IUBio Biosequences .. Software .. Molbio soft .. Network News .. FTP

brain sizes: Einstein's and women's

Jd JDay123 at BellSouth.com
Tue Oct 8 19:40:10 EST 2002

Bob LeChevalier <lojbab at lojban.org> wrote: 

>JDay123 at BellSouth.com (Jd) wrote:
>>>So I suggest that you discard your unnamed encyclopedia and get one
>>>that actually has information in it.
>>This proves 2 things. 1) that you do not have all the available
>>information on the subject at hand and 
>I could hardly contest a claim that I am less than omniscient.  But
>how is that relevant.
>>2) you kick out all data points which do not fit your pre-established curve.
>I trust references that are consistent with other references, and that
>are not known for off the wall nonsense.
>>Both 1 and 2 are a result of the mindset which operates by trend analysis.
>Why yes!  A scientific mind does look at trends.  They are patterns of
>>As far as discarding my encyclopedia, I don't rely on it much to
>>begin with so it's as good as discarded (well almost) anyway.
>Nothing like ignorance to further your growth.
>>But the portion I quoted was just the first line.
>When the first line is egregiously wrong, I'm not inclined to read
>further.  But I gave you entire first paragraphs of 3 different
>encyclopedias, and they all agreed.
>>It has plenty of info
>>in it and I agree with some here that all info in encyclopedias is
>>not 100% truth.
>You seem to have this hangup about "truth".  Only religion and
>philosophy pretend to be about "truth". For other subjects, what
>matters is evidence and inference.
>>That's why we need Bibles.  You will find in the
>>Bible that science began with Adam.
>Not according to any modern concept of science.
>>God gave Adam the duty of starting the Scientific Classification
>>And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field,
>>and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he
>>would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature,
>>that was the name thereof. (Genesis 2:19)
>Naming things is "language", not "scientific classification".

You're reply was quite arrogant.  Personally, I don't think you know
the difference between your asshole and a hole in the ground.


More information about the Neur-sci mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net