Please note that they don't say _whose_ scientific misconduct was exposed. At first glance, it sounds like they're saying the Meteoritical Society was at fault, but with careful reading (especially being aware of BCC's track record) it's more like they're admitting professional problems at BCC and hoping no one will notice.

"Look at the silly monkey!" (waves hand to distract from main issue)
Tracy Latimer


[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Note the interesting way of wording their disclaimer...
<< Due to the exposure of scientific misconduct, BCC Meteorites does not
have a reciprocal professional working relationship with the Meteoritical Society
nor the Nomenclature Committee. >>


I know the MetSoc is reluctant to engage in highly visible hand-to-hand
combat with every nut that comes along, and rightly so, but surely there's a line
in the sand somewhere. The Meteoritical Society has been insulted here, and
not particularly subtly....nothing to get litigious over certainly, but at
least worthy of a LITTLE self-defense? Jeff G.? Anything we can do to help?


Gregory

J. Gregory Wilson
2118 Wilshire Blvd. #918
Santa Monica, CA 90403

_________________________________________________________________
Don�t worry if your Inbox will max out while you are enjoying the holidays. Get MSN Extra Storage! http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es



______________________________________________ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Reply via email to