Re: Gerold Firl and ethnographic data

Len Piotrowski (
Wed, 2 Oct 1996 17:45:41 GMT

In article <52tsqg$> (Bryant) writes:


>In article <52sb85$>,
>Gerold Firl <> wrote:
>>In article <>, (Len Piotrowski) writes:
>>|> In article <52jb5g$> (Bryant) writes:
>>|> >I was simply making the point that if you ask for a reference and get
>>|> >one, you don't have a lot to whine about, so long as it covers the topic.
>>|> Unfortunately, most of what Firl assigns to this reference is wrong or
>>|> fraudulent.

>Perhaps Lenny should stop asserting fraud altogether, and "error," too,
>unless he's going to document it with alternative cites.

If you're going to uncritically support Firl in his misdeeds, perhaps you
should also consider sharing the burdens of his misconduct?

>>to see you substantiate either one. Show an instance where I have
>>wrongfully or fraudulantly "assigned" (sic) something, or where the
>>book is "wrong or fraudulent".
>>Here's a scientific prediction: you won't be able to do it.

>Good bet. Lenny's quick to label those who disagree with him "dishonest."
>And slow (or unable) to back the labels up with evidence.

I think those kind of expletives have already been reserved by you and your
triad of single-minded sociobiologists. If you think I'm bluffing your
woefully mistaken.

>That's why I don't get to read his disaffected ramblings unless somebody else
>follows up on them--and man, does sci.anthro seem like a better place for it. :)

That's disingenuous of you, Bryant. You're affected disinterest is just a
cover for your own implicative gaffes of the past.



"If you can't remember what mnemonic means, you've got a problem."
- perlstyle