Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: [Phys-l] Global Warming [was: Is evolution something tobelievein?]



Here's what you wrote to me:

I don't know why in the hell you forwarded a private message to Tap-L which
isn't even the list on which this thread was taking place.


followed by yet another diatribe against Al Gore and the IPCC

Here's what I wrote back to you:

I'm sorry, I often make the mistake that when a message is sent to me
and the list I end up only replying to the original sender, and I
thought this was the case. I didn't realize this was a private
communication. In fact, I still don't quite understand why it should
be. Why would you object to your message being read by anyone but me?
It seemed to give your position on the global warming debate, and I
responded to it. You didn't want anyone else to read it, why?


followed by my response to your diatribe.

I've had quite enough of this too.

On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 12:54 PM, Rick Tarara <rtarara@saintmarys.edu> wrote:

One last note on this to the group--to clarify a point. I had
communicated
privately with Alfredo (twice) and had tried to explain my position in
some
detail--last night. What he then posted was, IMO, a deliberate
misrepresentation of that position. That is why I objected so vehemently.
He also (accidentally he claimed to the list in question) posted my
private
communication and his reply to that other list. He apologized to the
list,
but not to me.

Enough,

Rick

----- Original Message -----
From: "John Mallinckrodt" <ajm@csupomona.edu>
To: "Forum for Physics Educators" <phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu>
Sent: Friday, April 04, 2008 2:45 PM
Subject: Re: [Phys-l] Global Warming [was: Is evolution something
tobelievein?]


I do apologize to Ron for lumping him into a group unfairly.

That said, I still maintain that it was most unfair, to vilify
Alfredo for his caricature of Rick's position (a completely obvious
caricature I might add, which, as Ron himself notes, is a different
beast than a "misrepresentation") without appreciating--or even
noting--the disingenuous provocation that was it's source.

Moreover, when Ron writes,

You suggest that Bob's "Thanks for so nicely making Rick's point!"
is a provocation. Ok, so why misrepresent RICK'S position? It
wasn't Rick who posted the provocation?


it seems to me that there is a bit of conflation going on. It's one
thing to object to the caricature, but quite another to suggest (as
this seems to) that one could have responded to the provocation
without going back to Rick's position since the provocation was
entirely *about* Rick's position.

John Mallinckrodt
Cal Poly Pomona

---


_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l