From: Richard McGough (richard@biblewheel.com)
Date: Thu Jul 03 2003 - 12:40:39 EDT
Re post: http://www.calvin.edu/archive/asa/200307/0062.html
>Hi Richard, you wrote:
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu]On
>>Behalf Of Richard McGough
>>Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 12:16 AM
>
>>>If you are correct, then I would challenge you to write a letter
>>or article to a PEER-REVIEWED physics journal pointing out the
>>simple and supposedly stupid error that Tegmark made. It would be
>>good for you to go through the same peer review so that we can be
>>sure that your criticisms are valid.
>>
>>I think I would prefer to have the issue settled here. To my
>>understanding, many folks here are fully competent to judge such
>>"small matters" as this. My criticism is not very involved - it
>>would fit in a single paragraph in the letter to the editor. There
>>is no need for what you suggest.
>
>I would suggest that this is not very sporting. You demand that Tegmark get
>peer-review but then demure for yourself. interesting.
>
>
As mentioned to George when he brought up the same point, I thought I was submitting myself to peer review here on the ASA list. Did I misunderstand the character of this list? It appears that some people think no-one here is competent to discuss the validity of Tegmark's work.
Of course, I don't agree with that assessment. I suspect many of the thoughtful and competent members are lurking until the flames die down. My argument is trivial in its simplicity. There is no reason whatsoever that it can not be evaluated here in this forum.
Good talking Glen.
In service of Christ the Light,
-- Richard Amiel McGough Discover the sevenfold symmetric perfection of the Holy Bible at http://www.BibleWheel.com --
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jul 03 2003 - 12:46:29 EDT