Concerning Bakke

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

> BAKKE

> Not at all.  Perhaps you've heard of "Nature" and/or "Science"?  Maybe

> even "Scientific American"?  Are you going to read any or all of these

> now that you know about them?



> TERRY

> I have already read some of those magazines. Thanks for submitting them.


BAKKE
If you are already familiar with them, how can you possibly not know
what is considered to be a leading, peer-reviewed science magazine as
opposed to the mass-market pap you referenced in the post which led to
this discussion?


> TERRY

> Without sounding unappreciative, If I should find something in them, no

> matter how trivial, that might support one of my arguments; I am sure you

> are less likely to disagree, since you value them as real scientific

> magazines.


BAKKE
I can assure you that if you ever find anything in one of those journals
that supports any of your arguments, I will keel over from shock.


> TERRY

> You had not responded the first time, so when I saw your name appear

> again, I repeated the question.  The answer IS interesting to me.  It is

> interesting to see what you enjoy reading as far as scientific magazines.


BAKKE
Now that you know, does this mean that my arguments will carry any more
weight as far as you are concerned?


> TERRY

> You seem suspicions of the question.   


BAKKE
I'm more suspicious of your reaction to my answer.


> TERRY

> I did not ask it, to see if you were or were not familiar with scientific 

> magazines.  I asked the question simply to see what you considered a real 

> scientific magazine, nothing more nothing less.  


BAKKE
And, now that you know, I'll bet that you'll still try to defend Time
and Newsweek as being equally-reliable sources of cutting-edge science
articles, right?


> TERRY

> I KNOW Time and Newsweek are not scientific magazines, but

> that does not mean that all the articles in them are without value.  


BAKKE
Of what value is an inaccurate or biased article on science in a
mass-market publication?


> TERRY

> Nor does it mean that the scientific magazines you mention are infallible

> either.  


BAKKE
Of course not.  However, a source does not have to been infallible to be
immeasurably superior.


> TERRY

> I am sure when it comes to scientific reporting, the scientific

> magazines are more valuable then news magazines, however that does not

> lessen the value of the article I read in Time magazine.


BAKKE
If that article had any value, we wouldn't even be having this
discussion.

-- 
Visit "NIGHT OWL MK. II" at: http://www.bakkster.com (New domain name!)
Featuring:
  BOULDER GAMES -- The Best in Wargames! (A Starting Point Hot Site!)
  Philosophy of Life -- Speak Your Mind! | Register your site with the
  "Grognard: The Collectable Card Game"  | Wargamers' Homepage Listing!

• Previous message: TO MARK BAKKE
• Next message: Concerning Bakke
• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]