Rich Strauss wrote:
>
> Your point is well taken, and I didn't mean to imply dishonesty either --
> the term "fudged" was a poor choice, but I meant it in the sense of
> manipulation or filtering, not necessarily conscious, and I mentioned that
> it was an assertion.
I don't see any reason to suppose that it wasn't _conscious_, but there
is no reason to suppose that it was _malicious_. One obvious hypothesis
is that Mendel used his model (incorrectly, as we now know) to guide his
classification of a few dubious cases.
-Robert Dawson
=================================================================
Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES are available at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
=================================================================
