Re: Labels and Obfuscations
From: Jim McGinn (jimmcginn_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 02/22/05
- Next message: Jim McGinn: "Re: Felsenstein is a liar"
- Previous message: Perplexed in Peoria: "Re: Labels and Obfuscations"
- In reply to: Gil Lawton: "Labels and Obfuscations"
- Next in thread: ekurtz99_at_WhoKnowsWhere.com: "Re: Labels and Obfuscations"
- Reply: ekurtz99_at_WhoKnowsWhere.com: "Re: Labels and Obfuscations"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 13:27:23 -0500 (EST)
Larry Moran wrote:
<snip>
> Here's an extended discussion of kooks by Donna
> Kossy.
>
> http://home.pacifier.com/~dkossy/kooksmus.html
<snip>
Therein I found the following:
"Being assigned kook status is inherently a matter of
perspective, relative to history and culture. A kook
of the 19th century might become a scientific hero in
the 20th. Take the example of geologist Alfred Wegener
(1880-1930), who hypothesized continental drift. In
his day, Wegener's theory was dismissed as a "fairy
tale." More recently he is honored for originating the
theory of plate tectonics. More frequently, a person
presumed to be a genius in a previous century is
regarded a kook in today's. In the 19th century,
phrenologists were as respectable as psychiatrists are
today."
<snip>
> One of the things I admire about her definition
> is that it mentions the obsessive nature of kook
> behavior.
Larry, you seem a bit obsessed with anybody that doesn't
think like you do. Does this make you a bit of a kook?
<snip>
> Kooks often challenge well-accepted ideas in science
> and promote their own peculiar versions of reality.
> They also like to propose new theories that will
> overthrow the establishment. Kooks see themselves as
> superior intellects and that's why they can see
> things that the average scientists can't grasp.
Yeah, who was that guy, about a hundred years ago,
that tried to convince everybody that energy equals
mass multiplied by speed of light squared? And on
top of that, this kook hardly ever combed his hair!
And then there's that bearded guy, about 500 years
ago, who tried to convince everybody that the sun
was the center of the solar system. Can you believe
that! As if it isn't obvious that the earth is an
immovable object.
<snip>
> One of the essential characteristics of kooks is
> their remarkable ability to ignore any scientific
> facts that conflict with their worldview.
I presented the folowing questions to Joe
Felsenstein. He ignored them. Does this make him
a kook? How about yourself, Larry? Since you have,
thus far, ignored these questions are you, thus far,
a kook?
Larry, you really need to answer these questions:
1) All other things being the same, are genes that
are IBD different from genes that are not IBD in
terms of their causative properties? Yes, No?
2) If they are different in terms of their causative
properties what is the PROXIMATE mechanism by which
they produce this difference in causative properties?
I mean, do genes somehow know whether or not they are
IBD and act accordingly? Yes, No? How do they know
this?
3) If they are not different in terms of their
causative properties then why even bother to
distinguish between them?
(BTW, in case you are wondering what the acronym
IBD stands for there is an excellent explanation
of it in the thread entitled, "Felsenstein is a
Liar." It can be found in my first response to
William Morse.)
Jim
- Next message: Jim McGinn: "Re: Felsenstein is a liar"
- Previous message: Perplexed in Peoria: "Re: Labels and Obfuscations"
- In reply to: Gil Lawton: "Labels and Obfuscations"
- Next in thread: ekurtz99_at_WhoKnowsWhere.com: "Re: Labels and Obfuscations"
- Reply: ekurtz99_at_WhoKnowsWhere.com: "Re: Labels and Obfuscations"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|