It is true that the late Steven J. Gould did write some stupid papers. I have all his books and most of his articles and found most of them quite good except where he lost it and attacked creationists.
JW scientist banned from Institute's WebSite because of Creationistic Views
by GermanXJW 229 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
drwtsn32
They just attacked everything that I wrote no matter what it was.
Perhaps it is because they perceived you as being arrogant and so sure of your opinions. Someone like that usually doesn't want to hear any sort of criticism; they simply ask other people to review their works so that they can receive praise about how wonderful it is.
When confronted with a really cocky person, it is human nature to "attack everything" that person does.
Perhaps if you were more open-minded (or at least appeared to be more open-minded), they would have been more open-minded with you and given more objective reviews of your works.
Just a thought. It may or may not apply to your situation.
-
badboy
Now, now! Girls!
any chance that some1 could start another thread on the subject.
-
Jerry Bergman
Perhaps it is because they perceived you as being arrogant and so sure of your opinions. Hardly. I was an agnostic at the time and anything but sure of my opinions Someone like that usually doesn't want to hear any sort of criticism; they simply ask other people to review their works so that they can receive praise about how wonderful it is.. Not at all. Most all scholarly article are passed around for review (or should be). If all I get is positive feedback from a person I may not pass new material to that person again. The whole point is for them to critically analyze the paper. All papers have flaws (no paper is perfect, and we know this, so try to reduce the flaws). I always pass my papers to at least 4 to 6 experts before it is published.
-
Jerry Bergman
Perhaps it is because they perceived you as being arrogant and so sure of your opinions. Hardly. I was an agnostic at the time and anything but sure of my opinions Someone like that usually doesn't want to hear any sort of criticism; they simply ask other people to review their works so that they can receive praise about how wonderful it is.. Not at all. Most all scholarly articles are passed around for review (or should be). If all I get is positive feedback from a person I may not pass new material to that person again. The whole point is for them to critically analyze the paper. All papers have flaws (no paper is perfect, and we know this, so try to reduce the flaws). I always pass my papers to at least 4 to 6 experts before it is published.
-
Jerry Bergman
Of interest
Calling the Darwinists' Bluff
UC BERKELEY LAW PROFESSOR PHILLIP JOHNSON
By John Dunlap
When he was in London on a sabbatical during the 1987/88 school year, UC
Berkeley law professor Phillip E. Johnson strolled into a bookshop and started
browsing through a large collection of Darwinian literature. Out of curiosity, he
bought a copy of The Blind Watchmaker (1986), which had recently been
published by evolutionary theorist Richard Dawkins, a militant atheist.
For Johnson, the Dawkins book was an eye-opener in ways unintended by the
author. "I could see that Dawkins achieved his word magic with the very tools
that are familiar to us lawyers. [Dawkins was] deciding everything on the
definitions.... If you take as a starting point that there's no creator, then
something more or less like Darwinism has to be true as a matter of definition."
Fascinated, Johnson immersed himself in the vast literature on evolutionary
theory. In 1991 he published Darwin on Trial, a carefully reasoned dissection
of the flimsy evidence supporting Darwinism. Although ignored by most of the
popular media, the book was widely -- and in most cases hostilely -- reviewed in
the scientific press. -
rem
Yeah, real interesting. I'd also be interested in reading a book about fixing cars written by a lawyer.
rem
-
Jerry Bergman
Good point. Remember Darwin was trained as a minister and Lyell as a Lawyer. All lawyers are not bad, even thought many may be.
-
Jerry Bergman
I finally completed my response to some of the issues raised above. My response is on line at: http://www.freeminds.org/psych/bergmancritique2.htm
My responce to Lippard et al.
-
Jerry Bergman
The latest estimate:
Riken finds bigger gap in chimpanzee, human genes Wednesday, July 2, 2003 at 08:30 JST
TOKYO — Researchers at the Institute of Physical and Chemical Research
(Riken) said Tuesday they have found a much larger difference in the genes
between humans and chimpanzees than the conventionally accepted level.
They say the difference, based on a yet-to-be-completed genome study of the
primate most closely related to humans, is roughly 15%. Yoshiyuki Sakaki,
director of the Riken genome project who announced the results, said the
extent of the difference was greater than previously thought. (Kyodo News)
<A HREF="http://www.japantoday.com/e/?content=news&cat=4&id=265043">
http://www.japantoday.com/e/?content=news&cat=4&id=265043</A>