Re: This used to be on disease and immunity

Karl Kluge (
27 Jul 1996 18:21:53 -0400

In article <4talke$> (Eric Brunner) writes:

Forgive me if I don't read the rest of your 47K of
text, if Firl (and you) have a point to make, it is specific to a very
specific text, either somewhere in RE/WL, or in the cite by Ted Holden
Firl relies upon.

It's hard to forgive what can only be a deliberate attempt to either remain
in ignorance of or deliberately evade discussion of Deloria's real agenda
and the depths of crackpottery of his beliefs. That isn't to suggest that
*everything* he says is BS -- after all, even a broken clock tells the
correct time twice a day.

As for posting 47k of text, I didn't want to leave you the out of falsely
claiming that I was quoting Deloria out of context. I was more than happy
to include the entire transcript of his talk and allow his views to speak
for themselves.

In any event, this is rather a detour from the subject at hand, being one
of Firl's frequent creative evasions from TB forensics, and Contact Period
problems in ethnographers, the historical record of Contact and the Post
Contact period regionally, and the interpretation of the archaeological

No, the subject at hand here (as per the thread title "Re: This _used_ to
be on disease and immunity") is in fact your creative evasions from
confronting Deloria's crackpottery, a theme you continue true to form with

Feel free however, to join in Firl's scholarship Karl, and do keep in mind
that real processualists do have some awareness of the limitations of the
popular conception of science, and of scienticisms.

Having no real interest in post-Contact epidemiology, I think I'll pass,
thank you. You, on your part, should feel free to join in Deloria's
pseudo-scientific bullshit, a project you have already indicated an
enthusiasm for with your prior remark that

> From: (Eric Brunner)
> Subject: Re: This used to be on disease and immunity
> Newsgroups: sci.anthropology
> Date: 17 Jul 1996 22:00:56 GMT
> Not quite. I've spoken with Professor Deloria and have in progress some
> work which I know he will consider when undertaking the second and third
> parts of his projected three-part work.

and do keep in mind that most real scholars dislike having their work
sullied by association with the kind of bullshit Deloria is slinging.

Deletions. I don't think a "Freudian process" is germane, and I really
don't care what work of Vine's is being posted if it isn't the one under

By all means, Eric, do stick your head in the sand. It's what most of us
expect from you by now.