Re: Okay seriously now (AAT again)
Phillip Bigelow (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Thu, 22 Dec 1994 05:08:16 GMT
email@example.com (Bryce Harrington) writes:
>In article <1994Dec16.firstname.lastname@example.org> email@example.com (Phillip Bigelow) writes:
>> Bryce, this level of detail in your "model" is so intricate and
>>speculative, that I am surprised you haven't provided us with the exact day
>>of the week our ancestors first entered the water!
>I put an ample disclaimer on the article in question, Phillip. I
>think you deleted it just to make a point. Anyway, all of the above
>was taken straight from Morgan's books and other literature where the
>topic was discussed in much more detail than this. But you are right,
>it _is_ speculation. I SAID that in a paragraph immediately before
>the quoted one.
Should scientific theories or hypotheses be based solely on speculation?
Should speculative conclusions be based on earlier-made speculations?
These are only rhetorical questions I am asking here. Whether the quotes
you made were taken directly out of Morgan's books is irrelevant.
Speculation is speculation is speculation.