"JMB"  wrote in message
>
> Why is it that the scientific community, which claims to validate
> conjectures "soundly" and, in most cases, definitely, is so fond of
> suppressing evidence?
>
That's human nature. If an experiment comes in with the results you expect
then you accept it, if it doesn't then you work out what is wrong with your
technique. For instance, I was counting insects on sundews, and the initial
results showed that there was no difference between big plants and small
plants in the capture rate. This was obviously nonsense, so we measured some
more.
>
> The culprits responsible for such acts manage to
> fade out of existence, while presenting the contradictory evidence
> against their claims becomes harder and harder because it has been
> silenced for so long; and this in turns creates a new generation of
> scientists who are biased toward the favored opinion, and have either
> not heard of, or have entirely disregarded, all contrary evidence.
>
However we have a copy of Elaine Morgan's Aquatic Ape Hypothesis in the
university library, we also even have Gish's Up With Creation. Movericks can
get a bit of a hearing.
>
> I
> have seen a lot of double talk, elusive speech, and ignored questions
> on the part of scientists who are more obsessed with persuading others
> with their points of view than with presenting all the facts. I have
> witnessed quite a bit of ad hominen attacks, purely emotive reasoning,
> and a great number of other fallacious attacks against opponents of
> mainstream scientists.
>
That's human nature. When your reputation and maybe financial prospects
depend on you being right, you're very reluctant to admit that you are
wrong. However, unlike business people, for whom knowing when to cheat is
part of their skills, few scientists will deliberately fabricate evidence or
even consciously suppress results.
>
> What I am interested in is, animal cognition, specifically, language.
> I have read from two authors that it is basically nonsense. Animals
> are trained to respond in certain ways; they cannot communicate
> without a facilitator to "interpret" their irrevelant, haphazard
> "sentences"; and basically, have shown no signs of language
> comprehension other than mimicry and cause-and-effect (signs causing
> effects).
>
I'm quite interested in this. I think there is probably quite a lot of
wishful thinking by the chimp language crowd. Obviously there are powerful
reasons why they are motivated to exaggerate their subjects' prowess.
It is hard to get to the truth, particularly when you have no first-hand
experience with chimpanzees.
>
> I've done my own analysis on the subject, in addition to the reading
> I've done on my side of the argument (which is very scarce to say the
> least). I don't need to be a specialist in a field that perpetuates
> lies in order to declare the "discoveries" to be lies.
>
"Lies" is quite strong. If a chimp invents the sign "water
bird" for a duck
anyone would note it. It is also very easy to overlook the "orange-juice
baby" and "give rubber" signs elicited by the same stimulus,
if such a thing
happened.
It does help a lot to be a specialist to get to the truth, particularly when
qualified opinion is divided.
>
>  I use simple logic -- you know, the kind philosophers use, not the kind
> nominal scientists use. But because I do not have a degree in
> Psychology to wave around, no one will listen to my sound arguments
> and responses.
>
This is a problem. To be considered for publication in a journal you
normally need to hold an academic post. This is not altogether fair. Often a
journalist will have valuable skills to deploy in cases of suspected fraud
or wishful thinking.
>
> So much for being open to being proved wrong, which is why I
> learned science was so magnificent in the first place. For this reason, I
> wonder, if anyone has any reading on the subject with evidence against
> animal language. Thank you.
>
The very first hit on "chimp language" was a sceptical article.
http://www.santafe.edu/~johnson/articles.chimp.html
---
þ RIMEGate(tm)/RGXPost V1.14 at BBSWORLD * Info{at}bbsworld.com

---
 * RIMEGate(tm)V10.2áÿ* RelayNet(tm) NNTP Gateway * MoonDog BBS
 * RgateImp.MoonDog.BBS at 8/23/03 8:29:35 PM