Re: AAT:A method to falsi
J. Moore (j#d#.moore@canrem.com)
Mon, 9 Oct 95 11:40:00 -0500
Tk> Anyone who has spent a day at the beach, or a lake, or swimming all day
Tk> in a river, knows that the hypothermia argument is a weak one.
Tk> Troy Kelley
Anyone who knows that !Kung hunters never carried water on their
day-long hunting trips through extremely arid country knows that
not having water around at all times makes for an extremely weak
argument, but that never stopped you from using it.
(Even though it didn't apply to the actual environment of early
hominids, just the make-believe strawman environment AATers use
[i.e. the AATers' "arid, treeless" savannah]).
Anyone who knows that chimpanzees handle land-based predators
through intimidation and threat displays, and that they actually
have less problem with predators in more open country than in
forest, and that they have survived in spite of predation
pressure, knows that the argument that our ancestors couldn't do
the same is also an extremely weak argument, but that doesn't stop
AATers from using it in spite of the evidence.
We could go on, citing the "swimming babies" or "diving reflex"
or "proboscis monkeys' nose" fallacies that AATers, such as you,
regularly present as "evidence" in spite of being shown the actual
facts. These are bogus "facts" (i.e., non-facts, sometimes
referred to as fictions), which certainly makes them all extremely
weak "evidence", but it doesn't stop you and others from continually
putting them forward as if they actually helped your case.
Jim Moore (j#d#.moore@canrem.com)
* Q-Blue 2.0 *
|