Dear Mr. Rasmussen,
I am simply a grocery clerk that sells milk and milk products to
consumers. I am not a scientist, but I feel I must offer what I believe is
an important observation about the contoversial BST/BGH dialogs on SAN:
The most "emotional" messages came from the people who felt offened
by Ms. Wiggert's (and others) comments. They claimed people like
her were being "irrational" and "emotional". This "criticism of
criticism" was very angry, desperate, demanding: It was VERY emotional.
In contrast, those people being critical of BST/BGH research and
conclusions were GENERALLY rational in their arguments.
This suggests to me that the claims being made about Wiggert and the
others are not valid ones dealing with the contoversial material at hand.
I really appreciated the debate generated on SANet over these issues!
It would be a great loss if such debates were discouraged or prohibited.
There was great potential for the pro-BGH folks to score points, but hey
blew it!. I learned more about their POV on SAN than anywhere else! But,
they, and the NAL, now appear less credible after personally
witnessing their their near hysterical reaction to criticism.
Welcome to the 90's Boys and Girls!
Yours Truly,
eric phillips
eugene, oregon
(ephlips@efn.org)