At 23:31 13-07-2002 -0500, Dan Minette wrote: >Actually, IMHO, the last is not a real tiff. My understanding is the Erik >is posting a serial parody of Jeroen.
One of the characteristics of parody is the presence of humour. I have re-read the thread several times but have consistently failed to find anything humorous in it. What part of it is humorous? The statement about me having mental problems? The blatant refusal to back that claim (and other claims) with evidence? The blatant refusal to answer my questions? The utter nonsense Erik has been posting in an attempt to avoid being held accountable? >BTW, Jeroen did state that I lost my credibility as a scientist because he >didn't like the way I analyzed data. Bzzzt. Incorrect. (I know because I dived into the archive and looked for that post). Here is what I said back then: <Quote> "My sources (and therefore the arguments which they contain) have repeatedly been called "not credible", or at best "questionable". I have repeatedly asked to provide sources that back those claims, but this entirely reasonable request has consistently been met with outright refusal." "If the current practice is really the best you can and will do, I can only say that your scientific credibility is worth to next-to-nothing." </Quote> So, it was not related to the way you analysed data, but to the fact that you consistently refused to back your claims. Hmm, anyone notice a pattern here? Jeroen _________________________________________________________________________ Wonderful World of Brin-L Website: http://www.Brin-L.com Tom's Photo Gallery: http://tom.vanbaardwijk.com
