Posted by:
rtdunham
at Fri Oct 16 16:01:51 2009 [ Email Message ] [ Show All Posts by rtdunham ]
>>I've looked at the data and the snake made the move from mid-May to the end of September.
Not the 30 days someone claimed on here. Are we to assume he was mistaken? Or--as someone on here feels so strongly about the "natural predators" statement--that it was an intentional misrepresentation to support his point of view?
I get uneasy when we're arguing about science and someone (not you) simply declares without support that a position they disagree with is not only wrong, but intentional deceit. My purpose with this post is to point out how we can all be mistaken--maybe the nat geo show said 30 days in error, despite what your data shows; maybe the poster heard the show wrong; only a cynic would say it was an intentional misrepresentation. If we're gonna argue facts (and i like the effort you've put into presenting exactly that) we've gotta reject "as a matter of fact" declarations that are really statements of opinion (natural predators, again). Whoever it is that's said that several times, imho it weakens the rest of your arguments.
[ Hide Replies ]
|
RE: Well, as a matter of fact... - rtdunham, Fri Oct 16 16:01:51 2009