[Junior]

Changing one's paradigm to fit the evidence is not weasling out. I put my original definition out there and it was quickly found to be lacking. Did I cling to it as a creationist clings to his "theories" in the face of confilicting evidence? Not I. I acknowledged my shortcomings and adopted the definition jennyp provided, which works far better than mine ever did. One must occasionally redefine one's terms, after all. HWWNBN however feels that any redefinition is a sign of weakness, hence his refusal to confront his more egregious errors (hippos/whales, wildly eliptical orbits, whatnot). Mr. Saturn and the Lawyer have similar motivations.

[gore3000]

Changing one's paradigm to fit the evidence is not weasling out.

It sure is. If you are proven wrong you should admit that you were wrong instead of insisting that you were correct all the time after you have been forced to revise your position.

[general_re]

You have mail.

[Junior]

Methinks HWWNBN doesn't understand that changing one's position is a tacit admission that one was wrong to begin with.