Well, I can talk to very few others, without having to dumb down my arguments, but when I can, so it’s much easier to be ‘clear’.
Most people who follow this work do so for reasons that value the narrative more so than the science, and so they inversely value the properties of the work. So I end up defending the theory of history rather than the science.
And the kind of people who conduct these arguments are generally not scientific but moral and literary thinkers.
So you know, I can’t really have adult conversations very often about the science and the logic. Mostly I’m limited to amateur conversations about the theory and history.
And those folks are generally not capable of understanding the science and logic upon which that theory and history depend.
—” Curt, This clarifies the nature of the interviews and Q&A’s you’ve done.”—Bill Joslin
Source date (UTC): 2017-08-09 13:10:00 UTC
Leave a Reply