Re[2]: FEDUCCIA AND THE NEW YIXIAN DINOS -Reply

[JAMES SUTTON <SUTTON.JAMES@EPAMAIL.EPA.GOV>]

>>> Royan Webb <bandr@globaldialog.com> 06/25/98 09:48am >>>

Thou:
But is the search to negate the ONLY good science? Positive discoveries
should
be discarded simply because they support your theory?

I:
Absolutely not.  Supportive discoveries are just that; part of an
ever-growing weight of evidence... a theory is never proved but must be
regarded as the best explanation that we presently have for some
scientific question. It must always be regarded as tentative and never as
final. What I'm pointing out is that, generally in the history of science,
many people have specifically gathered evidence to support a view.  I
clearly understand that they may do so subconsciously!  It makes no
difference because  it still may result in selective evidence gathering.
They have also discredited others merely because they do not accept the
dominant point of view.   Sometimes real  problems adduced by others
are ignored or speciously explained away.  Then they indulge in
rapacious ad hominem attacks on those with whom they disagree. That's
not science.  Oh, bring back the gentlemanly science of British country
parsons - or at least, the attitude!

Thou:
   And if this is true,
then the pro - dino-bird people are negating Feduccia's theory and by
your
definition are doing fine.

I:
Absolutely correct and I applaud it!  I've got no problem with it. AF's theory
is that birds evolved trees-down from an arboreal reptilian ancestor that
was not a theropod.   Okay, refute it with your contrary evidence and
interpretations.  That's the way science happens.

Maybe what we need is common ground here but yelling and indulging in
ad homimems ain't going to broker it.  

Thou:
The only trouble I've had with the "no they aren't" is the refusal to even
acknowledge the evidence that's been accumulating

I:
But AF does acknowledge it. He merely attempts to put the evidence in a
different paradigm.

Wiwaxia