🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <532@shum.UUCP> rwerman@vms.huji.ac.il writes:
>     But what sort of SCIENTIFIC [Primatology or otherwise] meeting prohibits
>attendance of those holding an unpolpular [or in this case, a popular] view
>of a particular set of phenomena?
...
>frustrated, create a new private in-group, and gain publicity.  But
>science [let alone SCIENCE], no, no, no.  It is not science.

Someone a few posts ago mentioned that the women primatologists were
hypothesizing that traditional studies were flawed by male cultural
biases, and that women, working without men, could do a better job.

It seems to me to be very scientific to test this out by doing it, as
they seem to be.  Natch, it may be hard to decide, eventually, whether
they have in fact produced better observations, interpretations, etc,
but it should be their onus to propose criteria which will allow the
hypothesis to be evaluated.

Dick Jackson