``GOBBLE, GOBBLE" (They've sure said a mouthful!)
Ed Conrad (edconrad@prolog.net)
17 Dec 1996 14:27:55 GMT
ndickover@ver.lld.com (Noel Dickover) wrote:
>In article <Pine.A41.3.95.961209171313.92898C-
>100000@login0.isis.unc.edu>, rabrown@email.unc.edu says...
>-snip-
>> But because he faces enormous opposition, Conrad's model leaves very
>> LITTLE room for criticism. In fact, I'd say almost none. The model needs
>> to support a mind but relies on tenuous links and threads. THIS leads to
>> some serious paranoia, and a world which I don't envy in the least.
>> Problem is, Ed has made some of his threads pretty sticky. There's no
>> doubt that he is completely stuck in his web...but I fear for others,
>> especially impressionable others.
>>
>> Constructed worldviews are fine, but Ed's is outstandingly uncritical and
>> largely paranoid. Unfortunately, he shows serious interest in propagating
>> his worldview, quite readily seized an opportunity when it appeared,
>> and shot out a sticky pseudopod to the nearest and easiest target. If
>> such blatantly manipulative behavior persists, I say we take action to get
>> him removed, somehow, from these groups. We don't need someone with the
>> massive authority of "science" posting things like this to high school
>> kids...
>>
>> Ryan Brown
>> UNC-Chapel Hill
>I think you are going a little far here. I don't think we need to
>reorganize USENET just because a pinhead with some pretty rocks in his
>back yard has learned how to type. I didn't see Ed's wonderfully written
>and thoroughly eloquent post, as I have put him on my newsreader's list
>of people whom I don't receive, but I got to imagine, that even an 8 year
>old (possibly even my three year old) could figure out he's a loon. I
>don't think we have anything to fear from an obviously bright and learned
>15 year old reading his posts.
>Best,
>Noel Dickover
-----------
What we have here, Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, is a perfect
example of how a pair of seemingly intelligent individuals have been
brainwashed and, consewuently, how incredibly vicious they can
become.
They want no part of evidence.
They want to roam their own little world in their own little way,
defending a factless, fictional position
.
Sad to say but that young gal in Australia -- who started all of this
-- undoubtedly has more good old common sense than the two of them
together.
At least she seems openminded, certainly not yet anchored down by
nonsensical fabrication and a flagrant pack of lies.
Awful, isn't it, that these two turkeys wouldn't recognize -- or admit
-- a truth if they stumbled over it.
And, imagine the audacity of one (Ryan Brown of the University of
North Carolina at Chapel Hill) making the following snide accusation
followed up by a pretty powerful threat:
> ``This leads to some serious paranoia, and a world
> which I don't envy in the least . . .
> If such blatantly manipulative behavior persists,
> I say we take action to get him removed, somehow,
> from these groups. We don't need someone with the
> massive authority of "science" posting things like this
> kids . . ."
Now I don't mind if either of these wiseguys seriously question
whether my specimens are really, REALLY bone. This is their
perogative.
But their behavior -- as clearly evidenced in this posting -- is that
of a spoiled school kid, made much worse by their incredible display
of total arrogance.
The unfortunate part is that this arrogance certainly did not arrive
overnight. Because it never before had been seriously challenged, it
simply has just grown and grown and grown and grown and grown -- to
the point that it finds them in the pathetic position of being far
removed from being considered uprighteous scientists or honest
investigators.
Their brainwashing has been so thorough, it appears there is no hope
of ever straightening them out.
At least I can try by simply challenging either of them to present one
scintilla of undeniable scientific evidence that man evolved from a
pre-human primate.
Obviously, their only response will be rhetorical: a reaction from
their big mouths but nothing susbtantial to place on the table in
front of us as indisputable evidence.
On the other hand, two of the finest scientists who ever lived --
Wilton M. Krogman and Dr. Raymond Dart, experts in human antomy --
examined some of my specimens and were greatly impressed.
Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury: Who should we believe: a couple of
turkeys quite annoyed their feathers are being plucked, reacting
the way they are because of vested interests and sour grapes.
We'll rest our case by recalling the words of John Adams, stated
while he was serving as defense attorney during the trial
following the Boston Massacre trial in 1770:
> ``Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be
> our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our
> passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and
> evidence."
|