Re: TRM - Morbidity has set in, or not?

"Frank Hamersley" <terabitemightbe_at_bigpond.com> wrote in message news:myy9g.3567$S7.1294_at_news-server.bigpond.net.au...

I admit I don't understand why I feel moved to rebut an ad hominem (and wholly irrelevant) attack on someone else, but here goes anyway.

> * Therefore contrary to your opinion Gene, I think it is reasonable to
> conclude that FP considers, nay promotes albeit obliquely, the belief that
> he is "smart and logical"

Well duh! Is there *anyone* who writes for public consumption who doesn't think that of themself? That is just a truism. You'd be right to howl down anyone who set out to do that who knew they were stupid or illogical and did it anyway.

> i.e. the antithesis of his tormentors, and further that he is also
> "boastful" given his preparedness to operate dbdebunk.

So everyone who is moved to operate a website for the instruction and information of others is boastful? What about those who write books? Articles? Who lecture? Who teach? Just how much humility is enough to qualify you venture out in public then?

> All that said there is nothing wrong with this posture if you are capable
> of substantiating this at every turn of events. Of course it can go pear
> shaped if you meet your match or you pick a loser - but that is FP's risk
> and his call to place his own bets.

There is nothing wrong with being wrong occasionally. There is everything wrong with having it demonstrated to one but refusing ever to concede. FP does publish errata and does from time to time revise his views. All the examples of the latter that I can think of he openly acknowledged to be after discussion with others.

>> Perish the thought that someone should have an agenda. I like
>> FP's of supporting the RM. It is far better than these slimy Latest
>> Things that keep popping up from under rocks.
>
> For sure. My only concern is having made himself a target of the
> naysayers, if he stumbles for what ever reason, it has the potential to
> tarnish the RM in the minds of under informed types.

Tough. That's a chance I'm certainly willing to see him take. Anyway, in the long run, one stumble couldn't tip the balance any more than one elegantly proved truth could.

> A lesser evil perhaps than allowing snake-oil to be sold in super-markets?

You make out that it is an issue of towering importance to our age, to be decided by the subtlest of arguments. It's just one guy and a website for goodness sake!

Roy Received on Sun May 14 2006 - 12:44:35 CEST