> I know what Janet was doing. I am trying to show her that when one plays
> the game of saying everyone who disagrees with me is biased, a liar etc,
> that those charges can be turned around and pointed at them. There is no
> defence or logical argument which can refute the charge 'All academics toe
> the party line to hold their jobs'. It is ad hominem at its best and is
> designed to innoculate the person from any contrary evidence.
Conspiracy theories generally are that way. I've talked with people about
other, more political conspiracies where the more counter-evidence you
offer, the more they become convinced they're right: "Those are exactly the
kind of lies they'd have you believe!! Can't you see it??"
I hope Janet isn't falling down into that pit. Often, there's no way out.
It's entirely -possible-, though, that she hasn't, of course, even though
the precedent set by other people along these lines isn't promising. Maybe
she's just repeating Petersen's charges at this point.
--John