Re: Virgin birth (again)
- From: j.wilkins1@xxxxxxxxx (John Wilkins)
- Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2007 13:33:49 +1000
r norman <r_s_norman@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Wed, 19 Sep 2007 18:49:16 -0700, Dave Corsello <d.corsello@xxxxxxx>
wrote:
The phenomenon of human virgin parthenogenetic male birth has NOT been
observed. It has NOT been experimentally reproduced in large part in
humans. It is considered to be, if not impossible, at least
outlandishly unlikely to occur naturally.
r norman,
Let me tell you, it has been no fun to be me for the past 3 hours. I
read your post that I'm responding to shortly after you wrote it, but
I couldn't take the time to respond at that time, and I'm just now at
a computer.
You're absolutely right. I made an extremely basic, regrettable,
nauseatingly embarrassing mistake. I did not read the entire article
on parthenogenetic chimerization, only the abstract. I humbly
apologize and withdraw my argument. Please know that my intent was
not to twist facts to my advantage. Hopefully, the obviousness of my
error makes that clear.
How do you folks normally handle a situation like this? This thread
has drawn some attention during the day. Is there any way for me to
withdraw this argument in a more thorough way than just posting this
reply?
Again, sincere apologies to everyone.
--Dave
And my own sincere apologies for being so abrupt. It is just that you
responded with such certainty that I couldn't help myself.
I have been in very similar situations as you, if not in exactly the
same. The best thing to do, the only honorable and decent thing to
do, and the only thing to do that actually works is to write back
saying, "Oops, I really screwed it up big time! I learned something
and I'll try very hard not to do it again."
And you have done exactly that.
And kudos for so doing that.
Actually, if you were a student, I would have written on your returned
failed paper, "please see me about this". I would then explain how
important it is to actually trace down every citation and actually
read it to make sure, first, that it exists and, second, that it
really says what you think it does. I would add: "Now go back,
rewrite it, and I will regrade it with no penalty." However, if the
student never bothers to actually come to see me, the grade stands.
I will henceforth apply this very rule...
--
John S. Wilkins, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Philosophy
University of Queensland - Blog: scienceblogs.com/evolvingthoughts
"He used... sarcasm. He knew all the tricks, dramatic irony, metaphor,
bathos, puns, parody, litotes and... satire. He was vicious."
.
- References:
- Virgin birth (again)
- From: Dave Corsello
- Re: Virgin birth (again)
- From: r norman
- Re: Virgin birth (again)
- From: Dave Corsello
- Re: Virgin birth (again)
- From: r norman
- Re: Virgin birth (again)
- From: Dave Corsello
- Re: Virgin birth (again)
- From: r norman
- Re: Virgin birth (again)
- From: Dave Corsello
- Re: Virgin birth (again)
- From: r norman
- Virgin birth (again)
- Prev by Date: Re: Two men go into a cinema!
- Next by Date: Re: Commentary: The Unpardonable Sin in Academia
- Previous by thread: Re: Virgin birth (again)
- Next by thread: Re: Virgin birth (again)
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|