[Gladwin]

You're quibbling over an obituary? Gould certainly had some theories that were controversial, but he was knowledgeable in many fields. I think he probably knew more about biology than some people who have obtained a degree in that field. A title is nearly meaningless.

It is in his nature to make personal attacks. You can't argue with him, any more than the frog can argue with the scorpion. To try to argue with him brings you down to his level.

[Gladwin]

Humans competed in related clan-based groups. The success of the group also implied the success of the individual.

[gore3000]

It is in his nature to make personal attacks.

I attacked the writer of the article for lying, you attack me for telling the truth. The writer called Gould a biologist. He was a paleontologist, as I said.The writer knew he was no biologist, that he never had been. The writer knew he worked as a geologist for the university. He knew he got his doctorate by studying fossils "For his doctoral dissertation, Gould investigated fossil land snails of Bermuda. " It tells a lot about you and your theory that you attack those who tell the truth and expose lies.