|
|
Re: Apology to Ms. Morgan
David Knowles (knocker@pylon.u-net.com)
Sun, 14 Jul 1996 17:51:49 GMT
Guest1@homer.libby.org wrote:
>Stephen Barnard <steve@megafauna.com> wrote:
>>While I have no sympathy for the AAH (I'm a mere layman in this area), I
>>have to say that I find Elaine Morgan's posts to this newsgroup to be
>>very reasonable and civil, and I find the tone of her detractors to be
>>often obnoxious in the extreme. Why is this hypothesis such a threat?
>
>This is a very good question that you raise. It isn't a threat to anyone, nor is it
>a threat to any pervasive ideas in paleontology (or for that matter, in the social
>sciences such as "anthropology").
>
>In short, the answer to your question is that the AAT(H) is NO more of a "threat" to
>real science than are such ideas as the stories of alien abductions.
>Just because Morgan's ideas are challenged (and weaknesses are pointed out in her
>facts), doesn't mean that the AAT(H) is a threat.
> However, it is common for the "attacked" to make such a claim as you have made.
>Just ask such alien-abduction proponents (and alien abduction theory writers) such
>as Budd Hopkins.
> Hope that clarifies the misconceptions.
> <pb>
>
>now posting from Montana. (Field work begins!!).
>
>
Wouldn't know about the alien abductions; but Prof Hardy was a "real"
scientist and you haven't accounted for the obnoxious tone of the
detractors that Stephen Barnard remarked on.
David Knowles
|