Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: SAJ

Look in the English dictionary under the word “plague.” The British journalist in a general-reader newspaper used it in that sense, not with the scientific distinction you are trying to draw. Sounds like the whole sophormore dorm is determined to distract from the issue by straw-men arguments. No more need be said. The recombinant discussion above is the only sound scientific comment that merits reader attention.


26 posted on 11/21/2009 9:04:29 AM PST by UncleVanya
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]


To: UncleVanya
I strongly recommend that you take at least one course in epidemiology. You will learn very quickly that misidentification of pathogens, even incidentally, leads to disaster.

As to the dictionary, laymen's dictionaries are next to useless in technical discussions. Competent discussions of recombinance involving viruses should avoid at all costs any reference to bacteriological pathogens, en passant or otherwise. There is absolutely no need for or use in risking muddying the discussion by using the term 'plague' in a generic, as opposed to disease-specific, sense in such a discussion.

This sentiment applies with equal force to 'journalists' who write on technical matters, whether in a general-readership publication or not.

''No more need be said,'', eh? Fine, you can cease your defense of an indefensible botch any time.

31 posted on 11/21/2009 9:48:58 AM PST by SAJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson