barracuda wrote:Again, you don't seem to be following the conversational strands.
Ludicrous. You denigrated Hancock based on the fact that he is not a serious scholar. I balked. You then said that training makes the difference between 'journalist' and 'scholar.' I called that elitist based NOT on the training itself, but on the fact that you will give more credence to traditionally trained experts than to non-traditionally trained experts.
Back off the 'you can't follow the argument' thing.. it's insulting.. to yourself.
I don't have time for the rest of it, nor the inclination... it's clear that if the institutions which produce "Scholars" were to be formed into the shape of a giant ass, you'd have your head so far up it you would be looking out of its mouth.