Raab wrote:

"Give me a break.

Yes as you say tens of thousands of careers are
lost or short circuited with no one at fault.
that is true everywhere with a competitive economy.

"This was different period."

Not really. The differences are only superficial and in no
way change the basic facts.

Raab further wrote:

"You may try to re-write the circumstances
for your own reasons but they stand as is."

The fact of the matter, I am definitely not rewriting anything,
I am simply discussing the real circumstances of being a
geologist, as I and many of fellow geologists **personally
experienced** them in order to provide background by which
so-called "evidence" being for there being a conspiracy against
Steen-McIntyre can be evaluated. The basic fact is that in the
context of what happening to almost everybody, who was trying to
make a living as a geologist, there was nothing either unusual
or atypical about the problems, which she had as a geologist.
As it stands from my personal experiences and investigation of
this matter, the claim that what happen to her was either
anomalous or atypical enough for the circumstances of the times
as to constitute evidence of her being persecuted is a quite
blantant rewriting of history and a clear case of "knowledge
filtering" on the part of various alternative archaeologists
for their own agendas.

Raab continued:

"Much has been made of on this site and even in
these posts by you that the alternative types
are tru brlievers and somehow that is a crime."

There is no crime in being a true believer. However, at least
in science, one "crime" is when a person's beliefs blind him
or her to basic facts such as 1. the undeniably unreliable
nature of U/Th dating done on the bones and the fission track
dates and 2. what happened to Dr. Steen-McIntyre also happened
to innumerable other geologists, who all published nothing,
which was unorthodox in nature. If various alternative
archaeologists want to rewrite history and its "circumstances"
and to fit their personal beliefs, or in case of certain Hindu
creationists for a religious agenda, and pretend that what is
false to be true and what is true to be false, I have no problem
as long they do not lie to people by calling it "science". If
they want to call it "fiction" or "scripture", it is not a
"crime". But as far as I am concerned calling it "science" is
both an outright lie and a "crime".

Raab continued:

"I would point out simply that whether there are
true believers or not it is the orthodox that are
the gatekeepers. They dole out tenure. They dole
out research assignments. They provide access to
publication."

For better or worst, the "orthodoxy" and "gatekeepers", which
you talk about are nowhere as monolithic as you and other
alternative archaeologists believe them to be. Still, is quite
revealing that there is not a single shred of evidence that
your so-called "orthodox gatekeepers" punished either of the
two other coauthors, Dr. R. Fryxell and Dr. H. E. Malde, of
the 1981 Quaternary Research paper arguing that the Hueyatlaco
Site was 250,000 years old in terms of withholding tenure,
research assignments, grants and so forth. This should be quite
apparent from the fact that Dr. Ronald Fryxell got the research
assignment of lifetime for any geologist by being appointed to
the geological team, who examined Moon rocks returned to Earth
by the Apollo program. It is quite obvious that your so-called
"gatekeepers" cared absolutely nothing about what Dr. Ronald
Fryxell, and anyone else. wrote about the Hueyatlaco Site being
250,000 years old.

In fact, "access to publication" for their ideas about the
Hueyatlaco Site being 250,000 years old was given by so-called
"gatekeepers" a paper published in "Quaternary Research",
which is globally recognized as a prestigious and first
class peer-reviewed journal, It is nonsense to claim that
the "gatekeepers" are withholding "access to publication"
to certain people when they are able to publish their
ideas in a paper in a journal such as Quaternary Research.
Similarly, Dr. VanLandingham was recently given "access to
publication" for his ideas about the Valsequillo sites in
the form of papers published in Micropaleontology
and Journal of Paleolimnology, which are two journals that
are both recognized and respected globally as first-class
scientific journals. Again, it is nonsense to claim that
"orthodox gatekeepers" of some sort are limiting "access
to publication" when papers advocating the ideas allegedly
being censored have appeared such journals. The basic
problem is that if there exist significant flaws in the
arguments that a paper makes, it will not make a convincing
case for its interpretations.

In addition, your so-called "gatekeepers" did not refuse Dr.
Gonzales and others their "access to publication" as their
paper about their ideas of what they interpret to be 40,000
year-old footprints from the Valsequillo region was published
a first class scientific journal. "They" also had apparently
had no qualms about Dr. Pichardo publishing papers, which
argued that the Valsequillo sites are Pre-Clovis Sites in
the 20,000 - 30,000 BP range. It seems like your so-called
"gatekeepers" do not have much, if any, interest in what
anyone say about Valsequillo sites.

Raab continued:

"That is all the difference in the world.

"Was she persecuted in the strictest sense of
the word? No. But the outcome was the same."

The fact of the matter is that neither you nor any other
alternative archaeologists have provided a single shred of
credible evidence, which demonstrates that she was persecuted
in any form or fashion.

Raab continued:

"And in this thread not a gracious "gee she
was right after all" and a positive look
forward to all of the research possibilies
provided.

That is because the post, to which I replied, did not discuss
anything about "research possibilities". It instead it mindlessly
repeated the mythology about her being persecuted for her ideas.
If you want to discuss the "research possibilities" about the
Hueyatlaco Site, then discuss them without including the
obligatory catechisms about the martyrdom of Dr. Steen-McInyre.

Raab continued:

" I see the grumpy old men syndrome
sputtering as they go on their way."

It should not take a rocket scientist to understand that the
way, which you and other alternative archaeologists constantly
complain, whine, and throw temper tantrums about how mean,
evil, nasty, bigoted, dishonest, blind, and so forth the
"orthodox gatekeepers" can be quite irritating and is guaranteed
to induced grumpiness in anyone. If you do not want grumpy
people, then her supporters need to stop the obligatory
sliming, slandering, and accusations of imaginary conspiracies
directed towards anyone, who disagrees with her ideas. It is
a simple fact of human nature is that people get grumpy when
mud is constantly thrown at them.

Raab continued:

I even expect to see the ultimate putdown
that even if right these occupants "had
no impact".

They sure enough did. They were here and
that turns much of what we know on it's
head. For starters which is truly the
"new" world?"

However, just because you believe something to be true does
mean it is true. However, if believing in a fabricated and
fictionalized version of prehistory makes you a happy person
the way that believing in Young Earth creationism makes
other people happy, it is ultimately your personal choice and
your problem, not mine.

Paul H.

"The past is never dead. It's not even past."
William Faulkner, Act 1, Scene III, Requiem for a Nun (1951)



Edited 8 time(s). Last edit at 10/29/2006 10:34AM by Paul H..