Joined: Nov. 2009
|Quote (deadman_932 @ Dec. 15 2009,13:11)|
The Blind Men and the Elephant by John Godfrey Saxe
(A poetic parable about the stupidity of Bobby B's methodologies):
It was six men of Hindustan
To learning much inclined,
Who went to see the Elephant
(Though all of them were blind)
That each by observation
Might satisfy the mind.
The first approached the Elephant
And happening to fall
Against his broad and sturdy side
At once began to bawl:
"Bless me, it seems the Elephant
Is very like a wall" ...
...The Sixth no sooner had begun
About the beast to grope,
Than, seizing on the swinging tail
That fell within his scope,
"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant
Is very like a rope!"
And so these men of Hindustan
Disputed loud and long,
Each in his own opinion
Exceeding stiff and strong,
Though each was partly in the right
And all were in the wrong.
So oft in theologic wars,
The disputants, I ween,
Rail on in utter ignorance
Of what each other mean,
And prate about an Elephant
Not one of them has seen!
Superficial similarities don't mean a hell of a lot when significant details = major differences, Bobby B.
Oh, and by the way, Harlan Bretz managed to publish his views many, many times during the 1920's-30's, Bobby.
You haven't, because you have nothing to publish.
Bretz was aware that his job was to find a "mechanism" for his Missoula flood event, Bobby B. -- the problem was that he couldn't see the obvious right in front of his eyes and didn't accept the word of his colleague J.T. Pardee about the ancient glacial-dam source ( the "mechanism") of the Scablands flood. This was exactly what Bretz needed, though and when Pardee and Bretz finally began to work together on the subject, the geological world quickly recognized the validity of their claims...
This stands in stark contrast to your belief that theories without plausible causative mechanisms should be stupidly accepted -- just because you say so, Booby Byers.
The moral of the story is : provide details and fill out your theories with generative mechanisms and clear data and you get accepted.
Or, be a Blind Booby B. and get laughed at.
A listing of Bretz' publications when you claimed he was being ignored, Booby:
Bretz, J.H., 1923a. Glacial drainage on the Columbia Plateau. Geological
Society of America Bulletin, v.34, p.573-608.
--, 1923b. The Channeled Scabland of the Columbia Plateau. Journal of
Geology, v.31, p.617-649.
--, 1925. The Spokane flood beyond the Channeled Scablands. Jounral of
Geology, v.33, p.97-115, 236-259.
--, 1927. Channeled Scabland and the Spokane Flood. Journal of
Washington Academy of Sciences, v.18, p.200-211.
--, 1928a. Alternate hypotheses for channeled scabland. Journal of
Geology, v.36, p.193-223, 312-341.
--, 1928b. Bars of Channeled Scabland. Geological Society of America
Bulletin, v.39, p.643-702.
--, 1928c. The Channeld Scabland of eastern Washington. Geographical
Review, v.18, p.446-477.
--, 1929. Valley deposits immediately east of the Channeled Scabland of
Washington. Journal of Geology, v.37, p.393-427, 505-541.
--, 1930a. Lake Missoula and the Spokane Flood. Geological Society of
America Bulletin, v.41, p.92-93.
--, 1930b. Valley deposits immediately west of the channeled scabland.
Journal of Geology, v.38, p.385-422.
--, 1932. The Grand Coulee. American Geographical Society, Special
Publication 15, p.1-89.
You might want to read this FACTUAL recounting of the episode in American science http://www.geo.ucalgary.ca/~macrae/t_origins/bretz_re.html rather than the usual bullshitting, fraudulent creationist accounts, Booby.
Nope your wrong.
Bretz was rejected and fought against. A big complaint was that there was no water for the Missoula flood. they used this to dismiss his fantastic evidence of a great flood.
Water source was a irrelevant point to the reality and evidence of the mega flood.
yet they tried to use this lack of a water mechanism to stop his ideas.
They lost and are just the bad and dumb guys in the story.