From: Sarah Berel-Harrop (email@example.com)
Date: Mon Sep 29 2003 - 22:41:17 EDT
----- Original Message -----
From: "allenroy" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: "John W Burgeson" <email@example.com>; <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Monday, September 29, 2003 8:20 PM
Subject: Kitcher's Book
> "The hard core evolutionists I've debated from 1993 and on, including
> Talk.Orig, either agreed the book stunk or simply distanced themselves
> none were able to defend Kitchers' book without embarrassing themselves.
> abused his own reputation with that book."
I could not recall any t.o. regulars disliking
Kitcher's book. So I just did a google search for
"Kitcher Abusing Science" and got 71 hits, most
of which included recommendations of the book by
talk.origins regulars. One, a list of books for an
FAQ does state that the book is not recommended
for creationists, who might find it offensive. That
book list also does not '*' the book, '*' means
that the book is recommended but the review also states the book is out of
print & many books do not
get '*'s so I think that is not significant. If the reviewers
thought it was a bad book they would have said so
or left it off the list. t.o.'s resident philosopher and voluminous
book-list spewer recommended the book,
but stated that he is skeptical of some of Kitcher's
claims. Unsurprising, he is skeptical of a lot of things.
I think your friend is incorrect regarding the disdain
talk.origins regulars have for this book. Perhaps
he could point to some posts, I saw some going
back as far as 1992.
Incidentally Howard Van Till's et al's book 'Science
held hostage' got a '*'
--- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.522 / Virus Database: 320 - Release Date: 09/29/2003
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Sep 29 2003 - 22:33:51 EDT