Ed Conrad (edconrad@prolog.net)
1 Dec 1996 06:27:26 GMT

> "Richard P. Hanson" <richard.hanson@*REMOVE*.gecm.com>
> wrote (to alt.catastrophism):

> Ed - doesn't the fact that *NO* anthropologists and *NO*
> paleontologists agree with you maybe suggest that you are
> more likely to be talking crap . . . ?
In response to your question, Richard, the obvious answer is *NO!!*
After all, I knew when I posted my first message to any of the news
groups nine months ago that the flak would be flying -- and,
obviously, it still is.

And, as I've mentioned so many times before, this abhorrent behavior
by establishment scientists is caused by the fear of screwing up
their vested interests as well as an inherent desire for

Then, too, there also is the intrinsic fear of even leaning in the
direction of the opposition because they know the side they're on
is carrying a mighty big stick.

No, Richard, it doesn't bother me whatsoever that *NO*
anthropologists and *NO* paleontologists" agree with me, giving the
wrong impression that I'm the one who is spewing crap.

The fact is, scientists have a duty and a responsibility to search
throroughly for the truth, then respond to legitimate questions with
honest answers (instead of twisting the truth so it helps perpetrate
a fabrication).

The anthropologists and paleontologists are looking in the wrong
direction if they really want to know who's been dishing out crap.
All *THEY* need do is look in the mirror.