JohnW
Posts: 3217
Joined: Aug. 2006
|
| Quote (Ftk @ Jan. 03 2008,14:29) | | I also know that he discussed his hydroplate theory with Dr. Robert S. Dietz, one of the founders of the Plate Tectonic Theory many times. They even became friends, so I can't imagine that he is the lying crank that you all believe him to be. In that case, it was not a formal peer review, but I can think of no one better to discuss his theory with. Granted, Dietz didn't agree with his theory, as he had his own. But neither would he debate him, even after stating that he would and helping Brown form the debate agreement. |
According to your link, Brown's interactions with Dietz were regarding the terms and conditions of a possible debate. Dietz was not part of a peer-review process, even an informal one. It's pretty clear, even from the creationist source you provided, that Dietz would have not been kind to Brown's work* if he had reviewed it.
*My contribution to International Understatement Week.
--------------
Math is just a language of reality. Its a waste of time to know it. - Robert Byers
There isn't any probability that the letter d is in the word "mathematics"... Â The correct answer would be "not even 0" - JoeG
|
