CHOMSKY Archives

The philosophy, work & influences of Noam Chomsky

CHOMSKY@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Blarne Flinkard <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Blarne Flinkard <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 26 Mar 1998 14:25:33 -0800
Content-Type:
TEXT/PLAIN
Parts/Attachments:
TEXT/PLAIN (38 lines)
> selohssa kaeps sdrawkcab eurt sti sey.

[Supposedly, it's speech, not the written word that contains covert
information.]

> Art Bell is a twit.  You must be outa your mind to post that crap
> here.  People like you, and that idiot John DiNardo, do more to make
> the Left look like a bunch of idiots than the entire Republican party
> could combined.

I usually don't respond to ad hominem and psychotically off-topic comments
and in a sense this response is no exception since it is not intended for
the sober consideration of frank scott, jf noonan, or DDeBar (since I have
some evidence that they aren't willing to participate in such a venture),
but rather for those who may be observing them in astonishment as I am and
for those who embrace the spirit of open and free inquiry.

For frank scott to imply that I'm an "asshole" and for DDeBar to concur
for the simple fact that I pointed to a controversial development in
linguistics in a neutral way belies some character imbalance. If someone
finds David John Oates' claims bogus, well that's fine with me. I'd like
to hear why you think so, especially if you've actually examined his
claims. Presently, I'm reluctant to accept his claims as true because it
appears he's inferring too much. But the sheer novelty of his claims may
be triggering my resistance. I do accept, however, that well-designed
experiments could dispell this concern.

Despite what jf noonan may think, Oates and his alleged discovery of
reverse speech has nothing to do with his politics, my politics, or anyone
else's politics. It is nothing more than a controversial scientific claim
and in that regard no different than say the scientific claims of Galileo,
Newton, or your favorite local scientist working at your local university
or in the garage next door. jf noonan's comments that I am somehow
compromising the integrity of the political left are bizarre and
completely nugatory. If you find reverse speech a threat to your politics,
please reexamine your politics. They're broken. How and why Art Bell fell
under attack is beyond me.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2