Re: A critique of the BBC aquatic ape programme and the transcript.


Marc Verhaegen wrote:
> "Algis Kuliukas" <algis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:1115724144.883497.193020@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> >... I think his wingeing about how his wife - a very well respected
> >anthropologist and one we can all admire
>
> (What is "wingeing", Algis?)

Sorry. I mis-spelled. It should be "whingeing" - kind of like
"whining".

> Is Moore married to a very well respected anthropologist?? who might
that
> be?

Jim writes, on the first page of his web site... "I've also had an
informal background in anthropological research, helping my late wife,
Nancy Tanner, with her research on human origins, matriliny, and social
organization."

> Then why does he write such informed irrelevancies? eg, why doesn't
he
> let his wife read what he has written before sending us his
nonsense?? why
> doesn't he even tell his wife where she can find find decent
information on
> AAT?? If his wife had serious critique on AAT, why didn't she give
us her
> arguments? Can't she tell us that for herself instead of letting her
husband
> produce "arguments" as relevant as those of creationists?? I'm very
curious
> to know why this very well respected anthropologist might think we're
wrong
> http://www.onelist.com/community/AAT

Tanner made a good contribution, especially about the role of women in
human evolution in my humble opinion, but Jim seems to be driven by
some sort of cattish jealousy that Elaine Morgan became more famous in
this area without any formal anthropological training. I can understand
those emotions but I think it explains why his web site is so bitter
and twisted.

Algis Kuliukas

.

Relevant Pages