Re: Testing for arboreality (was RE: On science (was Re: a bunch of other stu...

[Dinogeorge@aol.com]

In a message dated 5/31/00 8:38:09 AM EST, tholtz@geol.umd.edu writes:

<< By George, I think he got it!! >>

All right, already. What seems to be overlooked by some of this list's 
correspondents is that I've been a member of the SVP for some 22 years now, 
and a member of the American Association for the Advancement of Science for 
well over a decade; and that I have a couple of science degrees and a 
dissertation under my belt. So I do indeed have, and have had for most of my 
life, some grasp of the scientific method and what constitutes a scientific 
hypothesis, both in historical sciences and in the "hard" sciences. Take that 
as a given; there is no need for invidious comparisons with creationists or 
sarcasm in responses to posts of mine in which I feel like shaking the tree a 
little--a tree that every so often needs some shaking, I might add. I don't 
mind having my tree shaken in return, but I think we have reached the point 
of diminishing returns on all sides.