Re:Dinosaur extinction

[Stanley Friesen <sarima@ix.netcom.com>]

At 11:12 PM 3/1/98 -0800, Charles W. Johnson wrote:
>On Sun, 1 Mar 1998, Stanley Friesen wrote:
>> discussion - something that is this controversial should at least 
>>be presented as undecided, not as fact].
>
>I agree. I cited the URL because I knew that was one location of 
>his claim, albeit not supported by evidence. I suspect that the 
>primary reason for the perhaps inappropriate certitude of the 
>phrasing in the chapter is its intended audience: ...
>Secondly, the text online is in fact condensed from the original. 
>Thirdly, it is intended as a text for an amalgam of both geology 
>students and laymen, and not all of those geology students may be 
>interested in paleontology.

It is precisely in texts intended for laymen that avoiding spurious
certitude is MOST important.  Spurious certitude, followed by contrary
statements by other experts is why much of the public gets the idea that
"scientist don't know what they are talking about".  This sort of thing
does a grave disservice to science.

In *technical* works one can suppose the readers know better than to take
the author's word for such things.


Check my Web site, where, despite my position on certain taxonomic issues,
I at least *present* the alternative positions, even if minimally.
(http://www.crl.com/~sarima/dinosaurs/).

--------------
May the peace of God be with you.         sarima@ix.netcom.com
                                          sfriesen@netlock.com