Re: Jomon References


"J.LyonLayden" <JosephLayden@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1189684027.606863.187330@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I can't find a criticism for each theory in Urile's Machine, fo
instance. I find one or two articles with one or two refutations of
specific points in the book and then an archeologists saying.
"Therefore it's all hub-bub." What about the other 492 points they
made in the book? You have to disprove those too or we laymen will
think just an old cynical nay-sayer.


One MAJOR problem with the likes of Han*** is the way they present their
arguments.

Most good scientists/archaeologists/anthropologists will come up with a
hypothesis and, before publishing, they will research it in depth and even
attempt any number of things to knock their own hypothesis down. This is
called hypothesis testing. Only when they are certain that their ideas are
robust and will stand up to scrutiny will most of them go public with the
results. By going public I mean publishing. In the case of good scientists
this form of publishing will not involve the Discovery Channel, Tabloid
Newspapers or fancy websites. Normally they will publish their work in
professional journals so that it can be scrutinised by other professional
researchers.

Now then, these journals are generally not in the public eye, but that does
NOT mean that they are somehow secret; not to be shared with the unwashed
masses. Any journal can be read by anybody who takes the time to find it.
That's what libraries are for! Heck, you can even find many of them on the
Internet!

Now, contrast this with the "fringers" like Han***. They will come up with
ideas that, very often, are completely untestable! How could you test
whether or not aliens have visited ancient civilisations? It is, of course,
impossible to disprove. This is where the problem comes in. The fringers
will then contest that because something can't be tested, it can't be
disproved and if it can't be disproved it must, therefore, be true! It's an
odd kind of logic but a logic that many employ when choosing what they want
to believe when presented with fragments of "knowledge" by the Discovery
Channel.

Han*** is, in my opinion, a genius. I think he knows exactly how people
employ this kind of logic and he, to his credit, has worked out how to earn
an awful lot of money by allowing them to do so.


.

Quantcast