded Moorad with these words (among many):

    "What would it take you to realise that things may be demonstrated to be
    with out a physics like rigour (what ever that is)?"

    In defense of Moorad, with whom I have many times disagreed, I offer the
    comment of Samuel Boswell, who, though not a builder of furniture, opined
    once that he could still evaluate a chair as a "bad chair" without being
    able to do better.

    Coming, as Moorad does, from a background in physics, I think I
    understand his position, although I am not about to call another person's
    field of expertise "bad science." Well -- in the case of JB Rhine, maybe.
    < G >

    But I have always been concerned about the level of quantification in the
    evolutionary theories. That does not make them "bad," of course, let
    alone "untrue." But "uncomfortable" is a word that does come to mind.

    Burgy (John Burgeson)

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Apr 03 2001 - 14:28:11 EDT