[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: Brashears on Hanson



David Lloyd-Jones wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 21 Nov 1996 14:23:42 GMT, brshears@whale.st.usm.edu (Harold
> Brashears) wrote:
> 
> >I am finally going to donate my two cents to this argument, just for a
> >moment.  I must say I think that Jay's definition is fine for a
> >nontechnical discussion, as long as you recognize the assumptions he
> >has placed in it.
> 
> Harold,
> 
> The problem with this is that Jay's entire career as a freelance
> writer is predicated precisely on obscuring his assumptions, on
> presenting his weirdie notions as scientific fact, which they aren't.
> If he ever made his assumptions clear, he'd have to find a job.
> 
>                                                               -dlj.
Dear DLJ:

I totally agree. I think that too many assumptions are made



Follow-Ups: References: