|
|
Re: These guard dogs (Re: Evidence for "Big Bang Theory")
Carl J Lydick (carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU)
9 May 1995 06:17:14 GMT
In article <Admin.0x15@oubliette.COM>, Panopticon@oubliette.COM (Eric Shook) writes:
=In article <3oi1pl$6ap@gap.cco.caltech.edu> carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick) writes:
=
=> Why, you ARE too stupid to understand, Gil. I was referring to your claim that
= ^^^^^^
=> What that is, Gil, is that you must apply your own moronic bullshit to
= ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
=> yoursrelf. You are, unfortunately, demonstrably too stupid to understand that.
= ^^^^^^
=> confine your bullshit to the anthropology newsgroup, instead of inflicting your
= ^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^
=> ignorance on such groups as sci.astro? Or are you too stupid to learn how to
= ^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^
=> use your newsreader?
=> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
=> Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL
=
=Carl, could you be more explicit? I'm having a hard time understanding
=whatever it is you are trying to say. I know that you mean well, but
=perhaps you could give it another try. Do you think that maybe a _few more_
=of your cleverly inserted adjectives might make it any clearer for me?
Gil's demonstrated himself to be either a liar, a moron, a fraud, or some
combination of the three. Is that explicit enough for you? There was a time
when anthropologists as a group had a tendency to lump all things about
cultures foreign to them which they didn't understand into the category of
"religion." Their doing so resulted in quite a few uttrly bogus claims. For
at least several decades, most anthropologists have recognized the flaw in that
technique. They've learned that you can't, in general, generate a valid
explanation of some aspect of a culture unless you're willing to take the time
and effort to learn how the society in question deals with that aspect of the
culture. In the case of this thread, that would mean learning something about
the Big Bang theory before categorizing it, as Gil has repeatedly done, as
"religion." Now, Gil CLAIMS to be an anthropologist. Yet he doesn't seem to
have learned this particular lesson regarding anthropology. He's still using
the rule, "If it's not related to food, sex, or shelter, it must be religion."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL
Disclaimer: Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS. That's what I get paid for. My
understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below). So
unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my
organization responsible for it. If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to
hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it.
|