You're jumping to all sorts of false conclusions about me and my respect for science. In fact, here's what we have:
Person A: Wouldn't write David Dewitt a letter of rec. in the first place because of his "generic observations" that would lead him to believe Dewitt couldn't possibly be a competent graduate student or professional. Person B: Would flat out not hire Dewitt (for reasons that may be illegal) because of the _assumption_ that he must be dishonest. (Speaking of which [nodal semantic network], I wonder if Karen Ruggiero is a creationist?) Person C: Wants to use only empirically validated predictors of graduate school and professional performance...no matter what they turn out to be. So pick the person (A, B, or C) who truly values the scientific empirical approach. Al P.S. Paul's right. I got his vita from ICR (a group that I personally don't care for), but Dewitt's not the only one listed there. There are lots more at: http://www.icr.org/creationscientists/biologicalscientists.html They also have a list of physical scientists. If I had gotten a more up to date version of Dewitt's vita, it would have included his new $120,000 NIH grant. --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
