The standard seems to be that if a theory can be misunderstood by anyone to address things it does not, it is allowable to consider that the fault of the author, and perceived faults of the author can be held to be admissible as faults of the theory. Whoa. Who ever made the underlined claim?
756 posted on 10/13/2009 8:45:54 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
It seemed implicit in the assertion that in a discussion of TToE, Darwin's character, political views, choice of friends and associates and their character and political views, etc. are relevant to that discussion.
758 posted on 10/14/2009 3:56:46 AM PDT by tacticalogic
("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)