Joined: July 2006
An Organisation Behaviour theory footnote:
Highly Machiavellian, manipulative people are restrained not by compunctions or words of correction, but by prudence: where they perceive that they will likely get caught and it will hurt them, they will refrain from unacceptable conduct. but if the odds are they will get away with and benefit from it, they will proceed full steam ahead.
So, allowing such amoral men to act without painful consequence them is enabling behaviour.
And, as I have highlighted this morning, evolutionary materialism, since 360 BC, was known to be amoral.
Sadly, the manipulative, destructive darwinist rhetorical tactics above — sadly — fit the pattern as a hand fits a glove. (When I used to see this in the power centres of universities here in the Caribbean, I used to discuss it in terms of “Star Trek World, the reality.” Alcibiades has all too many descendants among us, I am afraid.)
A thought for the day.
GEM of TKI
In other news, Gordon Mullings is still responding to "Blue Lotus" as if Clive had not retired BL.
I asked Gordon
|So, I ask you KF, what journal access has been restricted and for whom? |
|Read and weep, here and here, onlookers; to see what is going on, when all the blaming the victim and poisoning the well rhetoric has settled down. (Again, inconvenient points already in evidence and steamrollered over. Worse, on matters of patent injustice.)|
The "here" links were
So one example is about where Stenberg published in a journal his paper (so, er, not restricted then) and the other example is someone who who did not get tenure, not somebody who has been barred from a journal simply because their work supports ID.
So, somebody could in theory ask KF if he has any actual examples of ID supporters being rejected from journals rather then examples of people either sucessfully publishing their paper or examples nothing to do with access to journals.
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand