|
|
Re: Is white racism nec. all bad?
Arun Gupta (gupta@mrspock.mt.att.com)
Sun, 16 Apr 1995 15:58:57 GMT
In article <3mrah9$nvn@ixnews4.ix.netcom.com>,
Frank Forman <forman@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>But why is this discussion such a good one? I have not read it, but
>from your quotation from it, Leon Kamin regards a couple of pieces of
>evidence Rushton used to be dubious. What about all the other evidence
>Rushton used? You won't know unless you read the book. Cases are often
>established by a *preponderance* of the evidence, not by one or two
>items.
>
Here is the problem as I see it : for cases where it is relatively
easy to check, your author mis-represents and mis-cites. Is the
information that he is said to have obtained from condom manufacturers
on record somewhere for one to check that he is not misrepresenting
that ?
You see, science is not like law, where one is supposed to present
the best possible case for one's client or pet theory, and gloss over
or misrepresent evidence when it doesn't suit one. Once someone
exhibits this a few times, at least in the science that I'm familiar
with, physics, that someone is not taken very seriously. "Preponderance
of evidence" is meaningless, unless it is obvious that the evidence-
collection was done with modicum of integrity.
-arun gupta
|